Hatrack River
Home   |   About Orson Scott Card   |   News & Reviews   |   OSC Library   |   Forums   |   Contact   |   Links
Research Area   |   Writing Lessons   |   Writers Workshops   |   OSC at SVU   |   Calendar   |   Store
E-mail this page
Hatrack River Forum Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Hatrack River Forum » Active Forums » Discussions About Orson Scott Card » When Orson Scott Card is done campaigning for George Bush 2008 maybe he can read this (Page 1)

  This topic comprises 9 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9   
Author Topic: When Orson Scott Card is done campaigning for George Bush 2008 maybe he can read this
The Magic Rat
Member
Member # 9401

 - posted      Profile for The Magic Rat           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
While I can still respect someone for having their own beliefs and opinions, I can no longer respect Orson Scott Card and his continuous disdain for anyone who holds an opinion that is different from his own.

In the latest edition of "Uncle Orson Reviews Everything" Card argues that everything is going right in America and in Iraq and that anyone who states otherwise is completely wrong. I am sure that is true coming from someone who is sitting pretty on his stack of bestselling books in Pleasantville North Carolina.

No Mr. Card, things are still not going right here or anywhere else in the world but I guess I'm only saying that because it is an election year with a Republican incumbent. I'm sure if there was a democrat in the white house right now I would be saying everything is "rosy and no stories are bad. All actions were brilliant accomplishments; all inaction was wise rather than indolent or cowardly. Everything spins to the plus side."

Yeah, like Republicans don't know anything about SPIN. This isn't about Republicans and Democrats, or at least it shouldn't be. Unlike most people in this country, I do not blindly follow someone based on what party he is or automatically ignore or attack any opinion from the other party.

"We've had eight years with a president of extraordinary courage and moral strength and, yes, wisdom. Bad at selling himself to the people, but then, he had to contend with the continuous hostility of the press, so it's not as if we could ever get to know him without them filtering everything."

To this Mr. Card, I can only say that you must only be watching and listening to Fox News, and ignoring any other news source. Oh and isn't Bill O'Reilly, the Master of Spin himself on Fox News? Yeah I'm sure President Bush is really courageous, if by courageous you mean avoiding actual and dangerous military service when he was a young man. And I'm sure he has great moral strength, if by moral strength you mean sending thousands of young men and women to die for one of the biggest lies in American history. Oh wait I forgot, only Democrats lie because Republicans have never lied before and never will. And yes I'm sure he is a man of great wisdom, if by wisdom you mean having a C average in college and being little more than a puppet for the Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld War Machine. I'm sure he is a great man who is just a victim of a savage press that is so evil because it dares question a Republican president in a time of war.

"Sometimes I think that having George W. Bush as President was God's last gesture of protection."

This statement made me so sick I almost threw up my dinner. I'll be sure to ask God about this when I die and if this is true I will beg him to send me to hell because I want nothing to do with a God that would place this monster, this ignorant coward in the White House. I guess when Bill Clinton became president God was on a break or just pissed off at humanity that day.

"If we're so stupid we can't recognize a good man when we're led by one, if we can't take responsibility for our own defense and the defense of helpless people in other lands"

I guess I am stupid for having a different opinion than you Mr. Card. You sound like a child when you ridicule someone else who dares hold a different opinion. "You're stupid because you're wrong because I'm right and you're wrong."

It must be so easy for you to say how wonderful life is in this country, you in your warm house enjoying your rich holiday parties while there are people who can't afford heating, or food or presents for their children. I'm sure its very warm, cozy and safe where you live, far away from the blood soaked sands of Iraq where I've lost friends and family or watched them come and tell their horrible stories and at the end wonder what it was all for. Yes, these are soldiers I have talked to who dare question our Commander and Chief, but I guess these heroes are just stupid or misguided according to you. Yes, I dare you to walk up to them and tell them they are stupid.

Tell me Mr. Card, is life really so much better now than before George Bush became President? Are we really any safer? Is our economy really so much stronger or are the rich only getting richer and the poor getting poorer. I ask you this because you are obviously very wise and I am just a stupid foolish man who obviously just likes to pick on Geroge Bush for no good reason.

"if we can't take responsibility for our own defense and the defense of helpless people in other lands."

Yes because that is exactly why we sent our soldiers into Iraq, to save the helpless people. Isn't it funny how George Bush continues to spin the wheel of truth. First it was 9/11, then WMDs, then when no connection was found and no weapons found, it was because we wanted to save the helpless Iraqi's. Wow, isn't George Bush such a great man that he cares so much about the Iraqis that he would sacrifice thousands of our own.

Nevermind that there are millions of people starving and dying in Africa from AIDs, Genocide and Civil War. It's funny how George Bush doesn't seem to cry for the people of Rwanda and Darfur, maybe it has something to do with the fact that there's no oil in those places.

There's no profit in saving the innocent. That is the moral law that George Bush lives by.

I can respect a man who holds to his beliefs but I cannot respect someone who can so easily blind himself to the truth and have so much hatred and disdain for anyone who challenges his beliefs. Is this really the kind of country we should be living in? Is this really your utopian vision of the United States of George W. Bush? Where you are either a republican or a democratic because you have to choose a side, you can't dare stop and think for yourself, and follow it blindly whereever it may lead. Except the Republicans are always good, riteous and moral people and democrats are always evil, lying and despicable people.

This is all I have to say and I am sure you will just read this and ignore it. I had to say what I had to say and I hope you can find it in you to respect me for that, not that it means much anymore coming from you. It's funny to think back now to when I read Ender's Game when I was 13 years old and imagined what the author of this book was like. You sir are nothing like I imagined. You sir, are a dissapointment.

Posts: 12 | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
C3PO the Dragon Slayer
Member
Member # 10416

 - posted      Profile for C3PO the Dragon Slayer           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Wow. That was just as ranty as Card's essay, if not even more.

Still, the title cracks me up.

Posts: 1018 | Registered: Apr 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 124

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
You have the right, of course, to decide whom you intend to respect. Do you think you'll accomplish anything by telling someone you don't respect him?
Posts: 36934 | Registered: May 1999  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Dagonee
Member
Member # 5818

 - posted      Profile for Dagonee   Email Dagonee         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Unlike most people in this country, I do not blindly follow someone based on what party he is or automatically ignore or attack any opinion from the other party.
Ow. The irony got in my eyes!

quote:
To this Mr. Card, I can only say that you must only be watching and listening to Fox News, and ignoring any other news source.
That must be it. It couldn't be that this accusation is your method of automatically ignoring or attacking opinions of someone who supports a different party than you.

quote:
I guess I am stupid for having a different opinion than you Mr. Card. You sound like a child when you ridicule someone else who dares hold a different opinion. "You're stupid because you're wrong because I'm right and you're wrong."
He calls you stupid. You call him a child. You're better why, exactly?

quote:
It must be so easy for you to say how wonderful life is in this country, you in your warm house enjoying your rich holiday parties while there are people who can't afford heating, or food or presents for their children.
You are apparently ignorant of Card's preferred economic policies.

quote:
I can respect a man who holds to his beliefs but I cannot respect someone who can so easily blind himself to the truth and have so much hatred and disdain for anyone who challenges his beliefs.
I suggest you work on regaining your self-respect, then.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Threads
Member
Member # 10863

 - posted      Profile for Threads   Email Threads         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Yeah, that last review was a little over the top even by Card's standards.

quote:
Originally posted by Orson Scott Card:
Sometimes I think that having George W. Bush as President was God's last gesture of protection.
Still, the title cracks me up.

I looked for evidence that this statement was tongue-in-cheek but unfortunately couldn't find any.

I generally enjoy his review articles because his tone is drastically different from the tone in his World Watch articles. It would be nice if he kept his politics out of them.

Posts: 1321 | Registered: Aug 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Morbo
Member
Member # 5309

 - posted      Profile for Morbo   Email Morbo         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Topic: 10 Reasons Why this rant, the thread, Will Suck
Posts: 6316 | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Launchywiggin
Member
Member # 9116

 - posted      Profile for Launchywiggin   Email Launchywiggin         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I just hope none of the Cards DO see this thread, because it's embarrassing and decreases the likelihood of their participation in the forum.

(which I would like to see again)

Is that really only Rat's 3rd post?

OSC's politics aside--he's such a great writer. I just started Pastwatch, and he has such cool ideas and perspectives.

I think we need that guy from cracked (from this thread) to write an article on 10 things Republicans and Democrats can agree on. We really AREN'T all that different, I don't think.

Posts: 1314 | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Synesthesia
Member
Member # 4774

 - posted      Profile for Synesthesia   Email Synesthesia         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
He is. But I still disagree with 90% of what he has to say.
Especially that LINE in the last book in the first Ender series. That's a total myth and completely unhealthy.
I don't agree with him about Bush one bit, it seems from other's perspective it just isn't true, and the economy really isn't doing well with the dollar growing weaker and the whole Real Estate crisis to consider.
Not to mention the trillion dollar budget deficit.
I am not insulting him, I just don't agree.

Posts: 9883 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Jay
Member
Member # 5786

 - posted      Profile for Jay   Email Jay         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Sometimes I wonder why Scott doesnít post here anymore. Then someone like ďThe Magic RatĒ posts and I remember why.

I wonder since he only has three posts, yet seems familiar with the area if heís got another name on the board.

Itís really a shame we canít have a positive place to talk about Scot Card.

Posts: 2844 | Registered: Oct 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Reshpeckobiggle
Member
Member # 8947

 - posted      Profile for Reshpeckobiggle   Email Reshpeckobiggle         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
To The Magic Rat (or whoever it is who registered the screenname back in May of '06 for the occasions that you want post something you don't have the conviction to post under your regular handle), it must be nice to know you are always right.

Ironic, coming from me, I know.

Edit: For perspective here's a choice quote from on of his other two posts: "And no I don't think Orson Scott Card will ever read this post or actually agree with me because that would mean he was actually thinking outside of his arrogant pompous mind."

I wonder who this is? I wonder if he (or she) has the cojones to admit who he is, rather than hiding behind this back-up screenname.

Posts: 1285 | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Kwea
Member
Member # 2199

 - posted      Profile for Kwea   Email Kwea         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I think that rant as absurd, and have a hard time taking it serious at all.

And God knows I disagree with Card on almost everything other than how to write good fiction. [Smile]


That being said....Jay, you have hardly been above partisan sniping yourself. You are hardly a beacon of love and light when it comes to politics.


If Card wants to comment on politics...and he isn't shy about calling others out either....then his views are open for discussion. I just prefer to discuss those views without attacking him as a person.

It's a shame others can't seem to understand the difference.

When I bother commenting at all. I usually stay away from the politic here, as those conversations tend to leave bad taste in my mouth lately.

Posts: 14992 | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Orincoro
Member
Member # 8854

 - posted      Profile for Orincoro   Email Orincoro         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I agree Kwea, I've been consistently perplexed by OSC's attitude toward discussion of his political writing here. It disappoints me that he no longer posts, although it hardly surprises me. I only ever argued with Card about anything because I thought his opinion mattered, and that he should be better informed about things I might know something about. He was extremely defensive with me and my criticism, and took it personally when he should not have, in my mind. Still this rant is extremely personal and hurts the point it tries to support.
Posts: 9551 | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lyrhawn
Member
Member # 7039

 - posted      Profile for Lyrhawn   Email Lyrhawn         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
And yet for all the wild vitriol in Rat's statement, presumably one of the things that keeps Card away, the majority, in fact every responder in this thread have derided that initial post as wrong, not necessarily in content (stance I guess) but certainly in tone and rudeness.

Near as I can tell, this thread would be a reason for him to come back, because while a lot of people disagree with him about Bush, everyone seems pretty non-confrontational about it. How much fun is it to just talk to people who agree with you?

Posts: 21414 | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Objectivity
Member
Member # 4553

 - posted      Profile for Objectivity           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Orincoro:
I agree Kwea, I've been consistently perplexed by OSC's attitude toward discussion of his political writing here. It disappoints me that he no longer posts, although it hardly surprises me. I only ever argued with Card about anything because I thought his opinion mattered, and that he should be better informed about things I might know something about. He was extremely defensive with me and my criticism, and took it personally when he should not have, in my mind. Still this rant is extremely personal and hurts the point it tries to support.

He's always been like that. I remember when he had the forum on Prodigy and Xenocide came out. I made a comment that the book was extremely disappointing because it didn't address any of the major cliffhangers in Speaker for the Dead, something I still believe to be true. I wasn't disrespectful, but I was critical - it was a comment thread about the book (or whatever passed for a comment thread at the time).

Based on his response (imagine Roger Clemens' news conference but more coherent) you would have thought I had insulted some beloved relative.

My only thought in hindsight is that he was frustrated by several other (professional) reviews that said the same thing and chose to take out his frustrations on an anonymous poster on a pre-Internet message board.

Posts: 50 | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rivka
Member
Member # 4859

 - posted      Profile for rivka   Email rivka         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Hey, someone else who remembers the Prodigy forum! [Smile]
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Chris Bridges
Member
Member # 1138

 - posted      Profile for Chris Bridges   Email Chris Bridges         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I had to say what I had to say and I hope you can find it in you to respect me for that, not that it means much anymore coming from you.

My favorite part. "I hope you can still respect me after I've completely disrespected you in every manner I can think of."

Posts: 7780 | Registered: Aug 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Magic Rat
Member
Member # 9401

 - posted      Profile for The Magic Rat           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Wow, so much anger. I thought this was a forum for free discussion. I guess that only applies to people who agree with the majority and Orson Scott Card.

To those people who think that I am hiding behind a screen name and normally post under another name, that is simply untrue. Yes, it is true I have only posted a few times. Does that mean my opinion is worth less than those who post more often?

As I have stated numerous times in my original post, I am not attacking Card for having different opinions from my own, I am simply calling him out for continually ridiculing people who believe differently than him. As I said before, I can respect someone for sticking to his beliefs, but not when it means attacking others. There just seems to be an arrogant tone in a lot of his posts. I don't know if that is intentional or not but it is there and suggests that he considers himself above other people. I hope that's not true, but that's what I feel when reading his articles.

As for the person who posted one my old posts from a while ago, I'm not sure what you're trying to say by doing that. Is this supposed to mean that my opinions mean nothing because I have criticized Orson Scott Card before? As I have stated in that post as well, I have a lot of respect for Mr. Card and am a huge fan of his books.

Forgive me if my posts might keep Orson Scott Card away. I would hope that he is not so sensitive about receiving negative feedback that he would stop posting on this forum. If so, then maybe he should stop writing about his politics if he can't handle someone else disagreeing with him. This is a forum after all.

Posts: 12 | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Jay
Member
Member # 5786

 - posted      Profile for Jay   Email Jay         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Kwea:

That being said....Jay, you have hardly been above partisan sniping yourself. You are hardly a beacon of love and light when it comes to politics.

I might not hold my conservatism in, but Iím a Scott Card supporter no matter what.
Posts: 2844 | Registered: Oct 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Dagonee
Member
Member # 5818

 - posted      Profile for Dagonee   Email Dagonee         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Wow, so much anger. I thought this was a forum for free discussion. I guess that only applies to people who agree with the majority and Orson Scott Card.
You'll note that your post is still here and your username still has posting rights. Is there some particular reason, other than the fact that people have vigorously discussed your post, that you're claiming that this forum doesn't allow free discussion?

quote:
As I have stated numerous times in my original post, I am not attacking Card for having different opinions from my own, I am simply calling him out for continually ridiculing people who believe differently than him.
And you're doing it by engaging in the same tactics you take him to task for. This is inconsistent at best, hypocritical at worst.

quote:
Is this supposed to mean that my opinions mean nothing because I have criticized Orson Scott Card before?
No. It's supposed to mean that your intentions here are not to actually discuss things, but merely to sound off.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Dagonee
Member
Member # 5818

 - posted      Profile for Dagonee   Email Dagonee         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
BTW, this is another example of you doing what you accuse Card of doing:

quote:
I guess that only applies to people who agree with the majority and Orson Scott Card.
A quick perusal of this site would make it absolutely clear to you that there is ample disagreement with both majority- and minority-held positions and that disagreement with Card is quite common.

Rather than taking the 2 minutes that would be required to discover that, you made inaccurate assumptions about the motives of people who criticized you and their reasons for doing so.

Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Chris Bridges
Member
Member # 1138

 - posted      Profile for Chris Bridges   Email Chris Bridges         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Well, you've responded to what you considered ridicule with... more ridicule, instead of, say, reasoned arguments. Why should we listen to you or him?
Posts: 7780 | Registered: Aug 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Magic Rat
Member
Member # 9401

 - posted      Profile for The Magic Rat           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I honestly don't see how my original post was hypocritical. I was merely calling out Card for showing so much anger and almost hatred towards people who disagree with him. I personally do not consider myself a Republican or a Democrat. I will not necessarily support someone who shares the same beliefs and opinions as me. Instead I would support someone who I feel can do the most for the most people, not a small minority.

I feel that I am discussing issues rather than sounding off as someone suggesting. I suppose if I were writing about something you agree with than you would say that was a discussion. Since I obviously do not share your opinions, you say I am merely sounding off.

When I questioned this being a free forum, I did not suggest that I might be removed from the forum. I question this forum when someone is attacked almost worse than Card attacks other people's beliefs.

In my original post, I stated my opinions on several of Card's statements. I consider that reasoned argument, not ridicule.

Posts: 12 | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Orincoro
Member
Member # 8854

 - posted      Profile for Orincoro   Email Orincoro         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
No, you actually hit most of my opinions, in general. Your delivery, and your personal opinions and characterizations are miles off however, and your style is unlikeable. Sorry, but your not the vocal minority, you're just vocal.
Posts: 9551 | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Dagonee
Member
Member # 5818

 - posted      Profile for Dagonee   Email Dagonee         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
I honestly don't see how my original post was hypocritical.

...

In my original post, I stated my opinions on several of Card's statements. I consider that reasoned argument, not ridicule.

You took issue with Card showing anger and almost hatred at people who disagree with him. TO do so, you said the following:

quote:
*Unlike most people in this country, I do not blindly follow someone based on what party he is or automatically ignore or attack any opinion from the other party.

*To this Mr. Card, I can only say that you must only be watching and listening to Fox News, and ignoring any other news source.

*this ignorant coward in the White House.

*It must be so easy for you to say how wonderful life is in this country, you in your warm house enjoying your rich holiday parties while there are people who can't afford heating, or food or presents for their children.

*I hope you can find it in you to respect me for that, not that it means much anymore coming from you.

Do you really not see the ridicule in your post? Do you really not see that, in your constant assumptions about why Card thinks what he does, you are engaging in exactly the same tactics you complain about him using?

quote:
I suppose if I were writing about something you agree with than you would say that was a discussion.
Another example of you making stuff up about other people. Is it impossible for you to comprehend that people might think what you are doing is not discussion even if they agreed with you?

You've stated that the only reason people have for taking exception to your post is that they disagree with your content. You have no basis for this, you've been called on it at least once, and you're still doing it.

For your information, several people who regularly criticize Card's reviews and essays have also criticized your posts. You can keep saying "You're being mean because you disagree with me" all you like; it won't make it true.

quote:
I question this forum when someone is attacked almost worse than Card attacks other people's beliefs.
You mean how you attacked others - not just Card - in your opening and additional posts?
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Magic Rat
Member
Member # 9401

 - posted      Profile for The Magic Rat           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I'm sorry if you are sensitive to my posts. Is it hard for you to think that any anger I might unintentionally show in my posts could come from the fact that I have witnessed friends and family suffer under some of George Bush's policies. This is one of the reasons I have chosen to call out Card.

It's interesting how you have no objection to what Card has written. I am simply responding to his post in kind. When someone slaps me in the face with his politics and his anger towards other people, am I supposed to smile and pick my words carefully so as not to hurt his feelings? Maybe Card should have thought about that in his article. All I ask is people to consider other viewpoints and beliefs.

Posts: 12 | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Dagonee
Member
Member # 5818

 - posted      Profile for Dagonee   Email Dagonee         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Is it hard for you to think that any anger I might unintentionally show in my posts could come from the fact that I have witnessed friends and family suffer under some of George Bush's policies.
So if there's a good enough reason for anger (and I don't believe for a second you're showing it unintentionally), then we ought to excuse that anger? If that's so, have you bothered to attempt to understand the reason for Card's anger?

quote:
It's interesting how you have no objection to what Card has written.
You have no way of knowing if this is true or not. This is the third time you've made unwarranted assumptions about what others' believe - the second time you've done it after it's been explicitly pointed out that you are doing it.

quote:
When someone slaps me in the face with his politics and his anger towards other people, am I supposed to smile and pick my words carefully so as not to hurt his feelings?
If your contention is that people ought not to do something, then don't be surprised when you are criticized for doing that something. If it is your contention that one ought not slap others in the face with their politics, you ought not to do that either.

quote:
All I ask is people to consider other viewpoints and beliefs.
And you have NO indication that people here aren't doing that. Instead, you're using your bald claim that they are not considering other viewpoints and beliefs to dismiss others' criticism of your posts.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Chris Bridges
Member
Member # 1138

 - posted      Profile for Chris Bridges   Email Chris Bridges         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
One of many, many examples:

"Oh wait I forgot, only Democrats lie because Republicans have never lied before and never will."

At no point has OSC ever said that. This is exactly the sort of overexaggeration you attack Card for. Can you see why, frankly, I find that funny?

Are you capable of doing what you claim OSC cannot? Can you express an opinion without making it an attack? If you can, you'll find plenty of people here happy to discuss OSC's columns.

Posts: 7780 | Registered: Aug 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Magic Rat
Member
Member # 9401

 - posted      Profile for The Magic Rat           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Actually Card did suggest that Republicans are always victims of a vicious media. He states how the media attacks Republican presidents so if that is the case then he is saying that Republicans have always made good presidents, they just aren't portrayed that way in the media.

Someone will probably say this is me attacking people again but I think that maybe some people here are just way too sensitive. I think that my original post is rather tame compared to some other articles and posts I have read.

And to you Dagonee, so far in our little "discussion" you have not addressed Card's article and the issues with it that I have raised. If you define what I am doing as attacking people, then you yourself are guilty of doing the same thing to me. You continue to criticize me yet you do not criticize Orson Scott Card.

I do not feel that I am making bald claims because unfortunately there are a lot of people who do not consider other viewpoints.

Posts: 12 | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 124

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
I think that my original post is rather tame compared to some other articles and posts I have read.
Please do not judge the quality of your contributions based on the quality of discussion common on the Internet. That's a very low bar, and we try to do better.
Posts: 36934 | Registered: May 1999  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Scooter
Member
Member # 6915

 - posted      Profile for Scooter   Email Scooter         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
There is no way to say this without instantly being labeled as a fox-news-loving, blinders-wearing, OSC kissing, rich-living, blind mental midget, but you Mr. Rat are seeing only what you want to see.

Plenty of people documented your fallacies and you dismiss them but will not hold OSC to that same slippery standard--you hold him to a much higher standard of criticism.

So, "he started it," but in his mind, he may think "you" (meaning people that you more closely identify with) have attacked "him" (meaning people that he more closely identifies with) first, and he is only slapping back. Or, sometimes the best response to one who starts it is to be civil and fair-minded.

This, of course, would require a fair analysis which so far appears to be lacking on your part. This is understandable--we all get partisan from time to time and let our biases take over. (go ahead, say I am doing that now--doesn't change the point, I believe)

Posts: 80 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Dagonee
Member
Member # 5818

 - posted      Profile for Dagonee   Email Dagonee         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
I do not feel that I am making bald claims because unfortunately there are a lot of people who do not consider other viewpoints.
But you are asserting that the reason your posts are being criticized is that the people doing the criticizing do not consider other viewpoints. You're not making a general observation - you're making specific accusations.

quote:
And to you Dagonee, so far in our little "discussion" you have not addressed Card's article and the issues with it that I have raised.
No, I haven't addressed the issue you've raised about Card's articles. I have, however, addressed your posts, specifically the repeated misstatements about others' motivations for disagreeing with you.

quote:
If you define what I am doing as attacking people, then you yourself are guilty of doing the same thing to me. You continue to criticize me yet you do not criticize Orson Scott Card.
No, we are doing different things. I'm addressing what you're actually saying. I am not casually dismissing what you are saying by assigning motives to you.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Dark as night
Member
Member # 9577

 - posted      Profile for Dark as night   Email Dark as night         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by The Magic Rat:


Forgive me if my posts might keep Orson Scott Card away. I would hope that he is not so sensitive about receiving negative feedback that he would stop posting on this forum. If so, then maybe he should stop writing about his politics if he can't handle someone else disagreeing with him. This is a forum after all.

It is a forum. On HIS website. And in my opinion it is bad manners to insult someone as you have on their own website.
Posts: 155 | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Chris Bridges
Member
Member # 1138

 - posted      Profile for Chris Bridges   Email Chris Bridges         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Someone will probably say this is me attacking people again but I think that maybe some people here are just way too sensitive. I think that my original post is rather tame compared to some other articles and posts I have read.

You're. Still. Missing. The. Point.

When you complain about someone for their contempt and ridicule, and you do so using contempt and ridicule, it doesn't matter what your points might be or what the actual facts are. The hypocrisy (and irony) just rises up like floodwaters and swamps everything else.

I'm not coming down on you because you disagree with OSC. I disagree with just about every political column he's written in the last five years. But I and others here have managed to do so by addressing the issues and offering competing views. Often we'll take those issues and argue them ourselves, using his points as a springboard.

Yes, he can get strident and contemptuous. Doesn't mean we have to, and it doesn't mean we have to pay attention to someone trying to be even more contemptuous to get himself heard.

Posts: 7780 | Registered: Aug 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Reshpeckobiggle
Member
Member # 8947

 - posted      Profile for Reshpeckobiggle   Email Reshpeckobiggle         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by The Magic Rat:
Actually Card did suggest that Republicans are always victims of a vicious media. He states how the media attacks Republican presidents so if that is the case then he is saying that Republicans have always made good presidents, they just aren't portrayed that way in the media.

I don't think this guy knows what he's getting into. This forum is not for the weak of heart, or the weak-minded. Am I the only one here who recognizes the incredibly fallacious conclusion being drawn here? You're gonna have to do a lot better than that, Rat.

quote:

And to you Dagonee, so far in our little "discussion" you have not addressed Card's article and the issues with it that I have raised. If you define what I am doing as attacking people, then you yourself are guilty of doing the same thing to me. You continue to criticize me yet you do not criticize Orson Scott Card.

Good job, you did it again. Here's a tip: anytime you make an if/then statement, make sure the "if" implies the "then."

If you had said anything that was worth a discussion, then I guarantee a discussion would have happened. Instead the only issue at hand on this particular thread is how bone-headed you are, not to mention arrogant (yes, I know, I am in fact mentioning it). If you think you can just waltz in here with three posts to your name and expect special treatment, you are sorely mistaken. Trust me on this, because I'm still paying my dues. But the return on my investment has been worth it.

If you plan on sticking around, you'll need a sharper mind, and a little tact goes a long way. If you don't have it now, you'll get it eventually. I know I did. And Tom is absolutely correct; we hold ourselves to a much higher standard here.

Posts: 1285 | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
BlackBlade
Member
Member # 8376

 - posted      Profile for BlackBlade   Email BlackBlade         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The Magic Rat:
quote:
Forgive me if my posts might keep Orson Scott Card away. I would hope that he is not so sensitive about receiving negative feedback that he would stop posting on this forum. If so, then maybe he should stop writing about his politics if he can't handle someone else disagreeing with him. This is a forum after all.
quote:
I'm sorry if you are sensitive to my posts. Is it hard for you to think that any anger I might unintentionally show in my posts could come from the fact that I have witnessed friends and family suffer under some of George Bush's policies.
Here's a novel idea, try sincerity when you apologize in your posts. You apologize like a child with the, "I'm sorry your so sensitive!" That's not sincerity, that's sounding like your apologizing when in reality your just insulting the other person again.

Instead of coming in here all blustery and angry, and then indignant when people don't just pipe up with an, "AMEN!" try seeing why you are being unilaterally rebuked. I promise you it has nothing to do with a vast Card wing conspiracy.

People are not interested in discussing their disagreements with Orson Scott Card until YOU learn to not be so irritable in how you portray your ideas. If you have to saturate your opinions so that they drip with emotion nobody is going to want to discuss things with you here.

I'm sure it's maddening to be angry with Orson Scott Card, vent on a forum and then instead of getting the satisfaction of a mob taking your ball and running with it, you yourself are critiqued. I get that, I really do.

But ordinary people can get angry, call people names, assume the opposition are idiots, insist disagreeing posts have spurious motives, and be unapologetic. It takes something else entirely to be stopped in their tracks, and to take it with a smile.

You are welcome to reconsider how you post here in the future and be a useful contributor in the future or you can leave here convinced we weren't worth your time anyway.

Posts: 14183 | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
sylvrdragon
Member
Member # 3332

 - posted      Profile for sylvrdragon   Email sylvrdragon         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I'll address one of the points in the OP.

Why is fighting for Oil so bad? In my opinion, that's a better motive than civil rights of a people who don't care if we care. Actually, I find it commendable that he waged a practical war and managed to whittle down the number of anti-American terrorists in the same campaign.

Think of it like this: The American government has probably had it's eyes on Iraqi oil for a long long time. Until Bush, we've been patiently waiting for a reason to make a go for it. By reason, I mean something to front to the American people (and our allies) so that we don't look like the selfish opportunistic country that we are.

This next part may sound like a crazy conspiracy theory, but this conclusion was reached through a logical train of thought that is probably far less deep than that of the people making decisions in the government. That part is that I don't think Bush really has anything to do with it. In fact, it would make perfect sense to believe that he's being used. What better way to keep troops involved in an unpopular war than to hold up the supposed guy in charge and have him repeat himself till he's blue in the face? The American people are shouting from the rooftops: "Bring our troops home!" "Nobody wants this war!" "Why don't you listen to the American people?!". When these fall on deaf ears and Bush just goes up and says the same thing again, the people say "Oh, what did we expect, he's an idiot, just look at the way he messes up half the stuff he says." That public opinion what's buying us more time to get a firmer hold on the oil that will maintain our lifestyles, our industry, and our economy.

I think the button-pushers in the government WANTED a president that looks like an idiot, because if the people thought he was smart, they would be looking a hell of a lot harder at why he doesn't stop this unpopular war.

I commend Bush for being a hell of an actor (or maybe just an idiot in the right place at the right time; you know, plausible deny ability and whatnot).

Posts: 636 | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
sylvrdragon
Member
Member # 3332

 - posted      Profile for sylvrdragon   Email sylvrdragon         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Oh, and before the storm of criticism about losing friends and family, I ask you this. For what cause would you NOT be bitter about losing said friends and family? What war could they possibly be involved in that you would consider their sacrifice "Worth it"?

Seeing as how the draft is not in effect, then they must have CHOSEN to get involved in the military and chosen to trust that the government was sending them for a worthwhile objective, whatever that may be. Is it so much to ask for you to trust their decision to trust the government's motives?

I'm not saying not to mourn your loss. I'm saying to think before you accuse someone of causing that loss. Bush didn't cause your loss, and so "Card supports the man that killed my friends and family" is not a justifiable reason to attack him.

Posts: 636 | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Synesthesia
Member
Member # 4774

 - posted      Profile for Synesthesia   Email Synesthesia         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I think I will continue to very politely disagree with a good deal of OSC's statements.
He's a contributing factor to driving me up a tree. I do not think it is logical to state that because we disagree with the war that it automatically means we want the enemy to win.
Things are not so simple. Everything is a lot more complex then it is presented, and if we are not allowed to disagree it opens the doors for potential abuse. People will be allowed to take power with no one to contradict them, even if they are in the right, and that is a dangerous premise.
Plus I do not believe in the concept of America hating intellectual elites. From the historical perspective of various groups of people, so-called tradition American values have NOT been a good thing.

Posts: 9883 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
C3PO the Dragon Slayer
Member
Member # 10416

 - posted      Profile for C3PO the Dragon Slayer           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Synesthesia:
Plus I do not believe in the concept of America hating intellectual elites. From the historical perspective of various groups of people, so-called tradition American values have NOT been a good thing.

Is that "America hates intellectual elites" or "America-hating" (as in the intellectual elites hate America)? I'll assume the latter, which seems to more appropriately address Orson Scott Card's opinions, in this post.

I have experience with the kind of "intellectual elites" that Card "rants" about frequently. In fact, they make up my neighborhood. The family of my best friend is so fanatically left-wing that they threatened to disown my best friend (somewhat jokingly, but with an air of threatening tone, and I've seen a more slippery attitude between them since) when he said "I think Hillary Clinton should not be President."

There's this other person I know who hates Bush so much that she "think[s] democracy doesn't work anymore because it has proven that it can't get Al Gore elected." She also laughed and thought I was retarded when I told her that I tended to lean a bit to the conservative side of politics when thinking idealistically, but to her, global warming is the apocalypse and she is the annoying street preacher who screams at everyone that the end times are coming.

In school, nobody bothers to say the pledge of Allegiance, and when I asked a couple of them why, they say "Because as long as Bush is in office, America sucks."

Others go so far as to use Bush as the butt of their obscene jokes the same way third-graders use Barney the Dinosaur.

My neighborhood, because it is rather affluent and near some famous public schools, is generally very left-wing and, since we're all cooped up together, the general mentality is either hatred towards Republicans, hatred towards politics because of what Republicans are doing, or in some instances hatred of politics because the local Democrats are being such jerks about people they don't even know.

People where I come from can't understand those who volunteer to join the military, puff their chests and either laugh or smile smugly at anyone who confesses the sin of not being a Democrat, and some of the younger ones distantly hope that a Communist revolution would overthrow the American government because China's doing so much better than us.

None of this is being done in seriousness; we're still friends beneath it all, but it is still done casually, which shows that they do think that, but are not willing to act on it.

This is the kind of population I think Orson Scott Card is thinking about, not the average liberal or critical thinker that expresses skepticism of Republican policy.

Posts: 1018 | Registered: Apr 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 124

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
I have experience with the kind of "intellectual elites" that Card "rants" about frequently. In fact, they make up my neighborhood. The family of my best friend is so fanatically left-wing that they threatened to disown my best friend (somewhat jokingly, but with an air of threatening tone, and I've seen a more slippery attitude between them since) when he said "I think Hillary Clinton should not be President."

There's this other person I know who hates Bush so much that she "think[s] democracy doesn't work anymore because it has proven that it can't get Al Gore elected." She also laughed and thought I was retarded when I told her that I tended to lean a bit to the conservative side of politics when thinking idealistically, but to her, global warming is the apocalypse and she is the annoying street preacher who screams at everyone that the end times are coming.

Okay. So they're obnoxiously partisan. Can you demonstrate that they hate America? Hating Republican policies does not constitute a dislike for one's country.
Posts: 36934 | Registered: May 1999  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Magic Rat
Member
Member # 9401

 - posted      Profile for The Magic Rat           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
sylvrdragon you asked why is fighting for oil so bad? Do you think it is worth thousands of American lives and even more Iraqi lives so you can pay a few cents less at the gas station? Also, how has this war whittled down the number of anti-American terrorists, when this war has only fueled even more hatred towards the U.S. not just in the middle east but throughout the world.

Also, in your second post, sylvrdragon you seem to argue that my friends, family members and every other soldier should have known what they were getting into when they enlisted and should not complain about their government or feel bitter. You are right, they did trust their government, TO DO THE RIGHT THING, to only engage in war as an absolute last resort. Is it so wrong to criticize a government and a president who betrayed the trust of so many people?

Also, perhaps you should consider the fact that many people who enlist do so because they have no other choice. They are from poor families or neighborhoods and are persuaded by recruiters to join the military and it will pay for their college education. The only catch is you have to survive a tour of duty in Iraq first, except that year turns into several years and suddenly you've been in Iraq for four or five years and you're 24 years old and still haven't set foot in a college classroom even though you've done your service several times over.

Yes, there is a cause that I would not feel so better about losing friends and family too, a cause that I would gladly sacrifice my own life for and that is in the defense of this country and others around the world who deserve it the most. There are just causes for war, but only as a last resort and these causes do not include oil, power or money.

I can't help but shake my head and laugh again at Cards most recent article where he again commends President Bush for finally having the "right" commanders in Iraq. Yes, good job Mr. President, for finally doing something right after almost five years of doing just about everything wrong. That's like saying a student is a genius for getting a C on a test after failing the first ten. I think Mr. Card is setting the bar way to low for our current president.

Posts: 12 | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Reshpeckobiggle
Member
Member # 8947

 - posted      Profile for Reshpeckobiggle   Email Reshpeckobiggle         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I enlisted in the Army in January 2001 because my options were so bad. This was pre-9/11, mind you, and I just thought I was going to find some stability in my life; that I was getting away from my dysfunctional family and druggie friends. I was 19.

I was sent to Iraq in March of 2003 and spent a year there. I had no idea what the big picture was. But when I got back, I decided to find out what I had just spent the past year of my life doing. All I heard about from the media was that we were there for a lie, that we were fighting a puny little chimp's war. Let me tell you, I got bitter. I mean, I watched this guy steal the election from Gore!

I can't describe the relief I felt when I finally saw Bill O'Reilly. I watched him with so much disdain, because everyone knew how much of a partisan shill for the Bush Administration he was. But it just so nice to actually hear that someone out there didn't think this was all a waste of time, and that the people running our government weren't simultaneously evil geniuses and illiterate rednecks. He had Ann Coulter on, and so I picked up one of her books. It was Slander, which is a scholarly book that explains exactly how I had been lied to my whole life. I immediately read her next book, Treason, which is a scholarly book about how the leftist in our government have been steadily working toward our destruction, with varying degrees of good intentions and awareness of what they have been doing (she tends to de-emphasize those parts.) Well, the rest is history.

My point, Rat, is... what is my point? I'll just make one up now. My point is that you don't speak for the soldiers. You speak for yourself, and you and many others would do well to remember that. You say those things as if they were in the spirit of sympathy for the way we were and are being used for some political end, but I guarantee that if you ask any random soldier who has put his life on the line for this cause, odds are he will consider it a noble cause. So do me a favor, and don't trivialize what me and my brothers have done and continue to do just to serve your ideological purposes.

Posts: 1285 | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Threads
Member
Member # 10863

 - posted      Profile for Threads   Email Threads         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I picked up an Ann Coulter book in a used bookstore once and it was horribly written. While I'm obviously a little biased, I can name plenty of books that I disagree with but that are well written. Ann Coulter is not scholarly.
Posts: 1321 | Registered: Aug 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Synesthesia
Member
Member # 4774

 - posted      Profile for Synesthesia   Email Synesthesia         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
All soldiers are different.

And there's no way I'd take Ann Coulter seriously.
She's too mean!
There's absolutely no reason to be mean about disagreeing with people. Name calling, insisting that everyone who doesn't agree with you sucks. I don't see the sense of that. It's not polite. She's not logical enough. The world is so much more complex than either conservatives or liberals make it out to be.

Posts: 9883 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Reshpeckobiggle
Member
Member # 8947

 - posted      Profile for Reshpeckobiggle   Email Reshpeckobiggle         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Just so you guys know, when I say scholarly, I mean that every statement of fact that she makes in those books are sourced. It's her abrasive style that makes her who she is (and sells so many books.) But her books are not horribly written, like you believe Threads. If you disagree with her, that's one thing. But to the choir (to whom she preaches), she's a brilliant writer.

Yes, Syn, she does not have much use for gray areas, even where they most certainly exist. For me at the time, she was just speaking something diametrically opposed to everything I had ever heard before, and this was extremely refreshing. Put please don't ask me to defend her wholeheartedly, because I am not about to do that.

Posts: 1285 | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 124

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
My point is that you don't speak for the soldiers.
Neither do you, of course. And I'm not sure that setting out to find sources that prove that your time in Iraq was meaningful is really the best way to decide -- in an unbiased way -- whether your time in Iraq was meaningful. It sounds like you hoped for a certain conclusion and cherry-picked writers who would help you reach it.

quote:
when I say scholarly, I mean that every statement of fact that she makes in those books are sourced.
To some extent. If you do a quick Google, you'll find a number of criticisms of Coulter's "sources," especially her very questionable (and extensive) use of Lexis. That said, I understand that you're not mounting a passionate defense of her; I do want you to understand, though, that the inclusion of "citations" does not necessarily make any work more accurate.
Posts: 36934 | Registered: May 1999  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
DDDaysh
Member
Member # 9499

 - posted      Profile for DDDaysh   Email DDDaysh         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Ok, I'm going to be really REALLY mean here now....

After reading this whole thread, I just get this picture of Rat boy....

The 9-year-old kid who is always doing SOMETHING wrong just so he can get the teachers attention. He's sitting their laughing at us because we think we might actually get somewhere by lecturing him, but in reality, we're giving him just what he wants by even noticing what he's doing.

I know I'm probably wrong, but that just goes to show how little you can understand of the reality by just reading dead words on a screen.

Posts: 1321 | Registered: Jun 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lyrhawn
Member
Member # 7039

 - posted      Profile for Lyrhawn   Email Lyrhawn         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by sylvrdragon:
I'll address one of the points in the OP.

Why is fighting for Oil so bad? In my opinion, that's a better motive than civil rights of a people who don't care if we care. Actually, I find it commendable that he waged a practical war and managed to whittle down the number of anti-American terrorists in the same campaign.


Eh, dumb for two reasons that I can see there. 1. We still don't have control of the oil, and even if we did, their production is not to pre-war levels.

But here's the real kicker 2. This thing will have cost, in purely monetary measures, well over a trillion dollars, probably closer to two trillion when you really factor in ALL that costs. All for oil? Ridiculous. For that kind of money we could have built an all new energy T&D system, could have created a renewable energy infrastructure, and hell probably could have bought a PHEV for every household in the country. You think spending two trillion is a good thing to do just to keep the status quo, HOPEFULLY?

Riiiiiiiiidiculous. Now factor in all the things that don't cost money per se, like the deaths, and political fallout. That's window dressing on top of an already ridiculous premise, now it just seems outright catastrophic.

Oh, and point number three I'll just toss on there. I don't believe for a second that we've whittled down the number of terrorists who hate us. I think we created so many new ones with this war, that any we kill will probably still keep us above the number we started with.

Posts: 21414 | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
GodSpoken
Member
Member # 9358

 - posted      Profile for GodSpoken           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Very interesting how the tone of MR's post is taken as inflammatory, when many of the discussions here - especially those on religion - frequently become passionate and at times downright childish.

I think his sentiments and the emotional conviction he expresses are shared by a large number of Americans at the moment. Not liking it spoken aloud doesn't minimize its importance.

Perhaps OSC will take the comments badly, but it doesn't seem likely judging from the way he writes vigorous dialog and arguments. But as many point out, characters are only that and don't represent the author.

I dunno, he can likely speak for himself if so moved.

Posts: 49 | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Reshpeckobiggle
Member
Member # 8947

 - posted      Profile for Reshpeckobiggle   Email Reshpeckobiggle         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Of course I don't claim to speak for the soldiers, Tom. To do so would completely undermine my point. So I have to wonder, what exactly was the purpose of that statement?

And was I cherry picking? Or was I just attracted to a completely different point of view that I very nearly didn't even recognize as even existing? I recognize that an ideology that didn't make me feel like a tool looked a lot better to me than everything I had known previously, regardless of its veracity. But I still don't understand what you're trying to accomplish with your post, and quite frankly I think you should've just kept those thoughts to yourself.

Her use of citations was most likely a defensive measure. People read her books for her opinions, and the way she expresses them. It's a guilty pleasure, but what makes it pleasurable is that you know she's not just talking out of her culo. She is definitely someone who cherry-picks her information, but no one in politics is going to tell you the whole story.

As for her use of Lexus-Nexus, in nearly all cases it was to serve as an example of the media coverage of particular events. I mean, when a LexusNexus search turns up dozens of front-page stories about Abu Ghraib in the New York Times alone, well, that's an effective use of the utility.

Posts: 1285 | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 9 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Codeô is enabled.
UBB Code™ Images not permitted.
Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Hatrack River Home Page

Copyright © 2008 Hatrack River Enterprises Inc. All rights reserved.
Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.


Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2