Posted on Monday, 16th February 2009 by Bruce
So much, so quickly. The unceasing drumbeat continues. It’s as though it’s all drafted from the historical model of FDR’s First 100 Days.
Will the party give their new President everything he requests, and everything their activist fringe demands? Only time will tell, but I have my suspicions.
Author and pundit Earl Ofari Hutchinson, writing today at fringe site OpEdNews.com:
“Conservative talk radio has been a treasure chest of riches for the broadcast syndicates, and their talk jocks weld a power over millions that emperors, kings and dictators would drool over. A near textbook example of that is the ongoing debate over Obama’s stimulus plan. There was some hint in the early days of the congressional debate over the plan that a few House Republicans might be willing to back the plan. The conservative talking heads went to work and quickly changed that. They railed against it as a fatally flawed pork barrel laden, tax and spend, power grab scheme by Obama and the Democrats. This stiffened the spines of the GOP rank and file against the plan. Now that they have flexed their broadcast muscles and whipped the GOP back in line, next up will be to browbeat, cajole, and bully any GOP dissenters on health care, the environment, and any other big ticket issue that conservative talk jocks deem an Obama and Democratic party power grab. All this of course with not a peep of an alternative view to be heard on their talk airwaves. Obama should bring back the Fairness Doctrine and help make sure that lone voice is heard.”
Posted in Home | Comments (55) |
55 Responses to “Lefty windbag: In the name of our “lone voice,” Obama should bring back the Fairness Doctrine.”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
February 16th, 2009 at 8:47 pm
Bruce, I made it abundantly clear over the last 2 years and specfically in the run-up to November’s election that liberals are vicious and don’t give a damn about fairness nor diversity. I pounded a couple liberal trolls into dust on this very forum. Earl Zero Hutchinson is just such a libtard. His assertion is absurd. But he’s in the fight. We need to fight these m’f'ers every step of the way. They are not interested in “COEXISTING” with you.
February 17th, 2009 at 5:01 am
Omigosh! Earl said that? Now we know it’s real!
Seriously, I’ve never heard of this guy. And isn’t “Op Ed News” kind of like kos or HuffPo in that anyone can sign up and say whatever they want? For all I know, “Earl Ofari Hutchinson” is Sean Hannity planting evidence via sock puppet.
Look, when Obama-who has said he opposes the idea-or someone on, say, one of the Commerce committees who might actually have the authority to do something starts talking, then you may have a gripe. Some Guy at Some Website is hardly worth getting your knickers twisted over.
February 17th, 2009 at 6:54 am
“Lefty Windbag”
“Fringe site”
My irreverent tone should have spoken for itself.
But to ignore the increasing loudness of the drumbeat, and the softening of previous promises on the issue, is naive on your part, Jay.
Your side has all the power now, and appears thoroughly resolved to abusing it.
February 17th, 2009 at 8:46 am
Earl Ofari Hutchinson is not as fringe as some think. It’s true that much of his output is in the “speaking as a black man …” voice, which by its nature makes little effort to be inclusive or relevent to those who are not black.
Nonetheless, his columns regularly appear in major mainstream print news media such as the Los Angeles Times, Chicago Tribune, Washington Post, as well as the always-reliably-Liberal newsweeklies.
But, his comment that “jocks weld a power over millions that emperors, kings and dictators would drool over” does appear to reveal a deep hostility toward free speech.
And, surely even a racialist idealogue must understand that that “emperors, kings, and dictators” do not rule because they can persuade the public to go along with them, but because they use their monopoly on violence to remove all threats to their authority?
February 17th, 2009 at 9:31 am
Folkbum,
It’s very important to understand that what Obama says and what he actually does are two entirely different and seperate things.
This was the guy who promised on the campaign trail to allow the public at least 5 days to view bills for comment before they are passed. But the stimulus boondoggle was forced through without a single member of the House or Senate having read a single page out of the thousand and some page tome.
This is the man who kept singing the chorus about tax cuts for 95% of Americans, and workers have now received an extra $13 per week.
This is the One who promised a new age of bipartisanship, then did nothing to protest the Republicans being shut out of the bill writing process, and expected them to vote for the bill simply because he invited them over for coffee.
So we do know that Barack Obama is not an honest man.
In regards to the Fairness Doctrine, we know that he has surrounded himself with “Fairness Doctrine” friendly folks, in regards to appointed positions within the FCC.
Senior FCC staff working for acting Federal Communications Commissioner Michael Copps held meetings last week with policy and legislative advisers to House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman to discuss ways the committee can create openings for the FCC to put in place a form of the “Fairness Doctrine” without actually calling it such.
http://spectator.org/archives/2009/02/16/in-all-fairness
It’s unfortunate that the American left does not support free speech.
February 17th, 2009 at 10:33 am
NBC
ABC
CBS
MSNBC
CNN
HNN
Tax-subbed PBS
Tax-subbed NPR
NYT
Miami Herald
WaPo
MJS
StarTrib
ChiTrib
LATimes
SFChronicle
DetFreep
DeNews
DenverPost
Atlanta JC
Baltimore Sun
BosGlobe
SacBee
IndiStar
DenverRkyMtnNews
AirAmerika
USAToday
..just to name a few, and that silly putz (and his ilk) complains of a liberal ‘lone voice’.
To FolkBum:
John Kerry, (D-MA): “I think the Fairness Doctrine ought to be there and I also think equal time doctrine ought to come back. These are the people that wiped out … one of the most profound changes in the balance of the media is when the conservatives got rid of the equal time requirements and the result is that they have been able to squeeze down and squeeze out opinion of opposing views and I think its been a very important transition in the imbalance of our public eye.”
Debbie Stabenow(D-MI):”Whether it’s called the Fairness Standard, whether it’s called something else-I absolutely think it’s time to be bringing accountability to the airwaves. I mean, our new president has talked rightly about accountability and transparency. You know, that we all have to step up and be responsible. And, I think in this case, there needs to be some accountability and standards put in place.” (Stabenow’s husband, Tom Athans, co-founded Air America.)
Jerry Brown,(D-CA AG): “A little state control wouldn’t hurt anybody.” Feb 13,2009
Tom Harkin (D-IA): “By the way, I read your Op-Ed in the Washington Post the other day. I ripped it out, I took it into my office and said ‘there you go, we gotta get the Fairness Doctrine back in law again….Exactly, and that’s why we need the fair - that’s why we need the Fairness Doctrine back.” - to Bill Press
Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.): “I would want this station and all stations to have to present a balanced perspective and different points of view, instead of always hammering away at one side of the political [spectrum].”-Oct,2008
~snip~
“Do you personally support revival of the ‘Fairness Doctrine?’†I asked.
“Yes,†the speaker[Pelosi] replied, without hesitation.
~endsnip~
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=27185
~snip~
Senior FCC staff working for acting Federal Communications Commissioner Michael Copps held meetings last week with policy and legislative advisers to House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman to discuss ways the committee can create openings for the FCC to put in place a form of the “Fairness Doctrine” without actually calling it such.
Waxman is also interested, say sources, in looking at how the Internet is being used for content and free speech purposes. “It’s all about diversity in media,” says a House Energy staffer, familiar with the meetings. “Does one radio station or one station group control four of the five most powerful outlets in one community? Do four stations in one region carry Rush Limbaugh, and nothing else during the same time slot? Does one heavily trafficked Internet site present one side of an issue and not link to sites that present alternative views? These are some of the questions the chairman is thinking about right now, and we are going to have an FCC that will finally have the people in place to answer them.”
~endsnip~
February 17th, 2009 at 10:59 am
“Look, when Obama–who has said he opposes the idea”
False. Obama has not said this. He has avoided the question as has David Axelrod. Axelrod was asked point blank this weekend, I think on Fox, if Obama supported the Fairness Doctrine and Axelrod refused to answer the question.
February 17th, 2009 at 11:07 am
Ahem…
http://badgerblogger.com/?p=10457
^^^ Axelrod… Chris Wallace… Non-answer… ^^^
February 17th, 2009 at 11:35 am
yeah, what Bruce says- thanks Bruce.
February 17th, 2009 at 12:39 pm
..just to name a few, and that silly putz (and his ilk) complains of a liberal ‘lone voice’.
He’s purposely being disengenuous for the furtherance of his own cause, much like Barack Obama.
February 17th, 2009 at 12:54 pm
I’m all for fairness.
Let’s have it in broadcast, print media and most of all our classrooms…..
February 17th, 2009 at 1:30 pm
All I can say is listen to Keith Olbermann rant about ONE SIDE OF AN ISSUE or try to endure Rachel Maddow’s smug mug for half an hour. It’s so funny (peculiar, not ha-ha) that when OUR side is mentioned, we’re “one-sided”, but when it’s THEIR side. I’m beginning to think that you have to be somewhat clinically insane to be really far Left.
February 17th, 2009 at 1:47 pm
Does Olbermann still routinely compare Fox News to Orwell’s Ministry of Truth? LOL
Just take the pill, folks, it will erase all those unpleasant memories of when you were free.
February 17th, 2009 at 6:00 pm
What Fred said.
I would love to have both side presented in classrooms all around the country from Elementary right through college.
But alas, children are ridiculed or ostracized by both peers and teachers for saying their parents supported John McCain. Conservative speakers are shouted down or physically assaulted - or even charged extra security “fees” so that they have to be cancelled on college campuses.
The lone voice of the conservatives is talk radio and now they want that too. I get it now. Free speech is free as long as you agree with those on the left.
February 17th, 2009 at 6:13 pm
JJ,
That emotion you, and Fred, and the others are feeling is oppression.
Remember what it feels like. The minute that emotion turns to acceptance, we’re all doomed.
February 17th, 2009 at 6:15 pm
“Sen. Obama does not support reimposing the Fairness Doctrine on broadcasters” sounds like a pretty strong statement to me, Dan.
And, Fred, you’re welcome to come watch my classroom any day. Should I put you down for Thursday? Friday? Just let me know.
February 17th, 2009 at 6:29 pm
Jay,
Seriously, get real. That article is from a hardly-known trade publication, was published last June, and doesn’t even directly quote Obama - only one of his “top aides”, via an e-mail.
Oh, and it was published while Obama was a candidate, before your party parlayed its perceived “mandate” into a tyrannical orgy of power-drunkenness.
Would you like me to compile a list of issues that Obama’s done complete one-eighties on since June, 2008? How could anyone be naive enough to believe that this one particular (third-party) campaign “promise” would be treated any differently?
Hit the Google again, Jay, and come back when you have something substantive to offer.
February 17th, 2009 at 7:11 pm
Hit the Google again, Jay, and come back when you have something substantive to offer.
I think, Bruce, it’s incumbent upon you to show where Obama has actually backtracked on this issue, instead of just imagining that he has.
By the way, what’s the bill number for the fairness doctrine? I was searching thomas and I can’t find where it’s been introduced.
February 17th, 2009 at 7:55 pm
Jay,
If an individual’s most steadfast “position” one was able to cite on an issue was an e-mail, dispatched (third-party) by a minion to a trade publication during the height of a political campaign, I’d think one might be asking themselves whether this was really a “position” they’d want to stick their necks out in defense of.
Here, try this one on for size. This is one of Obama’s actual “positions” on an issue:
- Barack Obama - November 3, 2007 - Spartanburg, SC
This is an example of a “position” that actually emerged from candidate Obama’s own mouth.
How’d that “position” work out, Jay?
February 17th, 2009 at 8:10 pm
Yes Bruce, Obama is honest. His home was purchased on the up and up, he took the matching funds, and he is Bi-Partisan.
Face it, Folktunes is just another Socialist flunky grazing at the gubmint teat.
I’ve said it before. He’d take a bullet before he’d acknowledge that Obama is a nobody.
February 17th, 2009 at 8:10 pm
Oops. Before you answer that - here’s another hollow, broken Obama promise:
Web site likely to fall short
Wait, let me take the words out of your mouth, Jay: “Where were the WMD’s?”
I know, I know… old habits die hard.
February 17th, 2009 at 8:13 pm
We could bring the fairness doctrine to MPS, but then 3500 teachers would have to be fired.
February 17th, 2009 at 8:18 pm
gus, I’ll put you down for Monday, then? Don’t want you overlapping with Fred.
And, Bruce, until Obama does change course on the FD-if he does-then it is not unreasonable or a lie for me to rely on his previous public statement on the matter. Your putting words in his mouth is the unreasonable part.
February 17th, 2009 at 8:25 pm
Time will tell, Jay. Time will tell.
February 17th, 2009 at 8:27 pm
Seven promises broken by Obama on the Generational Theft Act. Let’s just say the track record after three weeks does not instill confidence in his position on the Fairness Doctrine:
1. Make government open and transparent.
2. Make it “impossible†for Congressmen to slip in pork barrel projects.
3. Meetings where laws are written will be more open to the public. (Even Congressional Republicans shut out.)
4. No more secrecy.
5. Public will have 5 days to look at a bill.
6. You’ll know what’s in it.
7. We will put every pork barrel project online.
February 17th, 2009 at 8:30 pm
Folktunes, you’re a clown. I see right through you. If you didn’t have a government job, you’d go hungry or live at mom’s house.
Run along, you make me sick.
February 17th, 2009 at 8:30 pm
Also, Bruce, I love how you’re calling the recovery.gov website a failure because it doesn’t have information that doesn’t exist yet.
February 17th, 2009 at 8:32 pm
You know a lot about failure Folktunes, you work in a cessPOOL and I hear you made asst. Lifeguard.
Failure is your business ‘Tunes and apparently business is quite good.
You couldn’t carry Bruce’s jockstrap on your best day.
February 17th, 2009 at 8:39 pm
I didn’t brand it a failure, Jay. The Associated Press did.
Oh, and by the way… Now, the prestige media is acknowledging that prominent Democrats are urging the re-institution of some sort of “diversity and accountability legislation”. Kind of takes the wind out of your sails, my man.
From today’s Fredericksburg, VA Free-Lance Star:
Yeah, sounds like that imaginary boogey-man that feeble-minded conservatives are needlessly concerning ourselves with is just a figment of our wild imaginations.
February 17th, 2009 at 8:43 pm
I’ve tried to get it across for months and months Bruce. Folktunes and his posse have no intention of EVER being fair to you me or anyone else who disagrees with their Socialist Mommy state. Folktunes can no longer tell the difference between good and bad, truth and lies. He’s bought and paid for. I’ll bet he gets a real nice tan in the summer.
February 17th, 2009 at 9:10 pm
One more thing, Jay-
I find it interesting that your side has been so apt in recent years to so casually, inimically label those “evil” Republicans with the term fascist. In reality, it appears to be your side that’s mounting a drumbeat calling for legislation that paves the way to silencing your “enemy,” the oppressed minority party.
What a delicious twist.
- James Delingpole, Welcome to Obamaland, 2009
February 17th, 2009 at 9:32 pm
Bruce, I read Obamaland. It was pretty accurate.
I’d like to take a couple paragraphs to explain something that I’ve never fully enumerated on this blog. Bruce, we’ve corresponded many times, and I think we have a certain understanding and trust, though I’ve often put you in a tight spot.
Here goes.
In general, liberals do not care about honesty, truth or fairness. Liberals exist in politics by co-opting various groups and galvanizing them.
Here is my point. Liberals are dishonest and hypocritical on purpose!!! They say things that they do not believe in order to advance their position. Nancy Pelosi is a prime example and Barney Frank is the best example. They lie on purpose, because the use the LIE they create to further their agenda. The “underlings” and fools like Folktunes are sucked in, because they are only SECURE in their CAREERS and IDEOLOGIES via Pelosi, Frank, Doyle et al. Reid told us “the war is lost”. It was bullshit, a lie and it shit all over America, and he was demonstrably wrong. HE PAID NO PRICE.
Barney Frank slept with a FANNIE (NO PUN INTENDED) MAE exec and claimed “I thee nothing wrong with Fannie and Freddie”.
My point here is that LIBTARDS LIE AND ARE HYPOCRITES on PURPOSE. It works for them.
February 17th, 2009 at 10:21 pm
I couldn’t help but notice this little quote contained within the article cited by one Jay Bullock:
“That is why Sen. Obama supports media-ownership caps, network neutrality, public broadcasting, as well as increasing minority ownership of broadcasting and print outlets.”
“Network neutrality?”…What do you think that means? Isn’t this what FD supporters call for?
“Media-ownership caps?”…Both of these concepts sound like government control of content in our media to me.
Obama’s approach is much more nuanced…not the gauche style of his comrades Reid, Pelosi, Dodd, etc etc.
Not that you guys needed help whuppin’ up on folkster, but thought I would point out the flaw in his argument, evidence of which he himself provided.
February 17th, 2009 at 10:33 pm
I never called anyone fascist, Bruce, unlike Bush and the legions on your side who so easily moved “Islamofascist” from fringe racist blogs to the president’s lips. I actually understand that words have meanings, and fascist means something in particular.
(I also never called Bush “evil”; Occam’s razor suggests that there’s no reason to ascribe to malevolence what can be perfectly explained by incompetence.)
I’m also curious about what you think the “counterculture” is. Is it the 59% of Americans who want government intervention in health care? The 86% of Americans who think abortion should be legal in at least some cases? The 61% of Americans who think Iraq was not worth it? The 70% of Americans with a favorable opinion of President Obama? It looks desperate on your part to call the mainstream the counterculture, Bruce.
February 17th, 2009 at 10:36 pm
Roland?? Don’t be so harsh. MPS can still be a rousing success if only we inject a little SOCIALISM!!! If only Jay Folktune’s Bullox got a little more bennies!!!
We’d have EINSTEIN TECH on 15th and Bruce.
(No dis-to-Bruce-intended)
Roland, we are in serious trouble.
February 17th, 2009 at 10:38 pm
Roland, “net neutrality” is a real thing with real meaning, not something you can imagine a reality onto like Bruce and Obama’s support for the FD.
Media ownership rules have existed since, well, the dawn of media. Big media companies oppose such rules, of course, because things like competition cut into their profits. But, like net neutrality, ownership restrictions have nothing to do with content.
February 17th, 2009 at 10:52 pm
Obviously Folktunes the liberal clown agrees with moronic nonsense.
Folktunes is a loser.
February 17th, 2009 at 10:53 pm
ownership restrictions have nothing to do with content
That’s a naive statement.
February 17th, 2009 at 11:30 pm
Anyone who is wondering why MPS is possibly the worst public school system on the planet needs only to look at Folkbum for explanation. This nitwit, with his leaps of logic, denial, parsing, and poor grammar, is a disservice to education. Why, look only at this gem from 1/25 — not only is the word “hella” used, but the endorsee changes sexes during the endorsement.
“The February 17 primary offers the voters some choices; my recommendation is Michael J. Mathias.
I’ve known Mathias for some years now as a member of the progressive blogging community here in Milwaukee. He is smart, her is a hella good writer, and he has a big heart and thoughtful mind. He has kids in MPS schools, including one with special needs. I’ve had a few conversations with him recently about this seat, and he has both a solid grasp on the issues and a sense that there is still a lot more to seek out and learn. He will not merely fill a seat on the board; he will be a tireless advocate for progress and the well-being of our children.
The astute among you will note that Mathias is not the candidate endorsed by my union, and you would be right. The thing is this: MTEA has endorsed a member of the union, which is not a bug surprise, but it could be bad thing. If she is elected and she remains a substitute teacher (and, given the comparatively low pay of the board, I wouldn’t blame her), she will not be able to serve as a full member of the board, as she would have to recuse herself from any votes on contractual matters.
Mathias will have no such restrictions on his voting. Isn’t it time the fourth district had full representation?”
February 18th, 2009 at 4:42 am
Fairness doctrine? Equal time? Only if they are applied to WNOV and their fellow travelers. I want to see Word Warriors offer rebuttal time to some dude wearing a sheet!
February 18th, 2009 at 5:20 am
OMG! I make typos! As Polonius famously said, I’m slain! Ore wass that, Im salin!
February 18th, 2009 at 6:35 am
“her is a hella good writer”
No, Jay. “Hella good” is not a typo, it’s just a really stupid thing for a guy whose only teaching certification in this state is “high school English” to publish for all the world to see.
I’ll admit, I’m a bit of a throwback to another era, but no matter which online dictionary I check, I can’t find one that has accepted the term “hella good” as a common usage. (Gwen Stefani would be very proud, however. Perhaps you should offer her a residual each time you use it.)
I know, I know. Your defense would be that your “commitment to teaching,” vis a vis your daily immersion into the world of your students, has left you routinely using their informal speech.
On the other hand, any English teacher who allows his own published writing to be dumbed down into the colloquialisms of the students whom he claims to be teaching reflects pretty poorly on the general state of affairs at MPS.
It’s nice of the J/S to legitimize you with a bully pulpit every now and then, though. I hope you send them a gift basket from time to time.
February 18th, 2009 at 6:59 am
Bruce, Paul (*nice shot by the way) and Gus, don’t you guys think you’re being a little tough on Jay? I mean really, why hold a High School English teacher accountable for a few typing/grammatical mistakes in an endorsement for a fellow lefty who came in second in the primary for a position on the Milwaukee School Board? If the lefty intellectual elite are willing to overlook Jay’s mistakes, then who are people like us to criticize him? We are but mere peons in need of their guidance and should be grateful that they even grace us with their troll presence.
February 18th, 2009 at 8:14 am
I don’t know why I bother making actual arguments if you all are too intellectually dishonest to argue anything nit-picking. See you all in hell.
February 18th, 2009 at 8:42 am
folkbum Says:
See you all in hell.
Jay, you’re a master at garnering empathy. I can’t wait until your inevitable run for some form of public office.
Actually, were you not such an immodest, discourteous twit, it’s possible that people would cut you some slack.
February 18th, 2009 at 9:50 am
Ditto what Bruce said. Folkbum, if you guys expressed any humility whatsoever, you might almost be likeable and treated with the respect you crave from us even though we have political differences.
February 18th, 2009 at 10:12 am
Patriarchal, racist constructs like “grammar” and “spelling” in written language inhibit the development of children’s self-esteem.
Hemingway, Woolf, and Plath were good writers, but I wouldn’t want them on a school board.
February 18th, 2009 at 11:57 am
‘See you all in hell’
Jay, I thought you were an atheist. funny.
February 18th, 2009 at 3:17 pm
Folktunes, don’t go away mad. Just go away.
Wipe the dust of off your moronic wannabee blog and tell your 2 posters. (You and Little Keith) how the men took you to the wood shed. Folktune’s you’re a miserable loser. Your contributions to society are nil.
February 18th, 2009 at 3:21 pm
Folktunes said.
“he will be a tireless advocate for progress and the well-being of our children.”
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahah, snort, hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.
I think he meant Mikey Mathias will demand higher wages for teachers and longer summers off.
February 18th, 2009 at 7:12 pm
“Sen. Obama does not support reimposing the Fairness Doctrine on broadcasters†sounds like a pretty strong statement to me, Dan.
The statement was made by a spokesperson, to by Obama himself. This makes it easy to backstep and say that the spokesperson wasn’t entirely accurate, or he misspoke, or he didn’t have all the facts, etc.
But the bottom line is that anybody can say anything. Ultimately, words are meaningless.
Case in point, here’s a couple more pretty strong statements:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CP9_kkzfN-w
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KiIP_KDQmXs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ELoKGvOwSI4
And as we now know, their words meant nothing.
February 18th, 2009 at 7:21 pm
And, Bruce, until Obama does change course on the FD–if he does–then it is not unreasonable or a lie for me to rely on his previous public statement on the matter. Your putting words in his mouth is the unreasonable part.
Nobody’s putting words into his mouth. Rather, they are expecting him to continue on with his well documented pattern of lying.
February 18th, 2009 at 7:47 pm
Occam’s razor suggests that there’s no reason to ascribe to malevolence what can be perfectly explained by incompetence.
This would be incorrect. Occam’s razor would actually suggest that we are at war with Islamofascists, just as he said. That, Folkbum, is the simplest answer.
I’m also curious about what you think the “counterculture†is.
For myself, I’d say that Conservatism is the new counterculture. A title that I’m sure the left will not want to relinquish, because just like a teenager, they still think counterculture is cool.
But let’s correct some of your misstatements here:
Is it the 59% of Americans who want government intervention in health care?
This is incorrect, the number is actually closer to 29%:
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/issues2/articles/29_favor_national_health_insurance_overseen_by_federal_government
The 86% of Americans who think abortion should be legal in at least some cases?
This is incorrect, the nation remains divided roughly 50/50.
http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2007/images/05/09/rel6e.pdf
The 61% of Americans who think Iraq was not worth it?
This is incorrect, support for the war has risen to roughly a little over 50%.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/03/13/politics/politico/main3933699.shtml
The 70% of Americans with a favorable opinion of President Obama?
This is woefully incorrect. obama’s approval ratings hover somewhere around 38%
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll
Folkbum, it’s essential to realize that it’s never wise to never pull numbers randomly out of the sky to support a cause.
While inexperienced students may fall for these sorts of made up facts, in the adult world there will always be those familiar with actual reality who are ready to correct you.
February 18th, 2009 at 7:49 pm
Roland, “net neutrality†is a real thing with real meaning, not something you can imagine a reality onto like Bruce and Obama’s support for the FD.
As a teacher, you should understand that using Wikipedia as a source is greatly frowned upon.
February 18th, 2009 at 7:54 pm
I don’t know why I bother making actual arguments if you all are too intellectually dishonest to argue anything nit-picking. See you all in hell.
With Barack Obama as our President, we’re living it.