We Must Take Unilateral Action - Page 4

chequita guevara · January 16, 2004, 01:29

Quote:

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Oh, and I have to agree with the Funboy here... che has been a total ***** to Mr Fun, just because he believes something different and actually happens to be a moderate Dem.

While I agree I have been a royal ***** to MrFun for the last month and a half, it's not because he believes differently from me.

Imran Siddiqui · January 16, 2004, 01:32

That's what it seems like to a lot of us here.

chequita guevara · January 16, 2004, 01:38

No, what I'm getting on his case about is not being critical of the media. If Apolytoners are good at anything, it's going bbeyond the simple media and getting deeper. Like I said, I'd respect his stance more if he said he didn't like Dean's positions. Instead he's attacking media strawmen.

MrFun · January 16, 2004, 02:02

I do not believe everything the media presents!!

Geez -- you have seen my thread about education in Iraq and how I noted that they failed to bring up some important questions, right??

I make an effort to watch the media with critical eyes and ears.

Sprayber · January 16, 2004, 03:17

Quote:

Originally posted by chegitz guevara

Yes, but the criticism of him started well before he was front runner. (Although a case could be made that he became the front-runner because of it.) Furthermore, unless all candidates are treated equally, it would be giving a false impression that there's nothing wrong with the other candidates, just Dean.

Let me try to get what your saying by asking two simple questions. And the same could be asked to anyone else that cares to answer. Do you think that the press is out to get Dean? And if you do, do you think it's because of any other reason that he is the front runner?

Imran Siddiqui · January 16, 2004, 03:23

Quote:

I'm getting on his case about is not being critical of the media.

Just because he isn't as critical as you (who thinks the media is in a vast conspiracy to make sure Republicans win

), is no justification.

Edan · January 16, 2004, 03:30

Quote:

Originally posted by GePap

And where on earth sis you hear that bit of election gossip?Kerry will be lucky to get 3rd in Iowa. If anyone other than Dean will win, its Gephard.

Kerry has the momentum right now, while Gephardt is remaining stable and Dean has probably already peaked:

http://washingtontimes.com/national/...2452-4786r.htm

Quote:

Momentum grows for Kerry in Iowa caucuses

By Stephen Dinan
THE WASHINGTON TIMES

DES MOINES, Iowa — Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry, a year ago as close as the Democratic presidential nomination race had to a front-runner, is now narrowly back on top of the eight candidates, at least in Iowa, according to the latest polling.
The Zogby-Reuters-MSNBC poll released yesterday showed Mr. Kerry with 21.6 percent support among likely caucusgoers. That led former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean and Rep. Richard A. Gephardt of Missouri, both of whom have 20.9 percent, and Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina, who had 17.1 percent support.
The poll of 502 persons, taken Monday through Wednesday and with a 4.5 percentage-point margin of error, also found that more than 10 percent of caucusgoers are still undecided — about half what it had been in recent weeks, but still a big number with just four days until the first binding contest for the Democratic nomination.

MrFun · January 16, 2004, 03:33

Quote:

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Quote:

I'm getting on his case about is not being critical of the media.

Just because he isn't as critical as you (who thinks the media is in a vast conspiracy to make sure Republicans win

), is no justification.

I suppose even though I am capable of critical viewing of the media, I will never be as perfect as Chegitz.

Edan · January 16, 2004, 03:34

Quote:

Originally posted by chegitz guevara

I think all the candidates should face the same level of scrutiny. If only one is getting tough scrutiny, then in effect, it's a media endoresment of the others.

Yes, indeed. I know I want to see more scrutiny of Al Sharpton, Kucinich and Braun to help me clearly decide if I want to vote for them.

What the media reports on is largely dependant on what viewers are interested in, what they can dig up and what can create the biggest news story. It's not suprising that the limelight will shine on the front runner.

Imran Siddiqui · January 16, 2004, 03:37

Well forget Braun... she dropped out. But we need more on Sharpton and Kucinich

Edan · January 16, 2004, 03:42

Quote:

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Well forget Braun... she dropped out. But we need more on Sharpton and Kucinich

And Twain!

MrFun · January 16, 2004, 04:33

BTW Imran -- I still can't believe that you and I both like Kerry as a candidate.

Sikander · January 16, 2004, 08:09

Quote:

Originally posted by GePap

Of course, that annalysis does not fit into a coy soundbite, so it will fall by the wayside.

Hey GePap, is this your analysis? I found it over by the wayside.

Sikander · January 16, 2004, 08:16

Quote:

Originally posted by chegitz guevara

Say Fun, since you are so good at regurgitating RNC talking points, why not end the pretence and form a branch of the Log Cabin Republicans.

He'd probably get more action, but would it be worth it?

Sikander · January 16, 2004, 08:17

Quote:

Originally posted by chegitz guevara

I think all the candidates should face the same level of scrutiny. If only one is getting tough scrutiny, then in effect, it's a media endoresment of the others.

Are you kidding? We'd be so busy laughing at the positions of Kucinich and Mosley Braun that we'd forget that it wasn't the latest hit comedy and pay no attention to the issues.

Sikander · January 16, 2004, 08:19

Quote:

Originally posted by GePap

As Che and Boris have said, it seems to me the press is going over every single statement Dean has ever made- I mean, that "news" that he once said special interest ruled the Iowa caucus? Wow-they do: special inetrests control everything, becuase everyone has their own special interests....

As Boris said: so you are the front runner- OK, but every candidate is in theory the same- why not give all of them the same level of scrutiny? After all, should not all their record be similarly exposed?

Looks like a lot of it is "friendly" fire:

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/16/po...ns/16LEHA.html

Sikander · January 16, 2004, 08:22

Quote:

Originally posted by Sava
I'm amazed that you are buying that bullshit... I thought you had a mind of your own MrFun

why are you reciting the media's propaganda crap about Dean?

oh and the Log cabin repukes are just like the black repukes... uncle toms... I don't know what you call the gay version of uncle tom's, however...

I thought your theory was stupid until I remembered. Uncle Tom had a cabin too, just like the Gay Republicans.

Sikander · January 16, 2004, 08:23

Quote:

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
That's the Catch-22 for Dean. If he doesn't respond, he's a Dukakisesque wimp who bends over and takes it. When he does respond, he's painted by some as "whining" about being attacked. Which is it?

Obviously he's a whining wimp.

Sikander · January 16, 2004, 08:24

Quote:

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
Carville just doesn't get the credibility of Rove because of the funny accent and mannerisms.

They're both as$holes, but I wouldn't consent to be in the same room with Carville unless he is wearing a straight jacket, a helmet and something to keep the spittle from flying over to where I'm sitting.

PLATO · January 16, 2004, 08:41

Howard Dean:
-Former legislators in Vermont label him "vindictive"
-Is known for a short and hot temper
-Supports unilateral action
-Wants a finger on the "nuclear button"

No thanks.