U.S. Rep Katherine Harris finally kills her career

The AIDS. Heh.

I didn't really want to get into the whole election debate. My entire point is that I'm skeptical of info brought by hardcore partisans.

There were definitely some shaky things that happened (in both elections). History will get the last word.

I'm fairly confident in our voting apparatus but this doesn't mean we shouldn't be vigilant and work to make things more effective and do what is possible to take partisan-types (see: Blackwell in Ohio) out of the equation.

I think we can all drink to that? ::cheers::

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by g0zen

This is fallacious logic. It doesn't matter what his agenda is as long as the information he presents is supported by the evidence.

Also, I don't know how you can mention him and O'Reilly in the same sentence and single out Palast as the bad writer.

---

So you fully support a man with a agenda who did all the investigation for you?

Wow.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Melf

http://www.electharris.org/multimedi...kickoff_11.jpg

:yuck:

---

Butterface.

http://www.democraticunderground.com...237_harris.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by avatar

So you fully support a man with a agenda who did all the investigation for you?

Wow.

---

Don't be a horse's ass. If anyone on this board has been a vocal advocate of people searching out facts for themselves, it's me. I made it very clear in my posts that it is the FACTs that are important, not the person reporting them. So, I don't give a fuck if its from Greg Palast or Ann Coulter, the facts speak for themselves. As they do here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by avatar

Butterface.

http://www.democraticunderground.com...237_harris.jpg

---

Looks like Uncle Sam is about to hit it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by g0zen

Don't be a horse's ass. If anyone on this board has been a vocal advocate of people searching out facts for themselves, it's me. I made it very clear in my posts that it is the FACTs that are important, not the person reporting them. So, I don't give a fuck if its from Greg Palast or Ann Coulter, the facts speak for themselves. As they do here.

---

http://z.about.com/d/politicalhumor/...tchup_lies.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The_Meach

The DNC conducted its own investigation into the 2004 results in Ohio. Check out the 204-page report here.

---

I almost posted this, however, Gozen being the fact digger than he is would have ignored it, as he has.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by avatar

So you fully support a man with a agenda who did all the investigation for you?

---

Maybe they have an agenda because all of the information they find is pointing them towards a particular conclusion.

Maybe not, but in any case "someone believes something and wants to inform others about it" is a terrible lazy criticism. People make arguments. If there's something wrong with what he thinks it will be there for you to find within the argument. But the mere existence of an argument is not a flaw. Save the "agenda at work!!!?!!" stuff for when... I dunno, someone tells you that cigarettes cure cancer... twice. As a criticism it only makes sense when someone is being willfully dishonest in pursuit of a goal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by icarusfall

If you want to find out how truly evil this bitch is check out Greg Palast's story on the 2000 election. It's a proven fact the 2000 election was stolen.

Greg Palast Site

---

Awesome. I can show you a story by Rush Limbaugh that proves it wasn't. Get better sources.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by g0zen

I made it very clear in my posts that it is the FACTs that are important, not the person reporting them. So, I don't give a fuck if its from Greg Palast or Ann Coulter, the facts speak for themselves.

---

Are you saying Ann Coulter is a reliable source of information?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by buttcheeks

wasn't there a porn channle called "spice" back in the late 80s early 90s?

---

When I was 12 I watched it every night all scrambled.

Reliable? No, like you, she's pretty much consistently wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by g0zen

Reliable? No, like you, she's pretty much consistently wrong.

---

97th rule of TNL: when Gozen embarasses himself he turns to personal attacks. Your point is that ideologues are trustworthy when they share your agenda. It's a really dumb point.


Can the Democrats ever lose an election without crying over it? Stay tuned.

ATTN CONSERVATIVES:

define "idealogues" pls

thx

is that even a word?

Edit: Nevermind