[Vision2020] Bush Says He Won't Be Swayed To Withdraw

[Tony]

Andreas, it is becoming clear that you are not a man of reason and fair 
mindedness.  No reasonable person would argue that reporters are justified 
in injecting their personal opinion into the news.  You continue to do so. 
At this point I think it would be naive of me to avoid questioning your 
motives.

Please continue to advocate for injustice, at this juncture I would expect 
nothing else from you.

Disappointed but not surprised,   -T
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Andreas Schou" <ophite at gmail.com>
To: "Tony" <tonytime at clearwire.net>
Cc: <vision2020 at moscow.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2006 6:01 PM
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Bush Says He Won't Be Swayed To Withdraw


> On 11/29/06, Tony <tonytime at clearwire.net> wrote:
>> Andreas, for a bright guy, you pay very poor attention.  I never 
>> suggested
>> that official pronouncements should be regurgitated wholesale.  What I 
>> said
>> was it is NOT THE JOB of the reporter to analyze and argue with those
>> pronouncements.  If the journalist feels that more than the official 
>> version
>> would lend to a more fair and accurate reporting, then she should seek 
>> out
>> and quote someone with an opposing view.
>
> If it is clear that one side is correct and the other is incorrect, or
> if it is clear to the reporter that one person is telling the truth
> and another is lying, and that those facts can be proven, the reporter
> should say so. You may be entitled to your own set of opinions, but
> too many conservatives feel that they are additionally entitled to
> their own set of facts. Which is weird, because conservatives also
> accuse liberals of being relativists.
>
> There is one set of facts, Tony.
>
> Did Bush answer the question he was asked, or did he evade it?
>
> -- ACS
>
>> Readers have a right to expect
>> reporters to REPORT the news of the day, not interpret, shade, argue with 
>> or
>> manipulate it in ANY WAY with their own "analysis."  There is no question 
>> to
>> which the ONLY fair-minded and fully informative answer can be said to be
>> STRICTLY yes or no.  Folks who demand to ask a question and then insist 
>> what
>> the proper answer is, should be ignored out of hand.
>>
>> The only thing "idiotic" about this war is the hysterical and shrill 
>> carping
>> from the left on behalf of our sworn enemies.
>>
>> Goodnight and have a pleasant tomorrow.    -T
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Andreas Schou" <ophite at gmail.com>
>> To: "Tony" <tonytime at clearwire.net>
>> Cc: <vision2020 at moscow.com>
>> Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2006 10:56 AM
>> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Bush Says He Won't Be Swayed To Withdraw
>>
>>
>> > On 11/29/06, Tony <tonytime at clearwire.net> wrote:
>> >> Actually Andreas, the only legitimate way to transmit someone's words 
>> >> is
>> >> through a verbatim quote.  ANY "analysis" WHATSOEVER steps over the
>> >> bounds
>> >> unless on the opinion page.  You loose credibility Andreas when you 
>> >> flak
>> >> for
>> >> those who would shape public opinion in the name of reporting the 
>> >> news.
>> >
>> > This is idiotic. News is not the blind transmission of official pap
>> > from policy organs to the listening public. If Dick Cheney says that
>> > the insurgency is in its last throes, and it is clear that that is not
>> > the case, then the fact that the facts contradict him should be made
>> > clear. If someone is asked a yes or no question and doesn't answer it,
>> > it should be made clear that they didn't answer it -- because that is
>> > self-evidently the case.
>> >
>> > People often lie, and there is often a certain amount of ambiguity
>> > about the facts -- like, for instance, whether claims about Iraq's
>> > nuclear weapons programs were malicious lies or simply delusional
>> > fantasies. Because the news media acted as a funnel to deliver the
>> > "official story" to the people, we ended up with too many people
>> > supporting an idiotic and unnecessary war.
>> >
>> > -- ACS
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>
>