Comments Posted By Henry
Displaying 1 To 5 Of 5 Comments
RON PAUL: PANDERER TO THE PARANOID?
Is the point of this article, then, to discredit Paul based on some of his supporters? Isn't this a "fallacy of false cause"? E.g., Ron Paul is insane because a number of his supporters are insane? By this same logic, were Ron Paul to say the sky is blue, it would be false because "conspiracy theorists" happen to agree with him. Of course you admit that some (most, actually) Paul supporters are completely rational, but the article focuses on the fringe groups, cites one angry neoconservative's response to Paul, cites the aggressive efforts to publicize Paul on the web (the only electronic media open to his supporters initially) and your own anecdotal evidence. What Exactly does this prove? That Paul attracts a wide variety of extremely passionate supporters?
And contrary to what is intimated here, Paul employs no underhanded tactics in his challenging of neoconservative ideas. We all know he speaks his mind in unequivocal terms at what is arguably neocon ground zero--Fox News.
Why don't you attempt to discredit Paul's views on free market economics, or on the role of government as defined by the Constitution, or even on what foreign policy would best safeguard our safety and liberty in the long term? Obviously I'm a Paul supporter, but I don't object to your taking issue with the man's views. I just don't see this article as discussing anything, whatsoever, of substance.
Comment Posted By Henry On 12.11.2007 @ 14:31
MAKING THE WORLD SAFE FOR TERRORISTS
The only way to get the attention of any media source is to stop supporting it. The ultra-liberal Atlanta Journal-Constitution (AJC) is hurting for subscribers. They are maning the telephones seeking subscribers. I receive a call at least once a week. There not enough liberals to make up the difference. It just takes time. The AJC is the main news paper in the state and there are few local papers that are worth anything. My local paper is growing in circulation. I have to start picking on the editor who is a pretty good guy. Where do I get my news. I cherry pick from a lot of papers and sites such as this one.
Bless all of you.
Comment Posted By Henry On 27.06.2006 @ 22:58
WHY WE NEED MORE INTROSPECTION FROM THE MEDIA
Why we need nore introspection from the media is an excellent article. But it misses the point. The point is that the war is not important to most of the liberal media. The objective of the liberal media and those working outside the media is to destroy our form of government and to install socialsim. If you do not believe this spend a very small amount on Amazon and find a used copy of "Commies" a journey through the Old Left,the New Left and the Leftover Left, by Ronald Radosh, Encounter books, San Francisco.cio. Born as a red diaper baby, he played the role for years and wrote a tell all that will catch your breath. The same media now wanted the US to lose in Korea, in viet nam, and now in Irag.
Comment Posted By Henry On 18.06.2006 @ 21:45
BOLTON APPLIES THE SCREWS TO THE UN
The UN is what theleague of nations that President Woodrow Wilson tried to get the senate to accept and they were snarter than Truman's senate. Probably at some time, the one worlders like James (Peanut) Carter is pushing for. The UN wants to tax U. S. citizens to support that corrupt organization. we fought one war on taxation without representation. We may have to do it again.
Bolton for President 2008
Comment Posted By Henry On 9.06.2006 @ 20:23
GIVE TILL IT HURTS - THEN START THE BLAME GAME
Before you leave the Blame Game, maybe you want to give your brother at ABC a call and ask him to do the same. He is one of those rare species that can whine, bushbash, and project media-armchair-general-stratigery in one mouthfull.
Comment Posted By Henry On 2.09.2005 @ 17:12
