I didn't make it clear enough but I was actually thinking along the lines of how the internet makes widespread conspiracy mongering - BDS, CDS, truthers, etc. - so much easier.
If you want the paranoid in politics, you can go back a lot further than the Birchers. I was thinking specifically of internet based movements that seem to feed off each other and reinforce each other.Comment Posted By Rick Moran On 7.11.2007 @ 06:36
What the hell are you talking about. Coherence please.
You seem to be saying its Bush's fault that the deal with Bhutto fell through? Evidence please not just your half assed opinion which gets even muddier in your last sentence.
And how did it grow "more and more likely" that Musharraf would take this step? In fact, it grew less and less likely according to anyone who knows anything about it.
The Judiciary is mostly secular, democratic, and moderate. However, the lawyers are a different story. Many of the leading attorneys in the country are Islamist sympathizers. No time to look for a link but go to Asia Times on line and you should be able to find some articles from last summer about the lawyers agitating for re-opening the radical red mosque.Comment Posted By Rick Moran On 5.11.2007 @ 11:13
Don't waste your time, Chip. If they want to believe that a professional pollster would act so unprofessionally, let them stay with their little fantasy.
I wonder if Luntz is a Bilderberg?Comment Posted By Rick Moran On 1.11.2007 @ 09:55
Your comments were deleted because you didn't read the article:
I am not one who believes that everyone who criticizes neoconservatives is an anti-Semite. But in Ron Paulâ€™s case, he has attracted the support of white supremacists largely because they believe that his attacks on neocons validate their view (link goes to hate site) that the neoconservatives are agents of Israel and part of the worldwide Jewish conspiracy to destroy America and the white race.
At the risk of repeating myself, I do not believe the majority of Ron Paul supporters are haters...
What part of that don't you understand? Obviously, you didn't bother to read what I wrote hence, your comment on what you never read will not appear.Comment Posted By Rick Moran On 1.11.2007 @ 07:11
Heh - I've got my tin foil hat and raincoat on and am fully prepared for the onslaught.Comment Posted By Rick Moran On 1.11.2007 @ 06:36
Tom Paine could read. You obviously cannot:
"Knowing the crew in the White House and Pentagon, it would not surprise me in the slightest if the incompetence charge turned out to be true."
Strange way to "defend" Bush, don't you think?
But you don't think, or read which is why your comment was deleted.Comment Posted By Rick Moran On 27.10.2007 @ 21:09
Rumsfeld? Wake up Mr. Van Winkle!
And I still think Hunt should have kept his mouth shut about "incompetence" without giving more info.
What if the weather was bad? What if, as happened during the Clinton Administration, a high ranking foreigner was with Osama and killing him might have caused trouble in other areas of American diplomacy?
What if there were civilians in great numbers present?
There are probably a couple of other reasons why an attack would be aborted that would have nothing to do with "incompetence" - and if you read my post you would know I offer incompetence as a probability.
Too busy being an asshole to read that, huh.Comment Posted By Rick Moran On 27.10.2007 @ 11:28
So does that mean we can't trust the Hunt story? Or can we?
The trouble when you accuse a media outlet of total and complete bias is that any example to the contrary collapses your little house of cards - as the Hunt story does.
Therefore, you are left, like the rest of us, to take news stories from whatever source, one at a time and examine them individually for bias - something the left and apparently you don't have the intellectual honesty to do.Comment Posted By Rick Moran On 26.10.2007 @ 15:55
Sue et al:
There is a monumental difference between the way the left says the see Fox News and the right sees WaPo, NY Times, Reuters, CNN etc.
Only the fringe right argues that those other publications are not legitimate news outlets with individuals who exhibit bias.
The left - including "mainstream" blogs - sees the entire Fox Network as not only biased but illegitimate - to the point that they put pressure on the Democratic party not to have their presidential candidates attend any debates sponsored by that network. Almost without exception, they have made it a point to belittle ANY news coming from that network.
And now, all of a sudden, Fox is a font of truth and light.
Nauseating, dripping hypocrisy - among the worst I've seen in a while.Comment Posted By Rick Moran On 26.10.2007 @ 14:52
See comment above. Double for you.Comment Posted By Rick Moran On 26.10.2007 @ 10:26
Pages (132) : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132