Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by stubeeef, Aug 27, 2004.
please limit links to respected journalistic operations. thank you.
I respect very few, the liberal media bias you see.
Which conservative bias sites would you suggest, as I would not suggest any of the liberal ones as respected by conservatives and I bet there are few to none that liberals "respect" of conservative.
maybe michael moore can provide a "respected" site, he could join with katie couric, and that anchor guy at cbs...what's he name.....
Anywho, thanks for the troll!
Oh lord, do we need to have to "I won't link to the Worker's World Weekly if you won't link to FrontPageMag" discussion again?
Link to the Chicago Sun Times or the Wall Street Journal if you want respectable conservative thought. Post something from Safire or Will. Listen to Hume or Snow, or Buchanan. If you don't think there are respected conservative opinions out there, you aren't looking.
or he's trolling
I hear you calling the source not respected, but nothing on the content.
Please don't call the source names, or attempt to belittle it.
Are you upset with the source or the content. If the content, please refute. With the facts please.
Thankyou for your interest, and for reading the link.
darn, i was hoping everyone would ignore this thread completely....
And spamming. Multiple threads openings for the same topic, and one which already has at least one relevant existing thread? SPAM, I tells ya!
This is the guy who yesterday spouted unsupported rhetoric, then told us all to collectively to "put your comics down" to reply to him. TROLL, I tells ya!
He made my ignore list with one post.
The source IS junk and your protestations to the contrary don't hold much substance.
Want one fact that jumps out right away, since you seem to believe that the burden is to refute not to prove? How about this one... several of the groups they list are not even 527s but PACs . There's a nice big list available from the FEC - go read them if you care. Their pseudo-journalists couldn't even figure out how to correctly title the piece. That's not conservative bias, it's incompetence.
I'm sure there's more, but I don't care -- both "parties" are owned by big business and this is simply propaganda designed to deflect the attention of the populace from that fact.
edit: delayed spell-check.
Noting also that Emily's List is not one of the organizations mentioned in the CNN article. The entire "smoking gun" here consists of one person who is the president of Emily's List and also a fundraiser for the Media Fund.
Warning: arsonist at work.
Name calling is always a sign of intellectual strength and is a path toward certain victory with your argument. Good for you.
You were right to look for a source, but the correct source to use is the FEC, a primary source. Quoting secondary sources, liberal - conservative - or whatever, does not amount to anything resembling an intellectual exercise. Other primary sources in this matter would include the IRS and the assorted filing documents from the organizations in question.
So again, not all of the organizations listed are 527s. Don't take my word on it. Take the governement's own word and check out the FEC.