Posted on 02/06/2010 10:14:41 AM PST by Syncro
February 6, 2010 12:10 PM
*snip*
"Prove your case."
"I should prove, what, a birth certificate that may or may not exist?" Farah had gotten irritated. "That’s ridiculous. You don’t even understand the fundamental tenets of what journalism is about, Andrew. It’s not about proving things. It’s about asking questions and seeking truth."
Breitbart tensed up after that insult. "Right."
"I know you’re not a journalist, so that’s fine. But don’t diminish people who’ve been doing this for 35 years."
"So you’re going to go on record saying that I’m not a journalist?"
"Are you? I’ve never heard you claim to be. Are you?"
"I’ll let it be answered by you."
"Well, I knew [Matt]Drudge didn’t consider himself a journalist, so I assumed that you were. … I don’t know, I’m not trying to insult you."
"You did."
(Excerpt) Read more at cbsnews.com ...
I don’t see that you’ve shown me anything more than your opinion, to which you have a perfect right.
The visible evidence seems to contradict it, but perhaps that’s my opinion.
“I suppose that Rush, Boortz, Hannity, Levin, and everyone who ever talks about politics should spend 24/7 prattling on like an accountant. The FR should be renamed: “the Conservative Economics Forum”. Count me out, OK?”
I’m focused on stopping socialism’s march, OK? The NBC issue is just part of that story, the survey percentages you quoted about the BC aren’t even focused on the broader Constitutional issue, and prattling on about economics shouldn’t be despised. It wasn’t I who said, ‘it’s the economy stupid’ relative to winning electoral politics.
“The visible evidence seems to contradict it, but perhaps that’s my opinion.”
What matters shouldn’t be our opinion on the BC HI controversy, nor even the NBC Constitutional issue (front and center), but how to stop socialism in fact. The NBC issue should be one we fight on principle, but not to the detriment of our main objective.
I saw it with my own eyes. The visible evidence proves it.
Your arguments have been proven wrong.
It doesn't bother me that you don't want to accept the reality of he situation.
I'm just posting the facts.
It isn't about opinions, it's about facts
We’re getting a little off track here, but stopping socialism is a goal that can only be accomplished by ending government schools. - They are literally socialism spawning grounds.
Until we do that socialism will continue to pop up like Elderberry seedlings and burr clover.
Yet you presented no facts; just emotional feelings about what you believed others were thinking, but not saying. Quite a contortion of logic.
I would hardly call this article interesting. Leftist "news" organizations will typically make a mountain out of a molehill whenever two "right wingers" have a mild disagreement or mild dispute. This is a classic example and CBS is, not surprisingly, the culprit.
It's not breaking news that some "conservatives" wish that the issue of Obama's constitutional eligibility for POTUS would go away, because they feel that discussing it is counterproductive politically. Those "conservatives" are entitled to their feelings, though they may regret them down the road.
Mingled with hundreds of thousands, talked to many hundreds of tea partiers.
Very few were on the birther issue
Go to 30 or 40 teaparties and get back to me
I've been to twice that amount.
I didn't just sit in the corner and not talk to people
According to you, the majority of them would be pushing the birther stuff
LOL at no facts; just emotional feelings, you been reading Alinsky?
You are so sure that almost a 100% of teapartiers are birthers, and most of FR posters are.
So start a thread and do a poll
I'll accept the outcome
Nor did I state the article is interesting
What is interesting is the exchange between the two parties involved
I don't think it should be ignored
Or that it shouldn't be brought up here.
Sure the left will attack, they will anyway.
Might as well direct them to waste their time on this issue
No, it couldn't be because I don't think about him one way or the other. It was just a red herring you employed. A juvenile attempt to redirect attention from my comment.
The only insult I see in that post is a quote of yours, saying Breitbart made an ass out of himself.
And that wasn't directed at you was it? But you took it personally enough to come back with your digs directed personally at me.
And perhaps you can apologize to Andrew.
Here is a Video that shows the problems with todays official journalists and how they get the way they are that you might enjoy.
That is a non-sequitur. His speech, which I saw live last night, was excellent. But I owe him no apology for what I said about entirely different comments he made. That's absurd.
That was you to me.
I asked you to show where I did that to you. Crickets.
No problem, blank
Good luck in your endeavors!
I did and you made some smarmy remarks about hot links. (Which you asked for) In fact that was a response to a previous smarmy remark from you.
It was just a red herring you employed. A juvenile attempt to redirect attention from my comment.Your comment was that Breitbart made an ass of himself.
I didn't see my post out of line after you threw that invective at him
My comment on your "ass" comment:
I think that was a useless comment, and an unwarrented attack on an important Conservative activist..
There.
I apologize for not answering it better earlier.
Why yes I commented on your hot link that alleged that I had insulted you. It did not show that I did.
Unless "front man Farah" was an insult.
Therefore my cute smarmy comments about the hotlinks.
I do apologize for saying that tough.
I didn't think someone who would call a popular Conservative activist an ass would be so sensitive.
Your comment was that Breitbart made an ass of himself.
Yes, I did. I put it like this.
"You don’t recognize it as a fundamentally controversial issue that forces a unified group of people to have to break into different parts? It is a schism of the highest order."Breitbart made an ass of himself when he said that. Farah has nothing to do with it. Joseph Farah didn't invite himself to speak at the convention the organizers of the Tea Party convention did. They certainly knew what Farah would talk about so if Breitbart has any problem with it he should talk to them. Tell them that they are creating a schism in their own group. Otherwise he just looks like an idiot for berating Farah about it.
I also pointed this out...
"It is! It becomes even more of a winning issue when the press abrogates its responsibility–" - Joseph Farah"I should prove, what, a birth certificate that may or may not exist?" Farah had gotten irritated. "That’s ridiculous. You don’t even understand the fundamental tenets of what journalism is about, Andrew. It’s not about proving things. It’s about asking questions and seeking truth." - Joseph Farah
Sounds right on the money to me. Both hiding of the BC and media mendacity are without a doubt valid and compelling issues.
That's obvious. It was an unwarranted assumption and in context had no other purpose but to try and misdirect attention from my comment.
I'm not but thanks for posting yet another smarmy assumption to prove my point.
“I’m focused on stopping socialism’s march, OK?”
There are plenty of economics threads rather than trying to rattle our cage.
” ... prattling on about economics shouldn’t be despised.”
Boredom is our enemy, the siren song of two bit wonks.
“It wasn’t I who said, ‘it’s the economy stupid’ relative to winning electoral politics.”
People can walk and chew gum at the same time.
No need, the outcome is already here in this thread, but you’re in denial.
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.