I was misled

A Muzi said:

Now that all our respective positions are hardened and the
air is poisoned, can we return to bicycles?

Bicycles have no political consistency - they are constantly
leaning to the left, then to the right, back to the left...

--
Tom Sherman – Quad City Area

On Sat, 26 Jun 2004 12:54:51 GMT, "Kyle.B.H" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Tim McNamara said:

Quoted message said:

On Fri, 25 Jun 2004 21:50:07 GMT, "Kyle.B.H"
<[email hidden]> wrote:

>I've seen this type of behavior before (Walter Cronkite
>comes to mind)... an aging man, respected in his field,
>uses his name as a soapbox on which to subject those
>who are unfortunate enough to be listening to his
>highbrow, gray-haired wisdom. Its too bad, really.
>
>Well, at least any tinge of guilt I felt for
>photocopying "The Bicycle Wheel" from my local library
>is now gone... (and I may stop greasing my tapers).
>
>Kyle
>
>
><[email hidden]> wrote in message
>"]news:[email hidden]...
>> daily.misleader.orgctt.aspOpen ↗
>>
>> Jobst Brandt [email hidden]
>

Dear Kyle,

I've seen this type of behavior before, too.

You're not saying, of course, that you feel entitled to
cheat someone who disagrees with you.

You're just saying that it's a relief to learn that you
disagree with someone you cheated.

It's too bad, really.

That is your best synopsis ever, Carl.

I disagree. Of all people, I would expect Carl to excel in
reading comprehension.

Mr. Fogel makes no mention of the meat of my post, but just
snipes at my tongue-in-cheek attempt at humor. While
photocopying a portion of a book would perhaps
constitute a violation of copyright law, _cheating_
implies that I denied Mr. Brandt income, which is not
the case.

And that's not his most egregious error. The point of my
post had nothing to do with whether or not I disagree with
Jobst's post. In fact I never mentioned politics or
referred to his linked story. My distaste for his post
stems from disappoinment based upon (misguided)
expectations. I have a great deal of respect for Jobst. As
a fellow engineer, I admire his reliance on scientific
analysis, attention to detail, and I envy the fact that he
has been able to spend much of his career contributing to
the sport he loves. As a budding cyclist/mechanic, I place
him on the very pedestal he now uses as a soapbox. When
last near Palo Alto, I stopped downtown for the sole
purpose of checking out the big pictures that I had read
were hanging in Palo Alto Cycles. So when Jobst uses his
position within this group to incite another endless
political thread, it takes him down a few notches in my
view. He's entitled to do so, but I would expect one who
adheres to - and demands from other posters of this group -
the application of scientific rigor to the simplest of
observations, to have a more legitimate source than
misleader.org! If I were to post a link to a similarly
hysterical right-wing site, most readers of this board
wouldn't even let their mice hover over the link, much let
it form the basis of serious discussion. So just because
Jobst can accurately identify and describe fretting, I
don't give him a pass on gratuitous pandering to an
overwhelmingly like-minded audience.

Dear Kyle,

You made a new copy of Jobst's book. Who'd you pay for it?

Carl Fogel

"Kyle.B.H" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:j61Dc.94357$2i5.90766@attbi_s52...

Quoted message said:

I've seen this type of behavior before (Walter Cronkite
comes to mind)... an aging man, respected in his field,
uses his name as a soapbox on which to subject those who
are unfortunate enough to be listening to his highbrow,
gray-haired wisdom. Its too bad, really.

I don't know the significance of "aging" (aren't we all?) or
"gray-haired", except as a gratuitous pot shot, but, if your
big fear is that Jobst will abuse his automatic credibility
with this audience, you must be new here.

"Kyle.B.H" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

If I were to post a link to a similarly hysterical right-
wing site, most readers of this board wouldn't even let
their mice hover over the link, much let it form the basis
of serious discussion.

Hasn't stopped Mark.

Quoted message said:

So just because Jobst can accurately identify and describe
fretting, I don't give him a pass on gratuitous pandering
to an overwhelmingly like-minded audience.

"Like-minded" audience? Now, I know you haven't been
here long...

A Muzi said:

Weisse Luft said:

From the NYT, no less.
nytimes.com25TERR.htmlOpen ↗

I read their rabid flaming left editorial page every
morning but I'll be damned if I sign up for their spam.

Isn't it interesting, Andrew, that you see the NYT as rabid
leftists and I see them as part of the vast right wing
conspiracy. Either you or I are a whacko at the extremes of
political thought (or perhaps both).

I too will not register with the NYT, the Washington Post or
any other newspaper that tries to control access to its
content for the purpose of gathering information about me
and/or sending me unsolicited e-mail. All of MoveOn.org's
crapola ends up in my spam filter for that very reason. I
want access to information, but the price of having to give
private data about myself and to get their marketing BS in
my Inbox is just too high.

garmonboezia cthvlhv@r'lyeh.arg said:

"Kyle.B.H" <[email hidden]> wrote in
news:j61Dc.94357$2i5.90766@attbi_s52:

Quoted message said:

Well, at least any tinge of guilt I felt for photocopying
"The Bicycle Wheel" from my local library is now gone...
(and I may stop greasing my tapers).

Kyle

My tapirs are ALWAYS well greased before I hitch them to
my coach and six.

Greasing tapirs is illegal in 12 nations under OAS treaties
and in 19 states. You don't want to be admitting such
behavior on Usenet!

Tim McNamara said:

A Muzi said:

Weisse Luft said:

From the NYT, no less.
nytimes.com25TERR.htmlOpen ↗

I read their rabid flaming left editorial page every
morning but I'll be damned if I sign up for their spam.

Isn't it interesting, Andrew, that you see the NYT as rabid
leftists and I see them as part of the vast right wing
conspiracy. Either you or I are a whacko at the extremes of
political thought (or perhaps both).

I too will not register with the NYT, the Washington Post
or any other newspaper that tries to control access to its
content for the purpose of gathering information about me
and/or sending me unsolicited e-mail. All of MoveOn.org's
crapola ends up in my spam filter for that very reason. I
want access to information, but the price of having to give
private data about myself and to get their marketing BS in
my Inbox is just too high.

Dear Tim,

Can you think of any specific issue on which the New York
Times takes a right-wing position? That is, are there any
editorials that you would consider something other than
left-wing?

Since you won't register to read such newspapers online, you
may not be quite as familiar with them as you think. Do you
have a print subscription, or do you read the NYT at the
library, or what?

Carl Fogel

Tim McNamara said:

garmonboezia cthvlhv@r'lyeh.arg said:

"Kyle.B.H" <[email hidden]> wrote in
news:j61Dc.94357$2i5.90766@attbi_s52:

Quoted message said:

Well, at least any tinge of guilt I felt for
photocopying "The Bicycle Wheel" from my local library
is now gone... (and I may stop greasing my tapers).

Kyle

My tapirs are ALWAYS well greased before I hitch them to
my coach and six.

Greasing tapirs is illegal in 12 nations under OAS treaties
and in 19 states. You don't want to be admitting such
behavior on Usenet!

Dear Tim,

I must protest!

Some ill-informed nations and a few states bent upon folly
may have banded together to stamp out an event that in no
way harms the tapirs (who give every sign of enjoyment), but
this does not mean that the rest of us should give up our
greased-tapir contests where pigs are not readily available.

Indeed, only by greasing the tapir can the sport be called
humane, since grease reduces the abrasions on both
contestants and gives the tapir a chance to escape, while
mud alone is proven to be an insufficient lubricant when the
tapir falls into the clutches of a truly desperate child in
our modern answer to the Roman Colosseum.

Speaking of which, the Colorado State Fair, with its pig
races, is just around the corner.

Time to taper off,

Carl Fogel

G.T. said:

A Muzi said:

I read their rabid flaming left editorial page every
morning but I'll be damned if I sign up for their spam.

Man, you must be one helluva reactionary if you're calling
the NYT left.

Ladies and gentlement of the jury, I rest my case... ;-)

Mark Hickey Habanero Cycles habcycles.comhabcycles.comOpen ↗ Home of
the $695 ti frame

Quoted message said:

Tim McNamara said:

A Muzi said:

Weisse Luft wrote:

>From the NYT, no less.
>nytimes.com25TERR.htmlOpen ↗

I read their rabid flaming left editorial page every
morning but I'll be damned if I sign up for their spam.

Isn't it interesting, Andrew, that you see the NYT as
rabid leftists and I see them as part of the vast right
wing conspiracy. Either you or I are a whacko at the
extremes of political thought (or perhaps both).

I too will not register with the NYT, the Washington Post
or any other newspaper that tries to control access to its
content for the purpose of gathering information about me
and/or sending me unsolicited e-mail. All of MoveOn.org's
crapola ends up in my spam filter for that very reason. I
want access to information, but the price of having to
give private data about myself and to get their marketing
BS in my Inbox is just too high.

Dear Tim,

Can you think of any specific issue on which the New York
Times takes a right-wing position? That is, are there any
editorials that you would consider something other than
left-wing?

Since you won't register to read such newspapers online,
you may not be quite as familiar with them as you think.
Do you have a print subscription, or do you read the NYT
at the library, or what?

Carl Fogel

I'll answer since I have a NYT subscription and actually
read the paper. They print Willian Safire and David Brooks
on the editorial page on a regular basis. Both regularly
take hard right-wing positions. Safire was a Nixon speech
writer and occasionally takes the liberty of speaking for
Nixon's ghost. Yes of course there is plenty of liberal
opinion that more than balances this but give them credit
for presenting the conservative side.

Bret

Tim McNamara said:

A Muzi said:

Weisse Luft said:

From the NYT, no less.
nytimes.com25TERR.htmlOpen ↗

I read their rabid flaming left editorial page every
morning but I'll be damned if I sign up for their spam.

Isn't it interesting, Andrew, that you see the NYT as rabid
leftists and I see them as part of the vast right wing
conspiracy. Either you or I are a whacko at the extremes of
political thought (or perhaps both).

If you want to figure it out, find out where they published
the revelation that Russian President Putin warned the US in
the days after 9/11 that they had credible evidence that
Iraq was planning to attack the US. A huge, huge news story
by any account.

Front page headlines surely? Nope.

OK, at least front page, right? Nope.

Buried at the bottom of an inside page.

Mark Hickey Habanero Cycles habcycles.comhabcycles.comOpen ↗ Home of
the $695 ti frame

Peter Cole said:

"Kyle.B.H" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

If I were to post a link to a similarly hysterical right-
wing site, most readers of this board wouldn't even let
their mice hover over the link, much let it form the
basis of serious discussion.

Hasn't stopped Mark.

I will give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that's a
reference to the fact I've been willing to look at
"hysterical left-wing sites".

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

So just because Jobst can accurately identify and
describe fretting, I don't give him a pass on gratuitous
pandering to an overwhelmingly like-minded audience.

"Like-minded" audience? Now, I know you haven't been
here long...

I dunno - I'd guess the ratio at about 20 - 30 - 50 (right,
center, left). Of course, some are so far left they'd break
the teeter totter if we tried to figure out a "centrist
r.b.X. political position"... ). ;-)

Mark Hickey Habanero Cycles habcycles.comhabcycles.comOpen ↗ Home of
the $695 ti frame

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by Jp
Weisse Luft <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Go back to school, the adults are in charge.

Yeah, Cheney showed us from the floor of the Senate what it
means to have adults in charge.

JP

How far down do you want to dig? Sen. Lehey was bantering tripe about the VP to the point of fustration. Patty-boy was asking for it and many thought he got was was coming to him.

But rip things out of context and you can make any story fit your mypoic views.

Bret Wade said:

Quoted message said:

Tim McNamara said:

A Muzi <[email hidden]> writes:

>Weisse Luft wrote:
>
>>From the NYT, no less.
>>nytimes.com25TERR.htmlOpen ↗
>
>I read their rabid flaming left editorial page every
>morning but I'll be damned if I sign up for their spam.

Isn't it interesting, Andrew, that you see the NYT as
rabid leftists and I see them as part of the vast right
wing conspiracy. Either you or I are a whacko at the
extremes of political thought (or perhaps both).

I too will not register with the NYT, the Washington Post
or any other newspaper that tries to control access to
its content for the purpose of gathering information
about me and/or sending me unsolicited e-mail. All of
MoveOn.org's crapola ends up in my spam filter for that
very reason. I want access to information, but the price
of having to give private data about myself and to get
their marketing BS in my Inbox is just too high.

Dear Tim,

Can you think of any specific issue on which the New York
Times takes a right-wing position? That is, are there any
editorials that you would consider something other than
left-wing?

Since you won't register to read such newspapers online,
you may not be quite as familiar with them as you think.
Do you have a print subscription, or do you read the NYT
at the library, or what?

Carl Fogel

I'll answer since I have a NYT subscription and actually
read the paper. They print Willian Safire and David Brooks
on the editorial page on a regular basis. Both regularly
take hard right-wing positions. Safire was a Nixon speech
writer and occasionally takes the liberty of speaking for
Nixon's ghost. Yes of course there is plenty of liberal
opinion that more than balances this but give them credit
for presenting the conservative side.

Bret

Dear Bret,

I think that we're missing each other here.

Yes, as you point out, the New York Times prints some
columnists with right-wing opinions, just as the Wall Street
Journal runs Albert Hunt's column fairly often.

These are opposing points of view. Both newspapers print
letters to the editor, too, that disagree with the editorial
positions.

What I meant was the editorials that state the New York
Times position on issues. These are the unsigned left-hand
columns in traditional newspapers (same for the WSJ).

Does the New York Times editorial board (as opposed to their
syndicated columnists) take any positions that strike you as
right-wing?

Carl Fogel

Quoted message said:

Bret Wade said:

Quoted message said:

On Sat, 26 Jun 2004 14:54:03 -0500, Tim McNamara
<[email hidden]> wrote:

>A Muzi <[email hidden]> writes:
>
>
>
>>Weisse Luft wrote:
>>
>>>From the NYT, no less.
>>
>>>nytimes.com25TERR.htmlOpen ↗
>>
>>I read their rabid flaming left editorial page every
>>morning but I'll be damned if I sign up for their spam.
>
>Isn't it interesting, Andrew, that you see the NYT as
>rabid leftists and I see them as part of the vast right
>wing conspiracy. Either you or I are a whacko at the
>extremes of political thought (or perhaps both).
>
>I too will not register with the NYT, the Washington
>Post or any other newspaper that tries to control access
>to its content for the purpose of gathering information
>about me and/or sending me unsolicited e-mail. All of
>MoveOn.org's crapola ends up in my spam filter for that
>very reason. I want access to information, but the price
>of having to give private data about myself and to get
>their marketing BS in my Inbox is just too high.

Dear Tim,

Can you think of any specific issue on which the New York
Times takes a right-wing position? That is, are there any
editorials that you would consider something other than
left-wing?

Since you won't register to read such newspapers online,
you may not be quite as familiar with them as you think.
Do you have a print subscription, or do you read the NYT
at the library, or what?

Carl Fogel

I'll answer since I have a NYT subscription and actually
read the paper. They print Willian Safire and David Brooks
on the editorial page on a regular basis. Both regularly
take hard right-wing positions. Safire was a Nixon speech
writer and occasionally takes the liberty of speaking for
Nixon's ghost. Yes of course there is plenty of liberal
opinion that more than balances this but give them credit
for presenting the conservative side.

Bret

Dear Bret,

I think that we're missing each other here.

Yes, as you point out, the New York Times prints some
columnists with right-wing opinions, just as the Wall
Street Journal runs Albert Hunt's column fairly often.

These are opposing points of view. Both newspapers print
letters to the editor, too, that disagree with the
editorial positions.

What I meant was the editorials that state the New York
Times position on issues. These are the unsigned left-hand
columns in traditional newspapers (same for the WSJ).

Does the New York Times editorial board (as opposed to
their syndicated columnists) take any positions that
strike you as right-wing?

Carl Fogel

Yes, their decision to print Willian Safire and David
Brooks. I don't disagree with this policy. Many papers find
the shrillest voice possible when they print dissenting
opinions. The Boulder Daily Camera prints Mona Charen.
That's not the case with Safire and Brooks.

Bret

Tim McNamara said:

I too will not register with the NYT, the Washington Post
or any other newspaper that tries to control access to its
content for the purpose of gathering information about me
and/or sending me unsolicited e-mail. All of MoveOn.org's
crapola ends up in my spam filter for that very reason. I
want access to information, but the price of having to
give private data about myself and to get their marketing
BS in my Inbox is just too high.

You can avoid spam by getting a hotmail address and
giving that to the NY Times. Their registration form
doesn't ask for your name, street address, or phone
number. It asks a few demographic questions, but I don't
see that as a big deal.

Tom Ace

Quoted message said:

Can you think of any specific issue on which the New York
Times takes a right-wing position? That is, are there any
editorials that you would consider something other than
left-wing?

Since you won't register to read such newspapers online,
you may not be quite as familiar with them as you think.
Do you have a print subscription, or do you read the NYT
at the library, or what?

Fortunately the New York Times is readily available around
the country on paper. In general I find the editorial policy
of the NYT to be right-leaning and that they- like the rest
of the major media in the United States- have given Bushco a
free pass to the abuse of power without challenge.

Bret Wade said:

They print Willian Safire and David Brooks on the
editorial page on a regular basis. Both regularly take
hard right-wing positions.

I'm not a fan of Safire, but I think that Brooks is one of
the more rational rightwing editorialists. He at least seems
to think before he writes, and appears to be able to indulge
in actual critical thought. I'm surprised he gets published,
in fact, as it is usually the reactionaries (of either
stripe) that get column inches because they excite a
response in the readership. Rationality and intelligence
does not, and hence is given short shrift in the media.

Mark Hickey said:

Tim McNamara said:

A Muzi said:

Weisse Luft wrote:
> From the NYT, no less.
> nytimes.com25TERR.htmlOpen ↗

I read their rabid flaming left editorial page every
morning but I'll be damned if I sign up for their spam.

Isn't it interesting, Andrew, that you see the NYT as
rabid leftists and I see them as part of the vast right
wing conspiracy. Either you or I are a whacko at the
extremes of political thought (or perhaps both).

If you want to figure it out, find out where they
published the revelation that Russian President Putin
warned the US in the days after 9/11 that they had
credible evidence that Iraq was planning to attack the US.
A huge, huge news story by any account.

Which of course is utterly at odds with Russia's and Putin's
opposition to pre-emptive invasion, and thus itself makes no
sense and calls the veracity of this claim into question.

I am amazed at how the Bush Adminstration and its apologists
continue to grasp at straws to support the illusion of a
working relationship between Iraq and Al Qaeda. It wasn't
there, which makes perfect sense when one considers the
psychology of Saddam Hussein- there is no way in heck that
he was going to permit anyone to have power in his country
other than himself and those loyal to him. That especially
includes Al Qaeda, whom Hussein could not and would not have
trusted for a moment- especially when his own military power
was mostly illusory.

The connection between Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein was in
the fevered imagination of Paul Wolfowitz and the paranoid
delusions of Donald Rumsfeld. 9/11 was merely the excuse for
invasion; without 9/11 either another excuse would have had
to have been fabricated or there would have been no invasion
to reclaim America's tarnished miliatary image resulting
from the "ragged ending" of the Gulf War. It's a good thing
for Rummie and Wolfie that this war has gone so much better.

Your country is being run by idiots, psychopaths and
paranoiacs who have succeeded in smashing the federal
budget, running up the highest deficits in history, and
overstretching our defense so much that they have instituted
de facto conscription. They have declared themselves above
the law and obfuscate and frustrate nearly all attempts at
oversight and scrutiny as provided for in the Constitution.
They have all but repealed the Bill of Rights, except for
the 2nd Amendment, and returned us 50 years into our past
into the mentality of the McCarthy era. They have pursued
policies that harm many and benefit a select few elites.
They have made concerted effort to stifle dissent in the
media and among Congress members. Do you find this even
remotely acceptable?

As I've said before, never in my 44.66 years have I been
afraid of my own government- even during the darkness of the
Reagan years. I am now. This administration is utterly
dangerous and destructive, and if left unchecked will
continue to dismantle the democracy that so many Americans
have died to defend.

Tom Ace said:

Tim McNamara said:

I too will not register with the NYT, the Washington Post
or any other newspaper that tries to control access to
its content for the purpose of gathering information
about me and/or sending me unsolicited e-mail. All of
MoveOn.org's crapola ends up in my spam filter for that
very reason. I want access to information, but the price
of having to give private data about myself and to get
their marketing BS in my Inbox is just too high.

You can avoid spam by getting a hotmail address and
giving that to the NY Times. Their registration form
doesn't ask for your name, street address, or phone
number. It asks a few demographic questions, but I don't
see that as a big deal.

It's a matter of principle. Access to information should not
be conditional, controlled or fettered.