Politics and the Media

[RenaissanceMan]

the fact their (SIC) is literally no record of him being in alabama (SIC) while not 100% solid and concrete evidence makes it a highly probable assumption that he was never their. (SIC) the (SIC) military is a bueracracy (SIC) to have no record means most likely it didn't happen.

Brilliant. No, really. People should hang on your every word, no matter how you spell it.

If only Bush had the sterling military record that Bill "loathing the military" Clinton has, and if only Bush had served his country in the military with such distinction as Barack Obama. That would be special.

 

[spidergoat]

the fact their is literally no record of him being in alabama while not 100% solid and concrete evidence makes it a highly probable assumption that he was never their. the military is a bueracracy to have no record means most likely it didn't happen.

We know how these things work, Bush Sr. was able to pull strings for him, a privilege us little people don't get. They are the true elitists.

 

[James R]

English isn't your strong suit, is it.

Hint: When the red squiggly line is under a word... look the word up, unless you wish to keep demonstrating that ... English isn't your strong suit.

English isn't your strong suit, is it?

When you ask a question, you need to put a question mark after it - even if it is a rhetorical question.

Also, you should look up the appropriate uses of the ellipsis ("..."). You have not used it correctly.

And always remember the first rule of pedantry: if you're going to correct somebody on his spelling or grammar, make damn sure you get everything right yourself.

 

[quadraphonics]

Also, you should look up the appropriate uses of the ellipsis ("..."). You have not used it correctly.

I'm not seeing a problem there.

 

[Trippy]

English isn't your strong suit, is it.

Hint: When the red squiggly line is under a word... look the word up, unless you wish to keep demonstrating that ... English isn't your strong suit.

Oh I forgot. You can't think until you've had a cup of coffee.

You're like a dog chasing around a cow and sniffing its arse, just waiting for the tiniest little bit of shit to drop on the ground so you can gobble it up.

I'm sorry you're arguments are so pathetic that all you can do is stalk me sniffing my arse waiting for the occasional spelling mistake to fall into your wide open mouth like mana from heaven so that you can quote those words which you seem to revere so much - as if they were handed to you by god himself, in some kind of attempt to do what precisely?

Discredit basic physical principles that were first realized over 100 years ago?

Here's a hint for you, genius.

My grasp of the English language on the whole is not so piss-poor that I require my browser to auto-check what I type.

 

[James R]

I'm not seeing a problem there.

You're right. You aren't.

 

[Pinwheel]

So whats the right way...to use elipses...?

 

[Fraggle Rocker]

So whats the right way...to use ellipses...?

There must be no space before and one space after. Unless it's followed by another punctuation mark instead of a word, in which case it's usually okay to leave out the trailing space. So you should insert a space between the first ellipsis and "to".

However, they should be used sparingly, like dashes and colons, with obvious exceptions such as legal and technical writing.

 

[The Esotericist]

-- David Rockefeller, Speaking at the June, 1991 Bilderberger meeting in Baden, Germany (a meeting also attended by then-Governor Bill Clinton and by Dan Quayle--

"We are grateful to the Washington Post, The New York Times, Time
Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended
our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost
forty years."

"It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world
if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years.
But, the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite
and world bankers is surely preferable to the national
auto-determination practiced in past centuries."

by: David Rockefeller (1915- ) Internationalist billionaire, CFR kingpin, founder of the Trilateralist Commission, World Order Godfather
Date: June 1991 Baden, Germany
Source: Bilderberger Meeting, Baden, Germany

http://mingstruth.blogspot.com/2010/08/david-rockefeller-thanks-media-for-its.html

Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure — one world, if you will. If that is the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it. * Page 405 of Rockefeller's autobiography, "Memoirs", ISBN-13: 978-0812969733

Now, RenaissanceMan, I don't pay attention at all to the corporate press, b/c I know they are ALL bought and paid for. So, I am not real positive who the conservative journalists in this list are, I think most corporate journalists are liberal. Yet, you will pay special note, that the old heavy hitters in the conservative press, ARE in collusion with those liberals you so despise. What does that tell ya? What's your opinion of say. . . Rupert Murdoch, or William F. Buckley, Jr., or Irving Kristol, or Mort Kondracke, or Charles Krauthammer?

THE ESTEEMED CORPORATE PRESS --

____________________

Journalists and the Council on Foreign Relations

The Council on Foreign Relations has been the most powerful private
organization in U.S. foreign policy since it began in 1921. While
priding itself on non-partisanship and on recent efforts to recruit
minorities, women, and youth (under 35), CFR's 3200 members mainly
reflect the resources needed by the ruling class to maintain their
power. Don't call them if you want to join; they call you. And
don't wait for a call unless you have big money, national security
expertise, CIA experience, a political constituency, or clout with
the media. CFR publishes the prestigious journal "Foreign Affairs"
as well as a number of books and reports. Another major activity is
to organize closed meetings for their members with assorted world
leaders. Everyone feels free to share views and information about
current world events, primarily because CFR has strict confidentiality
rules and keeps its records locked up for 25 years.

A blue-ribbon panel of the Council on Foreign Relations suggested
in 1996 that the CIA be freed from some policy constraints on
covert operations, such as the use of journalists and clergy as
cover. Normally this would be laughable, because almost every
journalist who's ever been abroad knows how dangerous this can be
if he's trying to develop sources. But no one was laughing, because
CFR "suggestions" since 1921 have usually become official policy
within a few years.

The following journalists and media moguls were listed in the 1995
membership roster of the Council on Foreign Relations. Undoubtedly
numerous names were missed, since they are not otherwise identified
in the roster:

Roone Arledge, Peter Grose, Walter H. Pincus, Sidney Blumenthal, Jim Hoagland, Norman Podhoretz, David Brinkley, Warren Hoge, Dan Rather, Tom Brokaw, David Ignatius, Stephen S. Rosenfeld, William F. Buckley, Jr., Robert G. Kaiser, A. M. Rosenthal, James E. Burke, Marvin Kalb, Jack Rosenthal, Hodding Carter III, Peter R. Kann, Diane Sawyer
John Chancellor, Anne Karalekas, Daniel L. Schorr, George Crile III, Joe Klein, Robert B. Semple,Jr., Arnaud de Borchgrave Morton Kondracke Hedrick L. Smith, Karen DeYoung, Charles Krauthammer, George Stephanopoulos, Christopher S. Dickey, Irving Kristol, Strobe Talbott, Joan Didion, Jim Lehrer, Laurence A. Tisch, Leonard Downie, Jr. Joseph Lelyveld, Seymour Topping, Elizabeth Drew, Lee Lescaze, Robert C. Toth, Rowland Evans, Jr., Anthony Lewis, Mark Uhlig, James Fallows Flora Lewis Garrick Utley, Thomas L. Friedman, Mitchel Levitas, Katrina vanden Heuvel,
Suzanne Garment, Michael E. Lind, L. Bruce van Voorst, Leslie H. Gelb Kati Marton, Milton Viorst, David R. Gergen, Jessica T. Mathews, Ben J. Wattenberg, Philip L. Geyelin, Karl E. Meyer, Craig R. Whitney, Georgie Anne Geyer, Sig Mickelson, Steven Weisman, Katharine Graham, Judith Miller, Lally G. Weymouth, James L. Greenfield Rupert Murdoch Roger W. Wilkins, Meg Greenfield, Jack Nelson, Mortimer B. Zuckerman, John B. Oakes

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Public Information Research, Inc., PO Box 680635, San Antonio TX 78268
Tel:210-509-3160 Fax:210-509-3161 Nonprofit publisher of NameBase
http://www.pir.org/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

The list below is an older one. TC= Trilateral Commision. - J2


CBS: Laurence A. Tisch, CEO -- CFR
NBC/RCA: John F. Welch, CEO -- CFR
Lester Crystal -- CFR, TC
R.W. Sonnenfeidt -- CFR, TC

Associated Press:

Harold Anderson -- CFR
Katharine Graham -- CFR, TC

Reuters:
Michael Posner -- CFR

Baltimore Sun:
Henry Trewhitt -- CFR

Washington Times:
Arnaud De Borchgrave -- CFR

Children's TV Workshop (Sesame Street):
Joan Ganz Cooney, Pres. -- CFR

Cable News Network:
W. Thomas Johnson, Pres. -- TC
Daniel Schorr -- CFR

U.S. News & World Report:
David Gergen -- TC

New York Times Co.:

Richard Gelb -- CFR
William Scranton -- CFR, TC
John F. Akers, Dir. -- CFR
Louis V. Gerstner, Jr., Dir. -- CFR
George B. Munroe, Dir. -- CFR
Donald M. Stewart, Dir. -- CFR
Cyrus R. Vance, Dir. -- CFR
A.M. Rosenthal -- CFR
Seymour Topping -- CFR
James Greenfield -- CFR
Max Frankel -- CFR
Jack Rosenthal -- CFR
John Oakes -- CFR
Harrison Salisbury -- CFR
H.L. Smith -- CFR
Steven Rattner -- CFR
Richard Burt -- CFR
Flora Lewis -- CFR

Time, Inc.:

Ralph Davidson -- CFR
Donal M. Wilson -- CFR
Henry Grunwald -- CFR
Alexander Heard -- CFR
Sol Linowitz -- CFR
Thomas Watson, Jr. -- CFR
Strobe Talbott -- CFR
Newsweek/Washington Post:
Katharine Graham -- CFR
N. Deb. Katzenbach -- CFR
Robert Christopher -- CFR
Osborne Elliot -- CFR
Phillip Geyelin -- CFR
Murry Marder -- CFR
Maynard Parker -- CFR
George Will -- CFR, TC
Robert Kaiser -- CFR
Meg Greenfield -- CFR
Walter Pincus -- CFR
Murray Gart -- CFR
Peter Osnos -- CFR
Don Oberdorfer -- CFR

Dow Jones & Co (Wall Street Journal):

Richard Wood -- CFR
Robert Bartley -- CFR, TC
Karen House -- CFR

National Review:
Wm. F. Buckley, Jr. -- CFR

Readers Digest:

George V. Grune, CEO -- CFR
William G. Bowen, Dir. -- CFR

Syndicated Columnists:

Geogia Anne Geyer -- CFR
Ben J. Wattenberg -- CFR

Other CFR or TC Media Personalities ( who have changed employers ):
David Gergen
Ted Koppel
Diane Sawyer
Barbara Walters
John Scali
Robert McNeil
Jim Lehrer
Charlene Hunter-Gault
Hodding Carter
Daniel Schorr
Bill Moyers
Dan Rather
Richard C. Hottelet
Tom Brokaw
David Brinkley
John Chancelor
Marvin Kalb
Irving R. Levine
Harry Reasoner
William S. Paley
Charles C. Collingwood
William F. Buckley
George Will
Meg Greenfield

WASHINGTON POST ( partial )
Katharine Graham
Arjay Miller
Nicholas deB. Katzenbach
Walter Pincus
A.Hays Sulzberger

REVOLVING DOORS--

Donald Baer: Director of White House speechwriting and research,
1994-; U.S. News & World Report Asst. Managing Editor, 1991-94;
Senior Ed.,1988-91

Douglas Bennet: Assistant Secretary of State for intergovernmental
orgs., 1993-; President of National Public Radio (NPR), 1983-93

Carolyn Curiel: White House speechwriter, 1993-; Nightline
producer, 1992; New York Times editor, 1988-92; Washington
Post editor, 1986-88

David French: Deputy Director for Communications, CIA, 1993-;
CNN weekend Washington anchor and reporter, early 1980s-1993

Rick Inderfurth: Deputy to UN Ambassador Madeleine Albright,
1993-; ABC News reporter, 1981-1991 (Pentagon, national security,
Moscow) [Inderfurth has now been nominated Assistant Secretary of
State for South Asian Affairs.]

Thomas Ross: Special Asst. to the President and Senior Director
for Public Affairs at the National Security Council (NSC), 1994-;
Senior Vice President, NBC News, 1986-89

Tara Sonenshine: Special Asst. to the President and Dep. Director
for communications, National Security Council, 1994
Editorial Producer, ABC News Nightline, 1991-94; D.C. bureau
producer, '82-89. [She since left the NSC to be a reporter in
Newsweek's Washington bureau, then earlier this year she jumped
back to the NSC.]

Carl Stern: Director of Public Affairs, Justice Dept, 1993-;
NBC News Washington reporter, 1967-93 (legal affairs and Supreme
Court)

Strobe Talbott: Deputy Secretary of State, 1994-;
Ambassador-at-Large to the former Soviet Republics, 1993-94;
Time Editor-at-Large 1989-92; Time Washington Bureau Chief 1985-89

HOW MANY STORIES HAVE ANY OF THESE PEOPLE DONE ON THE
MOST INFLUENTIAL PRIVATE POLICY GROUP IN THE UNITED STATES ???

CFR meetings are usually held in secret and are restricted to
members and very select guests. All members are free to express
themselves at meetings unrestrained, because the Non-
Attribution Rule guarantees that "others will not attribute
or characterize their statements in public media forums or
knowingly transmit them to persons who will.
-- Council on Foreign Relations' 1992 Annual Report.

http://www.mail-archive.com/ctrl@listserv.aol.com/msg66920.html
conservative? liberal? :shrug: They're all owned in the end.

 

[RenaissanceMan]

///

Here's a hint for you, genius.

My grasp of the English language on the whole is not so piss-poor that I require my browser to auto-check what I type.

Here's a hint for you, genius.
You're not remotely as important as you pretend to be. Not remotely.

You blow up trivia as if you always have all the answers.
I make a faux pas, and you trot out your verbal sophistication.
I give it back to you time and again, and you create some new excuse to preponderate, for your own self-importance matters more to you than anything else.

Your narcissism bubbles up in everything you write.

I would challenge you to an IQ test as I challenged Josh Mankiewicz of NBC, but I doubt that you have $10,000 to lose. Josh wasn't man enough to take my challenge, and you don't have the money.

It would be one thing if anyone could bring up a subject for discussion without dozens, indeed scores of liberals squealing their myriad objections, many of them imagined. But no, that simply isn't tolerated.

Folks like you always beat dissenters down to your level, and the politically correct set here vastly outnumbers everyone else.

Now grasp this, "genius". I had occasion to review my personal finances two days ago. On second thought, I won't bother with the details. You couldn't possibly believe them anyhow.

 

[joepistole]

Here's a hint for you, genius.
You're not remotely as important as you pretend to be. Not remotely.

You blow up trivia as if you always have all the answers.
I make a faux pas, and you trot out your verbal sophistication.
I give it back to you time and again, and you create some new excuse to preponderate, for your own self-importance matters more to you than anything else.

Your narcissism bubbles up in everything you write.

I would challenge you to an IQ test as I challenged Josh Mankiewicz of NBC, but I doubt that you have $10,000 to lose. Josh wasn't man enough to take my challenge, and you don't have the money.

It would be one thing if anyone could bring up a subject for discussion without dozens, indeed scores of liberals squealing their myriad objections, many of them imagined. But no, that simply isn't tolerated.

Folks like you always beat dissenters down to your level, and the politically correct set here vastly outnumbers everyone else.

Now grasp this, "genius". I had occasion to review my personal finances two days ago. On second thought, I won't bother with the details. You couldn't possibly believe them anyhow.

I cannot speak for Trippy's finances. But assuming you are correct, he does not have 10k to wager, you don't have a brain. So I think you should count your blessings.

Because as proven many times, you can never support any of your grandiose claims with fact or even reason. All you can do is bring out an ad hominem attack and this is exactly what you have done and continue to do when challenged to produce fact and reason.

 

[arfa brane]

I had occasion to review my personal finances two days ago. On second thought, I won't bother with the details. You couldn't possibly believe them anyhow.

.
My mouth getting bigger;
My eyes getting bigger;
And my bank account...


Note: according to the Oxford Guide to Writing, an ellipsis should be spaced, i.e. " . . . ", rather than " ... ". Internet usage appears to have eclipsed this convention, but that's progress for ya.

 

[Trippy]

Here's a hint for you, genius.
You're not remotely as important as you pretend to be. Not remotely.

You blow up trivia as if you always have all the answers.
I make a faux pas, and you trot out your verbal sophistication.
I give it back to you time and again, and you create some new excuse to preponderate, for your own self-importance matters more to you than anything else.

Your narcissism bubbles up in everything you write.

I would challenge you to an IQ test as I challenged Josh Mankiewicz of NBC, but I doubt that you have $10,000 to lose. Josh wasn't man enough to take my challenge, and you don't have the money.

It would be one thing if anyone could bring up a subject for discussion without dozens, indeed scores of liberals squealing their myriad objections, many of them imagined. But no, that simply isn't tolerated.

Folks like you always beat dissenters down to your level, and the politically correct set here vastly outnumbers everyone else.

Now grasp this, "genius". I had occasion to review my personal finances two days ago. On second thought, I won't bother with the details. You couldn't possibly believe them anyhow.

Still no science to discuss then?

Just more strawmen and ad hominems?

Did my last post bruise your ego that much?

I'm still waiting on you to discuss the basic physical principles of the matter.

 

[Trippy]

Here's a hint for you, genius.
You're not remotely as important as you pretend to be. Not remotely.

You blow up trivia as if you always have all the answers.
I make a faux pas, and you trot out your verbal sophistication.
I give it back to you time and again, and you create some new excuse to preponderate, for your own self-importance matters more to you than anything else.

Your narcissism bubbles up in everything you write.

I would challenge you to an IQ test as I challenged Josh Mankiewicz of NBC, but I doubt that you have $10,000 to lose. Josh wasn't man enough to take my challenge, and you don't have the money.

It would be one thing if anyone could bring up a subject for discussion without dozens, indeed scores of liberals squealing their myriad objections, many of them imagined. But no, that simply isn't tolerated.

Folks like you always beat dissenters down to your level, and the politically correct set here vastly outnumbers everyone else.

Now grasp this, "genius". I had occasion to review my personal finances two days ago. On second thought, I won't bother with the details. You couldn't possibly believe them anyhow.

Seemingly you are unable to comprehend even the difference between sardonicism and genuine narcissism.

No matter.

If you want to wave your penis around, and mark your territory splashing urine about the place, go right ahead. I'll be in the other corner with the adults and the reasoned conversation.

 

[RenaissanceMan]

English isn't your strong suit, is it?

When you ask a question, you need to put a question mark after it - even if it is a rhetorical question.

No, you do not. You should do your homework before putting two fingers to keyboard.

Here is but one reference which confirms that question marks are optional in rhetorical questions. Didn't you know.

http://sites.google.com/site/punctuationguide/Home/the-question-mark

Also, you should look up the appropriate uses of the ellipsis ("..."). You have not used it correctly.

And always remember the first rule of pedantry: if you're going to correct somebody on his spelling or grammar, make damn sure you get everything right yourself.

I didn't originate the pedantry, Mr. English Professor. Your pal, Trippy, did.

Didn't you know.

It's terribly hypocritical of you to rebuke me for pedantry when in fact he was the Primary Pedant.

Now back to the original subject of the thread, viz. "politics and the media."

You and Trippy may wish to derail the thread, but Mr. Fraggle Rocker makes clear that such derailing is something upon which he doth frown.

Verstehen sie das.

ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, PBS, the New York Times, USA Today, Time, Newsweek, and countless other sources for the "news" are hopelessly left-wing and extremely biased. Can you try to stick to the subject... for a change.....

 

[James R]

Here is but one reference which confirms that question marks are optional in rhetorical questions. Didn't you know.

http://sites.google.com/site/punctuationguide/Home/the-question-mark

It's not my fault if that site got it wrong.

Whoever wrote that doesn't know how to use question marks correctly in rhetorical questions - just like you.

 

[Trippy]

I didn't originate the pedantry, Mr. English Professor. Your pal, Trippy, did.

Didn't you know.

It's terribly hypocritical of you to rebuke me for pedantry when in fact he was the Primary Pedant.

Yes, because pointing out that sic, which you were abusing anyway, and capitalizing unnecessarily is pednatry.

Or was it my pointing out your gross misrepresentations of my arguments that you consider pednatry? Or perhaps that was faux pas that you were referring to.

Tell me - do you make a habit of going around and doing things because everybody else is doing it? Because that's what your excuse amounts to at this point "But moooommmmmyyyyy! He staaaaarted it!"

Grow up.