Monday, July 25, 2011

Enquirer Promotes Tea Party Rally, Ignores Protests

The Cincinnati Enquirer has run an article about a rally that will occur. This rally is a 'Tea Part' event to support the insane efforts by the Republicans to hold a gun tot he head of Country in hopes of getting the demands they want. (Yes, like terrorists.) So, why does the Enqurier provide free promotion for a political rally for a hard right wing group, pushing an insane idea that if it happens will actually destroy the county in a matter of a few days, but when protests against Boehner happen, you don't get any promotion attention. Anti-Boehner groups are lucky to get after the fact coverage, mainly if they break the law while doing it.  Press-release journalism strikes again, this time with a political bias.

The Enqurier wasn't alone pushing this press-release event, the Dayton Daily News were suckers as well.


  1. Hmm, so in countering the insane 'effots' of the Republicans you liken them to terrorists holding a gun to the head of America?

    You do see the hilarity in that, right? Or is that beyond you and your 3rd grade grammatical skills?

  2. No, don't see it. I'm sorry typos are your biggest critique. I was hoping you'd have an opinion on what color drapes I should get...

  3. No, don't see it."


    In the same sentence as calling people 'insane' you accuse politicians across the other side of the political aisle of being terrorists. Yeah, nothing 'insane' about that.

    Good work. I think you're ready to host a prime-time show on MSNBC. You'll fit right in.

  4. When you threaten the country with economic ruin unless your demands are met, you are "like terrorists." I didn't actually call anyone a terrorist, I just pointed out they are acting similarly to them. I wish your reading comprehension matched your eye for typoes.

  5. Yeah and when I say you're sounding like a dumb little shit I'm not actually calling you a dumb little shit. Mmm hmmm.


  6. Hell, I'll call the House Republicans terrorists, that wasn't my point. I was being specific, just to counter your typo tirade. As I said previously: "when you threaten the country with economic ruin until your demands are met," then you are using the means utilized by terrorists. So where's the reach on my part?

  7. "So where's the reach on my part?"

    If you have to ask you're not playing with a full deck.

    Good day.

  8. Or more likely you think of a terrorist and only think of 9/11, where I think of the PLO and Lebanon. Also you must be fooled into thinking not raising the debt will not be catastrophic. It will and theatening to willing hurry the full faith and credit of the U.S. is treason or close to it.

  9. Oh so now not raising the debt ceiling will be catastrophic and those that oppose it are treasonous and terrorists?

    Hmm, so I guess you said the same thing about the President and EVERY SINGLE Democrat that voted against raising it in 2006 when GWB was President?

    Serious problems call for serious discussions. Not hyperbole and inflamed rhetoric. You may want to consider that in the future. Or don't and just continue to make a total ass out of yourself.

  10. Non sequitur arguments are really not my cup of tea.

    Making a protest vote against something that is going to pass is symbolic, and you know it. Trying to equate a cabal of Republicans who are holding the country hostage and putting the federal government a few days away from not being able to pay its bills is totally different. Your argument does not follow...

    The serious problem is that we have to pay our bills, but too many Republicans don't want us to pay our bills. They want to extort political gains with threat of default. Not some future default in few months or years, this is now. That's stuff countries go to war over and you want to play that game.

    If you play that game, if you want ruin the county, guess what, you are doing what terrorists want to do, so if you goal is to gut the federal government, then your biggest ally are other terrorists. Don't be surprised when someone calls you on the carpet for it.

    This serious problem existed under Bush, but your side said next to nothing after the trillions of dollars wasted on Wars and taxes cuts for the rich. Where was the crisis then?

    Look, you want to have a serious discussion, fine, BUT DON'T HOLD A GUN TO OUR HEADS! Extortion is not a discussion, it is a crime, so don't expect civility from me when you are trying to hurt me.

  11. With all due respect, you cannot see that you're part of the problem here with these words; not the solution. I can't convince you otherwise.

    Keep on keeping on though. You look *really* sane right now /s/.

    - Good day

  12. Well, you don't say what the problem is. If you think it is a problem to fight back against extortion, well then you must like appeasement more than I.


Don't be an idiot or your post will be deleted.