Kerry Infidelity?
- Thread starter HarryKeogh
- Start date
Hey, no big deal...Kodiak said:
Ahhhh...
Sorry, Zero. I misunderstood (maybe you weren't sufficiently clear?)what you were saying.
Yes, the opposite - blindly accepting information is just as bad as blindly rejecting it.
I think part of the problem is that the media LOVES SEX STORIES!! They are willing to talk about sex day and night, if you let them, and rumors are actually better than fact, as far as the media is concerned.
Tricky
Briefly immortal
Yes, but that is not the same as "blind". If you had a provider of information that had frequently provided bad and biased information, then to reject it out of hand could be construed as a sound practice.Kodiak said:
Suppose, for example, you had a contractor to provide competitor data for your industry. Suppose that that contractor had often been caught manufacturing data to make one of the competitors look good (or bad). It is likely that you would refuse to purchase data from this contractor based on his reputation. That does not preclude that he might sometimes give good data, but that it was not worth the risk to trust it.
You might get burned a few times by his rare "hits", but in the long run, you would have made a sound decision which was not blind, but based on evidence and experience.
(Note: For a simplified version of this explanation, read "The Boy Who Cried 'Wolf'".)
Kodiak
Illuminator
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2001
- Messages
- 3,279
Tricky said:
You're just being lazy and falling for a logical fallacy. With just a little effort - examining the data and not the source or disseminator - you could avoid ever getting burned by the rare "hit".
Lucky for all of us that the scientific community doesn't adopt what you propose.
Tricky
Briefly immortal
Putting on the mud suit
For those who think that this Drudge report is just a private group wallowing in the slime, well, you may be right. But that doesn't mean that the "official" groups won't do it too. The Bush campaign (which last week spent as much as Kerry has in his whole campaign chest) has already revealed that they plan to go negative towards the end of the campaign.
At least Bush won't be mentioning Kerry's war record.
For those who think that this Drudge report is just a private group wallowing in the slime, well, you may be right. But that doesn't mean that the "official" groups won't do it too. The Bush campaign (which last week spent as much as Kerry has in his whole campaign chest) has already revealed that they plan to go negative towards the end of the campaign.
If both candidates actually stick to the facts about each other's records, then Kerry has no worries. What do you want to bet we see another "Willy Horton" story before it is all over?
At least Bush won't be mentioning Kerry's war record.
davefoc
Philosopher
Tricky said:
Before I make a complete idiot of myself here, I'm assuming that the willy horton story was about the murderer that was set free as a result of Dukakis decisions.
Assuming that the above is right, isn't that absolutely a legitimate campaign topic? Part of getting elected to a higher office is having had a lower office that serves as a reference for how you will do with a higher office. If you make a significant error while in the lower office don't you think that is a legitimate campaign issue. Willy Horton was free as the direct result of a Dukakis action.
I would contrast this with the Democratic commericials about the dragging death of a black man in Texas. These seemed to be attempting to equate Bush with protecting people that drag black people to their death. This was so stupid that it seemed to me the commericials would have been counterproductive, especially since all Bush did was not block the death penalty for the murderers. But whether the commericials were counterproductive or not they were obviously unfair.
Before I make a complete idiot of myself here, I'm assuming that the willy horton story was about the murderer that was set free as a result of Dukakis decisions.
Assuming that the above is right, isn't that absolutely a legitimate campaign topic? Part of getting elected to a higher office is having had a lower office that serves as a reference for how you will do with a higher office. If you make a significant error while in the lower office don't you think that is a legitimate campaign issue. Willy Horton was free as the direct result of a Dukakis action.
I would contrast this with the Democratic commericials about the dragging death of a black man in Texas. These seemed to be attempting to equate Bush with protecting people that drag black people to their death. This was so stupid that it seemed to me the commericials would have been counterproductive, especially since all Bush did was not block the death penalty for the murderers. But whether the commericials were counterproductive or not they were obviously unfair.
Tricky
Briefly immortal
The Willy Horton ad is considered to be the nadir of negative politics. It was not only misleading, it was racist. It suggested that if Dukakis was elected, he would turn homocidal negros loose on America. Besides all general decisions have the potential for some negative consequences. Dubya has his own too from when he was governer of Texas. To pick a single negative consequence without regard for the total effects of the program is simply slimeball politics at its most ugly.davefoc said:
I don't remember those commercials or even any outrage over them, and I live in Texas. Certainly they were not as widely shown as the Willy Horton ones, if indeed they existed. But I'm not denying that both parties dip into the mud. Republicans seem to be better at it. Maybe because they've got about ten times as much money, based on latest figures.davefoc said:
It is not secret and no surprise that Americans are subjected to being manipulated by advertising. So it should not be surprising that the party with the biggest advertising budget has a decided advantage. Who do you think pays for those ads? Last election, Enron was a sizable contributer. Do you think Bush's fan base has changed significantly since then?
NoZed Avenger
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2002
- Messages
- 11,286
Tricky said:
I remember them - and a fair amount of controversy, though I will admit that the press did not cover the reaction to the ad the way they covered the Dukakis one:
The ad was from the NAACP, and had black and white footage of a pickup truck dragging chains behind it -- this was relatively soon after the dragging death in Jasper, Texas, of Mr. James Byrd. Mr. Byrd was dragged to death by three racists.
Over the dragging images, the ad had his daughter speaking: "I'm Renee Mullins, James Byrd's daughter. On June 7th, 1998, in Texas, my father was killed. He was beaten, chained and then dragged three miles to his death all because he was black. So when Governor George Bush refused to support hate-crime legislation, it was like my father was killed all over again ... "
Two of the men involved received the death penalty; the third (IIRC) received life in return for his testimony against the other two.
Oh, IIRC, the ad was released at almost the last minute before the election, so that there was little time for any response. Maybe that's why you don't remember it too well.
N/A
HarryKeogh
Unregistered
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2003
- Messages
- 11,319
now that it seems the Kerry infidelity sorry was a blatant lie will The Drudge Report have its entire page devoted to the headline "Kerry is NOT a Cheater". Will they put the same amount of fanfare to telling the truth about a story as they did when they published the erroneous information?
(wait for laughter)
Thank you, I'll be here all week!
(wait for laughter)
Thank you, I'll be here all week!
Is Matt Drudge homosexual (not that there's anything wrong with that)?
http://www.konformist.com/drudgehomo/drudgehomo.htm
"I go to gay bars but I'm not gay."
http://www.8bm.com/diatribes/volume01/diatribes002/diatribes21-41/diatribes29.htm
http://www.konformist.com/drudgehomo/drudgehomo.htm
"I go to gay bars but I'm not gay."
http://www.8bm.com/diatribes/volume01/diatribes002/diatribes21-41/diatribes29.htm
Drudge loves spreading lies and innuendo but I'm going to spread some truth here. Matt Drudge ****s ***k and ***** it ** the ***. He's a self-loathing homosexual and pathological liar and let's see him answer this truth with more of his little lies.
http://blogs.salon.com/0002222/categories/sodomites/
http://blogs.salon.com/0002222/categories/sodomites/
Drudge: A Hypocrite
According to the warped logic of one of his most vocal supporters, Limbaugh's hypocrisy is acceptable in large part because of the media's hypocrisy. As conservative pundit Matt Drudge declared recently on Buchanan and Press, "There's no law against being a hypocrite a few times in your life and this industry is built on hypocrisy. I'm challenging the media tonight to empty their pockets."
http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=17012
No law against it. And it means Big Bucks.
According to the warped logic of one of his most vocal supporters, Limbaugh's hypocrisy is acceptable in large part because of the media's hypocrisy. As conservative pundit Matt Drudge declared recently on Buchanan and Press, "There's no law against being a hypocrite a few times in your life and this industry is built on hypocrisy. I'm challenging the media tonight to empty their pockets."
http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=17012
No law against it. And it means Big Bucks.
Matt Drudge - Hypocrite in a Fedora
Watching last night's Super Bowl, I was right there with millions of fellow New Englanders when I shouted, "Hey, was that Janet's T**?"
'Twas. I got confirmation after I went to bed and Matt Drudge's radio show was on (I never go to sleep without the soothing sounds of talk radio), and our nasal-voiced proto-blogger was incensed, LIVID, that MTV would produce something so obscene, so vile, as the halftime show and Janet's exposed hooter, freed from its shiny black holster by Justin Timberlake, who, for a rock star, sure looks like the assistant manager of a Blockbuster.
So why, then, does Drudge have this on his website, which shows the breast in question in a much higher resolution and much closer up than CBS did?
So, to recap, thank you, Janet, thank you, Justin, and thank you, Mr. Drudge...you are a most helpful cog in the purveyance of filth.
http://www.reverendtim.com/2004_02_01_archive.html
Watching last night's Super Bowl, I was right there with millions of fellow New Englanders when I shouted, "Hey, was that Janet's T**?"
'Twas. I got confirmation after I went to bed and Matt Drudge's radio show was on (I never go to sleep without the soothing sounds of talk radio), and our nasal-voiced proto-blogger was incensed, LIVID, that MTV would produce something so obscene, so vile, as the halftime show and Janet's exposed hooter, freed from its shiny black holster by Justin Timberlake, who, for a rock star, sure looks like the assistant manager of a Blockbuster.
So why, then, does Drudge have this on his website, which shows the breast in question in a much higher resolution and much closer up than CBS did?
So, to recap, thank you, Janet, thank you, Justin, and thank you, Mr. Drudge...you are a most helpful cog in the purveyance of filth.
http://www.reverendtim.com/2004_02_01_archive.html