On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 14:19:06 -0400, George wrote:

> blake murphy wrote:
>> On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 08:52:23 -0400, George wrote:
>>
>>> blake murphy wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 21 Jun 2009 16:21:39 -0500, Gregory Morrow wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> blake murphy wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, 19 Jun 2009 11:08:57 -0500, Michel Boucher wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> blake murphy > wrote in
>>>>>>> :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> jeez, i thought all teachers were democrat stooges. at least,
>>>>>>>> that's what the republicans tell me.
>>>>>>> You have to stop watching PinheadTV, aka Faux News.
>>>>>> sometimes i thank god i don't have cable.
>>>>> Nothing "pinhead" about Fox News, blake, they regularly have libs like
>>>>> Bernie Sanders, Maxine Waters, NPR commentators, Dem strategists, etc. In
>>>>> fact during the last POTUS election they had a livelier mix of commentary
>>>>> and contributers than anyone else...
>>>>>
>>>>> Fox is *just* another news source,
>>>> fox news is a *de facto* arm of the republican party, not a news source,
>>>> and people like glen beck and bill o'reilly are most certainly pinheads,
>>>> not that i used that term. and liberals on teir shows are there to be
>>>> yelled at.
>>>>
>>>>> behooves everyone to make sure they get
>>>>> nooze from a variety of sources, like I do...I get nooze from left to right,
>>>>> everything from Radio Havana and _Granma_ (Cuban Communist Paper) and Air
>>>>> America right over to _Commentary_ and townhall.com and ...best to take it
>>>>> all with a grain of salt, so read more, try to find reputable sources so's
>>>>> you can have an informed opinion about thangs.
>>>>>
>>>>> [It's silly to blast Fox News, just change the channel if it bothers you so
>>>>> much. And BTW Fox New's ratings are BLASTING the other cable channel
>>>>> offerings, they are a - laffin' all the way to the bank...]
>>>> as a matter of fact, i didn't mention fox news. as a matter of fact, i
>>>> don't get any of my news from t.v., relying mostly on blogs and other web
>>>> sites.
>>>>> If you are wondering why I'm so generally well-informed, that's why...
>>>>>
>>>>> :-)
>>>> um, o.k.
>>>>
>>>> blake
>>> Naw, judging by your typical responses you are clearly a heavy kool-aid
>>> drinker. So everything outside of the "blue zone" is clearly wrong or an
>>> attack that must be immediately addressed.
>>
>> um, i addressed the facts. you just dismissed me as a kool-aid user. who
>> is being honest in their argument?
>>
>> blake
>
> I didn't dismiss you. My comment was no different than "he is an Apple
> fan" or "he is a Red Sox fan" and was simply based on observation.
> Folks who get obsessed tend to think everything is an attack and there
> is never any grey area.

bullshit. 'kool-aid drinker' is not neutral, it's an *ad hominem*. but if
you don't have the facts, that's what you are reduced to arguing.

blake