Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 27 of 27
  1. #21  
    LTC Member Odysseus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    FT Belvoir, VA
    Posts
    15,638
    Quote Originally Posted by NJCardFan View Post
    He and Helen Thomas used to brow beat Bush 41 at his press conferences. But at least he never goaded Reagan into an on air argument like Rather did with Bush 41.
    When JFK was shot, Rather got footage of Dallas kids cheering because they were getting out of school early, but the announcement didn't mention Kennedy, so they didn't know why they were getting out. He edited the tape so that it seemed as if they were cheering the news of the assassination, and then used it to smear Dallas as a city of hate.

    Later, he reported that some schoolchildren in Dallas had applauded when they were notified of the president's death.[11] Administrators said that, in fact, the thrust of the announcement was that school was to be dismissed early (making the students' delight more understandable). This story infuriated local journalists at then-CBS affiliate KRLD-TV

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Rather
    Rather's reporting of the JFK assassination brought him to the attention of CBS, and jump started his career, so it can be said that his career started with one lie and ended with another, and there wasn't a lot of honest reporting in between.
    --Odysseus
    Sic Hacer Pace, Para Bellum.

    Before you can do things for people, you must be the kind of man who can get things done. But to get things done, you must love the doing, not the people!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #22  
    Senior Member Chuck58's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    New Mexico USA
    Posts
    990
    And, then there's the other big name, Walter Cronkite and his shameful announcement that we had lost the Tet, the American Embassy was overrun, which it wasn't, and the war was lost, which it wasn't. In fact, if we had taken the offensive as Westmoreland wanted, the Vietnam war might have ended by the end of 1968. The VC were so completely beaten that they never recovered.

    Cronkite, however, was so respected a 'journalist,' and so believed that he is almost solely responsible for the switch in opinion of that war, and I say responsible for the bulk of American deaths that came after.
    The poster formerly known as chuck58 on the old board.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #23  
    Senior Member Arroyo_Doble's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Ft Worth
    Posts
    3,788
    Quote Originally Posted by Odysseus View Post
    Wow. That's a serious attempt at deconstruction.

    Again, the actual quote:

    Many on the political right believe this president [Barack Obama] ought not to be there they oppose him not for his polices [sic] and political view but for who he is, an African American! These people and perhaps even certain news organizations (certainly the right wing talkers like Limbaugh) encourage disrespect for this president."
    First, it wasn't two separate clauses, but two sentences. Second, the second sentence clearly equates spreading disrespect for Obama with racial bias, and Donaldson specifically singled out Rush as an example. Now, you can pull all of the Clintonian parsing that you want, but the definition of "is" hasn't changed.
    No. Two clauses: These people, defined in the first sentence, and (perhaps) certain news organizations.

    Rush decided it was easier to argue against the straw man that all criticism of the President of the United States is characterized as racist. It isn't. But it is really easy to argue against a fantasy construct.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #24  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    2,615
    Quote Originally Posted by Arroyo_Doble View Post
    It was two separate clauses; one containing the group which opposes the president because he is black and the other being those in the Media (Rush specifically included). His claim is that both encourage disrespect for the President of the United States. He is not claiming that Rush opposes the president because he is black yet that is the straw man that Limbaugh creates with which he can argue. No where in your quote do I see Rush disagreeing with the position that he encourages disrespect for America's Commander-In-Chief.
    How ridiculous. The two sentences are inseparable. To attempt to claim that Donaldson was somehow trying to create some separate group of people who encourage disrespect and that has nothing to do with some claim of racism is ludicrous in the extreme.
    Olde-style, states' rights conservative. Ask if this concept confuses you.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #25  
    Moderator txradioguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Bavaria
    Posts
    7,618
    Quote Originally Posted by Arroyo_Doble View Post
    No. Two clauses: These people, defined in the first sentence, and (perhaps) certain news organizations.

    Rush decided it was easier to argue against the straw man that all criticism of the President of the United States is characterized as racist. It isn't. But it is really easy to argue against a fantasy construct.
    If all criticism isn't racist...then why does ever talking head on your side cry racism everytime a Conservative disagrees with something Obama does?

    Why did Donaldson pull card if all criticism isn't viewd by you and others on the left as racist?
    In Memory Of My Friend 1st Sgt. Tim Millsap A Co, 70th Eng. Bn. 3rd Bde 1st AD...K.I.A. 25 April 2005

    Liberalism Is The Philosophy Of The Stupid

    To Achieve Ordered Liberty You Must Have Moral Order As Well

    The libs/dems of today are the Quislings of former years. The cowards who would vote a fraud into office in exchange for handouts from the devil.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #26  
    Moderator txradioguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Bavaria
    Posts
    7,618
    Quote Originally Posted by Adam Wood View Post
    How ridiculous.
    Par for the course with anything Bok posts.
    In Memory Of My Friend 1st Sgt. Tim Millsap A Co, 70th Eng. Bn. 3rd Bde 1st AD...K.I.A. 25 April 2005

    Liberalism Is The Philosophy Of The Stupid

    To Achieve Ordered Liberty You Must Have Moral Order As Well

    The libs/dems of today are the Quislings of former years. The cowards who would vote a fraud into office in exchange for handouts from the devil.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #27  
    LTC Member Odysseus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    FT Belvoir, VA
    Posts
    15,638
    Quote Originally Posted by Arroyo_Doble View Post
    No. Two clauses: These people, defined in the first sentence, and (perhaps) certain news organizations.
    But, he specifically singled out Rush as someone belonging to the people defined in the first sentence: "...certainly the right wing talkers like Limbaugh."

    Quote Originally Posted by Arroyo_Doble View Post
    Rush decided it was easier to argue against the straw man that all criticism of the President of the United States is characterized as racist. It isn't. But it is really easy to argue against a fantasy construct.
    He called Limbaugh a racist, and Limbaugh responded, effectively. He didn't claim that Donaldson was saying that every critic was a racist (although I would challenge Donaldson to identify what he considers non-racially biased criticism), but specifically responded to the charge that he was a racists. However, by pretending that Rush did respond to a straw man argument, you are creating one of your own.
    --Odysseus
    Sic Hacer Pace, Para Bellum.

    Before you can do things for people, you must be the kind of man who can get things done. But to get things done, you must love the doing, not the people!
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •