Text 2897, 120 rader
Skriven 2006-06-27 11:30:00 av Robert E Starr JR (3370.babylon5)
Ärende: Re: Atheists: America's m
=================================
* * * This message was from Dennis \(Icarus\) to rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.m * *
*
         * * * and has been forwarded to you by Lord Time * * *         
            -----------------------------------------------             

@MSGID: <a41d9$44a09a83$18d64cf6$1812@KNOLOGY.NET>
@REPLY: <gPIgg.39019$4L1.7650@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com>
"Josh Hill" <usereplyto@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:on01a2dag7inj7pj8d7u2bn1q3lt9qve78@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 13 Jun 2006 00:24:28 +0000 (UTC), "Dennis \(Icarus\)"
> <ala_dir_diver@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >"Josh Hill" <usereplyto@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:llar82lic8aiu79e59sr6h8af1l7tfq4ad@4ax.com...
> >> On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 03:51:05 +0000 (UTC), "Dennis \(Icarus\)"
> >> <ala_dir_diver@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>
>
> >> From mainstream politicians and commentators? I can't recall any --
> >> most of what I read is defensive or analytical.
> >>
> >> As for the rest of us -- just read this exchange on Usenet:
> >>
> >> Democrat:
> >>
> >> >Nope. It's much more simpler than that: I hate
> >> >liars, I hate maliciousness, I hate incompetence,
> >> >and I hate corruption;
> >>
> >> Republican:
> >>
> >> Then you should be blowing up the DNC and butchering all the leftists
> >> in DC.
> >
> >I'd like to see a bit more of the exchange.
> >Heck, if need be I can send you links of conversations I';ve had swith
> >liberals - one of whom chastised me fornot speaking up when segregationw
as
> >legal, even after I made it clear that I was busy gestating in 1965.
> >All sorts of other occassions where the lib went personal VERY quickly.
> >
> >Hey, we'll combine stories, and find that each side is being attacked
> >equally ;-)
>
> Hard to establish numbers, since we're talking personal here. It
> certainly isn't what I've seen on Usenet. But what really bothers me
> is that the conservative establishment has been running a systematic
> campaign of slurs against liberals and moderates and Democrats of
> every stripe, whom they broadbrush as liberals. And against a whole
> portion of the country that's portrayed as elitist, un-American and
> un-Christian. That's been the case ever since Nixon and Agnew
> originated the tactic with their homilies to "Middle America" and
> their attacks on "effete snobs."

And liberals have done the same - where does the term "borking" come from?

>
> >> I wish I could say that that was unique, but it could characterize any
> >> number of discussions I've had/seen with Republicans on Usenet. (Not
> >> all, of course -- just a significant percentage.) Add to that the fact
> >> that Republicans seem to fall for the most obvious spin and vote for
> >> people who want to exploit them, and the well-known fact that the more
> >> educated one is the more liberal one is apt to be, and maybe a dash of
> >> not believing in the evolution, and, well, the fact that much of what
> >> they say is complete and utter bollocks, and that that's obvious to
> >> anyone who does a bit of research and reads the paper  . . . what it
> >> looks like is a bunch of largely uneducated people who don't keep up
> >> with the news and lack the insight to see through transparent
> >> propaganda.
> >
> >Well, would that count as an example? :-)
>
> How's this? It's from a Hastert for Congress campaign letter someone
> forwarded to me this morning:


<snip>
>
> Need I point out the ludicrous lies and distortions here?
>
<snip>

And you'll find similar lettrs from all stripes.

> >
> >Yeah, I did - the links didnt work but it does describe 'em fairly well.
> >So you think its ok, and other folks think that they're racist.
> >Differing opinions & all.
>
> Nah. See my other post, and Amy's. This is just the sort of distortion
> I'm talking 'bout. Unless I've missed some kind of connection between
> parrots and black people, there was no racial stereotyping whatsoever
> in the portrayal of Rice, and Trudeau portrayed /Bush/ as racist. You
> can IMO argue about the third cartoon: the analogy was apt, but I
> think it much more important to avoid any non-critical use of
> traditional fictional stereotypes.

So you think its a fair portrayal?
Should be easy to verify its an accurate portrayal of how Bush sees folks.
:-)

<snip>
> >
> >Near-irreconcilable differences on policy?
>
> Are they, though? That, above all, is what we Demcrats find puzzling:
> on most every measure, the Dems are closer to the American public, and
> that includes most of the public; and the policy differences that are
> used to drive a wedge between the Democrats and the Bible Belt are
> generally trumped-up phony ones, very obviously so.

I dont think they are trumped up or phoney.

Dennis


.
                                        
--- SBBSecho 2.11-Win32
 * Origin: Time Warp of the Future BBS - Home of League 10 (1:14/400)