The Moderate Voice - Latest Comments in Lots of double standards

Re: Lots of double standards

GeorgeSorwell — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 03:35:02 -0000

Thanks, David.

Maybe DaGoat would have enjoyed some serious attention, too.

Re: Lots of double standards

GeorgeSorwell — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 22:35:02 -0000

Thanks, David.

Maybe DaGoat would have enjoyed some serious attention, too.

Re: Lots of double standards

adesnik — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 18:02:23 -0000

Pacatrue, I think "MSM" has become a fairly mainstream usage that can be used without prejudice, even if it has somewhat derogatory origins. We do need a term to describe the body of professional journalists responsible who work for newspapers and broadcast outlets.

George, I see no inconsistency between linking to a NYT transcript and criticizing their coverage. Just because I accept their ability to transcribe a speech does not imply that I must accept their analysis as unbiased.

Also, George, I&#39m beginning to gather that you don&#39t take the Weekly Standard seriously. I&#39m no fan of The Nation, but when I read their articles, I pay attention to their facts and analysis, rather than assuming that anything published in The Nation is useless.

In fact, George, I even pay serious attention to the contents of your comments!

Re: Lots of double standards

GeorgeSorwell — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 16:26:26 -0000

Jchem--

This is a post complaining about double standards. As if the Weekly Standard were some kind of exemplar.

As for the NYT, when this same author, David Adesnik, wanted an accurate copy of Sarah Palin&#39s resignation speech for what he wrote three posts down from this one, he got it from the New York Times.

By the way, if you go a few more posts down from that one, you&#39ll find the resident liberal also complaining about the New York Times.

Re: Lots of double standards

jchem — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 15:00:24 -0000

George, relax...how many times has Media Matters, Think Progress or any other such Left site been linked to here? I don&#39t read the Weekly Standard, but it seems to me they raise a valid criticism regarding the NYT coverage. Perhaps you can explain where they are missing the mark.

Re: Lots of double standards

DaGoat — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 14:54:42 -0000

They are all double standards, but the Weekly Standard&#39s opinion is diluted by their own consistent use of double standards. It&#39s the pot calling the kettle black again.

Re: Lots of double standards

adesnik — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 13:02:23 -0000

George, I see no inconsistency between linking to a NYT transcript and criticizing their coverage. Just because I accept their ability to transcribe a speech does not imply that I must accept their analysis as unbiased.

Also, George, I'm beginning to gather that you don't take the Weekly Standard seriously. I'm no fan of The Nation, but when I read their articles, I pay attention to their facts and analysis, rather than assuming that anything published in The Nation is useless.

In fact, George, I even pay serious attention to the contents of your comments!

Re: Lots of double standards

Father_Time — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 12:52:47 -0000

Soldiers are more important than journalists because journalists have a choice. Journalists are following their fame and fortune. Soldiers are just serving a legal commitment to defend the Constitution and must obey the officers and non-commissioned officers appointed over them.

Re: Lots of double standards

GeorgeSorwell — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 11:26:26 -0000

Jchem--

This is a post complaining about double standards. As if the Weekly Standard were some kind of exemplar.

As for the NYT, when this same author, David Adesnik, wanted an accurate copy of Sarah Palin's resignation speech for what he wrote three posts from this one, he got it from the New York Times.

By the way, if you go a few more posts down from that one, you'll find the resident liberal also complaining about the New York Times.

Re: Lots of double standards

GeorgeSorwell — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 11:20:03 -0000

The Weekly Standard!

Re: Lots of double standards

jchem — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 10:00:24 -0000

George, relax...how many times has Media Matters, Think Progress or any other such Left site been linked to here? I don't read the Weekly Standard, but it seems to me they raise a valid criticism regarding the NYT coverage. Perhaps you can explain where they are missing the mark.

Re: Lots of double standards

$199537 — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 09:54:42 -0000

They are all double standards, but the Weekly Standard's opinion is diluted by their own consistent use of double standards. It's the pot calling the kettle black again.

Re: Lots of double standards

pacatrue — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 09:40:17 -0000

I must say that I start to shut down as soon as I read the term "MSM". It&#39s become so politically loaded that it&#39s hard not to make assumptions about someone&#39s political world view as soon as they pop out with it. The term has gone from any discussion of political bias to often suggest there&#39s this uniform media elite out to destroy the common man.

Re: Lots of double standards

Father_Time — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 07:52:47 -0000

Re: Lots of double standards

GeorgeSorwell — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 06:20:03 -0000

The Weekly Standard!

Re: Lots of double standards

pacatrue — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 04:40:17 -0000

I must say that I start to shut down as soon as I read the term "MSM". It's become so politically loaded that it's hard not to make assumptions about someone's political world view as soon as they pop out with it. The term has gone from any discussion of political bias to often suggest there's this uniform media elite out to destroy the common man.