Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Suma who wrote (223509)	3/10/2007 3:08:57 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

You ignored at least 95% of the points I raised. When I read Sully's sources they are all publications that are notoriously right wing.. And I suppose TruthOut or MoveOn, so often used on those threads are examples of unbiased sources? Or the NYT? Give me a break! Look at their editorial page. Their bias is clear enough. The Washington Post? Are you kidding? Nobody had any idea which way Katherine Graham leaned, right? Message 23354947 Or no cite at all? Message 23354990 Is this what you call a rational argument? Message 23356919 Or name calling? And it's pretty mild compared to AS and you know it. I am especially referring to the American Spectator. It's worse than MoveOn? I would not believe a thing they published after reading David Brock's account of the lies that he helped publish while an editor there Are you HONESTLY going to claim no left wing source has been proven to lie? On money supplied by Richard Scharif, a millionaire twice over, the lies were created to discredit Clinton throughout his presidency. And no equivalent has ever happened on the left? Want to bet? Take me up on this. I DARE YOU!!!! Here, for starters: Billionaire financier George Soros, a Kerry donor, has pledged $5 million to MoveOn.org to defeat Bush. Schnur said there was an "absolute moral equivalency'' between the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth ads and ads produced by the Democratic groups. "Anyone who lashes out on the swift boat ads without calling MoveOn and the other groups into account is the worst kind of hypocrite,'' Schnur said. commondreams.org BTW, CommonDreams is YOUR SIDE! Looks at Sully's sources. They are from more than UNBIASED publications.. For every one that he posts I could find a counter post that would not only disagree but prove his claims false.. And I could find a counter source that would not only disagree but prove YOUR claims false. You will always support the current administration and I cannot in all conscience.. do so. You saw it and ignored it in the post you're responding to. Message 23356691 Message 23357161 If you haven't seen a Republican do it, it's because you never read their posts on their threads. It's happened often enough. I've done it myself, saying no credible evidence exists tying Iraq to 911 AND, if you REALLY looked at it, the evidence of WMD in Iraq before the invasion was weak at best. And this is not the first time I've said it. I no longer have advanced search and can't dig up those posts, but I know others who can and will. The challenge stands. You failed to call me. You are still free to do so.

To: Suma who wrote (223509)	3/10/2007 4:52:52 PM
From: Sully-	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

<< "When I read Sully's sources they are all publications that are notoriously right wing... I am especially referring to the American Spectator" >> That is a typical response from a typical leftist with a closed mind Suma - IE, baseless opinions that are discredited by the facts. My sources can only be considered "notoriously right wing" if you inappropriately conflate that term with mainstream conservative. In any event, the main point here is that anyone who reads what I post knows that the information in them is consistently supported by credible, independently verifiable evidence. So even if it is, "notoriously right wing" (it isn't), what I post is still accurate & reality based. You may not like to read what I post, but your inappropriate labels won't change the accuracy of the content in those posts. Unfortunately, that is a lot more than I can say for almost any notoriously left wing source, which sadly now includes much of the MSM. Yes Suma, that's a demonstrable fact that my one threads documents on a regular basis. BTW, I can't remember the last time I knowingly posted anything from the American Spectator. Not that I have any problems with them, but it seems to indicate you do not read what I post very much, but you sure do have exacting opinions about the content of my posts. Hmmm....