[Vision2020] love letters or a desperate cry for attention?

[g. crabtree]

"No Weatherman believed what he wanted about Obama, and marshaled
evidence to support his belief, when any reasonable person -- any,
reasonable, intellectually honest person -- operates on the opposite
principle."

Intellectually honest? That's funny. You can have absolutely no idea how NW came by his beliefs. For all you know he could have been OBL's former next door neighbor or ex-girlfriend. He might have been one of the multitude of down-trodden relatives that periodically pop up. He might have lived in Chicago and seen first hand and close up what mistake the man would be as chief executive. He might also have been a person with strong conservative convictions and a burning desire for smaller government. To make a statement such as yours is to display a bias at least as great as the one displayed by NW if not greater.

Regardless of how the anonymous poster came by their convictions they were clearly making an all out, everything but the kitchen sink effort to sway any undecided potential voter, not an unreasonable thing to do during an election cycle on a forum where political discussion frequently occurs. He/she may have gone slightly overboard on one or two occasions but, all in all, I thought that the info was timely, the place appropriate, and the time spot on. You certainly can't say that spirited discussion was not sparked and that is, after all, sort of the point of sites such as this no matter how much a certain element would prefer a monolithic liberal echo chamber.

g


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Chasuk" <chasuk at gmail.com>
To: "g. crabtree" <jampot at roadrunner.com>
Cc: "Joe Campbell" <philosopher.joe at gmail.com>; <vision2020 at moscow.com>; "Gray Tree Crab aka Big Bertha" <gray.treecrab.aka.big.bertha at gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, May 01, 2009 12:15 PM
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] love letters or a desperate cry for attention?


On Fri, May 1, 2009 at 06:00, g. crabtree <jampot at roadrunner.com> wrote:
> Whose memory needs a tune up?
>
> A very small sample from the November '08 archive. Topics which any
> reasonable person would have to agree were timely, contained information
> that was pertinent to the discussion, and were not ad hominem attacks on any
> member of this forum.
>
>
> [Vision2020] Murdoch says Obama win could worsen financial crisis: report
> No Weatherman
> [Vision2020] Obama's New Attack on Those Who Don't Want Higher Taxes:
> ‘Selfishness’ No Weatherman
> [Vision2020] Obama aunt from Kenya living in US illegally No Weatherman
> [Vision2020] Obama says he didn't know aunt's illegal status — and he still
> has not proven his own “natural born citizen” status No Weatherman
> [Vision2020] $800,000 to ACORN — $700,000 for stage props: CHANGE YOU CAN
> BELIEVE IN No Weatherman
> [Vision2020] Has Obama Overplayed the Race Card? No Weatherman
> [Vision2020] Obama's Hug-a-Thug Crime Policy No Weatherman
> [Vision2020] crowd boos Obama No Weatherman
> [Vision2020] Everything You Wanted to Know About the Obama Online
> Fundraising Scandal in Less Than 5 Minutes! No Weatherman
> [Vision2020] Obama’s homies (Black Panthers) intimidating whites at the
> polls No Weatherman

If by timely you mean regurgitated before their newsworthiness
expired, I might agree.  If by pertinent you mean they had tangential
relation to the discussion, I would agree if there had been a
discussion, but all I recollect was an info-dump presenting slightly
shuffled data, again and again and again.

No Weatherman believed what he wanted about Obama, and marshaled
evidence to support his belief, when any reasonable person -- any,
reasonable, intellectually honest person -- operates on the opposite
principle.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20090501/6a6e435e/attachment.html