On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 16:54:27 -0600, Jim Campbell wrote: > And exactly at what time > during the 2000 elections was the considerable presence of people > disagreeing and calling the Supreme Court politically motivated a > "rumor"? I suppose you've also heard the fairy tales about bipartisan > opposition to Bush's plans for Social Security changes. The DNC spin was that the Supreme Court was politically motivated. Some people believed that rumor. By saying "some people believe" would allow reporters to influence any news story as long as they had at least one other person that believed. If he said a recent poll shows 32% yada yada.. then it's news. Otherwise he's just trying to influence peoples opinion.
> I would still like your opinion on the "Massachusetts" example in my I agree it's not a fair statement. Once you add, "some say" anything goes. I can imagine when you'd want to mention things questioned by the people. But this seemed pretty blatant. As if he was reading from the DNC talking points memo. The Court ruled on the law as they were supposed to and it's very clear. To say that he's helping to spread the rumor of politics while ignoring the fact that Court had no choice but to rule the way it did. Anyway, that's just one example read more here: http://www.mediaresearch.org/notablequotables/2005/nq20050228.asp ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Purchase Contribute 3 from House of Fusion, a Macromedia Authorized Affiliate and support the CF community. http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=53 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:150149 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
