[extropy-chat] Moveon.org

[Samantha Atkins]

On Sep 20, 2004, at 10:33 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote:

> --- Spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:
>> OK my friends, I partially disqualify my own
>> conclusions
>> because I have been deeply suspicious of Dan Rather
>> and
>> 60 Minutes for a long time.  For those of you who
>> consider
>> yourselves neutral or nearly so, what is your take?
>> Forget
>> for the moment that one candidate or another may or
>> may
>> not have been helped or harmed; that is almost
>> beside the
>> point.  This question is about mainstream news
>> media.
>
>

It seems to me that the Bush administration has played games for a long 
time about the actual facts of Bush's "alternate service".   How many 
times now have they claimed that all the facts were public only to 
produce more documents and "facts" later?   I've lost count.

How many stories do all of us read every day in the US and world press 
that are not vetted and cannot even have their sources effectively 
examined?  So why exactly is one story being harped on?   Can't say for 
sure but the likely effect is that negative stories toward Bush and 
gang will be much more difficult to get into print than negative 
stories about Kerry and company now.    That is interesting.

- s