- Oct 9, 1999
- 46,892
- 10,713
- 147
97.6% do! Confirmed!!
You'll find that study in my blog, www.OMGPerkBlog2U.org.asm, as peer reviewed by all the other blogs which reprinted it. The results are accurate within 2.4%. (It's based on a poll of people who came to my site to get information.)
Rigorously scientific, I used advanced base 10 mathematics to tabulate the results, and even spell checked the entire article!
OK, I admit, I published the article in exchange for two advance tickets to Jeb Bush's 2009 inaugural.
You've got to plan ahead these days.
TastesLikeChicken
Lifer
- Sep 12, 2004
- 16,852
- 59
- 86
Where am I dismissing anything concerning those who were paid?
Some of you seem a bit confused here. I am not defending a damn thing in regards to payments. I am merely bringing to light the hypocrisy of those who would slam one party and give the other pass for a similar transgression.
Instead of acknowledging that though, people would rather argue levels of degree and split hairs. How f'n ridiculous.
Then there are morons like conjur in this thread who are adding nothing but smarm. No surprise there though.
The outright bias displayed in this forum is disgusting.
This has been argued before...
Lets compare the situation with dean with the situation with the bush admin situation...
medium was a credible newsource?
dean: no
bush: yes
(I could almost stop here since blogs are one of the least credible newsources but I won't)
some from of disclaimer was present?
dean: yes
bush: no
money used was taxpayers money?
dean: no
bush: yes
in a position to affect real change? <-- added in
dean: no
bush: yes
level of "shadiness" <--- my opinion on this one
dean: a little bit shady (but only in the slightly misleading sense)
bush: very shady (no attempt at informing people that people were being paid)
Given this I wouldn't call anyone who is really pissed off at the bush admin but not all that pissed off at the dean campaign a "hypocrite." The 2 situations can barely be compared given the first 3 facts I just mentioned. Any one of those 3 could just about make them not comparable on their own but together that's a pretty tight case if you ask me.
Lets compare the situation with dean with the situation with the bush admin situation...
medium was a credible newsource?
dean: no
bush: yes
(I could almost stop here since blogs are one of the least credible newsources but I won't)
some from of disclaimer was present?
dean: yes
bush: no
money used was taxpayers money?
dean: no
bush: yes
in a position to affect real change? <-- added in
dean: no
bush: yes
level of "shadiness" <--- my opinion on this one
dean: a little bit shady (but only in the slightly misleading sense)
bush: very shady (no attempt at informing people that people were being paid)
Given this I wouldn't call anyone who is really pissed off at the bush admin but not all that pissed off at the dean campaign a "hypocrite." The 2 situations can barely be compared given the first 3 facts I just mentioned. Any one of those 3 could just about make them not comparable on their own but together that's a pretty tight case if you ask me.
You are an independent? I think I missed the post where you did not blindly support the Bush administration.
-------------------
Bush Apologists of America (BAA): pulling the wool over America's eyes since 1980
TastesLikeChicken
Lifer
- Sep 12, 2004
- 16,852
- 59
- 86
Guys, let's not forget another important fact....
Dean was not in any position to affect any sort of public agenda. Bush is.
lozina
Lifer
- Sep 10, 2001
- 11,711
- 8
- 81
Unfortunately your stated position is pretty weak currently, like a foundation built in a swamp, because in your desperate attempt to marginalize the essence of this thread you threw a textbook strawman at it with your irrelevent blogger comparison. The only hypocrite here seems to be you: you complain about some bias (which I can't argue with, there is alot of bias form both sides of the coin on these forums) but then you go ahead and excrete bias from every pore of your body, in pretty much every thread I've seen you participate in.
TastesLikeChicken
Lifer
- Sep 12, 2004
- 16,852
- 59
- 86
I find many blogs far more credible than, say, SeeBS. But you're probably right here. Kos usually didn't rise above the claim of "Bush is Hitler." and any site with members who would make that claim has no credibvility whatsoever.
Plese, don't stop.
So one tells everybody he's a partisan shill and the other one hides that fact. End result - both are partisan shills. And?
The "taxpayer money" used in the case of Williams was earmarked for advertising and promotion of the NCLB act. It was paid to Williams by a public relations firm for that express reason. So is the origin of the funds really any kind of issue? No, it's nothing more than a red herring.
Did Bush hide that someone was being paid, or did Williams hide that he was being paid? Who is the burden of disclosure on in this case?
I don't think your case is tight at all. It brings up some inconsequential points, a red herring, and a faulty determination about what is and what is not credible.
Both were wrong. Both should be equally criticised or niether criticised at all. Focusing on one while ignoring the other is hypocritical and that's all there is to it.
TastesLikeChicken
Lifer
- Sep 12, 2004
- 16,852
- 59
- 86
You really don't get the difference?
Did the dems pay off Bloggers with taxpayer money? Bush is using taxpayer money from the HHS budget to buy propaganda.
TastesLikeChicken
Lifer
- Sep 12, 2004
- 16,852
- 59
- 86
Aren't you one of those people who frequently equates Bush with Hitler in here and can't seem to see any difference. All of the sudden shades of gray have now become important to you?
This is EXACTLY the type of hypocrisy I'm talking about in here.
Thanks for replying and providing further confirmation of precisely what I've been claiming.
Nice evasion of the real issue, using taxpayer money to buy rightwing propaganda.
Looks like you got nothing to say on that except try to dodge that.
I would ask you to show me where I equated Bush with Hitler, but let's STAY ON TOPIC.
i spend a ton of my day at work online and ive never read a blog.
i have no idea who the bloggers are that have been accused, except for kos (or cos. or coz. or koz. you know what i mean, no?) but after reading up on it found out that he had, in fact, disclosed all info necessary.
this seems slightly more shameless.
but even if the democrats were paying off bloggers, that does not excuse republicans (especially not higher ups) doing the same thing to mainstream media writers/reporters/personalities.
i have trouble seeing how one would argue that it does.
i have no idea who the bloggers are that have been accused, except for kos (or cos. or coz. or koz. you know what i mean, no?) but after reading up on it found out that he had, in fact, disclosed all info necessary.
this seems slightly more shameless.
but even if the democrats were paying off bloggers, that does not excuse republicans (especially not higher ups) doing the same thing to mainstream media writers/reporters/personalities.
i have trouble seeing how one would argue that it does.
They are using taxpayer money to buy rightwing propaganda, that's the issue. Not that media are whores.
I see. I am sorry I missed your other posts. I want to correct my bad impression of you. Do you have links?
Is that legal? Can the government contribute to political campaigns like this? Was it disclosed on Dub's disclosure reports?
TastesLikeChicken
Lifer
- Sep 12, 2004
- 16,852
- 59
- 86
Is it illegal? Got proof?
As far as I can see, Williams is unethical for not disclosing he was paid to promote NCLB. But this act is already voted into law and Williams was merely being paid to promote it in the public eye. It was a PR campaign for an existing law, which is nothing new. It had nothing to do with a Bush campaign plank or anything of the sort.
So please explain what was illegal about it.
You turn every thread into accusations of left wing hypocracy. The left is no different from the right. If you have a problem with left wing hypocracy and radicals then why do you spew the same junk?
And yes, you "dismiss" the case against paid propogandists when your only response up to that point had been "The left does it to!".
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter