NYT - DU Derided? -- Myths Run Wild in Blog Tsunami Debate

[matt819]

Take a look at this: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/03/international/worldspecial4/03bloggers.html

This from Monday's NYT re the blog responses to the tsunami. Clearly, they are having fun at DU's expense, though, to be fair, the second snip adds some balance. So, is any publicity good publicity?

<snip>
To some in the blogosphere, it (th tsunami) simply had to be the government's fault.

On Democratic Underground, a blog for open discussion and an online gathering place for people who hate the Bush administration, a participant asked, "Since we know that the atmosphere has become contaminated by all the atomic testing, space stuff, electronic stuff, earth pollutants, etc., is it logical to wonder if: Perhaps the 'bones' of our earth where this earthquake spawned have also been affected?"

The cause of the earthquake and resulting killer wave, the writer said, could be the war in Iraq. "You know, we've exploded many millions of tons of ordnance upon this poor planet," the writer said. "All that 'shock and awe' stuff we've just dumped onto the Asian part of this earth - could we have fractured something? Perhaps the earth was just reacting to something that man has done to injure it. The earth is organic, you know. It can be hurt."

The ridicule began immediately. Online insults, referred to colloquially as flames, rose high on other sites.

"What would life be without D.U.?" asked an editor at Wizbang, a politically conservative blog (www.wizbangblog.com), using the initials of Democratic Underground.

"Get out the tin foil hats," a contributor to the blog wrote.

<snip>

<snip>

Mr. Surowiecki pointed out that there is nothing new about ill-informed rumor-mongering or other forms of oddness. "There were always cranks," he said. "Rumors have always been fundamental about the way people talk, or think, about politics or complicated issues." Instead of a corner bar or a Barcalounger, however, the location for today's speech is an online medium with a potential audience of millions.

But there is another, more important difference, Mr. Surowiecki and others say. Internet discourse can be self-correcting, with near-instant feedback from readers.

What was lost in the sniping over the Democratic Underground posting was the fact that the follow-up comments were a sober discussion of what actually causes earthquakes. The first response to the posting asked, "Earthquakes have been happening since the beginning of time ... How would you explain them?"

Further comments explained the movement of tectonic plates and provided links to sites explaining earthquakes and tsunamis from the United States Geological Survey and other authoritative sources.
<snip>

[Maple]

1. Ignore the peanut gallery

People who said the earth was round, or that man could fly were treated the same way. Twas ever thus.

[metisnation]

2. Rovian attack

Attack dogs writing a story about DU to make you ashamed of who you are. Democrats are united.

[Floydian Slip]

50. ugh

The NYT does not do 'Rovian' attacks, its one of the most liberal newspapers in the country, why do you think they mentioned this site? Because they read it daily. It was not totally unfair in the article, they said all forums did it and the Internet had a way of self-correcting.

But, this ain;t no BLOG either

[Crunchy Frog]

68. Why do you believe that the NYT is liberal?

Do you know anything about Judith Miller and her role in building up the phoney case for war in Iraq, and her phoney reports concerning WMDs? If you don't, I would advise you to look into it.

The NYT, just like the rest of the corporate media, has not been doing its job of reporting the facts accurately and impartially, and of holding those in power accountable. That's the absolute minimum of what a "liberal" newspaper, or indeed any reputable newspaper should be doing.

They certainly do repeat Rovian and neocon talking points, in an uncritical fashion. We need to get over this myth that there's a "liberal media" out there. Apart from some small independent publications, there just isn't.

[The Doctor.]

133. While the NYT cannot be labelled as 'Liberal' per se....

It is fair to note that many of 'The Time's' columnists have reported news which is not entirely favorable to the administration.

Just do a DU search and you will find hundreds of references to NYT article cited as sources.

[silvermachine]

182. It's also fair to note...

... that this administration's policies are what created the news that is not entirely favorable to the administration. It didn't appear out of thin air and was hardly a concoction of the NYT.

[David Zephyr]

236. The New York Times Cheerled For Making War Against Iraq.

Nothing liberal about it at all.

Once maybe. Certainly, not now.

[bvar22]

72. Did you read the NYTimes while bush*...

...and the republican psychos were lieing this country into WAR?

They (NYTimes) were totally onboard the bush* propaganda bandwagon! Yeehaw! Lets go kill a bunch of Brown People!!!!


I was more disappointed in the NYTimes than the other WhiteHouse outlets. The NYTimes knew better, but still went with the Rovian NeoCon Program of Death and Destruction for profit.

That's only one example. Like all the other CorpoMedia Outlets inside the US, the NYTimes DOES channel the Republican/Republican Lite Press Releases.

You may find some liberal Columnists on the back page, but you will also find Gingrich, Friedman, Safire, Frist, Buckley, and Limbaugh on the same page.

If you want to find out what is happening inside the US, you must look outside the US.

May I suggest:
http://www.ipsnews.net/headlines.asp

[creeksneakers2]

150. The Times exposed the aluminum tubes hoax before the war n/t

[bvar22]

170. And then immediately dropped it.

That story was NOT a scoop or an expose', and required no investigation or compilation.

As early as May of 2001, experts at the Energy Dept. were issuing public statements refuting White House claims that these tubes were suitable for use in centrifuges. In fact, experts everywhere (Oak Ridge, IAEA) were PUBLICALLY DENYING that these tubes were evidence of WMD.

So it is a stretch to say that the NYTimes broke the story. They merely published what was already (or should have been) public knowlege. To their SHAME, they also continued to publish and HIGHLIGHT the WhiteHouse claims.

"The calculated and dishonest character of the Times’ reportage of the tubes issue is underscored by its coverage after September 8, 2002. This history is set out in the October 3 exposé by Barstow, Broad and Gerth. Having plastered a sensational and alarming article on its front page, the newspaper subsequently buried on its inside pages articles hinting at the truth—that the claims were not credible and were hotly disputed by the most expert analysts within the government itself.

On September 13, the Times published an article on page A13 that noted in passing the internal differences within the intelligence community, but came out clearly on the side of the administration and the CIA. According to Barstow, Broad and Gerth, the September 13, 2002 article reported that “an unidentified senior administration official dismissed the debate as a ‘footnote, not a split.’”

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2004/oct2004/nyti-o13.shtml

[Tinoire]

79. The NYT? Liberal! Lol, Your floydian slip is definitely showing! n/t

[tsuki]

85. Thanks, I was getting ready to ask. I didn't think this was a blog.

[CatWoman]

120. only morans subscribe to that logic

The NYT does not do 'Rovian' attacks, its one of the most liberal newspapers in the country,.......

[mountainvue]

146. Were they "the most liberal

newpaper in the country" when Judy Miller was carrying water for the proponents of the Iraq war?

[pokercat999]

288. There us no such thing as bad publicity......eom

[soleft]

3. Read further

But there is another, more important difference, Mr. Surowiecki and others say. Internet discourse can be self-correcting, with near-instant feedback from readers.

What was lost in the sniping over the Democratic Underground posting was the fact that the follow-up comments were a sober discussion of what actually causes earthquakes. The first response to the posting asked, "Earthquakes have been happening since the beginning of time ... How would you explain them?"

[RoyGBiv]

9. Unfortunately ...

A lot of people won't. This actually is a pretty good article on the whole, but a lot of people, including people right here apparently, will get stuck at "myths" "Democratic Underground" and "cranks."

[mcscajun]

117. If I hadn't already been involved with DU...

...this article would have left me with a truly bad impression.

It's not balanced at all, but does a remarkable job of feigning impartiality by mentioning sites on both sides. BUT...the conservative sites are mentioned only in their derision of DU with no mention of their own 'warts' and the hate they spew. Where was the mention of Free Republic? Nowhere.

Many people do not read past the first few paragraphs of any article in the newspaper, which is why the most important information is always there. If they persist, then the last paragraph is what a great many readers will take away as their final thought on DU, if they got past the first: "In the tsunami discussion on Democratic Underground, some participants continued to post farfetched theories about what caused the earthquake based on pseudoscience and conspiracy,..."

In this case, bad publicity is simply bad publicity.

[KoKo]

131. We've been a target since the latest "Selection" because of ACTIVISM!

This article is cleverly worded (thanks for pointing that out).

Because our registration is so high and we've been a Forum that encourages activism and links to activism projects from all over the internet...they want us gone. Everytime we are mentioned many "infiltrators" show up...along with a few folks sincerely "just looking."

When the NYT's goes after us it shows they think we are dangerous. So, to ridicule us while not mentioning Free Republic and the Swift Boat Liars for Truth who are part of the Repug Machine on the ground, is a clear sign from the White House that they want us "marginalized."

[jdj]

238. I wondered if the original post was a set-up. I was suspicious of

it the minute I read it.

Oh, well.

Compare this to Falwell's "Blow them away in the name of the Lord" and Bush's love-practicing gynecologists, and who loses. At least we are anon., very few open public figures.

I think this is an attack on the internet in general, because the print media KNOWS we are kicking their asses. We are doing the work they can no longer do, or won't do, we are reading their articles online for free. They have to be close to going under.

All a sudden this weekend, I tried to look up old articles on some papers online and they were trying to charge me for the archived ones.. Fuck that. I'll google til I find a site that's free, there is an archive site that archives important articles like the Tampa Bay Tribune Flying Out The Saudi Royals on 9/13 story.

[RoyGBiv]

248. Glad you said that ...

I had the same thought.

[RoyGBiv]

274. Bad Impression ...

That was kinda my point. People will get stuck on the bad elements of the article, particularly since they are "up front," and not pay attention to any of the broader themes.

I just wanted to comment on one other thing, though. The lack of a mention of Freeperville could be seen in one of two ways. You've mentioned one. Another is that DU has gained enough notoriety and has developed enough influence as a group that it warrants being mentioned, whether positively or negatively. Freeperville is obviously a bastion of stupidity, even to a lot of people who would disagree with pretty much everything that's said on DU. (I know a few who've said this to me personally.) It's off the radar of pretty much anyone with a brain. DU, however, is very much on that radar.

That's not a defense of the article, just the way I see it.

[GHOSTDANCER]

296. It was written to create a bad impression.

Look at what they chose as a topic to manipulate. In no way is this a fuqin blog!!! It's a new revolution in collaborative communication filled with a broad spectrum of ideas, feelings and points of view from all kinds.
To take a tin foiled fuqin idea like US created earthquakes, from all the important topics on DU is fuqin bullshit. To exclude what the fuqin Fascist Republican Party is conspiring about on their sites is further proof, it was written to keep the tin-foil lefties in their corner. LOOK AWAY....LOOK AWAY

In defense of the Tin foil idea of manufactured earthquakes. which the US wouldn't ever do because hurting This region only hurts the slave production that is so important to our precious living standards in the US. Why do you think the World bank is the 3 largest contributer of aid for Tsunami relief? The machine can't be slowed down too much. Christmas is only 349 days away.... Get it back on its feet quick!!!

Russia, carried out an extensive "tectonic weapon" research program, a deliberate attempt to create earthquakes using underground nuclear weapons. Russian newspaper Moscow News has obtained papers showing that the program, first known as "Mercury" and later as "Volcano," was launched in 1987 and ended in 1992.
<http://www.coastalpost.com/96/12/2.htm>

[lib_1138]

244. But they didn't feature that

Now it looks like we are a bunch of tin-hats. I am new here, but facts is facts -- the effect of bombs on a country, even the shock and awe type and quanity, are the same as tapping your fingers on the side of a building. People forget how big the Earth is.

The last part is just a "but I mean that in a GOOD way" like the old Seinfeld routine.

This just breaks my heart. I don't why this guy decided to do a hit piece on DU.

[librechik]

4. wow, it turned out to be fair!

more or less...We are so educational. And kooky.

:loveya:DU

[paulk]

5. if anyone saved the hate threads on the Tsunami from the

Free Republic, (before they got deleted), they should send them along to the asshole who wrote this piece of crap, along with a few questions about impartiality.

[Pirate Smile]

14. I remember asking people to do just that. We should forward them

to the reporter.

[Kagemusha]

6. .... You people don't really believe those bombs caused it... right?

Do you?... For real? Not a joke?

Because so far I'm seeing no one even try to deny that the tsunami was man-made, which is not a view I share personally...

[Pirate Smile]

10. LOL. I kind of assumed everyone just thought that was obviously

nuts.

I saw that thread (although I wish I knew now who posted it), rolled my eyes, and looked for something else.

There was probably one person who thought that and 1,000's who didn't but, you know, the wacky bird gets the attention.

[Kagemusha]

13. There was more than one thread and I noticed several.

My reaction was, "not worth my time"

But geez, look what happened. This is what happens when complete loss of perspective isn't challenged.

[Pirate Smile]

16. I know. I just ignore stuff sometimes but I think more challenging

is in order.

[bpilgrim]

22. are you kidding?

challenging is what makes DU great and a great deal of it goes on, especially directed at the TH folks... believe me i know, i'm in that minority ;->

:hi:

peace

[Pirate Smile]

28. I know, but who has time to actually challenge everything you

see that you disagree with - MY GOD MAN, I MUST SLEEP SOME TIME.:evilgrin:

[bpilgrim]

30. welcome to the MATRIX

it ain't just YOU and I on here ;->

peace

[IStriker]

241. Sorry but I have to ask what are the "TH folks..."

I've sat here trying to figure out what it stands for and gone back a couple of comments and still have not figured out what TH folks are.

[nickgutierrez]

299. I imagine TH folks = Tinfoil Hat

Which is a usually derogatory way of referring to a conspiricy theorist.

[bpilgrim]

21. according to the article it was challenged

and made for an interesting thread, according to the NYT.

i just wish we could all vote on every post this way we could have the highest rated post float to the top... it would save a lot of time :evilgrin:

:hi:

peace

[Kagemusha]

24. Yes, it was challenged in one of the threads I saw.

And not at all in another that came later.

[bpilgrim]

27. well, 9 x out of 10 then

like i said above, most everything is challenged here and thats what makes this place GREAT.

if you can't back up an assertion here you WILL get called on it and thats why it BLOWS the main-stream media out of the water.

they probably feel like the candle stick makers did when electric bulbs first appeared in the market :evilgrin:

peace

[freeplessinseattle]

53. if you read even one of those threads you wouldn't need to ask

[SmokingJacket]

154. Actually it WAS challenged. nt

[zelda7743]

63. Actually, I caused the tsunami

I live in Hawaii. I went out swimming in the ocean on December 25th after eating some Taco Bell.
Sorry about all the loss of life and stuff....

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

76. I have tried.

I can speak for myself and several others, who have actively tried to counter the unscientific rumor-mongering because we believe in educating people on geology, and because this sort of gibberish makes all of us look bad. Granted, it is impossible to keep up with the radically high post counts of those who attemt to spread fear and disinformation, but we do try :)

[fujiyama]

100. Don't worry

If you check out one of the threads, you'll notice that many responded, debunking the idea and dismissing it completely.

The NYT article, while on the whole somewhat snide and biased (ignoring hateful comments by RWers), did mention a few of the replies.

[HeeBGBz]

102. I remember contributing to that thread

I offered that underground nuclear testing would have an effect on the equilibrium of the planet. I wondered if that could in effect set off a massive quake. I didn't say anything about the tsunami being manufactured. Only that man's stupidity could be the cause.

That's when somebody was saying the tectonic plates were too massive to be effected. I did not argue that fact because I just don't know.

[alaintex]

143. I read in the paper (FW Star Telegram) that the 9.0 quake

Had the equivalent force of 2 million Hiroshima sized atomic bombs, so I don't think an occasional underground test would have much of an impact.

Just my opinion.

[OldVlad]

233. Oh Brother

*slaps forehead* We haven't done underground testing in decades! Why bring this up now after such a tradigy?

I certainly hope it wasn't your misinterpretted, poorly timed post that brought about this coverage, the NYT is one of the widest circulated papers on earth, tons of people who have never heard of DU think we're America hating looneies thanks to this horrible publicity. First the Wellstone funeral, then the election, now this, the hits just keep on rolling. Helluva year.

[nashville_brook]

257. i brought underground testing up too on that thread --

as i remember, i didn't assert that this tsunami or this earthquake was caused by an underground nuclear test... my point was like, "doesn't it seem reckless to set off nueclear weapons underground." as in, "this is something that has always bugged me."

jiminy christmas! guess i better watch what i say.

(i'm going to start a thread that claims masterbation causees blindness and see if the WP runs a story).

[zann725]

283. LOL! Please do! And they probably will.

Might make for more interesting NYT reading!

[ashmanonar]

304. well, it's not that i say that the government wanted it to happen

bc as evil as bushco is, they'd...never...
ok, scratch that line of thinking...:evilgrin:

let's just say that nothing is impossible...i wouldn't say that we definitely caused it, but it'd be hubris to say that we can have no effect on our world, and that anything that happens (earthquake, volcano, tsunami) is purely natural...

like it or not, we have some effect on this world...in 40,000 years of human presence on this world, we've dammed rivers (destroying river deltas), run species into extinction (there's definitive evidence that the earliest inhabitants of North America ran the mammoth off cliffs and exterminated them), we've detonated thousands of nuclear weapons on its surface, under its oceans, and deep underground...thousands of tons of pollution are created every day by all the vehicles that drive around this world, and the factories that produce our goods...

and people want to believe that the world just does what it does, and that we have no effect?

[bpilgrim]

7. we hit the NYT, wooHoo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

we must be doing something right to get them to start deriding us :evilgrin:

thanks for the FREE advertising NYT :toast:

peace

[NAO]

56. Yeah but they DIDN'T LINK DU (they DID link the conservative blogs) bias!

[Child_Of_Isis]

69. Put a link in the comments section.

Looks as if someone has already been there. ;-)

[NashVegas]

It Does Now

Can't remember if it did this morning.

[NAO]

179. Now I feel like a successful media watchdog activist

The link is there!

Still, the initial observation that the linked the conservative blogs but not DU, which was purportedly the subject of the story, shows the subtle right-wing bias that dominates the corporate media.

[OldVlad]

234. Your optimism is cute

Wish I was that young again.

This is the worst advertising possible, reinforcing tons of stereotypes about the internet and us.

[NashVegas]

8. I Am So Tempted to Lock This

But I won't :)

After reading the article and seeing direct quotes lifted from DU, the irony is delicious.

That's just the laziest excuse for reporting I think I've ever seen in the NYT. Did they have an intern write this up? You'd think the reporter would have taken the step of contacting the posters in question and asking for clarification (I got this weird flakey idea in my head because that's exactly what an AP guy did with me, elsewhere). This article is essentially no different from a blog entry.

PS, Matt - you need to edit your post down. 4 paragraphs are the max under copyright rules.

Someone tell the Gray Lady her drawers are showing.

[Pirate Smile]

12. Did you see the original thread? How many people actually

believed that?

The lazy ass could have included some of the venom toward the victims coming from the other side.

That is so much more reprehensible then one person's misguided idea about the causes of earthquakes.

[RoyGBiv]

19. There have been several threads ...

The number of people who believe this or some variation of it is not incredibly small ... unfortunately.

[Skittles]

42. perhaps the "reporter" himself posted it

:D

[depakid]

81. Wouldn't be the first time

Remember Jayson Blair?

The Times' editors haven't exactly had the greatest reputation for checking their reporter's stories over the past several years....

[Flammable Materials]

119. Does the four paragraph rule include ...

... quotes ripped from DU?

:evilgrin:

[NashVegas]

128. Don't You Get Fresh With Me ....

Or I'll make you run write an essay on the sublime beauty of the "Musica" sculpture on the Demonbruen traffic circle.

[Flammable Materials]

212. They're NEKKID people! They're DANCING! With their HOO-HAHS out!

[goforit]

271. Toooo funny!................(Do ya work for the Daily Show?)

[Snivi Yllom]

211. the Times is the Gray Old Whore

Queen of the Media Whores. Lazy bad reporting has become standard at the Times.

[VegasWolf]

11. The conservatives would never find any good in DU regardless,

water under the bridge. Too bad they don't do a follow up
artice about free republic, they are tin foil hat about everything.

[Name removed]

52. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[OrwellwasRight]

58. In case you have not heard yet...

Welcome to DU, Floydian.

:hi:

On edit: silly HTML error

[Floydian Slip]

70. thanks

hello to you too

[Spiffarino]

59. That's because they're sorry, stupid assholes

...who have no real thoughts or ideas of their own. Like all ignorant, fascist chumps, they spend their time pointing fingers and laughing at things they pretend to understand.

Nobody here really gives a shit about what they think. I've read that shitpile often enough to understand that they're nothing more than a mutual masturbation society.

[Mike Niendorff]

15. not really surprising.

If DU allows itself to devolve into Art Bell central, then we deserve what we get. The credibility of this site is our responsibility (although, eventually, I think Skinner's going to have to make some judgment calls as to what's actually good faith participation vs. what's an attempt by disruptors to skate around the rules).


MDN

[Pirate Smile]

20. Sometimes I think someone is just trying to make us look like

idiots on purpose - trolls - but people have their own wacky ideas too so how do you really know.:shrug:

[Mike Niendorff]

33. I think it's a bit of both

but the exact split, well, that's anyone's guess. Like I said, I think ultimately Skinner's going to have to make some tough choices on this front. But that's just my personal opinion (and, as the saying goes, "that and a dime ...").


MDN

[bpilgrim]

35. and you forgot an option, sometimes they are TRUE - 911, BBV, PNAC, etc

another reason why DU is VERY important in pass'n the word ;->

peace

[Mike Niendorff]

44. nope, didn't forget that at all :)

I guess I'm not making myself very clear here, but I'll try again:

All I'm saying is that there's a huge difference between doing legitimate investigative research -- with verifiable facts, backing citation, etc -- versus just random speculation without concern for verifiability or factual accuracy.


MDN

[AZCat]

46. I'd say there's a fair bit of random speculation here

But it doesn't get coddled (like at the NYT). Instead, the poster usually retreats under fire from posters who do know a thing or two about the subject of the post.

[HeeBGBz]

116. So we're not allowed to question until we have answers?

That will narrow things down a bit, eh?

[muse]

43. Well, that's an interesting thought. Let's hope that's it.

Because some of the stuff on here - like the thread mentioned in the NYT - is ridiculously embarassing.

[murray hill farm]

137. Why do u even care?

Why are u embarrassed? Is our role here to only discuss what is viewed by the main stream media as "appropriate"..to present ourselves as a scientific journal here? We are not that...we ..or i thought that we were here to present ideas...and, ya know.. a lot of what appeared wacky to the world at first, has turned out to be so true in the long run. If you only discuss ideas that are approved of by the media...thoughts that u perceive as OK to discuss, then where have we put ourselves..what have we helped them to do to us? We will then be silenced...except for, of course, appropriate and approved of and accepted ideas. I don't want to go there, do you?

[zann725]

284. I agree. And THEY know that. It's the "dialogue" of possible "facts"

that's bothering them. That's why they're laughing at us, and trying to get their readers to laugh at us...to try and belittle or dismiss possible alternative theories of "MSM-reported" world events.

When they can no longer laugh us away, or shame us into no longer freely discussing "possible" facts, then they may try and shut us down. Stay tuned!

[murray hill farm]

298. ya know..u are right!!

The "dialogue of possible facts" is what is happening..is just what they are trying to squelch here...and a good number of DUers..are assisting them with the ongoing and often nasty and name calling responses to any attempt in that "dialgue of the possible". I was at the point of..just laying low for a bit here...but then i discovered the joys of that "ignore" button..ha! Thanks for the reply.

[0007]

219. Then why not take it on the Arthur Duffy instead of staying

and whining?

[muse]

275. Whatever that means.

Whining? Who is whining? Who wants this to be turned into a a little corner of the world for kooks and their unsupportable theories? It's a lot more fun to pop in here and read the ideas of people who bring some intelligent viewpoints to the table.

[arwalden]

141. Trying?

:eyes:

We are becoming a Mecca for cranks.

[Pirate Smile]

164. Well, sometimes succeeding, of course. Do we need a damn poll to

show 99% of people here don't think pollution causes earthquakes?

Then we could send it to the NYT.

The Washington Post has already published a DU Poll so why not the NYT?

I know everyone here always takes the polls very seriously.
;-)

[muse]

277. agreed

Can't figure out if I belong here or not. I'm wondering if the "whacky" threads are really freepers coming in here making DU looking like the land of liberal nutsville.

[Minstrel Boy]

23. There are 60,000 registered here. That's a small city.

Sorry if you find it uncomfortable to be in the presence of some. Perhaps you should cross to the other side of the street if you see one coming.

[Octafish]

37. NYT Missed 'BUSH Involved in JFK Assassination'

Never see this covered, FBI memo documenting how George Herbert Walker Bush called the FBI to rat on a suspect -- within MINUTES of the death President Kennedy:



This one shows what a "Mr George Bush of the Central Intelligence Agency" told J Edgar Hoover a week later.



SOURCE:

http://www.internetpirate.com/bush.htm

Not that I know everything, but there are a LOT of important things The New York Times misses.

[sleepyhead]

96. Wait a minute.....

Didn't GHWB say in an interview that he "didn't remember" where he was on 11/22/63? You'd think he would recall his important part in the investigation. I guess he's not being entirely truthful. How shocking.

[Octafish]

147. 'He who does not trust enough will not be trusted.' -- The Tao

"He who excuses himself accuses himself." -- Gabriel Meurier

[Child_Of_Isis]

61. One does wonder why we get so much attention.

Hell we probably have as many lurking as we have registered.

[d.l.Green]

185. Lurking?

B-)

I wouldn't call it lurking, geez. I've been "lurking" here since I was linked here from a Dean campaign site in '03. Finally decided to register.

I administer a local chat forum. There are only about 10 regular posters, yet there are close to 50,000 hits/month. (Thanks local MSM!!!!)

[Child_Of_Isis]

213. Yes. It's called lurking.

When you read a board but do not post, it is called lurking.

[nashville_brook]

258. yeah, we should tombstone anyone who says anything stupid. n/t

[geek tragedy]

17. Drive-by reporting of a straw man. The only surprise was that it wasn't

Bumiller.

[Straight Shooter]

18. I believe DU encompasses more than merely hating the bush administration

Do you think they would have referred to Free Republic as the bush administration worshipping forum? Somehow I doubt it.

Of all the valid, rational, scientific and thoughtful threads on DU, they choose a speculative tsunami thread. Maybe NYT should join Free Republic and get a real taste of off-the-wall material, eh?

[bpilgrim]

25. and they say the NYT is liberal - lol

everything mainstream is so tilted AGAINST us it ain't funny.

shoot i've seen numerous freakrepublic articles held up for praise by mainstream it's SICK :puke:

but at least we made the BIG-TIME :bounce:

peace

[JI7]

55. NYT ,Washington Post are both pretty right wing leaning

they do a few ok articles at times and of course they make their traditional election year endorsement of democratic candidates. but that's only to keep their mostly democratic subscribers.

i would rather have them NOT endorse any democratic candidates and do better reporting of the issues with facts than crappy reporting and the worthless endorsements.

[bunkerbuster1]

103. Anyone who believes the NY Times is especially progressive

ought to look at the adverts they run in the Sunday magazine.

The Times cares about three things: Money, money, and money. The Times readership is mildly interested in progressive causes, so the Times pretends to care about them.

I'm not so burnt-out cynical that I don't still believe the Times is, on balance, still probably the best American daily paper out there--it is--but the idea that it's somehow ideologically leftist is a wingnut lie.

[TheKingfish]

250. In defense of WaPo

You have to separate the neo-con editors from the news reporters. If you don't know who Dana Priest and Anthony Shadid are you really should.

[hansolsen]

269. Good point. Dana Priest in particular provided responsible reporting on

WMD in the lead-up to the war when hardly any one else dared. I respect her work.

[AngryOldDem]

99. My thought exactly

There's more to us than that.

That description is actually pretty insulting, IMO.

[SemperEadem]

190. because the topic was 'fish in a barrel'

God forbid they choose one that wasn't wrapped up all nice and pretty in a bow for them so they didn't have to break a sweat doing their damn job.

[Neshanic]

26. Maybe the NYT can make up some stories. We love when they do that.

[bpilgrim]

29. how many times did they have to appologize for lying to us last year 2, 3x

:puke:

peace

[Dr Fate]

34. How many troops dead b/c the NYT refused to investigate the truth????

They reported Bush lies about WMDs & 9/11 connex as fact- and only retracted the lies AFTER troops & civillians were killed.

So how many deaths has DU been indirectly responsible for???

About 80% of America supported the war, b/c they TRUSTED the NYT and other GOP/media talking points when they all claimed that Saddam had WMDs and had "somthing to do" with 9/11.

The NYT is a joke.

[bpilgrim]

38. zactly, those who read the DU are the most informed people on the PLANET

we should do an official survey, like the one that showed how STUPID everyone is who gets their news from the mainstream, especially FOX :evilgrin:

peace

[lcdnumber6]

41. So, who is up for the LTTR?

I think this is unbelievable. Pigeonhole DU as a site ONLY (as anyone who reads this article) for "people who hate the Bush administration". Dear lord I wouldn't come here if it was just about hating Bush. Has NYT ever done any other press on DU for just being a GREAT clearinghouse of all sorts of news from around the world, with quite compelling debate among critical thinkers? Or for its efforts to mobilize democrats from state to state and city to city? I found out how to contribute to the Gregoire recount from this site. Mr. Schwartz needs a talking to. I'd do it, but I ain't too eloquent. I just can't believe the NYT editors let this spin get into press. Ugh.

[Dr Fate]

31. NYT reported that Saddam had WMDs and 9/11 connex as hard fact...

...w/o even investigating it. They just took Bush's word for it.

They even had to apologize for the months of fake news they reported.

Pot, meet kettle. At least DU doesnt claim to be investigative journalism- but an open forum.

[No Exit]

49. Great point! Better to be a "conspiracy theorist" or a "kook" than

to just be an out-and-out LIAR.

[tsuki]

86. I like the local pub analogy.

[depakid]

32. Well, this doesn't surprise me-

Despite the fact that numerous people have tried to talk sense into the conspiracy nuts- no one listens.

Frankly, I think many of these posters are either:

1) Too poorly educated in science to understand that they sound just like creationists; or

2) They are plants by the right who post here to make DU look stupid.

[Dr Fate]

36. Hey- at least DUers did not report fake, uninvestigated "news"...

...that resulted in thousands of deaths.

DU was not the one who convinced 80% of Americans that "Saddam has WMDs & had somthing to do with 9/11"

No, that was the handy work of "investigative journalist" from the New York Times, Fox, and CNN.

DU is an OPEN opinion/discussion forum- NYT is SUPPOSED to be news.

[depakid]

75. This is true

even so, I wish people were a little more responsible and thought a little more before posting this nonsense. It affects everyone else's credibility in other areas- where a good many DU'rs actually do know what they are talking about and deserve to heard.

I little respect for the Times anymore- based not only on the likes of Miller, Adam Ngourney and others who brazenly slant- perhaps even falsify the news- but on the fact that their editors seem too lacsidaisical to care what's printed.

The Times' only saving grace is that they're not the Washington Post- which has gone so far off the journalistic deep end as to have lost all credibility. There was an article the other day about cougars moving east that contained some absolutely stunning false statements of fact.

No one at my university takes them seriously anymore- most of us actually laugh at them (as several of us did over the couger article)- although those of us old enough to remember who they once were- also lament.

[HeeBGBz]

111. Or maybe they are just worried about the damn planet

Or those of us who know Earth is fragile and wonder if her repeated rapes are beginning to set off unimaginable cataclysm.

Anyone who thinks I'm gonna stop thinking and wondering so those-who-know-so-much-more can have a pristine playground, can kiss my tinfoil behind.

Set me straight. Inform me. Teach me. Ease my worry.

If that makes me a tinfoiler to explore all possibilities then so be it. I wear the tin topper with pride. At least I'm thinking. Which can't be said for the right.

[depakid]

292. I have news

If you want to learn- if really you want to know things- and not play games with pseudoscience- be prepared to worry like you never worried before.

The real thing is much harder and much scarier than fiction.

It'll keep you awake at night, wondering.

[mcscajun]

113. I have to agree...

...I've been replying to some of the many threads involved with conspiracy or other crackpot theories on the tsunami...and the lack of understanding in science is appalling. There's a wall of "I don't believe facts from official sources" that is impenetrable by reasoned argument.

And yes...the fact that this issue keeps coming up again and again has made me wonder just who is raising it and why. It certainly does make us look collectively stupid and/or marginally wacko.

[geek tragedy]

122. That's why they were given their own ghetto forum (the 9/11 forum). eom

[LastLiberal in PalmSprings]

152. "Hello, Mr. Rove, we ran the article you sent us...

Thanks for pointing out that Bush-haters like those on Democratic Underground are also conspiracy wackos. We really appreciate that you did the research for us so we didn't have to." -- NYT memo

BTW, for any NYT reporter who reads this, it's a joke. It's called "satire".

[w4rma]

39. I didn't get mentioned. Not even my arguments (which weren't about quakes)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1461670

[muriel_volestrangler]

101. Good - because your argument didn't hold up

(a few inches on top of a couple of miles of water won't affect the power of a tsunami).

I think that people who have genuine questions about science that they don't understand, and have ideas that can potentially look outrageous, should ask them as follow-up posts inside an existing thread. They'll get answered there (people with knowledge in the subject should already be looking there), but won't attract immediate attention from people skimming the site for a "look at the silly DUers" article. It also means anyone coming new to the site via a link sees the sober discussion first, before we move off into the hyper-speculative realms.

[daleo]

40. Maybe some muddying of the waters re: who new what and when they knew it

Eventually real questions will be asked about why there was not more warning given to the affected region. Plenty of people monitor the ocean, including the U.S. Navy. This is the 21st Century, there are dozens of lines of communications. And yet, this disaster varied little from the Krakatoa tsunami of the 1880s.

When the death toll of Americans comes clear (most are still just being called missing) the questions will begin. This seems like an attempt to make anyone who has questions into a crazy unscientific nut who thinks the earthquake was triggered by H-bombs planted in the earth's crust.

The mainstream media is doing its job of protecting the status quo with this kind of reporting.

[Eric J in MN]

45. I think this will get us more members (nt)

nt

[ThoughtCriminal]

47. The Earthquake Weapon threads annoy me but

A person who thinks you can trigger a man-made magnitude 9 earthquake is not nearly as annoying as the nuts who think God made it to punish Asians for being non-Christian, non-White or whatever.

The NYT isn't writing about forums promoting that lovely bit of hatred are they?

[Child_Of_Isis]

64. What about a president who believes that

he has been hand picked by god to be involved in a holy war so that the second coming of christ can be carried out. THEY CALL US NUTS???
Ha!

[Downtown Hound]

65. Ditto!

they love to pick on DU because of a few out there posts in the midst of many more "rational" ones, but the truly vile stuff from the right never gets quoted. At least we don't pretend to be balanced NYT. Better to be radical than a hypocrite.

[No Exit]

48. Derision will NEVER make me close my mind

I want to consider all possibilities, if I'm trying to figure something out. So if the NYT, or someone else, wants to ridicule, LET 'EM! I don't care!

I've been told some things that I really thought were off-the-wall. Sometimes it was a friend telling me. I would just keep my mouth shut, to avoid insulting the friend, but inwardly I was thinking, "That's crazy."

Well, guess what? Some of the things I smugly thought were "crazy" turned out to be true! Boy, was I glad I kept my big mouth shut!

One time on another forum, I referred to a connection btw assassin John Hinckley's brother and Neil Bush. A Bush-worshipping poster responded, "Oh, now I see what you are--you're just a kook, that's all." I answered back with two Associated Press articles from the time of Reagan's shooting. Those two AP articles described how on the day of the shooting by John Hinckley, "coincidentally", Hinckley's brother was scheduled to have dinner with Neil Bush. Oh, and the likely subject of their dinner conversation was the fact that the Hinckley family's oil company had just been slapped by the federal government (EPA) with some extremely hefty fines (in the millions). See, Neil Bush, being the son of the Vice President, seems to have had some friends in high places... gee, maybe he could help their friends the Hinckleys and get those fines eliminated/reduced?

The guy who'd called me a "kook" never said another word about it.

[genieroze]

51. That fact that they are protesting and making fun strikes me as we

hit a nerve somewhere. Hum-mm, very interesting. We aren't the only discussion group saying these things. Take the black vault, holy tinfoil hat. I read a link that was on DU that was from a legit news source and it said that the Russians have a weapon that can cause tremors. Now is that a conspiracy theory?


http://www.bvalphaserver.com/

[NAO]

54. The NYT linked wizbangblog.com but NOT D.U. (only mentioned name, no URL)

So they link the conservative blogs, but only name the liberal blogs...

A similar tactic was used by the Bush shilling media in the coverage leading up to the election. They would show footage of Bush speaking (or garbling utterances and smirking) but they when they cut to covering Kerry they would only RELATE what he said, not show him speaking or play footage of him. The result was that people felt the did 'not know Kerry' or 'were not connecting with Kerry'. It was an overt, obvious media ploy.

Linking to the conservative blog, but not to DU is just so obvious and so biased. Will it be noted by NYT or any NYT readers?

[OrwellwasRight]

57. Interesting point

Do you have any data to back up the different format of the coverage (actual clips v. summarizing by the talking heads)? I'm not challenging your statement, I'm just wondering if there is something published to which we can cite in letters to the ed, etc.

[NAO]

60. Just personal observation, day to day on CNN and MSNBC

It was quite obvious, and when I noted it I immediately realized it was responsible for the feel that 'people did not know Kerry' - they felt the 'knew' Bush because they saw and heard him talking on the TV.

The worst instance of this was during October when Bush got an entire hour (!) of TV time for 'an important foreign policy speech' that turned out to be his stump speech with some stuff about Iraq and a few barbs against Kerry thrown in. The networks fell for it a second time, and Kerry never got equal time. He had to pay $$ for ever little 30 second spot.

I do hope the Columbia Campaign Desk or FAIR or some other media watchdog group was monitoring this and could produce hard statistics.

[OrwellwasRight]

67. WORD.

I think that the networks should have given Kerry an hour of free time the following day to compensate for broadcasting that campaign speech instead of a "major foreign policy speech."

Oh yeah, that was the old America, in which there was an "equal time rule." Now, there are just memory holes. :mad:

[bettyellen]

83. that's the same tactic the british press used with irish nationalists...

on television, even when they would interview them you would never hear words coming out of their mouths, they would subtitle them. the result would be planting doubt or creating a disconnect. very stange that it's spread to this country....

[fedsron2us]

94. The UK press were being directly censored

by the British government. They may have been craven not to resist but at least everyone knew what was going on. The restrictions were taken out in October 19 1988 when Douglas Hurd introduced a notice under clause 13(4) of the BBC Licence and Agreement and section 29(3) of the Broadcasting Act 1981 prohibiting the broadcast of direct statements by representatives or supporters of eleven Irish political and military organisations. The restrictions have subsequently been seen to have been an own goal by the authorities. Governments have got a lot more savvy about these matters since that time. They have learned how to lean on the media without direct recourse to the law. Of course, they have been helped by the fact that control of broadcasting and the press is now concentrated in the hands of a relatively few companies and individuals. It is this corrosive indirect manipulation of the media that makes the DU so important. The analysis of the news that I get on LBN and elsewhere acts as a way of filtering out all the bias. I know that there are plenty of crazy conspiracy theories knocking about on the boards but I am prepared to weed out the nutcases myself. Anyway, just occasionally one of these apparently barking mad people will turn out to be telling the truth so it is a good idea not to close your mind to them completely. I think Skinner and the moderators do an excellent job most of the time. They certainly do not require any lectures on how to run the boards from the NYT.

[bettyellen]

187. Oh I know they were, it's just strange that many tv stations were doing

the same thing to Kerry without any laws forcing them to. It makes me wonder exactly how planned it was, because if i didn't know about it happening in the UK , i might have thought it was more or less coincidental. I saw simply saying that there's a precedent for it, and journalists should have been aware of it.
The only reason that I knew about it in the UK was that I worked on the sound crew for a documentry about human rights abuses back then, and a lot of the victims had very heavy accents and were pretty difficult to understand. None of us could make out some of what they said, and it was hard making people repeat their painful stories over and over again. But we wanted to avoid the subtitles at all costs.

[anarchy1999]

62. Typical divide and control. Attack DU, not the real problem.

If DU is being attacked in mainstream media, it is serious. We are a force to be reckoned with, if we can keep ourselves together. I believe we can and we will.

on edit:
I would suggest we attack back tomorrow morning to media, the Congress, every single person we can reach with facts and articles and investigative reports and demand accountability from our "4th Estate". DO YOUR JOB!!!

[Mike Niendorff]

156. re: "We are a force to be reckoned with"

I agree 100%.

What Skinner has done here is outstanding. He has created a space for progressive discussions that can actually survive the *massive* attacks that the RW throws at us, and where a community can even thrive and grow in spite of these attacks. That is one hell of an accomplishment. However, it has to be understood that as our defenses evolve, so will the RW's methods of trashing us. For a long time, I've been a proponent of the "good faith" model for activist communities like this, and this is why. Rather than having a crisis each time some RW nut comes up with a new way to skirt the rules and trash the site, we should simply have enough faith in our own judgment to be able to call a spade a spade and act accordingly. If that means that a few genuinely "good faith" nuts get bumped along with the stealth freepers, well, I'm sorry, but I can live with that. This isn't a self-esteem forum, this is a place for building coalitions and strategies for getting the RW out of power before the damage gets even worse. DU has made a name for itself by taking this charge seriously, and I hope that this never changes, even if it does require some tough decisions along the way.


MDN

[Art_from_Ark]

66. "Myths"???

As in "stories about non-existent gods"???

:wtf:

[RandomKoolzip]

71. Do you know WHY those threads are being derided in the mainstream press?

BECAUSE THEY DESERVE TO BE DERIDED. Anyone who thinks that the Bush administration caused the earthquake/tsunami is not thinking clearly. We are not GI Joe fighting Cobra. We are not battling the Legion of Doom or some other cartoon supervillains; jesus, does it even need to be said? They're flesh and blood motherfuckers, and the crimes they've committed IN REALITY are enough to be outraged about. No need to invent science fiction about the Bush team; the truth is already fucked-up enough.

The Bush Administration is home to some of the most evil men on the planet, BUT THEY ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR EVERY SHITTY THING THAT HAPPENS IN THE WORLD.

This is just like when sober, reasonable people start to talk about, say, the discrepencies in the official story of the JFK assassination or the Plame outing, and then along comes some doofus with spinning eyes yowling about chemtrails: the listener/reader remembers the crazy-assed bullshit about chemtrails, associates it with the legitimate research done on the more reasoned subjects, and in his head, forever links ANY conspiracy reaserch with kooky krap that would make David Icke look like James Randi.

This is why I can't get my wife to read about the odd circumstances surrounding RFK's murder, or about the CIA's involvement in assassinations and covert plots. Because of the nutball crackpot shit she's heard concerning UFO's and chemtrails and mind control, and the attendant associatons made in the media, she'll never open her mind to the legitimate stuff.

Shame on any DUer who helped to propagate this bullshit earthquake theory. Thanks for muddying the waters again......

[OrwellwasRight]

73. Good point; maybe you should make a thread with this as the lead

so more folks will read it.

:thumbsup:

BTW, I went to a lecture several years ago by a journalist (I think he was French) who had written a book about the RFK conspiracy you refer to. Even though I recall few details now (and I didn't have the spare $$ at the time to buy his book), I left convinced that he made a solid case.

[RandomKoolzip]

74. Ah, why bother.....people will believe what they want to believe.

And placing it as its own thread wil just bring the woo-woos out of the woodwork.

(I must credit DUer Dookus for some of the above terminology. Nice vocab, Dook!)

[Disturbed]

78. NYT should clean up their act.

Picking on DU does show me that they are trying to discredit any voices of opposition to the Shrub Junta. When DU hits 100K the Corp Media will start hitting even harder.

[tanyev]

97. Exactly.

Not all that long ago, DU would have been too insignificant to even rate a mention in the NYT. Now we are getting mentioned in the MSM, but usually with derision. Hmmmm. Wonder where that talking point came from?

And how sad it is it when the NYT is writing about bloggers reporting the news, instead of reporting the news?

[Beware the Beast Man]

106. Thank you, thank you, a million times thank you!

You succinctly made many points I have only thought of saying. Disasters happen, people. I think it makes many feel comfortable in times of crisis to shift blame upon whatever "boogeyman" they see fit. You can come at me with any variety "documented evidence" and "reliable sources" you see fit but I am standing clear on this: Bush is not to blame for the tsunami; blame Earth.

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

108. Koolzip and I went to Highschool witha kid named Earth. I don't think its

fair to blame him.

[Beware the Beast Man]

109. I would have blamed God,

but ODB's kid had nothing to do with this, either! :D

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

115. That settles it the Earthquake was caused by General Zod - had ta be!

[mcscajun]

114. You said it all...

...and no matter how many people have tried with facts, links and plain common sense to sway the Tin-Foil Hat Brigade, they just keep spinning in circles and screaming conspiracy.

We have GOT to get a grip, here. We have enough REAL problems to deal with without manufacturing more. And no matter how much power the Bush Administration gathers to itself, there is a limit to what even they are capable of...really.

[jmcgowanjm]

136. Notice you can't find that DU link? n/t

[jmcgowanjm]

151. Straw Man

 
A.  Imagine somebody making a great fuss showing how
brave they are by demolishing a straw man.

B.  The Fallacy of the Straw Man is the opposite of the Principle
of Charity.

 Principle of Charity:  Make your opponent's argument as
good as it can be.

C. Fallacy of the Straw Man:  Make your opponent's
argument look ridiculous so that you can easily demolish it.

D.  Example #1:  (on the issue of
abortion)

People for Pro Choice are arguing that we ought to murder
little children.

(That is not the position of people who are Pro
Choice.)

E.  Example #2:  (on national health
care)

People against national health care think that greed for profit
can solve all our medical problems.

F.  Politicians are particularly fond of the Straw Man Fallacy.  
(It ought to be a black mark against them even to try such
a
tactic, put the public seems to tolerate it.)

[Mike Niendorff]

166. Very well put.

Legitimate inquiry requires credibility, and there is simply no excuse for playing into the delegitimization of our own movement. If people aren't clear on this yet, I hope they get clear on it pretty quick.


MDN

[glitch]

301. It's called "muddying the waters" and it's just a good old fashioned

technique to direct attention away from real issues. We roll our eyes at it, but the NYT prints it.
If I didn't already know this about the NYT, it would be good to know. But once you do know, they only discredit themselves by continuing to publish their bias so openly.
The number of people who see this about the Times are growing.

[zann725]

77. What was the Gandhi quote: "First they laugh at you, then..."

Let 'em laugh. They're coming to the blogs in search of the REAL news...since they don't cover it any more. Then they try and pick out a few "food for thought" quotes to try and dismiss us...so THEY can be top dogs again!

Laugh if they want, but they keep tuning in, I bet...
And not just to laugh at us! Gotta get their news somewhere!

[UpInArms]

98. my first thought too, zann725 - here's the quote:

"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win."

Mahatma Gandhi


You ready for the "fight"?

[Tinoire]

80. Unlike the NYT, DU doesn't have blood on its hands. n/t

[goforit]

268. So true!!!!

[sherilocks]

82. Lighten up folks, the article was fair

Read the whole article!

If anyone thinks that some of us aren't prone to conspiracy theories, check out the conjecture here on the death of Robert Matsui.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x1115738#top

Personally, I find a lot of these theories fun to read and I learn a lot from all the rebuttals and searching through the links.

Expect a lot of new chimp haters joining us today, courtesy of the NYTimes article. And maybe a few trolls as well.

[Fiona]

84. I'm glad the NYT

did a story on the woeful state of science education in America. It's unfortunate they found their fodder on DU.

[HysteryDiagnosis]

87. 15,300 hits for HAARP Earthquakes search on Google. n/t

[slay]

88. Crappy propaganda reporting runs wild in mainstream media!

Lets examine the New York time shall we:

The New York Times Company publishes The New York Times, the International Herald Tribune, The Boston Globe and 16 other newspapers; owns eight network-affiliated television stations and two New York radio stations; and has more than 40 Web sites including NYTimes.com and Boston.com.
http://www.nytco.com/company-properties.html

Wanna find out what corporate interests own the New York times? Well don't bother looking on their Investors -> F.A.Q. page, cause all you'll find there are links to how to invest, and how well the paper does financially.
http://www.corporate-ir.net/ireye/ir_site.zhtml?ticker=nyt&script=1801

A huge part of DU has devoted itself to covering ELECTION FRAUD, yet reaction to "the tsunami" here at DU, of all places, is the news story they decide to cover. In the tradition of such excellent reporting, the point of the article seems to be to make the people here searching for the truth look like wackos.

Tell ya what New York Times, how bout you get your coverage of election fraud up to the level of DU before you start in on us. Jealous of our freedom to speak our minds are ya? Why don't you go do some real reporting and ask Ken Blackwell the list of 36 questions Rep. Conyers asked, yet he refused to answer. Here's a link to those questions just in case fair elections ever become "in style" or "the current thing" like Scott Peterson.
http://www.house.gov/judiciary_democrats/ohblackwellltr12204.pdf

[lindashaw]

89. Geez, remind me to never post on DU. My post had the header:

Another dumb question about earthquakes, or something like that. And we did have some discussion about my post. Little did I know that it would end up in the New York Times.

Advice: Be careful what we say here! Mercy!

[Catchawave]

95. Yes, I remember that discussion....

Also that I didn't think any question was dumb that provoked such an intelligent and educational discussion !

[jmcgowanjm]

167. Here's your Post, lindashaw

Keep up the good work!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x2877711

[The Zanti Regent]

90. Go to hell, Screw York Times!

Worthless bunch of ass kissing Nazis!

[spooked]

91. An attempt to discredit DU

but why? lol

[Ganja Ninja]

92. This from a "news" paper that carried the Bush lies about the war

without questioning any of it. They don't have much credibility left so they decided to point a finger and laugh a DU.

Hey NY Times! We were right about Bush, the WMD's, the reasons for the war and all the other crap that's come down the pipe from this administration. As long as you continue to print the lies, spin and right wing disinformation of people like Judith Miller and William Saf-Liar we're laughing right back at you. If the editors of the times need a good laugh they need only to pull up some of your issues from before the war. Tin foil hats indeed.

[UpInArms]

93. "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then

you win."

Mahatma Gandhi

[Mad_Dem_X]

104. Great quote! n/t

[jpgray]

107. Except sometimes you only merit constant and unabating laughter

And then you don't do anyone much good.

[Merlin]

105. Don't care what they say about us. AS LONG AS THEY USE OUR NAME!

Nobody would give a damn about DU if we hadn't developed a hell of a lot of clout over the past couple of years.

Eat your heart out, NYT, WizBang and Feeperland!

[underpants]

112. Yep any publicity is good publicity

let people log in or just lurk and find out what DU is all about.

[buddysmellgood]

110. NYTimes reporters are reading your posts. Good job Duers.

[mattclearing]

118. The New York Times is Amateur Hour.

I posted this in another related thread, but thought it was worth bringing here, in case the freak who wrote this comes here.

Any real journalist will tell you that this is poorly written. "For people who hate the Bush Administration?" That's unattributed statement of belief. You don't do that as a journalist.

A journalist is supposed to show that people hate the Bush Administration through quotation and exposition: i.e.:

"Tasteblind, a poster at Democratic Underground said, 'That Bush Administration is a pack of shit-eating criminals, thieves, and lunatics.' Such derision towards the Bush Administration at Democratic Underground is common."

That would be proper. The New York Times is totally amateur hour.

[atommom]

125. I had the same feeling as I read this article. It reads like something

out of a student newspaper. But at a student newspaper, the writer would be critiqued for being so lazy, and the whole thing would have been a learning experience. I doubt that will happen in this case. :eyes:

[KoKo]

138. I agree it sounded very amateurish...But, we know why it was written...

Thanks for mentioning that...Lot's of folks here aren't looking at "why" it was written...and why it seems like it belonged in a student newspaper...:eyes:

[alaintex]

157. Another trick that all the MSM uses ...

Another trick that all the MSM uses is to start a paragraph as a statement of fact, then hide behind some anonymous quoter, i.e.:

"The Bush Administration is a pack of shit-eating criminals, thieves, and lunatics according to their critics."

But I think they probably do it against both sides.

[marions ghost]

227. Yes, Journalist sinks to Foxlevel

I agree with tasteblind who said:
"Any real journalist will tell you that this is poorly written. "For people who hate the Bush Administration?" That's unattributed statement of belief. You don't do that as a journalist."

We do have to counter this kind of media spin, because readers will often make snap judgments based on an opening paragraph without reading the rest. Send emails to NYT.

This line at least should have been "a site where people often question the policies of the Bush administration." 'Hate' is too strong to describe the beliefs of such a large and diverse group. Very misleading...but so inflammatory that it will draw the curious to DU and then they can decide for themselves.

I am inspired and encouraged by those at DU who are calling the MSM on this stuff. NYT taking this particular post out of thousands --so grossly unfair--it's enough to make one formulate conspiracy theories...

[Massachusetts]

121. "online gathering place for

people who hate the bush administration".


Would there be an article if it was anything different?

[leesa]

123. Thank goodness we aren't perpetuating myths like 9-11 was done

by a guy on dialysis living in a cave in Afghanistan. Would hate to be irresponsible.

[atommom]

124. Damn, I need to get this person's job...

If I can surf DU all day and cherry-pick a few posts to write on, and then get published by the NYT, I think I've discovered my dream job!

Still annoys me that the media always searches out the flashy controversies and virtually ignores the good informative conversations that we have here. And I'm still waiting for the MSM to notice that the true loonies are not here, but at Freeperville. For true irrationality and spite, you need look no further.

Last of all, THIS IS NOT A BLOG!

There. Now I feel better. ;)

[noamnety]

126. Eavesdropping on conversations makes for good journalism

Next week, I hope to see the NYT report on a random conversation they overhead in Starbucks. And the next week, a conversation they listened in on at a bar.

If they could do that AND keep us up to date on all the critical info related to Paris Hilton, they'll be the envy of Fox.

[nashville_brook]

260. better than Wonkette -- she's just running Craig's List ads - eom

[Carni]

127. I am sure they called people warning of nuclear fallout *cranks* too

What kind of a *NUT* would have claimed that wearing a wide brimmed hat might not protect you from *invisible death rays* during nuke tests?

What sort of a tin foil hatter would have thought that cigarettes (lucrative as they are) could cause cancer?

It's just a good damned thing we have always been able to put our trust in the firm hand of the American Government--if these crackpots had their way, the damned fools would be insisting on alternate energy mandates and God knows what else!

(In summation: If the media is starting with the *crackpots and nuts* stuff already...maybe there really IS something to the theory that Bush's wreckless policies played a role in this horrific disastor!)

[atommom]

130. The first doctor to say docs should wash their hands

to avoid the spread of disease was a "crank," too. He died in disgrace. Whether they're right or not, people with unpopular ideas often get the shaft from the rest of society.

[arwalden]

139. How Do You Feel About Chemtrails?

The government denies that commercial jets are spraying mind-control chemicals on populated areas. So if they deny it, there must be something to it, eh? :eyes: What astounding logic!

[Name removed]

168. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

181. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Carni]

221. I *attacked you personally*

My initial comment about the media having their fangs out about "cranks" etc on DU and then stating that maybe there is some validity to the weird theories if the media is on it this quick
was tongue in cheek.

It was in fact sarcasm.

Of course I have no "proof" that global warming, or bombs, or whatever else has contributed to this earthquake and I never stated that I thought that in the first place.

I stated that I can't prove some of the more offbeat theories that I have seen on DU WRONG.

I have no right to call some of these people *cranks*

I am not the board monitor, no one died and left me the final authority on what DU posters want to think or post.

I do know that I don't give a rat's ass what some idiotic column in the newspaper that brought us *Judith Miller and her Weapons of Mass detruction* bullshit writes about the forum.

As far as the right is concerned the whole of DU is based on "conspiracy theory" (Remember? They think Bush won-TWICE)

[arwalden]

235. Ah... Okay. It Was Sarcasm. Thanks For The Explanation.

>> "I *attacked you personally*" <<

Well, yes you did. When you confuse the message with the messenger and start making baseless accusations that I'm "flaming" or that I'm motivated by a desire to appear to be "more intelligent"... then yes... indeed you have made it personal. You're attacking me, instead of attacking my message.

>> My initial comment about the media having their fangs out about "cranks" etc on DU and then stating that maybe there is some validity to the weird theories if the media is on it this quick
was tongue in cheek. <<

Oh. Tongue in cheek. Ya know... that just completely escaped my notice. My apologies.

>> It was in fact sarcasm. <<

Sarcasm. Hmmm. Okay.

Sarcasm often difficult to decipher when the text is lacking body language like a raised eyebrow, a coy glance, wink, smile or laughter. Minus vocal inflection it's also easy to miss.

>> Of course I have no "proof" that global warming, or bombs, or whatever else has contributed to this earthquake and I never stated that I thought that in the first place. <<

Okay. Did someone accuse you of making those claims? Shame on them... whoever they are.

>> I stated that I can't prove some of the more offbeat theories that I have seen on DU WRONG. <<

Well... that's because it's IMPOSSIBLE to prove a negative. (For example, if I told you that I can levitate, but I only do it when I'm alone, you couldn't prove me wrong either. That would be trying to prove a negative as well.)

>> I have no right to call some of these people *cranks* <<

LOL. Well, if you say so! I'm certainly in no position to argue with you about that. I imagine that's probably true that you don't have the right to do that.

No worries... I don't mind calling cranks and crackpots what they really are... when it doesn't conflict with DU rules.

>> I am not the board monitor, no one died and left me the final authority on what DU posters want to think or post. <<

Uh... okay? I'm a little confused what you're getting at here, Carni. Certainly, in theory, people are free to have and post their opinions... but in practice, it cannot be denied that DU is becoming known for its crackpots.

>> I do know that I don't give a rat's ass what some idiotic column in the newspaper that brought us *Judith Miller and her Weapons of Mass detruction* (sic) bullshit writes about the forum. <<

Okay. I'm not sure what that has to do with anything. Are you confusing me with someone else? Or you having an argument with someone else simultaneously in your reply to me?

>> As far as the right is concerned the whole of DU is based on "conspiracy theory" (Remember? They think Bush won-TWICE) <<

Never mind about my previous question. I think you just answered it for me.

[Name removed]

245. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

252. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[HeeBGBz]

222. No Questions and no deviation from the collective paradigm

Thinking again? What were you thinking. Don't embarrass the people that count.

Kick out all the tinfoilers. Forget about the foolishness that arises in the Lounge, it's the tinfoil that offends the masses.

You are going to need bodies to fight the current regime. Don't run them all off, you may need them someday.

[Carni]

224. How am I running him, or her, *out*

I made for all practical purposes a joke in my first post and got a lecture on logic and being a crank--that's rich.

Don't embarrass the *people who count*

Pardon me...I thought every poster here "counted" and was entitled to an opinion, but apparently not.

[HeeBGBz]

225. I got some splainin to do

"Don't embarrass the people that count."

Was referring to those who are embarrassed by tinfoil theories and how it seems that viewpoint is the only one that matters. Yes. Everyone counts. That was the point I was trying to make.

"Don't run them all off, you may need them someday."

Again was not referring to you, Carni, but to those who would like to ban those with tinfoily thoughts.

Sorry. I should have clearly stamped the SARCASM label on my post.

[Carni]

226. I realized that AFTER I posted

Sorry!

I agree with you completely :)

[Moderator]

261. All of you, cut it out.

Sheesh.

On this board, please restrict yourself to discussing the posted issues, not aspects of the person posting them.

[goforit]

266. Carni, ya tell it like it is:"Tin foil hatterinfer cigaretts cause cancer"

Yah you go NYT!!!

Carni will tell ya where ya stand!!

Hats off to you!!!

[arwalden]

129. ** THIS IS EMBARRASSING ***

Why are these uninformed cranks and crackpots gathering here at DU? It makes DU look bad and by association, it makes many Democrats look bad too.

[KoKo]

140. The guy who wrote the article is ***EMBARRASSING*** Don't take it

so seriously. Look behind why it was written in such a juvenile way..

I agree with "Crisco" The "Grey Lady's drawers are showing," in this. :D

[arwalden]

149. Actually... I Was ** EMBARRASSED ** At DU's Kooks And Cranks BEFORE

this article was written. I have very little concern in this article itself or for what the writer's motivation might have been.

Just set the article aside for a moment and we're still left with the embarrassing fact that there is a prolific (yet loud and cantankerous and whiny) minority of ill-informed, undereducated, superstitious, paranoid cranks who have wandered in to DU and simply STAYED.

I suspect it could have been ANY other discussion forum of any flavor (politics, home improvement, travel, retirement... whatever) and they would have been just as happy. It just happened that a few of them took up residence here and now they are attracting their kook friends to discuss cranky theories that have absolutely NO basis in scientific fact. Any any attempts to rebut with scientific fact are scorned. :eyes:

THAT'S what's really ** EMBARRASSING **! That article itself means nothing to me.

[GOPFighter]

153. OK, Devils advocate here.

This is a public forum whose membership is broad, very broad. A lot of what I read here makes me cringe, but to be perfectly honest, much of my knowledge and views when I was a teen or early 20s was pretty spotty. I'm sure some things I might have written back then would embarrass me today. In fact, even now I occasionally write something that turns out to be a howler, and I learn from it. DU is a great educational forum. I assume when someone writes something stupid, they soon realize how dumb their post was and learn from it (or get pissed and leave).

[atommom]

155. I agree! And I think that forums like this can be very educational

for anyone who is openminded enough to rethink his/her positions. We have a great variety of people here, with many different kinds of knowledge and expertise, and they're all quite willing to poke holes in our arguments and show us different ways of looking at things.

[arwalden]

160. Heh heh heh.

[GOPFighter]

171. Is that...

Heh heh heh :thumbsup:

or

Heh heh heh :thumbsdown:

:evilgrin:

[arwalden]

159. How Can Someone Realize "How Dumb Their Post Was" When

in many cases, rebuttal isn't permitted?

>> DU is a great educational forum. <<

For some things, yes.

>> I assume when someone writes something stupid, they soon realize how dumb their post was and learn from it (or get pissed and leave). <<

Don't be too sure about that.

[DireStrike]

194. Rebuttal "isn't permitted"?

By who?

[SemperEadem]

197. I agree with you on this one

>> I assume when someone writes something stupid, they soon realize how dumb their post was and learn from it (or get pissed and leave). <<

Don't be too sure about that.

Exactly. I've seen the above mentioned type of poster who digs in and seems to spend the next 4 hours checking and rechecking their 'my posts' to keep the stupidity of their groundless argument going.

And interestingly, it's been quite recently that I've seen a rise in this sort of 'poster' here at DU.

[alaintex]

161. First of all, the devil doesn't need an advocate...

But that's a whole other issue.

Your acknowledgment about sometimes being a knucklehead (my word, not yours) when you were younger should not be justification for others to be knuckleheads today.

When my teenagers do dumb things I correct them. When my wife tells me that I did dumb things as a kid and I sound just like my father all I can respond with is that my father was right, and I was wrong back then.

I agree with you that when someone writes something stupid, they soon realize how dumb their post was and learn from it (or get pissed and leave).

[lib_1138]

246. I think Devil's Advocate is a term used as part of Canonization

The Church selects someone who is responsible for taking the "anti" position when someone is up for Sainthood. That person is called "the Devil's Advocate."

If you already knew that, I am sorry if I pontificated where it was not needed.

[ashmanonar]

305. lol

interesting choice of words..."pontificated" *

isn't a devil's advocate (advocatus diaboli) also someone involved in choosing a new pope? if i'm not mistaken, he finds out everything possibly dirty on a chosen bishop who has been plausibly chosen as the pope, in order to find out if this person is suitable or not...

*: the reason i think it's interesting wording is that the word pontificate's original meaning has to do with the office of pontiff, or the pope...either that was a linguistic slip or some damn clever referencing...

[Mike Niendorff]

169. well said.

and seconded.


MDN

[goforit]

270. Whats wrong with "kooks and cranks" whom have evidence????

Anybody who tells the truth here is considered a kook
or crank by this thug regime.

[murray hill farm]

188. uninformed cranks? Crackpots?

"uninformed crank" and "crackpot" are like beauty..it is in the eye of the beholder....if it embarrasses you to be associated with open discussion because u want to be seen by the media in the USA as one who only takes part in...as seen through the eyes of the NYT..as appropriate and scientific acceptable...and not subject to ridicule and criticism, then a scientific journal is a better place for you to post..and be associated with since u then do not have to suffer the embarrassment of belonging here...be sure it is a scientific discussion that only allows mention of already scientifically pr oven theories though..cause otherwise....embarrassment!!!

[arwalden]

228. The Plural Of Anecdote Is Not "Data".

An "open discussion" is not a substitute for fact.

I never knew that facts were subjective... like beauty. Interesting.

I am sorry if I gave you the impression that I was *personally* embarrassed... that is not true. I have no reason to be personally embarrassed. --- Instead, I am embarrassed that DU is developing a reputation as being a gathering point for crackpots and kooks.

[Name removed]

231. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[arwalden]

242. Mexicoxpat, Any Problems That Concern Me Go Far Beyond...

... what the impact of that particular thread may have. It's the sum total of everything put together.

Yes, I'm well aware of the little verbal device, gimmick, of making an absurd suggestion by putting in the the form of a question. In doing so, the person who makes the statement can always claim "but I was just asking" or "I never said for sure".

You know... if enough tabloid headlines ask "Is Tom Cruise Gay?" without providing any evidence, they've already planted the notion that Tom Cruise is gay. --- When an absurd or controversial question is asked in that manner, the author wants the reader to assume the answer is "yes".

Indeed... I'm quite aware of how that works.

>> but what u see as crackpots and kooks is subjective...your label is the part of you that is subjective...and thus in the eye of the beholder that is you. <<

That's a bit of a stretch. When someone states "facts" (or things that they believe to be true) such as the earth being flat or that magnets cure cancer (things that have NO basis in scientific fact or theory and which are easily disproved) then these folks are indeed cranks and crackpots.

>> Soooooo, scientifically speaking, before u call any of us such names again, be sure you have scientific proof of it...at least a researchable link...that says we are certifiably wacko or kooky or cractpots. <<

I see... you want me to prove-a-negative. You want me to DIS-prove the absurd claims rather than putting the burden of proof where it BELONGS... which is on the person who is MAKING the claim in the FIRST PLACE. :eyes:

Good grief!

[murray hill farm]

256. OK..i see your point!!

and i agree..to a point! My concern is that ..well..you never know what may appear to be "way out there" one day..may change the next...and a question..which this was..and a legitimate one from the perception of the questioner..should be respected..rather than label the person as a kook or crackpot.

[Bill McBlueState]

273. keeper

"The Plural Of Anecdote Is Not 'Data.'"

Man, that's a keeper. Thanks!

[satori]

132. World renowned scientist-The Earth as a weapon in 21st Century of Wars

Third World Network
The Earth as a weapon in 21st Century of Wars
By Rahab S Hawa

While scientists, governments and concerned groups worry about increased industrial emissions of greenhouse gases and its effects on the planet, the role of the military in climate change has been ignored.

‘When environmental crises occur, it is usually only the civilian economy that is called upon to rectify the balance, while military programmes are rarely taken to task,’ says Dr Rosalie Bertell, renowned scientist and nuclear activist.

At the Peoples’ Health Assembly in December 2000 in Dhaka, Bangladesh, Dr. Bertell revealed to a shocked and incredulous audience that ‘the latest weapons in the arsenal of the US military is Planet Earth itself ... and weather will be one of the worst destructive weapons by the year 2025’.

Dr. Bertell was referring to how engineered earthquakes and tornadoes could wreak havoc on populations and nations.

http://www.twnside.org.sg/title/hawa2.htm

[atommom]

134. BTW, how is it that the news stories never mention this forum (LBN),

and what a great collection of information we have here? Anyone browsing through here can learn a great deal in a very short period of time.

[slackmaster]

135. They didn't quote my favorite tinfoil hat theory

The pumping of oil from wells in Indonesia caused the earthquake that triggered the tsunami, ergo it's all Bush's fault.

:tinfoilhat:

[Chovexani]

142. Who cares about the NY Whore Times?

As far as I'm concerned they have even less credibility than the NY Post.

[NNN0LHI]

144. Hey NYT. Who was right about the Iraq war and all them WMDs?

Still have that compulsive liar Judith Miller working for your rag, do you? You should be ashamed to still have her on your payroll. But you do. That says a lot.

Don

[progressivebydesign]

177. Truer words have never been written! BRAVO! n/t

[jmcgowanjm]

145. Could someone find this DU link?

"The entire Pacific Ocean is slowly but surely closing in on
itself. What happened is that the floor of the Indian Ocean
slid over part of the Pacific Ocean, releasing massive tension
in the Earth's crust.

"That's it. No mystic injury to the Gaia spirit or
anything."

Because this poster quoted is as bad as the first poster.

1- this quake had nothing to do with
the Pacific Ocean-unless you want to get into
Harmonic Resonance.

2-the "floor" of the Indian Ocean "slid"
UNDER the (enough!)-Sunda Plate right where the
Australian Plate joins both.

3 And this event is not over:
http://www.iris.edu/seismon/

http://volcano.und.nodak.edu/vwdocs/volc_images/southeast_asia/indonesia/toba.html

And, BTW, NYT, since you're here. when do you plan on
releasing the raw exit poll data from Nov 2,
and how long do you think you'll be able to square
BushCo's 40something approval rating and his
"overwhelming" 58million votes?

While it's frustrating that we still can't see the exit polls,
let's thank the media for at least resolving one thing for us
today. Now we know why we don't see stories about the
election on the evening news. Their refusal to release the
exit polls shows us categorically that there is a concerted
effort on behalf of the major media outlets to consciously
prevent the information from getting out. It's not simple
oversight, and it's not because they don't think it's
newsworthy. Now we know. They are withholding
information from us.
Now that that's been resolved, we can move on to the
next question: What are they (you NYT!) hiding, and why?

http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2004/1044

[SemperEadem]

199. look at post 167

[Isere]

148. Now's the time to take out our tinfoil hats

along with our dancing shoes.

http://eclectech.co.uk/mindcontrol.php

In fact, this link should be posted after every silly, over-the-top post like the ones cited in the NYTimes.

[SemperEadem]

200. that is so silly!!!!

but cute!

[lady lib]

158. Will this result in self-censorship?

Will you now think twice before posting because maybe, just maybe, your post will be published and derided? I hope not. Personally, I like the the free-flowing exchange of ideas - wacky or not - that are really a form of brainstorming. You take the good and leave the bad, and learn something or look at an issue in a different way, as a result.

[onager]

162. Typical of the post-1990's NYT

The troubles at the Times started LONG before their current craven Bu$h-worship and their mindless cheerleading for the Iraq cluster-Cheney.

Go WAY back to Jeff Gerth's "reporting" on Whitewater. He was talking to every Clinton-hating crank in Arkansas. People who told him he was being set up by racist kooks like "Justice Jim" Johnson were ignored......even when those people were Arkansas Republicans.

EVERY sleazy rumor was dumped straight onto the TIMES front page. And nobody at the TIMES would ever admit it, but there was clearly one reason for this: the TIMES wanted its very own Watergate scandal, and nothing was going to stand in their way. And if no scandal existed, they would invent one.

You know, I've actually written for publication, though not for such a distinguished (chuckle) rag as the Old Grey Lady. Believe it or not, children, long ago publications used to employ people called "fact-checkers." The TIMES must have fired all their fact-checkers around 1991 in a cost-saving move.

Of course, Gerth went on to another journalistic coup: persecuting the scientist Wen Ho Lee.

[jmcgowanjm]

163. Here's the Derided Thread

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x2877711

[Cheswick2.0]

165. so is the NYT saying the war in Iraq is NOT responsible for the tsunami?

D'OH! LOL

What I would like to know is when they are going to do a piece on how DU was MONTHS ahead of the rest of the country on realizing the Iraq war was not about WMD?

On Edit: I wanted to add that I think the article is somewhat fair. I am not sure why they felt they needed to quote some conservative about DU.

[lady lib]

173. I thought gay Swedes caused tsunamis

You do know God hates those sodomites}(

[lindashaw]

172. OKAY! ENOUGH! I am not a crackpot and all the things...

I'm being accused of. All I did the other day was ask a question. I said in my header that it was a dumb question about earthquakes. I am a 65-year-old woman, and I am NOT all the ugly names that posters on this site are calling me.

I posed my question because I once wrote a piece on my friend, Millie Hughes, who was an astronaut on the space shuttle Columbia. That piece was published in an international magazine. Millie said that the earth has a glow about it that dead planets, like the moon, do not have. She said that the earth is a living thing, and you can see that from outer space. She also said that she saw the smoke from the Kuwait oilfield fires, and it had traveled almost around the globe.

My question about earthquakes was not a crazy question -- about whether or not mankind could hurt this planet and set it up for disasters to happen.

Why the NYT picked my post to print, I don't know. But okay, you all win. I will not be coming back to DU. I've been coming here since before the war, but even an idiot can tell when they've outlived their welcome.

[lady lib]

174. Your question wasn't crazy

and I think the vast majority of posts are supportive. Please stay.

[GOPFighter]

175. Whoa

Hey Linda, you said right up front that your post might contain a stupid question. It generated a lot of good comments and I think a lot of people learned from it. After reading your initial post I think the NYTs had no right to use your post to deride you, DU, and blogs in general. I hope you won't leave DU, you were very upfront when you posted. That should have been the end of it. For that, I think the New York Times owes you a big apology!

[Cheswick2.0]

176. I agree with you

I don't see anything wrong about asking a question. Ignore the lousy rightwing reporter for the NYT and the rude people here.

[fedsron2us]

178. Your question was far from crazy for a General Discussion board

Don't be upset because some lazy journalist at the NYT picked up on it because he could not be bothered to write some original copy to earn his salary. Unfortunately, some of the people who post on DU board do not seem to realise that the rest of us are not all science honors graduates. A little more civility and understanding on their part would seem to be in order.

[Minstrel Boy]

196. Please don't be run off by the few who crave the respect of those

who will always find a cause to hold us in disdain.

[Child_Of_Isis]

214. I believe the Earth is a living thing.

And that mankind can hurt this planet and set it up for disasters. But, I also believe that she, she being Mother Earth, will shake us off like so many pesky fleas before we EVER destroy her.

[HeeBGBz]

215. I'm sorry, Linda, that you were treated rudely.

Some people are way too harsh in their ability to communicate. Knowledge snobs. Overcompensating for lack of heart, IMO.

[Nothing Without Hope]

216. PLEASE STAY!! What the NYT article showed ...

...if anyone will actually read it, is how information is exchanged and people can learn in this environment. That was the whole reason you asked your question, right? You wanted to get other peoples' input. Well, you did. There is a colorful array of points of view and backgrounds at this site, and that is one of its great strengths IMO. Even though it can be irritating at times.

Your question about earthquakes was absolutely not a crazy question. And many of the people who responded to it didn't treat it like one, they played it straight and gave information and their own opinions. If some people were rude, including the NYT reporter, that's not your fault. It's theirs, and it is indeed a fault.

I didn't contribute to your thread when you asked your question, but I did to several others that asked various similar questions about the cause of the Indonesian earthquake. I replied, as some did in this thread, with geology-based answers and links to threads with fuller explanations. That's what you were after, right? Getting more information so you could understand and make up your mind. DU is a good place to do that. In fact, I think it's damn-near unique in the range of human experience, knowledge, and points of view it draws upon.

In my opinion, the NYT owes you a big apology. The article is one more example, as if we needed one, of how reporters are often willing to intrude and embarrass people and distort situations in order to produce a "better" story. That's NOT YOUR FAULT. And it's not DU's fault, either. This is a forum where all can come if they are reasonably well-behaved, so opinions and backgrounds are going to be all over the page. I rather like that. If some want to try to puff themselves up by ridiculing people who have a different point of view or educational background, they should know that they don't do themselves any favors in acting that way. In fact, they look pretty juvenile and petty when they do.

Please stay.

[Carni]

223. We don't all think you are a *crank*

You have every right to post your opinions and screw anyone that tells you otherwise.

I don't see how in the hell making the observation that mankind is hurting the planet is the stuff of fantasy.

[WorseBeforeBetter]

280. This thread goes on forever...

and I haven't read it fully b/c it's late here on the nasty 'ol liberal East coast and I need to get to bed, but have you considered a letter to the editor? Is DU responding to the NYT? There are many well-informed, scathingly funny members on this site; surely DU can come up w/ some sort of memorable response. Or is that against the rules?!

[NashVegas]

300. Your Question Was a Great Question, Linda

Never be afraid to ask questions, even stupid ones. It's still the best way invented to get answers.

[Chimpanzee]

180. Any goofball can post a whacky conspiracy theory

but DU tends to separate the wheat from the chaff quickly and either debunk or support the theory with facts. I don't think the NYT quite figured that out completely.

[arwalden]

184. Really?

>> DU tends to separate the wheat from the chaff quickly and either debunk or support the theory with facts. <<

[Chimpanzee]

191. That's my experience.

[arwalden]

195. Okay. Whatever.

Maybe it's your suggestion that this "tends to" happen is what I have difficulty with. That's so subjective and vague that it could mean many different things to different people.

[Chimpanzee]

265. Jezus - it was just a comment!

Are you going to dissect every sentence I post here? I think 'tend' is a proper word for the meaning I intended. It is MY opinion, not yours. You have the right to your own opinion, just don't nitpick on mine. Thank you very much!

[arwalden]

272. Chimpanzee... Here's My Reply.

>> Are you going to dissect every sentence I post here? <<

Mercy me! A question like that would lead one to believe that I'm following you around from forum to forum just nitpicking "EVERY SENTENCE YOU POST HERE". :eyes:

The facts you assert are incorrect. I don't do that!

However... I will point out when someone is being vague and when their ambiguity makes it difficult to figure out exactly where they are coming from. Without providing detailed examples, that's what I was trying to do.

Whoops. I'm embarrassed. It looks like my OWN attempts at being brief and my decision NOT to go overboard by providing examples, it looks like I'm guilty myself of being vague. Sorry.

Here... maybe this will help to explain what I meant.

Judging from your original "tends to" claim, and the proud, reassuring tone of the message, one might assume that DU has a good record of distinguishing fact from fiction. But consider this...

If false information posted on DU is corrected 51% of the time, then one still could accurately claim that it "tends to" be corrected. Unfortunately, that would leave 49% of the false information unchallenged and uncorrected. (Wow! Forty-nine percent. That's not very impressive and certainly not something worth bragging about.)

Or, if disinformation was corrected 95% of the time, someone could still say "tends to" be corrected. Even though this is less precise and understated, it's still technically accurate.

This is what I meant by vague responses being able to be interpreted differently. Your meaning wasn't clear, that's all. Everyone does it, including me. No need to be so defensive. I'm sorry that if my response to your message has distressed you.

-- Allen

[Chimpanzee]

289. I'm afraid I don't agree with you at all.

Why don't you go challenge some other innocent poster.

[arwalden]

293. Chimpanzee...

... okay, you disagree. If you have no further on-topic arguments to make in support of your message or that refute my message, then why not just leave it at that?

I fail to see the point of making that other personal comment. :eyes:

[Chimpanzee]

302. I don't. If you don't want me to reply, then stop replying

[tx_dem41]

198. I hardly ever see that happen....

usually everybody just gets ticked off and goes home.

[Sterling]

237. But the arguments are posted for others who are more objective

to reference. It is a great tool for those who know how to use it. Not everyone gets the same thing from DU.

Not everyone benefits from it's potential equally. Some refuse to use it as anything other than a pissing contest.

[Northern Perspective]

183. Dare to be DU

They just wanted to report on the PEW research related to "blogs" and used one DU thread as a hook. There are a thousand thousand examples (uh-oh...hyperbole!)of DU, KOS, et al. "self-correcting". So, it's not as derisive as it might seem. It is, as someone else pointed out, "lazy reporting".

NYT could go to the freeper site and see someone arguing that the world is flat, gravity is a liberal conspiracy and there were WMD.

[SheepyMcSheepster]

186. those crazy nuts at DU who didn't believe Iraq had WMD's..................

what were they thinking?!!??

how out of touch from reality these people must be! /sarcasm
:eyes:


the fact that DU is getting negative attention is due to:

a. someone feeling threatend by it

or

b. a way for opponents to drive wedges

[AngryAmish]

189. Don't you realize the NYT is the enemy?

They spout pro-Bush propaganda at every opportunity. They got us into the war.

They must be crushed.

[lady lib]

193. What newspaper would you recommend?

I ask because having given up on the right wing press in Arizona, I just subscribed to the NYT. :shrug:

[NAO]

203. AZ Daily Star is not bad - UK Guardian is best - BuzzFlash

The Arizona Daily Star, Tucson's newspaper is pretty good. It's fantastic compared to the reich-wing rag sheet published in Phoenix, The Arizona Republic.

The UK based Guardian (online or in print) is an excellent source of news.

http://buzzflash.com is an excellent news resource - the very best I know of on the web - it's like a progressive news clipping service, and a link I vist daily.

[lady lib]

232. Thank you.

[Coastie for Truth]

192. All sorts of wacko theories....

I live between America's two favorite earthquake fault lines -

(1) the San Andreas - the one that runs through Northridge-Los Angeles and just west of California Highway 1 (Pacific Coast Highway) by the Cliff House in San Francisco,

(2) the Calaveras-Hayward - the one that runs under I-680 in the "South Bay" and right through the UC Berkeley Campus,

in the flood plain defined by Coyote Creek and the Guadalupe River, and in the Tsunami inundation plane at the southern tip (Alviso-Fremont-San Jose) of San Francisco Bay -- and I have been through quakes and mini-stsunamis and through (and now teach) the numerous and various and sundry "Living on the Fault Line- Earthquake Preparedness" courses that are ubiquitous out here. Just like the quakes and tsunamis themselves.

These events are as natural as earthquakes and volcanoes, and - once you know the epicenter of a deep ocean quake - and have the "hydro charts" of the ocean bottom - as predictable as tracing Highs and Lows on a weather map.

The hardware (weather data buoys, weather data satellites) are 30 plus years old.

The math models are equally old.

I sat through a seminar on the math models and data collection hardware in my Coast Guard days -> shortly after one hit Alaska

The only problem is the implementation of the high resolution buoys and satellites nominally "dedicated" to tsunamis. Implementation means $$$$.

The theory had been that you position the hardware where the threat is highest. The threat, while worldwide, is highest around the Pacific "Ring of Fire." If you take a strict college text book definition (the nature of the disturbance, not the magnitude) there must be several dozen very low magnitude tsunamis a year around the Pacific, and a fraction of that number in the whole rest of the world.

Although you folks on the East Coast - there is a mega fault in the mid-Atlanic (Atlantic Trench) where Africa and South America are moving apart.

[Psephos]

249. Faults where plates are moving apart are not the problem...

...it's the faults where tectonic plates are colliding and subducting (diving under each other) that create the killer quakes. Big tsunamis are much rarer than big quakes, because to create a tsunami requires a vertical displacement of underlying seafloor, pushing up like a big piston. Quakes tend to have greater motion horizontally than vertically, as plates scrape past each other.

"there is a mega fault in the mid-Atlanic (Atlantic Trench) where Africa and South America are moving apart."

East Coasters may have other worries, even including tsunami worries, but an East Coast tsunami won't come from an plate collision in the Atlantic. If there is an Atlantic coast tsunami, it would likely come from a collapse of a major section of the continental shelf. A few years ago, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute researchers found big cracks in parts of the shelf that could lead to collapse...but no one knows whether these cracks are ancient and stable, or more recent, and less stable.

[Name removed]

201. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Mike Niendorff]

207. lol ... "democrat moderates"

Amazing how some people just can't bring themselves to utter that scary word "democratic".

lmao :D


MDN

[Susang]

208. Right......

I'm sure that's exactly it! :freak:

[TheKingfish]

254. Thanks Rush but go to hell n/t

[GoddessOfGuinness]

202. What's wrong with lindashaw's question?

I think it demonstrates a hell of a lot more thought than the "wrath of god" opinions that the WP published the other day.

She didn't claim to be an expert; and frankly I find it appalling that there are so many non-experts here who are so quick to rake her over the coals. I expect no less from the rethuglican camp...that's the only way they can stay alive. But surely we Democrats can treat our own with the respect they deserve.

Lindashaw, I hope you'll reconsider your decision to leave DU...

[murray hill farm]

204. Linda..do not leave..

we do need people like u to dare to ask the questions..that others here are too insecure to ask because there will always be some one who will jump on them and accuse them of being wrong! If no one poses such questions, then we all here must confine all discussions and all questions of what has already been researched and proven..we will live in the past only...we will not look at possibilities until they are safely proven..we will be afraid to speak less we are looked upon as cranks or uninformed wackos. This is not the world that we want...and it is not the DU that we want..where we are treated with disgust because we dare to ask those unpopular questions. we need people like u here...those who dare to think..and speak..and question...without first asking ourselves if this can be proven..or if we will be attacked for daring to speak.

[HeeBGBz]

218. Well said, GofG

Just because your belief system is different from another is no reason to ridicule and deride another's thoughts. That is right winger programming.

Great way to bring people together to stand up to the real enemy. /sarcasm]

[slutticus]

205. Jeez. Talk about stirring up the nest.

Everyone just needs to chill for a bit.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, no matter how outrageous. I many times complain about "tin foil hat" stuff on DU, but that doesn't mean that I want the people who discuss this stuff to leave.

If I think a theory is outrageous, I will post a reply saying so and why I think it is incorrect. There are just as many skeptics on DU as there are "tin foilers". That's a good balance.

Let's not eat our own over some publicity, which may turn out to get us many great new members.

[gorbal]

263. Your so right

If anyone feels like arguing, go to Yahoo news messages boards or somewhere freepers hang and argue with them. So much more fullfilling than arguing with your fellow DUer's believe me:)

[davidinalameda]

206. face it

we do get our share of the reality challenged on here from time to time

this is a pretty good example

[GoddessOfGuinness]

209. I don't agree

She asked a question, she neither claimed to be an expert nor attempted to present an opinion as fact. She asked.

I really think people need to go back to the DU link that was quoted.

[DownNotOut]

210. Don't assume that any news source

including the NYT is on our side. We will be discredited from every direction whenever possible.

Lets face it, Bush allowed this tragedy to happen for some of the same reasons he allowed 9-11 to happen. Its all a power grab aimed and being correctly positioned for the end game. Stay on your toes and keep fighting!


DownNotOut

[Rainscents]

217. At least...

DU is being read by others!!! Even they don't agree. :dem:

[Cocoa]

220. a very good story about DU

this reporter captures some important things about DU and blogs in general, which I've never heard expressed before.

[rodeodance]

229. he could have went to a conservative blog and found the same?

I think so--as he initially wanted some lines to capture the readers attention.

[Cocoa]

230. he could have

and he could have made the same important point he made about DU, that beneath the garbage there's valuable stuff.

I remember a FreeRepublic thread right after the shuttle exploded, someone posted it here to highlight their usual nonsense, but if you went to the thread itself there was also some interesting information posted by Freeper space nuts who were following the launch and knew nearly everything about it, and were emotionally invested in it.

[Kelvin Mace]

239. I happen to know the reporter of this story and sent him

a note asking about it.

While I can't go into specific details, the gist was that pieces were trimmed from it, which resulted in the current story appearing "lopsided".

The main thrust of the article which seems to me now blunted was, while you can find goofy/offensive people on both sides of the political spectrum, the blogsphere is, unlike MSM, self-correcting in real time. This was pointed out as the medium's strength.

That's all I can say about it publicly, except for the fact that the omission of the link to DU was an error and is being corrected.

David Allen
www.thoughtcrimes.org

[maduroftime]

240. Just as long as they spell DU right ...

for the publicity:hi:

[The_Casual_Observer]

243. When did the content of forum threads start rating as news?

Answer: When they found one that made DU look silly or hysterical.

It really isn't any of the NYT business what is said here. From the looks of their own incompetent "investigative" skills leading up to the Iraq war and after, it would seem that they ought to be paying more attention to what goes on in their own offices instead.

[robbedvoter]

247. The Gray lady feels neglected - needs to bitch

Just think about it - if we only read their rag, we would have bought all the Chalaby BS, the Whitewater hoax and Judith Miller BS. As it is, we make up our own - so the fiction makers that pose as journalists feel threatened.
Tough titties, NYT!

[goforit]

251. This is great news!!!!.....Du is putting a dent in the administration!!!

:bounce::bounce::bounce:

NYT was probably ordered by that Rove guy because it
is hurting the administration's feelings!!!

The WH has never been able to take criticism!!!!

The whole world reads the DU !!!

I even think the NYT is jealous!!!


:bounce:Goooooooo DUrs!!!!!:bounce:

[satori]

253. Bhopal disaster expert -Background on the HAARP Project

Background on the HAARP Project
Earthpulse Press
November 5, 1996
By Rosalie Bertell
PhD, GNSH

http://www.globalpolicy.org/socecon/envronmt/weapons.htm

Dr. Bertell directed the International Medical Commission - Bhopal which investigated the aftermath of the Union Carbide disaster in Bhopal, and of the International Medical Commission - Chernobyl, which convened the Tribunal on violations of the human rights of victims in Vienna, April 1996.

_________________________________________________


Military interest in space became intense during and after World War II because of the introduction of rocket science, the companion to nuclear technology. The early versions include the buzz bomb and guided missiles. They were thought of as potential carriers of both nuclear and conventional bombs. Rocket technology and nuclear weapon technology developed simultaneously between 1945 and 1963. During this time of intensive atmospheric nuclear testing, explosions at various levels above and below the surface of the earth were tried. Some of the now familiar descriptions of the earth's protective atmosphere, such as the existence of the Van Allen belts, were based on information gained through stratospheric and ionospheric experimentation.

The military implications of combining these projects is alarming. Basic to this project is control of communications, both disruption and reliability in hostile environments. The power wielded by such control is obvious. The ability of the HAARP / Spacelab/ rocket combination to deliver very large amount of energy, comparable to a nuclear bomb, anywhere on earth via laser and particle beams, are frightening. The project is likely to be "sold" to the public as a space shield against incoming weapons, or , for the more gullible, a devise for repairing the ozone layer.

According to Defence News, April 13 - 19, 1992, the US deployed an electromagnetic pulse weapon (EMP) in Desert Storm, designed to mimic the flash of electricity from a nuclear bomb. The Sandia National Laboratory had built a 23,000 square metre laboratory on the Kirkland Air Force Base, 1989, to house the Hermes III electron beam generator capable of producing 20 Trillion Watt pulses lasting 20 billionths to 25 billionths of a second. This X-ray simulator is called a Particle Beam Fusion Accelerator. A stream of electrons hitting a metal plate can produce a pulsed X-ray or gamma ray. Hermes II had produced electron beams since 1974. Thes devises were apparently tested during the Gulf War, although detailed information on them is sparce.

[goforit]

264. Where is Kirkland AFB ?.........Great info!!!

"The Sandia National Laboratory had built a 23,000 square metre laboratory on the Kirkland Air Force Base, 1989, to house the Hermes III electron beam generator capable of producing 20 Trillion Watt pulses lasting 20 billionths to 25 billionths of a second."

This is absolutely incredible!!!

[nashville_brook]

255. this person was only wondering out loud?? since when is that rumoring?

and everyone who flamed them ought to be ashamed.

if you can't ask questions and ponder our impact on the earth on this forum? well, hell, i don't want any part of it either.

[goforit]

267. Don't worry...LOL!!!....NYT (WH) knows how close to the truth it might be.

[lovuian]

259. NYT is starting to realize the DU is where to get Information LOL

Isn't that awesome!!! And those poor souls lost in those countries!!!

Its kinda sad for Bush that people dislike him so much they blame him for the earthquake!!!

[gorbal]

262. Your being watched, you heard it here first

(does her hair to look good for the cameras)

I thought most of the "conspiracy theories" posted on that thread were pretty toungue and cheek.

Besides not seeming to understand this, the article isn't that bad. I don't know what to say about the NYT, I stopped reading it after awhile because I can't really afford it.

[Chicago Democrat]

276. On Balance a relatively fair article...

:)

Good press.

[Old Mouse]

278. This article contains NOTHING newsworthy

yet is in print in a major world newspaper. Please think about that.

This is the first real attempt to discredit DU in the eyes of the public.

While we have had freepers in our forums for quite some time, recently they have been joined by others more coordinated and professional in agitating discord among ourselves. Now a NYT article headlines us as irrational.

The heat has been turned up on us a notch. This may or may not mean we have been successful in irritating people in power, but it does mean we have gained their attention and reaction.

[Kelvin Mace]

291. This wasn't an attempt to discredit DU

Please read this post on the matter.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=2901509&mesg_id=2901509

David Allen
www.thoughtcrimes.org

[Old Mouse]

294. Thank you for the clarification

but the editing of the article destroyed almost all trace of the original argument. Topic paragraphs are all most readers have time for these days.

Did your friend suggest the story to his editor, or was it assigned?

[Kelvin Mace]

295. His idea

but not his regular editor editing.

David Allen
www.thoughtcrimes.org

[Strelnikov_]

279. The Poster Was Just Expressing A New Age/Earth Religion View

I think the NY Times has too much time on it's hands if they are pursuing stories like this.

Are they going to run articles on every New Age and Native American board that expresses these views?

I really thought that this board was above the kind of race to conformity we are seeing here.

[Desertrose]

281. AHEM.... You guys take a good look at the LOUNGE lately?

If you are "worried" about how DU looks...mayeb we should think twice about the LOUNGE being open to the public...its sure not like it used to be....but I never go there anymore cause there is a lot going on in the other forums that is of way more of interest to me ......

BTW...I didn't know we were here for the neocons...I thought it was a place for linerals to hang out & chat and discuss what is important to us....

[Psephos]

282. I say don't hide anything. It is what it is; anything else w/b a lie. n/t

[gandalf]

285. They ridicule these things only when they cannot ignore them

...I guess.

When it was impossible to ignore 9/11 conspiracy theories because many people started to become interested in them, they were ridiculed in coordinated media attacks (at least, this was the case in Germany, where about 20% of the population thinks BushCo could have engineered 9/11).

[neweurope]

286. DU isn't the only place where people have speculated.

Also I think it's absolutely nothing to be ashamed of even if some speculations turn out to be ridiculous: MUCH more important to the NYT should be the fact that people ARE speculating - that is: That the USA have a government that folks think CAPABLE of these things... but all that's just smoke, never a fire, right?

Diego Garcia News:
(Unfortunately this is a part two - couldn't find part one, no idea who the interviewed/interviewer is)

http://article.wn.com/link/WNATC38D6E5C58AD2856F5F3532DBC6CC368?source=templategenerator&template=diegogarcianews/headlines.txt

Q: Have tidal waves figured in weapons research?
A: Yes. Secret wartime experiments were conducted off the New Zealand coast to create a bomb that would trigger tidal waves, according to government files declassified in Auckland. But the tsunami bomb was never fully tested and the war ended before the project was completed. Its mastermind was Thomas Leech, an Australian professor who was the dean of engineering at Auckland University from 1940 to 1950. He set off a series of underwater explosions that caused mini tidal waves at Whangaparaoa, north of Auckland, in 1944 and 1945. The New Zealand Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade contain details of the research, known as Project Seal, in 53- year-old documents released.
Q: Is it possible for a nuclear explosion to have triggered the Macquarie quake in some way and indirectly caused the changes that led to the Sumatra quake and the Asian tsunami?
A: It is possible that a very large explosion might have triggered the first quake directly in some way or that repeated prior testing could have induced changes that led to the quake indirectly, but research on the fall-out of nuclear testing is so highly classified that little is known of the possible impact. The US has not ratified the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, leaving the door open to future US testing despite an extended moratorium. There has already been a strong move toward resumption of testing since 2002. Now earth-penetrating nukes (bunker busters) and mini-nukes might provide the pretext.

[Carni]

297. Thanks for this post it is very interesting

Now THIS is what I like to see on DU and it's what I come here for...aren't we here to exchange ideas and share sources?

I find this article fascinating and if I want to do further checking as to it's validity...search engines are only a few keystrokes away.

Then I can draw my own conclusions based on my own verification of the credibilty of the publication and the authors.

I don't come here to watch people call each other crackpots in a rude fashion and rag about talking points and the best image for DU
(esp. when the whole discussion has been generated by some quotes from a right winged site and then recirculated via some editor at the NYT's)

I will definitely be checking this out further--I like to keep an open mind as opposed to telling others what to think.

[Nihil]

287. Maybe they're as touchy as certain people in this thread?

Given that the in one of the replies to the (alleged) "dumb question"
note:

> This only proves the the NYT can be scientifically ignorant too.
>
> Most reporters do not have science educations and make errors when
> they try to cover a science story.

If the lazy donkey of a NYT "journalist" happened to read this comment
and reacted in the same unpleasant way as some of the DU so-called
"sceptics", what better way to pour scorn on the unwanted opinions
than to cut & paste little snippets to their rag?

Two birds with one stone: not only do they feel "revenged" for the
slight but they also curry favour with their White House controllers.

[FULL_METAL_HAT]

290. We Know NYT is WATCHING...

THEY ARE PAYING ATTENTION

Let's give 'em something to talk about...

... and I'm not talking about lo-o-ove...

Over the next two days we will have an opportunity as one of the leading voices of reasoned dissent, to speak a message that can have an impact on the nation as a whole, if our message is relevant and serious.

On January 6th, 2005 America faces what is certainly the greatest challenge and opportunity to reaffirm the tenants and cornerstone of our democracy, as defined, "of the people".

Please take a moment now to step back from the overload of emotions experienced since November 2nd's disappointments and to re-focus your passion and energies for the landmark opportunity on January sixth of American Democracy to truly reflect the Constitution's foundation of our Goverment, in truth, being of the people.

The best is yet to come!

FULL_METAL_HAT

[GOPBasher]

303. The most outlandish post gets in the NYT.