tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14237465.post2225862870765862440..comments2024-03-22T19:12:22.089+11:00Comments on One Salient Oversight: The State of Conservatism in AmericaNeil Cameron (One Salient Oversight)http://www.blogger.com/profile/03143948543305522865noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14237465.post-53669834249315283932008-06-29T15:53:00.000+10:002008-06-29T15:53:00.000+10:00Thanks for those, I guess. I am disappointed you...Thanks for those, I guess. I am disappointed you didn't tell me about the blind squirrel and his nut.<BR/><BR/>If you have the time and patience to wade through many tons of mud and excrement to find the occasional semi-precious stone, well then God bless you. <BR/><BR/>I don't have the time or inclination. Media Matters and other muckers of their ilk are not worth my time when so many other more reputable sources are available.BLBeamerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00953399820620982720noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14237465.post-55239400910071068682008-06-29T10:04:00.000+10:002008-06-29T10:04:00.000+10:00Two adages for you:"Even a stopped clock tells the...Two adages for you:<BR/><BR/>"Even a stopped clock tells the right time twice a day"<BR/><BR/>"A desire for balance can lead to imbalance because sometimes something is true".Neil Cameron (One Salient Oversight)https://www.blogger.com/profile/03143948543305522865noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14237465.post-9272579302255269432008-06-29T02:49:00.000+10:002008-06-29T02:49:00.000+10:00Please Neil, I read the linked articles. You link...Please Neil, I read the linked articles. You linked to Media Matters. Using your criteria, to qualify as being reliable, the source should have a record of being honest and at least as accurate as the person they are trying to expose. Media Matters has neither. Oliver Willis and David Brock? Puh-leeze! Sean Hannity has more reliability than either of them, and Hannity <I>is</I> a partisan hack.<BR/><BR/>Hewitt's obviously jesting. Based on the article, Hume may or may not be referring to an article that Media Matters says Jake Tapper may or may not be also referring to. That's their (and your) case that Republican partisans "can't get their facts straight"?<BR/><BR/>I didn't bother linking to the Limbaugh piece - in the interest of saving time. Limbaugh's not a journalist, anyway. He is a partisan entertainment figure. He's just as fervent as Media Matters, and possibly just as reliable.BLBeamerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00953399820620982720noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14237465.post-3996341612130552102008-06-28T16:56:00.000+10:002008-06-28T16:56:00.000+10:00The links are all there. If you want to refute the...The links are all there. If you want to refute them by fact checking then go ahead - I'll think you'll find they're accurate insofar as they were said by the people and were shown up to be quite wrong.<BR/><BR/>As for Hewitt's comments being hyperbole, you must remember that in order to qualify as hyperbole the person speaking them must not have a record of saying all sorts of stupid or inflammatory things.<BR/><BR/>Hewitt stated yesterday: "I think Sen. Obama’s election will greatly increase the likelihood of an attack on the United States. Because of the policies he advocates, a return to the 90s, the Clinton-style prosecute but do not pursue the terrorists before they’ve committed crimes is a recipe for disaster for the United States." (http://thinkprogress.org/2008/06/27/hewitt-obamas-election-would-greatly-increase-the-likelihood-of-an-attack-on-the-united-states/)<BR/><BR/>If there's a guy running around saying that Obama = terrorism, and then makes a joke about it, is it hyperbole or is it true?<BR/><BR/>I encourage anyone who reads my posts to click the links I provide to find out the truth for themselves. It would certainly save time.Neil Cameron (One Salient Oversight)https://www.blogger.com/profile/03143948543305522865noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14237465.post-33256838534168655992008-06-28T16:31:00.000+10:002008-06-28T16:31:00.000+10:00"...controlled by scaremongering Republican partis...<I>"...controlled by scaremongering Republican partisans who can't even get their facts straight."<BR/></I><BR/>There were very few facts - offered as facts - in any of those quotes. Which ones did they not get right? Hewitt's was obviously a jest. He must be a fervent Ohio State football fan and I don't believe for a moment he really believes Obama's election will lead to nuclear holocaust.<BR/><BR/>I never know what Limbaugh's talking about because I never listen to him.<BR/><BR/>But tell me: what facts not offered in jest or as hyperbole in those quotes were incorrect?BLBeamerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00953399820620982720noreply@blogger.com