And when it was available, I started reading the paper it was based on. I'm only part way through that.
You see, I don't need my need my information pre-chewed, simplified, and spun for me, either by posters or journalists. I have enough respect for most of the people here that I don't think they need that either, which is why I often simply present data, articles, or even opinion pieces, with no further comment from me. Sometimes I do have comments, if I feel like it.
If that's too much work, just skip it, and move on to something else. As you say, there are often better things to do with one's time. But if that's the case, it's not helpful to ignore the information presented and still pipe in with a comment on something you know nothing about.
There are large amounts of information coming out in recent weeks that are, for the most part, being ignored by your favorite sources. You might want to spread out a bit.
Flame » in reply to And you, Tom, are the worst.
Why yes, I read the whole article.
The whole thread (47 posts)
- A couple of neocon tactics.
- But...but....it's a secret!!
- re: tactics.
- Yella dawg..............
- And you, Tom, are the worst.
- Why yes, I read the whole article.
- Tom! About the biggest raft of nonsense you've ever tried to float.
- Ya know, Bowser,
- At least
- With all due respect, Robert,
- Ya know, Bowser,
- "You see, I don't need my need my information pre-chewed, simplified, and spun for me, either by posters or journalists." Unless Berkley is mentioned. (n/t)
- Or Robert Fisk.... (n/t)
- Tom! About the biggest raft of nonsense you've ever tried to float.
- Why yes, I read the whole article.