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 : The Obama - Clinton Disaster -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: GROUND ZERO™ who wrote (15946)	7/23/2009 1:13:48 AM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Respond to of 103300

Re: "Well, why not ask the one who wrote that article..." All I asked was "How many?" I.e., how many are in opposition. Because the FOX article never said, and the last such article that shorty posted had only thirteen members in the 'medical organization', (one a 'chiropractor'), that was trumpeting it's opposition to the health care reform proposals. Seemed fair to ask 'how many' Fox was writing about this time. <g> I'm sure that it would easy to find some number of folks who are opposed to ANY proposal... equally easy to find some number of folks who are for... but what makes it significant? If there was a public debate over a town's proposal to install a new traffic light near the local Dairy Queen I'm sure any reporter for the local paper, worth his snuff, could probably find 13 people for the light and 13 people a'gin without breaking a sweat. Same for anything. The question becomes, when you are writing an article like this purporting to identify some 'massive' wave of opposition, or some equally 'massive' wave of support... can the article AT THE VERY LEAST make some minimal effort at quantifying the supposed public tsunami that it's trying to write about? That was my only point --- 'where's the beef' on this story? I mean... 'Astro-Turfing' (trumping up fly-by-night 'organizations' that SOUND LIKE they must have a whole lot of public support behind them) is one of the oldest tricks for lobbyists in Washington....