Comments on: Arthur! Arthur!

By: Buddy Larsen

Buddy Larsen — Sat, 30 Apr 2005 23:42:18 +0000

Torrid, actually the reverse is true. Glance at the international news, or thru the blogosphere…worldwide respect, affection, and gratitude for the USA is on the ascendant–and has been since 911 and the national response to it. You must be getting your info from some pro-UNscam, pro-DNC political-partisan sources, which spend a lot of effort trying to sell something untrue on its very face. Look at election results and GNP growth around the world–only a fool can’t see what’s happening, only partisans invested in liberalism keep trying to tell the people not to believe their own lyin’ eyes.

By: torrid

torrid — Sat, 30 Apr 2005 21:27:50 +0000

How many of Saddam’s 350,000 killed (an overblown number to begin with) occurred contemporaneously with Google’s existence? That’s a rather odd comparison to make.

Google is a worldwide service. I gather the rest of the world was somewhat interested in the revelation that the US’s talk about torture over the last 50 years is just that. As pre-emption before it, the signal has now been sent to the world that torture is no longer beyond the pale in the US. They’re Googling because they’re taking notes.

By: Kyda Sylvester

Kyda Sylvester — Wed, 27 Apr 2005 22:00:05 +0000

Yeah, I think you’re right–I vaguely remember that he, and the guy who took the test for him, were able to reapply sometime later once they demonstrated good citizenship or some such. Wonder what that cost (I think UVA got a building, or at least a wing).

By: Silicon valley Jim

Silicon valley Jim — Wed, 27 Apr 2005 21:17:47 +0000

I think he got his degree from UVA (and it cost daddy plenty).

Harvard undergraduate, UVA law school, I think.

By: Buddy Larsen

Buddy Larsen — Wed, 27 Apr 2005 20:34:40 +0000

I don’t know why NYTimes doesn’t just carry a disclaimer somewhere high above the fold: “For readers who like lies, here’s some. For those who don’t, we apologize. And whichever side you’re on, remember, you read it in the Times.”

By: Buddy Larsen

Buddy Larsen — Wed, 27 Apr 2005 20:19:28 +0000

Re: The sharp language that Instapundit used on the NYTimes, here for emphasis is his close:

“Sorry, but this is just a pathetic performance by the Times, and warrants a correction. And an apology.”

Uh, indeed.

By: dougf

dougf — Wed, 27 Apr 2005 19:31:54 +0000

Is the NY Times similar to Pravda of the former Soviet Union? No, that would not be entirely accurate–DT

I think that,in context,this comparison would be entirely unfair —- to Pravda.

By: David Thomson

David Thomson — Wed, 27 Apr 2005 19:24:17 +0000

ìAs long as you’re already p*ssed, David, you might as well read an equally–and uncharacteristically–p*ssed Instapunditî

I earlier read Glenn Reynolds rebuke of the New York Times. Please note this gentleman uses words very prudently. He is a lawyer and knows that one should be extremely careful when charging someone with lying. And yet, Instapundit accuses the New York Times reporter with ìan out-and-out lie.î This is how far the situation has deteriorated. The Times cannot be trusted. It is often today nothing more than a liberal propaganda rag. Is the NY Times similar to Pravda of the former Soviet Union? No, that would not be entirely accurate. It is, however, still too unreliable and deceitful.

By: Syl

Syl — Wed, 27 Apr 2005 18:18:36 +0000

I’m not so sure old Ted even believes what he says. Not that he doesn’t either. I mean he doesn’t really care about Abu Ghraib either way. He’s just using it to keep the minions fired up. To remind them why they should hate Bush and all Republicans.

The real sheeple in this country are the moonbat Dems. And the Dem leadership keeps feeding them the crap they want to believe.

By: Bruce W.

Bruce W. — Wed, 27 Apr 2005 18:00:20 +0000

Kcom: A little hyper-technical, are you? OK.

So it is the ACT of plagiarism that is a lie.

Hard to see how it would not be indicative of general dishonesty.