2
   

Keith Olberman MSNBC Takes On Lying Liar Anne Coulter

 
 
Dartagnan
 
  1  
Reply Wed 17 Nov, 2004 11:23 am
Ticomaya wrote:
Harper wrote:
The NYT is a corporate conservative shill. You posting opinions holds no water. I could find lots of people who will agree with me that the Times is corporate and conservative but it is pretty silly to cut and paste opinions. If you want real progressive thought, read The Nation. If you want to argue that NYT is liberal, make your own arguments. Unlike you, I actually read the New York Times. It isn't liberal by any stretch of the imagination.


The Public Editor (ombudsman) of the New York Times posed the question "Is The New York Times a Liberal Newspaper?" in his July 25th column, and he answered his own question with, "Of course it is".


That's a gross oversimplification of what he wrote, as I'm sure you know. That is, if you actually read the article. You did read it, yes?
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Wed 17 Nov, 2004 11:47 am
D'artagnan wrote:
Ticomaya wrote:
Harper wrote:
The NYT is a corporate conservative shill. You posting opinions holds no water. I could find lots of people who will agree with me that the Times is corporate and conservative but it is pretty silly to cut and paste opinions. If you want real progressive thought, read The Nation. If you want to argue that NYT is liberal, make your own arguments. Unlike you, I actually read the New York Times. It isn't liberal by any stretch of the imagination.


The Public Editor (ombudsman) of the New York Times posed the question "Is The New York Times a Liberal Newspaper?" in his July 25th column, and he answered his own question with, "Of course it is".


That's a gross oversimplification of what he wrote, as I'm sure you know. That is, if you actually read the article. You did read it, yes?


Of course I read it. And I posted the entire article for your edification. (Please note that if my skin was as thin as Harper's, I'd be accusing you of violating the TOS right about now for daring to suggest such a thing.)

Did YOU read my remark which tried to sum up Mr. Okrent's comments?

Tico wrote:
Okrant concludes that the NYT does have a liberal bias in coverage of certain social issues, gay marriage being the example he used. He concludes it's rather obvious, but it's also completely legitimate. The Times' publisher won't call it liberalism, but prefers to call this bias an "urban viewpoint," reflecting its cosmopolitan nature as the hometown newspaper of New York City.


If you have a beef with my use of Mr. Okrent's own words, or if you think his statement was an oversimplification, take it up with him. As it is, he posed the question, and he answered it with a succinct response.
0 Replies
 
Harper
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Nov, 2004 05:36 am
Again, Tico veers from board policy by making another perosanl attack by accusing me of being thin-skinned. I am not thin skinned, I can get down and dirty and flame with the best of them, if it were up to me, there would be no restrictions whatsoever, but it is is not my forum.

Staing an opinon that you don't read NYT and WSJ is an opinion and does not in any way violate guidelines.

Getting back to the NYT, Elizabeth Bumiller won the New Yorl Press's Wimblehack Award. She was accused of being a mere mouthpiece for the Bush campaign. The mazn problem with stodgy corporate concerns like the Times is that they become sounding boards for the staus quo. And it is a probl;em of laziness more than it is bias, it is a lot easier to echo the words of the adminisration than it is to to acsertain the truth. BTW where is the Times big investigative piece on election irregularities?
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Nov, 2004 10:19 am
Harper wrote:
Again, Tico veers from board policy by making another perosanl attack by accusing me of being thin-skinned. I am not thin skinned, I can get down and dirty and flame with the best of them, if it were up to me, there would be no restrictions whatsoever, but it is is not my forum.

Staing an opinon that you don't read NYT and WSJ is an opinion and does not in any way violate guidelines.

Getting back to the NYT, Elizabeth Bumiller won the New Yorl Press's Wimblehack Award. She was accused of being a mere mouthpiece for the Bush campaign. The mazn problem with stodgy corporate concerns like the Times is that they become sounding boards for the staus quo. And it is a probl;em of laziness more than it is bias, it is a lot easier to echo the words of the adminisration than it is to to acsertain the truth. BTW where is the Times big investigative piece on election irregularities?


You are thin skinned. -- But of couse that's merely MY opinion. And since it is my opinion, it does not in any way violate guidelines, right? Rolling Eyes

Now I see why McGentrix puts that in his signature. Cheap insurance. Laughing

Quote:
BTW where is the Times big investigative piece on election irregularities?


As biased as the NYT is, it has apparently decided it is not yet a "tabloid" newspaper. Maybe it will pick up the story if it proves to be something other than a desperate and pathetic conspiracy theory.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Nov, 2004 10:24 am
Ticomaya wrote:
Harper wrote:
Again, Tico veers from board policy by making another perosanl attack by accusing me of being thin-skinned. I am not thin skinned, I can get down and dirty and flame with the best of them, if it were up to me, there would be no restrictions whatsoever, but it is is not my forum.

Staing an opinon that you don't read NYT and WSJ is an opinion and does not in any way violate guidelines.

Getting back to the NYT, Elizabeth Bumiller won the New Yorl Press's Wimblehack Award. She was accused of being a mere mouthpiece for the Bush campaign. The mazn problem with stodgy corporate concerns like the Times is that they become sounding boards for the staus quo. And it is a probl;em of laziness more than it is bias, it is a lot easier to echo the words of the adminisration than it is to to acsertain the truth. BTW where is the Times big investigative piece on election irregularities?


You are thin skinned. -- But of couse that's merely MY opinion. And since it is my opinion, it does not in any way violate guidelines, right? Rolling Eyes

Now I see why McGentrix puts that in his signature. Cheap insurance. Laughing

Quote:
BTW where is the Times big investigative piece on election irregularities?


As biased as the NYT is, it has apparently decided it is not yet a "tabloid" newspaper. Maybe it will pick up the story if it proves to be something other than a desperate and pathetic conspiracy theory.


That, and I got tired of always saying "well, in my opinion..."
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Nov, 2004 10:59 am
Me too. I wish the policy was that it is assumed to be the writer's opinion if another source is not quoted. It is very tedious have to include the disclaimer 'in my opinion' in every remark. If we disagree with an opinion we can always ask why the person holds it or, as appropriate, ask for verification of facts stated.

But, in my opinion, my opinion will be dismissed here. Smile
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Nov, 2004 11:02 am
it's a large tent.
0 Replies
 
mesquite
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Nov, 2004 11:08 am
Foxfyre wrote:
But, in my opinion, my opinion will be dismissed here. Smile


Only by the vast majority Very Happy
0 Replies
 
Harper
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Nov, 2004 02:51 pm
Tico, you don't know me personally and I am going to ask you one more time to stop your personal attacks.
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Nov, 2004 04:53 pm
Harper wrote:
Tico, you don't know me personally and I am going to ask you one more time to stop your personal attacks.


What personal attacks?
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Nov, 2004 08:06 pm
You spoke Harpers name and you are conservative, thus you have made a personal attack.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2020 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 11/23/2020 at 10:46:17