Propaganda 101: You’re a racist and you didn’t even know it!

[Trompe le Monde 1,107]

AJ also posts spurious hit pieces only from the other side of the fence - but you normally have nothing to say when he does it. What's good for the goose....

What's good for the goose? What are you talking about??? Have I told metta or Dev to stop posting??? Good grief....I don't know how I could have made my points any clearer.

I don't see your outrage about "half truths" when they help your side - that's all I'm saying

[one...two...tree 2,762]

AJ also posts spurious hit pieces only from the other side of the fence - but you normally have nothing to say when he does it. What's good for the goose....

What's good for the goose? What are you talking about??? Have I told metta or Dev to stop posting??? Good grief....I don't know how I could have made my points any clearer.

I don't see your outrage about "half truths" when they help your side - that's all I'm saying

Robin - this isn't outrage...it's calling a duck a duck. Just look at the title of this post - Propaganda 101. Metta was an ardent supporter of Hillary Clinton during the Primaries, meaning the policies and political views she championed are what metta values as well. The fact that he now posts hit piece after hit piece on Obama from Right Wing blogs which attack Obamas policies and political views as leftist or liberal is irrational, at least intellectually since Obama and Hillary are very close on those terms. I get that he doesn't want Obama to win. I get that he now supports McCaine. What I don't get is why he would now disseminate propaganda which attacks the very policies and political views that his former candidate of choice (Hillary) supports?

As for My side? The Democratic Party? American voters tired of the last 8 years? Or Kool-Aid drinkers?

[Trompe le Monde 1,107]

AJ also posts spurious hit pieces only from the other side of the fence - but you normally have nothing to say when he does it. What's good for the goose....

What's good for the goose? What are you talking about??? Have I told metta or Dev to stop posting??? Good grief....I don't know how I could have made my points any clearer.

I don't see your outrage about "half truths" when they help your side - that's all I'm saying

Robin - this isn't outrage...it's calling a duck a duck. Just look at the title of this post - Propaganda 101. Metta was an ardent supporter of Hillary Clinton during the Primaries, meaning the policies and political views she championed are what metta values as well. The fact that he now posts hit piece after hit piece on Obama from Right Wing blogs which attack Obamas policies and political views as leftist or liberal is irrational, at least intellectually since Obama and Hillary are very close on those terms. I get that he doesn't want Obama to win. I get that he now supports McCaine. What I don't get is why he would now disseminate propaganda which attacks the very policies and political views that his former candidate of choice (Hillary) supports?

As for My side? The Democratic Party? American voters tired of the last 8 years? Or Kool-Aid drinkers?

But why do you care? Some of the viewpoints I actually find interesting even if I don't agree with them. Why do you have to get so demanding about what they do and do not post?

And, when AJ posts hit pieces from the Daily Kos on Sarah Palin are you going to "call a duck a duck" since they aren't exactly advancing the post-partisan-above-the-fray-politics that your own candidate seems to support. Are you going to call them propaganda (which is exactly what much of it is). I realize you have been a little more fair on this than some others here but it doesn't change the fact that your outrage is a little on-sided.

your side=the candidate you (personally) are supporting

[Heracles 417]

Does anyone still wonder why nothing is achieved by politicians here. If the OT section is a sample of what is going there, I am not surprised we are in a financial mess. The I am right you are wrong, and an idiot, attitude to communicating and debating should be left to anyone under the age of 8.

I mean Steven has to realize that the ####### the Dems gave republicans for the past eight years is now only going to be used on them if / when Obama wins. That is, for the next four years nothing Obama does will ever be right. He will be blamed and condemned for everything and so forth. As was the case with GWB. Where an asteroid could be heading to earth and he would be the blame.

Edited September 25, 2008 by Aficionado

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

So true. It goes well with Nutella, I find, LS.

Everything goes with Nutella.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

AJ also posts spurious hit pieces only from the other side of the fence - but you normally have nothing to say when he does it. What's good for the goose....

What's good for the goose? What are you talking about??? Have I told metta or Dev to stop posting??? Good grief....I don't know how I could have made my points any clearer.

I don't see your outrage about "half truths" when they help your side - that's all I'm saying

Robin - this isn't outrage...it's calling a duck a duck. Just look at the title of this post - Propaganda 101. Metta was an ardent supporter of Hillary Clinton during the Primaries, meaning the policies and political views she championed are what metta values as well. The fact that he now posts hit piece after hit piece on Obama from Right Wing blogs which attack Obamas policies and political views as leftist or liberal is irrational, at least intellectually since Obama and Hillary are very close on those terms. I get that he doesn't want Obama to win. I get that he now supports McCaine. What I don't get is why he would now disseminate propaganda which attacks the very policies and political views that his former candidate of choice (Hillary) supports?

As for My side? The Democratic Party? American voters tired of the last 8 years? Or Kool-Aid drinkers?

But why do you care? Some of the viewpoints I actually find interesting even if I don't agree with them. Why do you have to get so demanding about what they do and do not post?

And, when AJ posts hit pieces from the Daily Kos on Sarah Palin are you going to "call a duck a duck" since they aren't exactly advancing the post-partisan-above-the-fray-politics that your own candidate seems to support. Are you going to call them propaganda (which is exactly what much of it is). I realize you have been a little more fair on this than some others here but it doesn't change the fact that your outrage is a little on-sided.

your side=the candidate you (personally) are supporting

Do you mean, why do I call them on it?

[Ban Hammer 13,342]

I haven't really taken the time to count Steven's propaganda pieces- but he certainly isn't FOCUSING on hatin' one candidate in particular with mostly bland op-ed pieces that cater to something other than the obvious.

I suppose some folks would rather take the price of tea in China as the price of a latte in Your Town, USA.

And I am neither a registered Democrat nor Republican. But I can definitely tell the difference between what issues are critical for this nation and which ones are silliness.

While that may be the case for yourself, hard to believe though, Steven has always been biased; Since the first post I saw of his.

And that is not even factoring in any of his left wing oriented articles he posts. He is entitled to his opinion but it is laughable when he accuses others of something he is extremely guilty of doing himself.

Perhaps so. All I see are "labels" he uses quite accurately. His bias is present, yes. And that same bias addresses issues, not gossip.

like calling all metta & my articles a 'dissemination of half-truths, hearsay, and flat out lies'? Yet he posts www.michelleobamawatch.com as a valid source?

Or perhaps it's the labelling of us as PUMAs, which has no truth, just a label slapped on us simply because we aren't O lovers. Because we dare question the Democratic nominee.

and i have a difficult time taking anything he posts from a website called pinkflamingo seriously.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I don't think its out of the realm of possibility that a person can reach their own conclusion on who to vote for regardless of what anyone here says. In which respect posting inflammatory articles about their preferred candidate so as to elicit chagrin on the part of specific posters (which seems to be the what a lot of these threads seem to be about), is naturally going to irritate others...