Rhonda in TX Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 Sadly, Charlie Sheen is #2 behind Japan over here, at least the stations I've seen. Of course now Libya is on, but before, I didn't hear a lick about it. That's surprising. I've barely watched TV at all this week and I knew about the UN vote about the no fly zone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JessReplanted Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 My husband and I were talking about this today. I don't like the fact that our government seems to think it has the right to tell other governments how they can behave. How would we feel if another country did this to us? At the same time, if the leader of our country was slaughtering people who dared to disagree with him, wouldn't we all be praying for someone to step in? FWIW, I am not pro-war, and don't agree with most of our military action. And yet I think that there have to be times when it is right to step in... (WWII for example). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frontier Mom Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 Terrible situation. It also concerns me that other countries will rise up and believe the US or UN Troops will come liberate them as well. Sad all around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs.MacGyver Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 You're welcome. In case your interested, the countries voting in favor were France, Britain, the United States, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Lebanon, Nigeria, Portugal, South Africa, Columbia, and Gabon. The countries that abstained were Russia, China, Germany, Brazil, and India. Just curious how much $/assets countries like Gabon and Columbia are going to contribute, but it is nice to see France stepping up... This just worries me however you look at it... I still have friends doing 12 month deployments to Bosnia... and how many years ago did the UN go in there for peace-keeping? We are getting stretched thin while contemplating a drawdown in number of troops - it is just getting a bit uncomfortable to me. Most of our guys (and girls) are exhausted from this OPtempo. Hopefully we can get him out quickly and move on, but it never seems to work out that way.... :glare: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Margaret in GA Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 Sadly, Charlie Sheen is #2 behind Japan over here, at least the stations I've seen. Of course now Libya is on, but before, I didn't hear a lick about it. I can't believe that. A perfect example of why we need NPR/PBS newshour. They never discuss celebrities. Unless in the context of a movie/music review. As for being sick of war-- we are not alone. A Washington Post/ABC news poll shows that nearly 2/3 of Americans believe the War in Afghanistan is no longer worth fighting. I've felt that way all along. As for Libya, however, I'm not really sure. So far, it seems reasonable. We aren't losing American lives and few civilians have been hurt. I hate standing by and seeing innocent people being murdered by a militant dictator. And I like that the UN is involved and not just Team America. But, I'm ready for that suggested 5 year time out :glare: Margaret Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amy in NH Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 It's been all over the news I've been watching. #1. Japan, #2. Libyan situation, #3. Nothing else is even close... :iagree: We don't "watch" news, but we listen to it. Julie has it right. And even though I protested the war in Iraq when Bush started sending in our troops, I'm glad someone's doing something to support the Libyan people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TXMomof4 Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 Never heard of Charlie Sheen. Count your blessings! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris in VA Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 I heard on the news yesterday that the Libiyan rebels are not so clean-cut-- does anyone fear someone worse than the Big Q (or Gh, whatever! lol) will get into power. IOW< that it won't turn out to be a democratic country if Q goes down, but something else? I'm NOT saying Q is better than an unknown quantity and should stay in power. I'm not good at discussing this stuff, just b/c I don't know enough. Just wondering if you all had heard more about the rebels and the chances that they are not so great. Not just downtrodden people who want democracy--y'know what I mean? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arghmatey Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 My husband and I were talking about this today. I don't like the fact that our government seems to think it has the right to tell other governments how they can behave. How would we feel if another country did this to us? "How would we feel..." I would feel great. Because that would mean there was hope for our people to survive despite the fact an insane leader was killing us because we peacefully disagreed with him. Not that I am stating whether I support or do not support this recent military action. I'm just saying if our leader was killing my friends, family, and country mates, and we had no rights to pick another leader, I might welcome another country's violent assistance, regardless of right or wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spy Car Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 I have decided to go with the spelling Kadhafi. It is the way the subtext had it on the ABC news. Well using a "K" would be the worst transliteration. There is a different Arabic character (kaf) that is transliterated as "K" (and sounds like an English K) and that is not the character used in his name. G also doesn't fit well into transliteration schemes, but as Emma rightly points out in some Arabic dialects (including Libya's) the locals mash the proper sound of a "qaf" into something that sounds more like a hard "G". Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spy Car Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 I can't believe that. A perfect example of why we need NPR/PBS newshour. Margaret :iagree: The Libyan situation has been covered in depth on NPR and PBS. Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yellowperch Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 This I morning as I opened my paper I said to myself, "I miss Charlie Sheen." Somewhere back there, before Libya really turned, before the earthquake, before Congress started going really full bore, I (who had CS and the guy in the pirate movie and that other guy who i knew form grocery store lines had been in and out of rehab conflated into one bloached, silly hollywood fool. I really did think they were all the same guy) was enjoying the spectacle. Until, that is, I read an op-ed piece about how CS is has repeatedly physcally abused the women in his life. Then watching him self-destruct wasn't so funny any more. I can understand people missing the news re:Libya--its not always easy to keep up--but you can't really blame the press. This has been front page, top of the hour news in the NYTimes and NPR since the protests began. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lady Florida. Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 At the same time, if the leader of our country was slaughtering people who dared to disagree with him, wouldn't we all be praying for someone to step in? FWIW, I am not pro-war, and don't agree with most of our military action. And yet I think that there have to be times when it is right to step in... (WWII for example). I agree. FWIW, Ghaddafi has been a thorn in the side of the free world, and a supporter of terrorism (Lockerbie anyone?), for more than 30 years. Reagan was hailed as a hero for striking Libya after Libya supported a terrorist bombing. This bombing was not in the U.S., though some Americans were killed and injured. But it happened on another country's soil, and the American (Reagan) government decided it was appropriate to respond. Reagan's supporters stand behind his decision to this day. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_El_Dorado_Canyon The Libyan people, inspired by other protests in the area, have finally decided they had enough of Ghaddafi. They've been trying to fight back. The Arab League, worried about a large scale slaughter of civilians, asked the U.N. to step in. The U.N., not just the U.S. We are not only part of the U.N., but part of the U.N. Security Council, therefore we are involved. Please don't make it sound like our government just decided to swoop in and play the hero. We are part of a group of member countries that made a decision based on the request of other member countries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TXMomof4 Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 I hesitate to add this, but it's even been on Fox news! *gasp* ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coralloyd Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 We are going to war to "stimulate" the economy. War cause the need for production and raises the value of the dollar. This is the main reason imo. It is not because we are so worried about the Libyans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yellowperch Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 (edited) Nevermind. I'm going out to play with my children. I have deep personal connection to this issue, and am scared, and need to get outside. I think this is an important discussion an hope it doesn't get derailed. Edited March 20, 2011 by yellowperch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sleepymommy Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 The Libyan people have been oppressed my Qadhaffi's regime for decades. Many people have had to flee their own country and have been living away from their homeland for years. We (America) never did anything about it because we weren't threatened by Qadhaffi. However, now the people of Libya have finally become able to rebel against their oppressive government. I heard on the news when this first started that they did not want any help from America or other countries, they wanted to fight for their freedom on their own. But now they are aware of just how harsh and impossible it will be for them to fight for their freedom against Qadhafi and have asked for help. They are fighting for Democracy. Isn't this America's big ideal? If we can't help a nation that is clearly asking for help in order to establish a free, democratic society then when should we help? I have always been against the war in Iraq and Afghanistan. But we (America) jumped in with both feet without even looking supposedly to help the oppressed people or Iraq and Afghanistan. IMO, America really didn't have much choice here. The eyes of the world are watching to see if we really want to help others that want democracy in their nations or if we only want to help the countries in which we have great monetary interests. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sleepymommy Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 I agree. FWIW, Ghaddafi has been a thorn in the side of the free world, and a supporter of terrorism (Lockerbie anyone?), for more than 30 years. Reagan was hailed as a hero for striking Libya after Libya supported a terrorist bombing. This bombing was not in the U.S., though some Americans were killed and injured. But it happened on another country's soil, and the American (Reagan) government decided it was appropriate to respond. Reagan's supporters stand behind his decision to this day.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_El_Dorado_Canyon The Libyan people, inspired by other protests in the area, have finally decided they had enough of Ghaddafi. They've been trying to fight back. The Arab League, worried about a large scale slaughter of civilians, asked the U.N. to step in. The U.N., not just the U.S. We are not only part of the U.N., but part of the U.N. Security Council, therefore we are involved. Please don't make it sound like our government just decided to swoop in and play the hero. We are part of a group of member countries that made a decision based on the request of other member countries. :iagree: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MyLittleWonders Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 This I morning as I opened my paper I said to myself, "I miss Charlie Sheen." Somewhere back there, before Libya really turned, before the earthquake, before Congress started going really full bore, I (who had CS and the guy in the pirate movie and that other guy who i knew form grocery store lines had been in and out of rehab conflated into one bloached, silly hollywood fool. I really did think they were all the same guy) was enjoying the spectacle. Until, that is, I read an op-ed piece about how CS is has repeatedly physcally abused the women in his life. Then watching him self-destruct wasn't so funny any more. I can understand people missing the news re:Libya--its not always easy to keep up--but you can't really blame the press. This has been front page, top of the hour news in the NYTimes and NPR since the protests began. I agree; despite CS and LL (Lindsay :glare: ) being all over the news, Libya has been front and center (as has been the general turmoil in that region of the world. When I mentioned up thread that I hadn't been paying attention, it's not for lack of coverage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unsinkable Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 I can't believe that. A perfect example of why we need NPR/PBS newshour. They never discuss celebrities. Unless in the context of a movie/music review. As for being sick of war-- we are not alone. A Washington Post/ABC news poll shows that nearly 2/3 of Americans believe the War in Afghanistan is no longer worth fighting. I've felt that way all along. As for Libya, however, I'm not really sure. So far, it seems reasonable. We aren't losing American lives and few civilians have been hurt. I hate standing by and seeing innocent people being murdered by a militant dictator. And I like that the UN is involved and not just Team America. But, I'm ready for that suggested 5 year time out :glare: Margaret :lol: That is NOT a perfect example. Even if you are using hyperbole (which is the BEST THING EVER!), I disagree. NPR already exists and yet some people are surprised by this news. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spy Car Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 :lol: That is NOT a perfect example. Even if you are using hyperbole (which is the BEST THING EVER!), I disagree. NPR already exists and yet some people are surprised by this news. I think she is saying that people who tune into credible news sources (including NPR and PBS) were well informed of the events leading up to yesterday's actions. All it take to not be surprised is to :bigear: Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pqr Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 The Libyan situation has been covered in depth on NPR and PBS. Bill ....and on BBC on Fox on CNN in the New York Times, the Economist and scores of other places yet all the rest do so without public monies. Truth be told I have been watching Al Jazeera for its coverage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spy Car Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 ....and on BBC on Fox on CNN in the New York Times, the Economist and scores of other places yet all the rest do so without public monies. Truth be told I have been watching Al Jazeera for its coverage. The BBC relies on public funding. D'oh! :D And al Jazeera? Underwritten by the Emir of Qatar despite attempts to make it as a commercial broadcaster. No one said, BTW, that ONLY public outlets are good news sources, but NPR and PBS are among the top of the heap in the USA. Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pqr Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 (edited) The BBC relies on public funding. D'oh! :D And al Jazeera? Underwritten by the Emir of Qatar despite attempts to make it as a commercial broadcaster. No one said, BTW, that ONLY public outlets are good news sources, but NPR and PBS are among the top of the heap in the USA. Bill Point taken on the BBC. mea culpa. The comment was that given the debate about tax dollars on NPR it must be noted that there are plenty of good outlets that do not use public funding. Edited March 20, 2011 by pqr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spy Car Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 Point taken on the BBC. mea culpa. The issue was that given the debate about tax dollars on NPR it must be noted that there are plenty of good outlets that do not use public funding. Well there is nothing remotely similar to the quality of radio programming found on NPR with the possible exception of the BBC. NPR is a national treasure. And one gets a very different (and more insightful) level of analysis watching PBS than watching any of the cable news outlets. De-funding these is just away to further boobocracy. Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Margaret in GA Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 Point taken on the BBC. mea culpa. The comment was that given the debate about tax dollars on NPR it must be noted that there are plenty of good outlets that do not use public funding. Yes, there are. But, honestly people go on and on about how they hate that 24 hour news stations have more coverage of celebrities than real news. Like this Rush Limbaugh critique of the media covering Lindsay Lohan: " I mean virtually everywhere you go, every cable news channel, every nightly newscast had a story on Lindsay Lohan going to jail. Meanwhile, you can't find any news about the oil spill. You cannot find any news about it anymore. You cannot find the truth about this Berwick guy and the reason he was recess appointed to be the health care, Medicare, Medicaid administrator. " And my point is, if your news if feeding you garbage, you may want to switch on over to real news. We have that luxury right now in the United States to turn off the mega media outlets and listen or watch real news that honestly covers important issues. Enjoy it while you have it, it may not be here for long. Margaret Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Margaret in GA Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 We are going to war to "stimulate" the economy. War cause the need for production and raises the value of the dollar. This is the main reason imo. It is not because we are so worried about the Libyans. Have to disagree. I mean, we are in two wars right now and they don't seem to be helping to "stimulate" the economy. Margaret Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rosie_0801 Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 Well using a "K" would be the worst transliteration. There is a different Arabic character (kaf) that is transliterated as "K" (and sounds like an English K) and that is not the character used in his name. Are we worrying about offending this joker by spelling his name incorrectly? :001_huh: :tongue_smilie: Rosie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melissa in Australia Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 The Libyan people have been oppressed my Qadhaffi's regime for decades. Many people have had to flee their own country and have been living away from their homeland for years. We (America) never did anything about it because we weren't threatened by Qadhaffi. However, now the people of Libya have finally become able to rebel against their oppressive government. I heard on the news when this first started that they did not want any help from America or other countries, they wanted to fight for their freedom on their own. But now they are aware of just how harsh and impossible it will be for them to fight for their freedom against Qadhafi and have asked for help. They are fighting for Democracy. Isn't this America's big ideal? If we can't help a nation that is clearly asking for help in order to establish a free, democratic society then when should we help? I have always been against the war in Iraq and Afghanistan. But we (America) jumped in with both feet without even looking supposedly to help the oppressed people or Iraq and Afghanistan. IMO, America really didn't have much choice here. The eyes of the world are watching to see if we really want to help others that want democracy in their nations or if we only want to help the countries in which we have great monetary interests. What about all the other countries that have protests because they want democracy? The UN doesn't step in to help them. What about Yemen, Syria, Bahrain,Zimbabwe, China etc.etc. Some people question why it is mostly countries with large oil deposits that get "help" from other nations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spy Car Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 Are we worrying about offending this joker by spelling his name incorrectly? :001_huh: :tongue_smilie: Rosie :lol: :lol: :lol: Perhaps all the weird spelling variations are a very clever form of psychological warfare :D Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tntgoodwin Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 Have to disagree. I mean, we are in two wars right now and they don't seem to be helping to "stimulate" the economy. Margaret Perhaps the military-industrial complex would disagree with you...:D Meet the new boss, same as the old boss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tex-mex Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 ETA: And I wish the media would stop giving Charlie Sheen any time. What a waste. :iagree: I can't believe folks are buying tickets to see him in person on stage. It is like lookie-loos rubbernecking at the scene of an accident. Yoikes. :glare: The man needs medical intervention at the very least. (Threadjack over... :D) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Margaret in GA Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 Perhaps the military-industrial complex would disagree with you...:D Meet the new boss, same as the old boss. Yeah, I do think that there is a level of corporate influence when we consider using our military. But, I have to believe that, at this point, we really are not at a loss as to how to increase our sale of weapons. BUT, if you want to talk stabilizing oil prices, I'll :bigear: Margaret Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Georgiana Daniels Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 De-funding these is just away to further boobocracy. Bill :lol::lol::lol: We SO have a boobocracy. I'll need to incorporate this into our future studies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
regentrude Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 What about all the other countries that have protests because they want democracy? The UN doesn't step in to help them. Because their dictator of 40 years has not threatened (giving reason to believe he absolutely means what he says) to have his soldiers go from house to house, room to room and kill them all? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stacy in NJ Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 the word redonkulous. It's so appropriate, too. :001_smile: :iagree: and, I am going to use the word, "redonkulous." It just fits so many situations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stacy in NJ Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 Fox News. ;) And it didn't even cost me anything. :iagree: The Libyan situation has been covered in depth on NPR and PBS. Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spy Car Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 It was also covered in depth on Fox News. ;) And it didn't even cost me anything. You don't pay to get FOX "News"? :confused: I'm sure you are not going to equate the quality of journalism on NPR or PBS with the circus on FOX. Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Margaret in GA Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 Fox News. ;) And it didn't even cost me anything. Just your soul. :lol: sorry, couldn't help it Margaret Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Margaret in GA Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 You don't pay to get FOX "News"? :confused: I'm sure you are not going to equate the quality of journalism on NPR or PBS with the circus on FOX. Bill :iagree: I love nonsense, especially. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spy Car Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 :iagree: I love nonsense, especially. What's odd is that Rupert Murdoch runs the smuttiest US broadcast TV network (FOX), and publishes trashy tabloids around the world (some with Page 3 girls) and tarts up the anchors on FOX "News" and yet he somehow is able to present himself as a upstqnding defender of traditional virtues. I do not get it :lol: Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TXMary2 Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 "How would we feel..." I would feel great. Because that would mean there was hope for our people to survive despite the fact an insane leader was killing us because we peacefully disagreed with him. Not that I am stating whether I support or do not support this recent military action. I'm just saying if our leader was killing my friends, family, and country mates, and we had no rights to pick another leader, I might welcome another country's violent assistance, regardless of right or wrong. :iagree::iagree: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stacy in NJ Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 And, yes, I do equate Fox with NRP/PBS. But, then, I'm a knuckle-dragging wing-nut, not a thoughtful, nuanced, non-judgemental, light-seeker like you. You don't pay to get FOX "News"? :confused: I'm sure you are not going to equate the quality of journalism on NPR or PBS with the circus on FOX. Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LibraryLover Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 Brings back 1985 memories. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stacy in NJ Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 ;) Brings back 1985 memories. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spy Car Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 No I don't pay. It comes with basic in NJ. And basic cable is free in New Jersey? :confused: And, yes, I do equate Fox with NRP/PBS. But, then, I'm a knuckle-dragging wing-nut, not a thoughtful, nuanced, non-judgemental, light-seeker like you. OK, that makes sense :D How's is the research on The New Republic article coming? I'm looking forward to that apology. Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stacy in NJ Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 :001_smile: What's odd is that Rupert Murdoch runs the smuttiest US broadcast TV network (FOX), and publishes trashy tabloids around the world (some with Page 3 girls) and tarts up the anchors on FOX "News" and yet he somehow is able to present himself as a upstqnding defender of traditional virtues. I do not get it :lol: Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peela Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 W Some people question why it is mostly countries with large oil deposits that get "help" from other nations. Yes, its enough to make some of us a bit cynical about the supposed altruistic motives. To say the least! As for news- we have the internet. I watched popular news while the Japanese quake was headlines (which it no longer seems to be), and appreciated the coverage but was also annoyed that they seem to fill in space a lot by saying innane things and interviewed all sorts of people just for their virtually worthless opinion. But overall, I go to the internet for news, and check various sources. You have to dig a little but we do have an amazing sort of underground network of information on this planet right now (to me it seems lie the light and dark always balance themselves somehow). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pqr Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 Well there is nothing remotely similar to the quality of radio programming found on NPR with the possible exception of the BBC. NPR is a national treasure. And one gets a very different (and more insightful) level of analysis watching PBS than watching any of the cable news outlets. De-funding these is just away to further boobocracy. Bill You are joking, please tell me you are joking. NPR national treasure????? They should be defunded simply becuase the taxpayer should not be supporting radio stations. Given the comments of both Shillers (not related, to each other) it is difficult to argue that NPR is run in a professional manner never mind anything more than that. If they are so very good then let them stand on their own feet without the crutch provided by the taxpayer. They were interested in $ 5 million from a fictional Muslim group. (go to the 40second point) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stacy in NJ Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 And basic cable is free in New Jersey? :confused: No. But Fox is. OK, that makes sense :D How's is the research on The New Republic article coming? I'm looking forward to that apology. Bill I read the article, have you? Guess not, because otherwise you wouldn't be asking for an apology. The actual content of the article doesn't support your prior assertions, Bill. Your initial post with the accusation might have been legitimate if you had bothered to include necessary qualifiers. But because you got your information second hand, you weren't even aware of them. You were simply regurgitating information from partisan sources. As someone who purports to support logic, shame on you for this silly slight-of-hand. Perhaps you should judge yourself using the same standards you seem to judge others. Go read the article, cheapskate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts