Letters posted here are associated with the following Salon Premium Member:

Frankly, my dear, ...

Published Letters: 1049

Friday, June 29, 2007 08:02 AM
Original article: Interview with Helen Thomas

If you look at the poll in question ...

If you look at the poll in question, Shooter is misrepresenting (lying about) the numbers. It was more like 34%. He's a liar. No surprise there.Z

If you look at the poll in question, you will see that shooter has combined the "very" likely (34%) with the "somewhat" likely (35%) to get a total of 69% (or "almost" 70%) who consider it "likely". This is a fairly standard technique. Shooter doesn't often lie (but he does it often enough that you can't trust anything he says without checking). What he mostly does is distort — take a valid fact and offer a distorted conclusion based on it. His other main strategy is to just make stuff up and then starting with a false premise reach an equally false conclusion. Usually his conclusions seem to be taken from elsewhere and shooter clearly does not have the intellectual equipment to be able to evaluate these conclusion so he simply parrots those that match his opinions.

Friday, June 29, 2007 08:21 AM
Original article: Interview with Helen Thomas

On the other hand,

if you look at shooter's posting (http://letters.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/06/28/helen_thomas/permalink/6c520647c377721ed5a56edec2f8df6e.html), you'll see that he claimed that nearly 80% found Saddam's involvement in 9/11 likely. (I took my 70% figure from Glenn's posting, not shooter's.) This looks like a lie, but is probably just a result of the previously mentioned lack of intellectual equipment. Doubtless shooter tried to add 34 and 35 and got 80. Of course it might just be a distortion since nearly 80% looks more impressive than nearly 70% and 69% is nearly 80% if you're counting by 20's.

Friday, June 29, 2007 10:17 AM

Speaking of palpable contempt ...

Did anyone catch Cheney's act at the 60th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz in 2005? If not, see http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A43247-2005Jan27.html.

Talk about contempt you can cut with a knife — everyone else is dressed for a funeral, or at least a memorial service, and Cheney is dressed for a Packers game.

No wonder these guys love him.

Friday, June 29, 2007 04:20 PM

Wrong again, RealName

The last time war was declared in the US was 12/8/1941.

The last time war was declared in the US was 6/5/1942 when the US declared war on Bulgaria, Hungary and Rumania.

In fact that may have been the last time on earth war was declared.

The Soviet Union declared war on Japan on 8/8/1945.

Facts are stubborn things.
— Ronald Reagan
Thursday, July 5, 2007 12:55 PM

The reason for the data shortage

is that Pew didn't get started until 2001. Data marked 1999/2000 in the survey is from the State Department's surveys. There is earlier data, but it is scattered and may not be directly comparable due to methodological variations.

It is interesting, however, that one of Pew's very first polls (from August 15, 2001; http://pewglobal.org/reports/display.php?ReportID=5) shows that Bush was already, if not unpopular, at least suspect in Europe:

In France, Germany, Italy and GB, the approval of Bush's international policy ranges from 17-29% with France being the low and Italy the high. Similarly, to the statement "Bush makes decisions based only on US interests", agreement ranged from 74-85% with the high being France and the low being Germany.

These are fairly staggering numbers 7 months into his presidency.

Saturday, July 14, 2007 01:04 PM

Susie says...

Because it's the same story, over and over again. I mean, it's no longer news. Those of you who are "logical" and "reality-based" and legal-minded are constructing a case for the record, but why? The reality is as plain as the nose on yours and everyone else's [] face. . . .

Let me state the obvious: The media is controlled by corporate interests. Those interests are in sync with those of a greedy, corporatist culture that is epitomized by the worst of our political culture. . . So of course the media supports the war. After all, their companies are making money off it.
— Susie Madrak

Please send the following quotation to Susie and to anyone else who belabors the point that the corruption of the American press and the American government (both branches of Corporate America) is too "obvious" to require repeating:

We have now sunk to a depth at which restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men.
— George Orwell

Presumably, intelligent women are excused.

Most Active Letters Threads

530

Do Obama officials know what his Afghanistan plan is?

What explains the completely contradictory statements from key aides on a central plank of the war strategy?
183

I live in a van down by Duke University

How do I afford grad school without going into debt? A '94 Econoline, bulk food and creative civil disobedience
147

A new report questions "suicides" at Guantanamo

Why is the Obama DOJ attempting to block judicial review of three highly suspicious deaths?
128

Is my kids making me not smart?

Stay-at-home fatherhood dulls my intellect to a nub. Excuse me while I ponder the subtext of "Hippos Go Berserk"
126

Trig, the anti-abortion straw baby

Sarah Palin's son is being used to demonize pro-choicers

View all »

Letters Help

Currently in Salon