NationStates Jolt Archive

Armstrong Williams, who some few may remember from a few months ago when it was revealed that he was paid to say pretty things in his supposedly objective column, about the No Child Left Behind Act by the Department of Education, thus potentially breaking laws on propaganda by government agencies and certainly destroying whatever little journalistic credibility he once had, has perhaps topped himself.

In an article for Townhall (http://www.townhall.com/columnists/Armstrongwilliams/aw20050704.shtml), (which ought to be enough of a warning, but hey--they pay), Williams says the following:The government cannot raise our kids. As Abraham Lincoln observed 130 years ago: "You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift. You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong. You cannot help the wage earner by pulling down the wage payer. You cannot further the brotherhood of man by encouraging class hatred. You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich. You cannot keep out of trouble by spending more than you earn. You cannot build character and courage by taking away a man's initiative and independence. You cannot help men permanently by doing for them what they could and should do for themselves."
Only problem is that Lincoln never said it. (http://showcase.netins.net/web/creative/lincoln/speeches/cannot.htm) The link notes that "these sentiments were created by the Rev. William J. H. Boetcker, who lectured around the United States about industrial relations at the turn of the twentieth century. "

But even more to the point--and thus showing Williams' idiocy or hackitude (I can't decide which at this point--thus the poll), Lincoln has been dead for about 140 years, so he couldn't have possibly said what Armstrong said he did when Armstrong said he did.

So which is he--idiot or hack? You decide, my fellow netizens. :D

An idiot-hack child, a construction of a poisoned pool so that no information is reliable and the only thing that 'reads' is repetition. But you know my media theories and I won't be on long enough to explain them to others.

It's the 4th, shouldn't you be blowing things up for America? I'm out of my old place after I send this post. Mmmm...homeless on the 4th...there has to be something to that somewhere...

sorry, back on topic...

An idiot-hack child, a construction of a poisoned pool so that no information is reliable and the only thing that 'reads' is repetition. But you know my media theories and I won't be on long enough to explain them to others.

It's the 4th, shouldn't you be blowing things up for America? I'm out of my old place after I send this post. Mmmm...homeless on the 4th...there has to be something to that somewhere...

sorry, back on topic...
You forget--I'm three hours earlier than you now, so I've already blown shit up for America. Coming home from my brother-in-law's house was cool, though--south Florida is so flat that you can see everybody and their grandmama blowing shit up from I-95, and these people drop some serious coin on fireworks down here.

An idiot-hack child, a construction of a poisoned pool so that no information is reliable and the only thing that 'reads' is repetition. But you know my media theories and I won't be on long enough to explain them to others.

It's the 4th, shouldn't you be blowing things up for America? I'm out of my old place after I send this post. Mmmm...homeless on the 4th...there has to be something to that somewhere...

sorry, back on topic...

Yep. We need a "both" option.

EDIT: This idiot-hack child just figured out he could vote for both already. :p

Armstrong Williams, ON HIS OWN, has some good ideas. But I think him getting paid to propose an opinion was complete bullshit. The word "sellout" comes to mind.

Also...The Daily Kos (and a few other blogs) getting paid to promote Howard Dean in the 2004 primary race and disguise it as their own opinion is equally "bullshit sellout".

Armstrong Williams, ON HIS OWN, has some good ideas. But I think him getting paid to propose an opinion was complete bullshit. The word "sellout" comes to mind.

Also...The Daily Kos (and a few other blogs) getting paid to promote Howard Dean in the 2004 primary race and disguise it as their own opinion is equally "bullshit sellout".

Armstrong Williams has always been an idiot. He just got paid to be the ventriloquist's dummy, instead of a normal dummy.

As for the blogs getting paid, I didn't know that. I don't agree with that either -- one should not present something as one's own opinion when it is paid for by a campaign. There is, however, a world of difference between paying a few bloggers and subverting traditional media.

(Granted, historically, partisan/ideological newspapers were the norm.)

Armstrong Williams, ON HIS OWN, has some good ideas. But I think him getting paid to propose an opinion was complete bullshit. The word "sellout" comes to mind.

Also...The Daily Kos (and a few other blogs) getting paid to promote Howard Dean in the 2004 primary race and disguise it as their own opinion is equally "bullshit sellout".
Ummm--too bad you don't actually know what the hell you're talking about. Neither Daily Kos nor My DD was paid to blog about Dean. Jerome Armstrong of MyDD was paid as a technical consultant and stopped blogging while he worled for Dean, and Kos was paid as the same and put a disclaimer on the front page of his site, noting that he was paid for technical work.

So let's recap--Williams was paid to disguise work he was paid for as his own opinion and deliberately chose not to disclose any connection. Kos and Armstrong either disclosed their connections or stopped blogging while working for Dean. There's a huge difference between them, and if you won't admit that, then you're being intellectually dishonest and you know it.

Ummm--too bad you don't actually know what the hell you're talking about. Neither Daily Kos nor My DD was paid to blog about Dean. Jerome Armstrong of MyDD was paid as a technical consultant and stopped blogging while he worled for Dean, and Kos was paid as the same and put a disclaimer on the front page of his site, noting that he was paid for technical work.

So let's recap--Williams was paid to disguise work he was paid for as his own opinion and deliberately chose not to disclose any connection. Kos and Armstrong either disclosed their connections or stopped blogging while working for Dean. There's a huge difference between them, and if you won't admit that, then you're being intellectually dishonest and you know it.

*shakes head sadly*

Should have known. :rolleyes:

*shakes head sadly*

Should have known. :rolleyes:
Yeah--false equivalency is the right-wing's stock in trade.

Armstrong Williams has always been an idiot. He just got paid to be the house ..... oh, nevermind.
Oh.... come on... say it.... "HOUSE ******". THAT is what you were alluding to. Might as well be the politically racist fuck you are and SAY IT.

But the truth hurts don't it.
Must be nice to abstain from applying "truth" to yourself.

People like you make me fucking *sick*. You complain about "racism"...and you engage in it at the same time. Racist FUCK that you are.

Must be nice to abstain from applying "truth" to yourself.

People like you make me fucking *sick*. You complain about "racism"...and you engage in it at the same time. Racist FUCK that you are.

EDIT:

OK, I did not intend the words in a racist sense and I can defend their use, but it was a stupid choice of words and I recognize it. I was not referring to the words that Tex assumed, but I was referring to that concept. As have Malcolm X, Eldridge Cleaver, Harry Belafonte ... among many others whom I consider good company. Nonetheless, the words were ill-chosen in this context.

I have edited the original.

If anyone took honest offense, I apologize.

I still do not appreciate the flames.

3. Would you prefer the literary inacccurate use of the term Uncle Tom?
No... I would prefer that you treat everyone as individuals... as I *try* to do... while you make "HOUSE ******" references.

I'm going to sleep before I lose it watching leftist racist pieces of shit try to explain how they're NOT racist while making racist statements. :headbang:

I retracted and apologized -- although I never used the term and that was not the exact phrase to which I was referring.

I'm not going to confess to something that is bullshit.

Now, stop hijacking the thread and stop flaming. Obey the TOS.

I retracted and apologized -- although I never used the term and that was not the exact phrase to which I was referring.
Sure. Okay.

I really need to start quoting EVERYTHING so that people can't delete posts and claim some kind of feigned innocence. *puke smiley*

Sure. Okay.

I really need to start quoting EVERYTHING so that people can't delete posts and claim some kind of feigned innocence. *puke smiley*

The common phrase used by Malcolm X, Eldridge Cleaver, Harry Belafonte and many, many, many others is "House Negro" or "House Slave." Thank you very much.

I never used the phrase to which you refer. I resent the implication that I did.

In fact, I never even used the phrase "House Negro" or "House Slave" -- although I admit I intentionally referred to it. My deletions were an attempt to mollify you, not to hide anything.

Obviously, your intent is to claim offense regardless. To that you now claim I am lying. You are really pushing it.

Nonetheless, I again apologize if my choice of words offended. It was not my intent. I should have recognized my error sooner and apologized immediately.

I am also sorry this has hijacked the thread. Now as you told someone about clinical depression: "Get over it."

EDIT: I would note that what I actually said is "house ...." and it is contained in your posts. I couldn't hide what I said if I wanted to.

The common phrase used by Malcolm X, Eldridge Cleaver, Harry Belafonte and many, many, many others is "House Negro" or "House Slave." Thank you very much.

I never used the phrase to which you refer. I resent the implication that I did.

In fact, I never even used the phrase "House Negro" or "House Slave" -- although I admit I intentionally referred to it. My deletions were an attempt to mollify you, not to hide anything.

Obviously, your intent is to claim offense regardless. To that you now claim I am lying. You are really pushing it.

Nonetheless, I again apologize if my choice of words offended. It was not my intent. I should have recognized my error sooner and apologized immediately.

I am also sorry this has hijacked the thread. Now as you told someone about clinical depression: "Get over it."
My God. You really *are* a piece of work, aren't you? You sound like Robert Byrd. "I apologized... so I'm not a racist anymore!"

*puke smiley again*

I'm going to sleep...people like you give me a terminal headache.

I STRONGLY suggest that you, Texpunditistan, knock off the flaming. The Cat Tribe admits alluding to an offensive term and apologized for offending you.

Both of you can just drop it now.

Armstrong Williams, who some few may remember from a few months ago when it was revealed that he was paid to say pretty things in his supposedly objective column, about the No Child Left Behind Act by the Department of Education, thus potentially breaking laws on propaganda by government agencies and certainly destroying whatever little journalistic credibility he once had, has perhaps topped himself.

In an article for Townhall (http://www.townhall.com/columnists/Armstrongwilliams/aw20050704.shtml), (which ought to be enough of a warning, but hey--they pay), Williams says the following:
Only problem is that Lincoln never said it. (http://showcase.netins.net/web/creative/lincoln/speeches/cannot.htm) The link notes that "these sentiments were created by the Rev. William J. H. Boetcker, who lectured around the United States about industrial relations at the turn of the twentieth century. "

But even more to the point--and thus showing Williams' idiocy or hackitude (I can't decide which at this point--thus the poll), Lincoln has been dead for about 140 years, so he couldn't have possibly said what Armstrong said he did when Armstrong said he did.

So which is he--idiot or hack? You decide, my fellow netizens. :D


Both. It's one thing to talk out your ass as Forumposter or Blogger-you're not being paid, and people aren't reallly relying on you to provide accurtate, wise, or timely commentary.
It's something else to talk out your ass when you're being paid by the word, and it's allegedly non-fiction. A fothermucking bucking fastard like Williams is taking up valuable column inches that could better be filled by someone who can actually write, and actually researches what he or she writes before setting it to post.

Both. It's one thing to talk out your ass as Forumposter or Blogger-you're not being paid, and people aren't reallly relying on you to provide accurtate, wise, or timely commentary.
It's something else to talk out your ass when you're being paid by the word, and it's allegedly non-fiction. A fothermucking bucking fastard like Williams is taking up valuable column inches that could better be filled by someone who can actually write, and actually researches what he or she writes before setting it to post.

Exactically!

Sure. Okay.

I really need to start quoting EVERYTHING so that people can't delete posts and claim some kind of feigned innocence. *puke smiley*

Thanks for quotes Tex. I can't say it's a surprise.