" As far as I know Romney is not a lawyer..."

-- shooter

As far as I know you don't need to be a lawyer to understand the American Constitution. All you need to be is something this side of you in the honesty department, and something this side of you in the intelligence department. Both of those qualifications are easy to aquire if one tries. But according to the lack of honesty you present in your posts, and your apparent inability to understand the most clearly stated underpinnings of the Constitution, well, I guess Romney and you are on equal footing. Be careful not to slip into the abyss.

but it sure smacked of nationalizing to most observers.

--DRocks

Just wondering...who are these "most observers" that you claim to be speaking on behalf of?

What dishonesty, what callous disregard for good faith. Have you people really descended so low that all you have to offer is criminalizing human imperfection in the face of sneak attacks from the rear? If you folks are going to pillory people for inappropriate responses to trick questions there is no hope of honest discourse.

--Shooter

The irony of that blather coming out of shooter -- who has, by the way, never left any room for "liberals" or Democrats to descend below the level Shooter has claimed "liberals" and Democrats have always been since the first post I ever read by Shooter -- is laughable beyond measure.

"Honest discourse"...oh yes, Honest is Shooter's middle name. Right?

you should strive to understand our point of view even if you disagree with it...

There is no sense in "striving to understand" the so called point of view of someone who thinks like this:

I feel as if my children’s purity is under attack. That by being forced to accept alternative lifestyles, I cannot teach my children what I believe to be right and wrong.

You aren't being "forced". You're free to teach your children what you choose. Their "purity" isn't under attack. There is just nothing in that entire rant that makes any sense. That's why you come off as repulsive.

But then it's not bizarre if you read Paul Rosenberg's summary of Altemeyer's analysis.

Where is that, please?

Off-topic, thank you for responding to a post....

Yours is the first response I have seen to any of the letters by the author in any of the articles in Salon.

Greenwald responds everyday, several times a day, to the people who comment to his posts.

Aside from the main points of Glenn's post on this subject, there is another issue that comes to the fore here. Just how juvenile and pathetically defensive can a major news organization's PR person be?

Schneider's fact free finger wagging and curtness towards Glenn's points is embarrassingly obvious. How do people of Schneider's inarticulateness and childishness get through colleges, Journalist schools, or whatever without having professors throw their papers back at them out of disgust?

I guess Schneider wanted to believe that if he just got on his high-horse and then dismissed Glenn Greenwald as if he were some sort of uneducated bumpkin, this would all go away and Schneider could claim victory by default.

Does it get more juvenile then the following?

Glenn - Had you contacted us for comment prior to posting your story - or done a little research yourself - you would know that ABC News and Brian Ross did in fact update and clarify our original Friday, October 26, 2001 Anthrax/Bentonite report and quickly.

You assert that sources "manipulated ABC News." The reality is that we reported what numerous, diverse sources believed to be true on October 26, 2001. As further tests were done, the story evolved as did our reporting and just days later we made it clear to millions of viewers that our original report was indeed wrong.

Thanks.

My goodness, that is embarrasing!

In fact, they have a-changed!

Yee of little faith, Jonathan. We're in, Jonathan, and ain't nobody kickin' us out now. Nobody. Not "powers that be". Not puss infested, certified liars such as Karl Rove. Not dimwitted neandrathals such as George Bush. Not shotgun weilding, snearing walking heart attacks like Dick Cheney. We're in...and we ain't a-goin' away.

Perhaps for a moment you folks should consider that you aren't perfect, and that life isn't completely one-sided.

-- shooter242

What a Bush-league Strawman comment.

You should write a book, Shooter, titled How to group words together that say nothing and pretend like you've said something.. Fooling yourself into thinking you've said something is what your whole schtick lives and hangs on.

Any citizenry that will piss in a cup in order to get or keep a job has very little fight left in them.

The Democrats are only *slightly* less venal than the Republicans.

-- Jonathan Hoag

The Republicans have been trying to destroy net nuetrality for years now. Because of the outrage of at least some of us in the general public, and because of the "slightly less venal" Democrats in Congress...they have failed to do so.

We are winning that battle. Why don't you get on board instead of rolling over with a 'kick me, and please kick me again' attitude? Why do you want to allow yourself to be cowed into believing that there is some all powerful group of 'haves' out there that just are gonna' have it all no matter what anyone else does or says? I can't live my life that way. Sorry to see that you choose to.