Create a New Forum Admin Login Member Login Contribute to Voyager Search VoyForums Help Desk VoyForums Exchange VoyForums Directory/Categories VoyForums Homepage VoyForums News FAQ - Frequently Asked Questions

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, [4] ]

Subject: Arnett's "unbiased©" Experts Author: Xpltivdletd [ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ] Date Posted: 13:16:51 04/06/03 Sun In reply to: NKLS Cody 's message, "Thank you, Kathyrn : )" on 10:29:44 03/31/03 Mon Arnett’s exalted opinion that his remarks were not “…out of line with what the experts think” (about 2 paragraphs up the page) would be more credible if he named the “experts,” and it doesn’t require a degree in journalism to know that. It speaks volumes that he cites un-named experts as do the rest of the lot who are trying to make this another “Tet Offensive” (1968) disinformation coup. The notion that this is a shoving-match between patriotism and objective reporting is another false-dilemma talking point that waddles like a Democrat and quacks like one. To any Blame-America-First, “unbiased©,” “Mainstream®” journalist, no report that presents a positive picture of anything American but its Communists is “objective.” Ergo, to this “unbiased” lot, “patriot” and its derivatives are epithets in a class with “militia.” In their own “unbiased” focus-groups either expression will suffice, in lieu of a rebuttal, to send heretics scurrying for the tall grass. It is fashionable to pretend 'Freedom-of-Speech' equals freedom from any-&-all consequences of running off at the mouth--unless, of course, one says ungoodthinkful things at a gathering of Democrats! WRONG. The Motion Picture Academy made a business decision when it gave Michael Moore an award for his "documentary" (Trolling for Concubines or whatever*). NBC et al. made a business decision by out-placing Peter Arnett. The coming year may demonstrate the relative wisdom of those two decisions, but the entities making them had the right to make them--and patriotism (whether one calls that a compliment or an epithet) has nothing to do with it. RKBA! Regards, all. *(thank Dennis Miller for that wish-I'd-said-it transmogrification) [ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]