Skip to comments.
Word For The Day, Tuesday, 10/15/02
The Verbivores
| 10/15/02
| Teacher
Posted on 10/15/2002 4:56:59 AM PDT by RikaStrom
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 121-133 next last
To: Sword_of_Gideon
good for you, SG!!!
41
posted on
10/15/2002 5:32:49 AM PDT
by
xsmommy
To: hobbes1
Dewey, Cheatham, and HoweThis used to be a real publishing company in Boston.
Garde la Foi, mes amis! Nous nous sommes les sauveurs de la République! Maintenant et Toujours!
(Keep the Faith, my friends! We are the saviors of the Republic! Now and Forever!)
LonePalm, le Républicain du verre cassé (The Broken Glass Republican)
42
posted on
10/15/2002 5:33:43 AM PDT
by
LonePalm
To: Sword_of_Gideon
Actually SG, you should take some time to point out to them, that excepting that fact that 12% of america that is Black, is about 80% against this war, If their 50/50 poll was accurate, the Senate would not have voted almost exactly 75/25 for the resolution. (act 77/23)
No senator wanting to get re-elected, except Wellstone, and NO SENATOR that wants to be president, voted against.
43
posted on
10/15/2002 5:37:07 AM PDT
by
hobbes1
To: xsmommy
You know it's a little shocking the first time you see your name (even if it's only your screen name) mentioned in an editorial, but I got over it. Little liberal whinners, when their own tactics are turned back upon them then they cry foul.
To: Sword_of_Gideon
See above. You did them a favor. If they are online, and you provide a link, I will write them and point that out.
45
posted on
10/15/2002 5:39:11 AM PDT
by
hobbes1
To: hobbes1
I know... the Senate & the House votes were both pretty close to the 75-25 split I thought. Not to mention that they cried foul because the number of response went up, but then they committed a liberal no-no... they mentioned data. They said that usual volume went from about 200 hits on a poll to 500 for the Iraq questions... I wouldn't call that overwhelming.. I would say that more people are interested in the war than they are in diversity & the other crap they post polls about.
To: anniegetyourgun
If her highness even lowers herself to a book-signing tour, I'll certainly attend. I'll ask her to sign my copy of "High Crimes and Misdemeanors" and/or "The Death of Vince Foster".
I've never been thrown out of a bookstore before.
47
posted on
10/15/2002 6:06:00 AM PDT
by
EODGUY
To: RikaStrom
Homework:
As the national democrats circle around the truth with lies and distortions and exaggerations about GW, they may yet lose their gambit to overthrow him illegally.
And in the Senate, Hillary's and Das*hole's ambitions are even worse.
To: Sword_of_Gideon
Actually I just sent this
Editor,
Concerning your Oct. 15, article, I wanted to take a moment to point out a couple of things. You were concerned that your sampling on the Iraq question was skewed, by a process called "freeping". However, you seem to faithfully discount the possibility that the added conservative view point, counters the liberal bent of your readership.
A simple question. As you so carefully pointed out, "... opinion polls ultimately mean nothing. But voting does. Voting is the true American opinion poll". How did the United States Senate vote, on the Iraq resolution? They voted 77-23 for, almost mimicking your 75/25 percentages. That includes every Democrat, running in a tough re-election campaign, except Paul Wellstone, and every Democrat that has Presidential aspirations. Obviously your poll when measured against reality, turned out excruciatingly accurate.
Oh, yes, one other point.
You asked, and answered, the question why most polls don't actually get published.
"Is it because of some deep, dark liberal media conspiracy? Or is it because you so skew the results that the polls no longer matter? Id be willing to bet that its the latter, but thats probably just my media-biased liberalness talking. " According to Dick Morris' article in the Oct 8 NY Post, it is the media themselves that are responsible for polling inaccuracy. Morris goes on to say" For decades, responsible journalists refused even to cover public-opinion polls. Then, in a turnaround, they began to conduct them and treat their findings as hard news. Now the process has come full circle: Journalists appear to be using polls to generate the conclusions they want and to validate their own pre-existing theses and hypotheses.(emphasis mine).
I am not suggesting that is the case in your situation, just that the phenomenon is clearly present in todays news media, and perhaps you are a victim of that. But in the final analysis, your poll did come out startingly accurate, and since you feel that, "Its a mockery of more than 200 years of democratic rule that todays politicians check their standings in the polls daily. Its shameful that we allow these fence-sitting, conscienceless "leaders" stay in office."
Maybe you have more in common with freepers than you think.
Take Care. name deleted (Hobbes1)
49
posted on
10/15/2002 6:10:32 AM PDT
by
hobbes1
To: hobbes1
Very nicely put response, much more eloquent than I would have been.
To: hobbes1
Actually I use Dewey, Cheatham, Cummin, N. Goen, and Howe. You might consider Teddy Kennedy's law firm:
Datem, Dickem & Dunkem
To: RikaStrom
Good Morning Miss Rika. Did you know that there are now only 16 days until Halloween, 37 days until Thanksgiving, and 71 days until Christmas?
To: RikaStrom
Jerry's
ambit seems to extend infinitely....

...or at least to the nearest stack of Krispy Kremes.
To: EODGUY
EEEWWW - I'd hardly want to be in her presence, but your plan does sound like fun! I'd like to see her or her so-called husband just so I could turn my back on them.
To: RikaStrom
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20021015-19278400.htm
" Bill Clinton, campaigning Friday in Massachusetts for
Democratic gubernatorial candidate Shannon O'Brien, sounded
like he hasn't changed much since leaving the White House.
Mr. Clinton told a crowd in Dorchester, Mass., that an
O'Brien victory "would be a wonderful way to celebrate the
10th anniversary of my victory in 1992," the Boston Globe
reports."
Clinton really is a nitwit.
Talking to a crowd, his ambit,
"It's all about me,
Why can't you all see,
Dems are all sucking on my t*t."
55
posted on
10/15/2002 7:31:15 AM PDT
by
doubled
To: anniegetyourgun
Good point....perhaps I could back-up to the signing table and hand her the book behind my back so I wouldn't have to look at her.
56
posted on
10/15/2002 7:51:16 AM PDT
by
EODGUY
To: doubled
Klinton remains the center of his own universe.
The other 6 billion folks on the planet are merely supporting cast and stage crew.
To: RikaStrom
As the D.C. sniper continues to expand his ambit, there have been many theories expressed about who he/she/they might be.
This is one of the more interesting views about these crimes.
To: xsmommy
...That reminds me, Xs. Keep your head down and stay well away from your neighborhood Michael's stores, OK????
To: hobbes1
Actually I use Dewey, Cheatham, Cummin, N. Goen, and Howe. I use Steckem, Trickum and Dickem
60
posted on
10/15/2002 8:31:33 AM PDT
by
Gabz
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 121-133 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson