SI
SI
discoversearch

 Politics | Foreign Affairs Discussion Group


Previous 10 | Next 10 
To: russwinter who wrote (214598)1/25/2007 8:31:06 AM
From: michael97123
   of 281222
 
I think he is on to something there. Oil between 55-60 doesnt hurt the US economy one whit so that free the US to act for better or for worse. The aim is to defang Iran and whether that is achievable with the actions that have been taken is debatable. I would love to hear suns take on this. Mike

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read


To: Brumar89 who wrote (214534)1/25/2007 8:39:17 AM
From: jttmab
   of 281222
 
As for it being a state vs federal office holder, I recall hearing a lot about a minister in Colorado awhile ago also. Not even an office holder.

Huh? Why would you throw in an news report about a minister in response to a comment on political office holders.

Of course the media is going to highlight sexual misconduct between ministers or priests. Sex and ministers is even better "news" than sex and politicians. The press would go into a frenzy if they had a sexual misconduct story on the Pope. The press really likes sex and boy scout leaders too. Is the press anti-boy scout because they mention it's a boy scout leader? Is the press biased against Hollywood because they print a story about some actor hiring a prostitute? I recall a story of a sting operation where police were getting BJs to get the necessary evidence to prove prostitution...there you have it, the media is biased against law enforcement. A school teacher having sex with one of his/her students...great "news" or is the media biased against teachers?

Anything about sex is good, but sex and any figurehead is really good. It's especially good if you can catch the person doing something he/she publicly condemns. And you can bet big money that the press is going to mention their public position in that context.

Here's some great "news"

Cops: Lawyer Naked With Teen in Court
newsday.com

I didn't copy the text, because I'm certain no one on this thread is interested in the details. The link is merely "for the record"; I don't expect anyone here would actually click on it.

jttmab

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)


To: Brumar89 who wrote (214596)1/25/2007 9:04:51 AM
From: jttmab
   of 281222
 
As a matter of fact, I was outraged at Rush Limbaugh when he went off at Chelsea.

How did you feel about McCain's joke about Chelsea at a GOP fundraiser?

"Why is Chelsea Clinton so ugly?
Because her father is Janet Reno."

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)


To: Brumar89 who wrote (214596)1/25/2007 9:18:30 AM
From: epicure
   of 281222
 
"However thats the only time I know of when anyone in the media treated Chelsea harshly. "

Then you missed a lot (imo).

And your construction of Bill's treatment by the media is strange. The press LOVED the salacious details. Don't you remember the feeding frenzy in the press? I remember interviews with everyone who ever saw Bill with a big haired girl.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)


To: kumar rangan who wrote (214586)1/25/2007 9:52:28 AM
From: bentway
   of 281222
 
Because it was a stupid question that answers itself?

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)


To: bentway who wrote (214603)1/25/2007 10:14:53 AM
From: michael97123
   of 281222
 
Kumar's mistake is not that he asked a stupid question but that he directed it to a stupid person.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)


To: mistermj who wrote (214567)1/25/2007 10:34:16 AM
From: GST
3 Recommendations   of 281222
 
The threat was a complete lie. We did NOT invade Iraq because Saddam was a threat. There was NO THREAT. There was instead an ideological rationale for war -- but of course you can't go to Congress and say "on ideological grounds we are going to invade another country". So every effort had to be made to make it appear there was a threat -- this is outright deception. Pure unadulterated deception. At best you can argue that Bush was not let in on the plan that Cheney crafted, and lacked the competence to understand what he was doing. We might never know where incompetence ended and the lying began. What is almost certain is that Bush lacked the capacity to create the lie -- he simply became the hand puppet of the lie. But make no mistake -- the lie of the "Iraqi threat" paved the way for the worst set of decisions we have seen in the US. It cost us the war on terror and we are never likely to fully recover from this tragic deception.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (2)


To: michael97123 who wrote (214604)1/25/2007 10:51:29 AM
From: Elroy
1 Recommendation   of 281222
 
He must have PMed it to you because we didn't see that one.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)


To: kumar rangan who wrote (214584)1/25/2007 10:51:50 AM
From: GST
2 Recommendations   of 281222
 
The Japanese have a right to point out the big lie, and to point out the damage to the world that has been the result of the big lie. Japan has the right to say they won't continue to be a party to the invasion that the big lie was calculated to justify.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read


To: geode00 who wrote (214576)1/25/2007 10:52:28 AM
From: neolib
   of 281222
 
I give up on you. However, you might want to consider this:

Except that's not true either. Insurance companies have tremendous incentives TO NOT PAY. They have tremendous incentives to DENY CARE which is POLICY at many (most or all?) insurance companies.

Almost all your arguments are in favor of INCREASING costs in the system. You seem to want an insurance system that encourages more consumption. What the heck?

Do you honestly think that for-profit insurance companies aren't out devising ways to pay Docs LESS and deny care as much as possible?

ROTFLMAO. What the heck do you think Medicare is all about. They lead the pack in paying Docs LESS, so much so that many Docs refuse to take Medicare patients.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (3)
Previous 10 | Next 10 

Copyright © 1995-2014 Knight Sac Media. All rights reserved.Stock quotes are delayed at least 15 minutes - See Terms of Use.