[B5JMS] And So It Begins...

[b5jms at cs.columbia.edu]

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: Brian Reed <bcreed at nctimes.net>
Date: Tue, 27 May 2003 18:30:57 -0700
Lines: 62



Mena Ryan wrote:

> Brian Reed wrote:
> >
> > Mena Ryan wrote:
> >
>
>
> You should have appealed that, that's more of a "that professor" thing
> and not a liberal thing.  I have had some real winners for teachers but
> they didn't try to impose their beliefs.  I also went with the science
> stuff, not for that reason though.

I chose science for the most part because it was more interesting and challenging.. Also
another point I was attempting to make was that it's easy to fool a liberal professor by simply
parroting what they say in class to get a good grade. Instead of that a professor should
encourage logical debate on a subject and grade someone based on their argument and the
validity of the argument from their point of view and not the professors.

>
> A really dear friend of mine and I are so completely different when it
> comes to religion and politics that it's a miracle that we get along and
> have for 14 or 15 years.  Except for my recent outburst that the
> moderators may have removed (sorry everyone but I live in Dupage county
> IL where even I can probably get elected to Congress (eeew) just by
> claiming to be a Republican because no one would look any closer) I am
> pretty much ambivalent about this whole conservative vs. liberal thing
> provided that someone knows what they are talking about.  Try stepping
> back and don't let it get to you, it's probably not as common as you
> think.

It doesn't get to me except when I am barraged with accusations that Republicans/Conservatives
want to destroy the environment, starve the poor and give all the money to the rich. There are
balanced approaches to every problem but it seems the media and others prefer to dwell on the
extreme sides of issues to cause trouble so both sides harden their positions to the point of
nothing getting done.

>
>
> > The Wall Street Journal tends to take a balanced approach and both praises and criticizes
> > the President when appropriate. The NY Times has demonstrated no such balance.
>
> Again, take a step back and try to remember that there were 41
> presidents before Clinton.  None of these guys are there permanently (we
> hope, so far so good) and they all have their plusses and minuses.

I've been around for 10 of them so far and based on how a lot of the top media people react to
Republican presidents it's fairly damning.  It is true all presidents get bad press at some
point but it just seems to be a constant diatribe against Bush.  I can recall only one good
thing the media said about Bush 41 was when he raised taxes, including a so called luxury tax
on yachts, airplanes and other high priced items.  That produced job losses in the yacht
building companies, and the small aircraft companies in the US and the amazing result that rich
people then bought their yachts in another country.

BCR






=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: jmsatb5 at aol.com (Jms at B5)
Date: 28 May 2003 06:50:51 GMT
Lines: 41

>It doesn't get to me except when I am barraged with accusations that
>Republicans/Conservatives
>want to destroy the environment, starve the poor and give all the money to
>the rich. There are
>balanced approaches to every problem but it seems the media and others prefer
>to dwell on the
>extreme sides of issues

Okay, so that being the case, please show us evidence as to the
republicans/conservatives 

-- helping the environment

-- feeding the poor

-- not giving money to the rich.

If you say it's unfair to portray them in the former light, then the latter
light must be true, yes?  So please, fire away, show us the information to back
this up.

Because there's spin and there's spin, and cutting money to, say, an agency
that feeds people is not a matter of spin, it's x dollars this year vs. y
dollars last year.  Time after time, Bush has *said* he's for one
"compassionate" cause after another, but when it came time to allocate money or
support, was nowhere to be found...he applauds the theory but dismantles them
behind the scenes by starving them.

So please, you've made the assertion that republicans are being unfairly
tainted with these former allegations, so show me where the latter are true.  

 jms

(jmsatb5 at aol.com)
(all message content (c) 2003 by synthetic worlds, ltd., 
permission to reprint specifically denied to SFX Magazine 
and don't send me story ideas)