"usual suspect" > wrote in message
...
> C. James Strutz wrote:
> >>It does when "ethical" vegans and other leftwingers (like you)
> >>repeatedly violate copyrights.
> >
> > I'm not left-wing at all.
>
> Liar. You're way left of center.

Wrong.

> > Then again, Newt Gingrich is liberal
> > compared to you.
>
> No, he isn't, but you have a lot more in common with him than I do.
I've never
> left an older wife for a younger woman.

What are you talking about?

> >>One of the central lies is that President Bush personally arranged
> >>for the Binladen family to leave the US following September 11th
(along with
> >>a litany of other crackpot conspiracy charges which General Wes
Clark was asked
> >>if he agreed with when Moore endorsed his campaign). The person
who authorized
> >>the departure of the Binladens and other Saudis was Richard
Clarke.
> >>
> >
http://jskelly.squarespace.com/displ...moduleId=15843
> > &entryId=13586
> >
> > This is a very conservative website.
>
> Its source for the Clarke quote isn't. Here, I'll spare you the
"very
> conservative" editorializing and let you read the original source
yourself:
> http://www.hillnews.com/news/052604/Clarke.aspx

It seems on the surface like a more credible source. Much better.

> > It's hardly a credible source
> > from which to make a legitimate case.
>
> I think Richard Clarke's quote is legitimate. So, too, do other
liberals like
> Christopher Hitchens, former editor of The Nation. Hitchens himself
(charitably)
> calls Moore's latest flick propaganda. He even wrote, "Here we
glimpse a
> possible fusion between the turgid routines of MoveOn.org and the
filmic
> standards, if not exactly the filmic skills, of Sergei Eisenstein or
Leni
> Riefenstahl."
>
> http://politics.slate.msn.com/id/2102723/
>
> Face it, Putz, my first source wasn't "out there." Moore's
distasteful piece of
> shit of a film is.

Your first source was "out there". It at least seemed to accurately
represent the Clarke issue.

> >>Would you like me to find the other lies and distortions in
Moore's
> >>tawdry movie?
> >
> > Knock yourself out. Just use credible sources if you want anyone
to
> > take you seriously.
>
> What exactly do you consider credible, seeing how you dismiss the
Hill's
> reporting that Richard Clarke -- whose own book showed a rabid
anti-Bush animus
> -- unambiguously admitted he authorized flights carrying the
Binladens and other
> Saudis out of the country following 9/11? Do you hold the same high
standards
> for Moore's sources, or does he get a free pass?

No, I hold the other side to the same scrutiny as I do you. It's hard
find objective sources. Perhaps the best way is to draw conclusions
from several sources.

> > You believe only what the conservative propaganda
> > machine says you should believe.
>
> Such as? Such as when I categorically denounced what happened at Abu
Ghraib and
> called for prosecution all the way up the chain of command if the
soldiers
> involved really were acting under orders as they and their attorneys
claim?
> http://snipurl.com/798q
>
> > You are a biased, inconsistent parrot.
>
> Show where I've ever been inconsistent, asshole.

At least you don't deny that you're biased.

> > Rush isn't all that bad a guy after all. He's a Pittsburgh Steeler
> > fan! :^)
>
> That's definitely an indelible mark of bad character -- almost as
bad as being a
> Pirates fan. Did you see what the Astros did to Fogg in the fifth
inning last
> night? Hehe.

No, but I heard. The Pirates just don't seem to be able to get it
together this year. I think we're due for some managerial changes
during the off season, maybe before.