From: "Mark" 

I confess, my keyboard was flying loosely last night! Sorry if I was too
strident. I'm sure there is a wide variety of opinions among our troops as
there should be. As I recall though, the stats show a very healthy
percentage do vote Rep.

"Robert G Lewis"  wrote in message
news:454ccf3e{at}w3.nls.net...
> Mark seems to do that with everything he disagrees with .
>
>
> "Rich Gauszka"  wrote in message
> news:454cc02d$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>>I don't disagree with that. My disagreement with Mark was the automatic
>>toss out of the entire story with the MSM excuse equating it to leftist
>>talking points.
>>
>> Perhaps the Army has changed since my day but to think  ( as many neocons
>> seem to do ) that grunts are automatically in lock step with the
>> decisions of their  officers/CIC is absurd.  < never could keep
in step >
>>
>>
>> "Robert G Lewis"  wrote in message
>> news:454cbbd4{at}w3.nls.net...
>>> Merely pointing out that Gannet owns the Times.
>>>
>>> I think that when push comes to shove the owner will control the
>>> product. Editors who go against the orders of the owners won't remain
>>> long. I do not know if that is the case here or not. I really doubt the
>>> owner's are pushing that story .
>>>
>>> I subscribed to the Marine Times for several years, Overall I thought it
>>> was a good publication and would trust any of the Military times far
>>> more than Mark's MSM on military related news.
>>>
>>> Bob Lewis
>>> "Rich Gauszka"  wrote in message
>>> news:454ca760$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>>>> The editor of the Military Times is Robert Hodierne
>>>>
>>>>
http://www.asbpe.org/asbpeCF/archives_members_only/2003/07082003army_times
.htm
>>>> If you start editing your newspaper on the basis of what
everybody who
>>>> is affected by the story wants published or not published,
you're in an
>>>> untenable situation. We understood that a picture like that could
>>>> increase the grief of the family but there was a larger
issue at stake:
>>>> portraying war and all of its horror. If you're going to
cover an event
>>>> and tell the truth, you have to tell the good and bad.
Pictures are one
>>>> way you tell stories.
>>>>
>>>> Do you think ethics differ for trade journalism vs. consumer
>>>> journalism?
>>>>
>>>> Hodierne: If you want to be in the publishing business in the long
>>>> haul, you will be stronger if you are perceived as honest,
independent,
>>>> fair and accurate. Sometimes that means you're going to
write stories
>>>> that will aggravate important people in your
constituencies. You have
>>>> to be prepared to weather that. If you're in an insurance trade, and
>>>> you find out one company has been doing shady accounting,
you need to
>>>> write about it. Become indispensable as the honest broker in your
>>>> field. If you find some insurance company that does something
>>>> exemplary, it has more impact if you write critically versus only
>>>> flattering pieces.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.hodierne.com/
>>>>
>>>> "Robert G Lewis" 
wrote in message
>>>> news:454c2899$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>>>>> They do own the Army, Navy, Marine, and Air Force Times.
>>>>>
>>>>> "Rich Gauszka" 
wrote in message
>>>>> news:454c2414$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>>>>>> So that's the spin you are giving it - Gannett
controls editorials
>>>>>> for the military times?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Mark"  wrote in message
>>>>>> news:454c1fb4$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Rich Gauszka"
 wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:454c1c1e$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>>>>>>>> Ah Yes - now that the Military Times
opposes Bush in one area it is
>>>>>>>> a mish-mosh of leftist talking points - GMAB
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No Rich, not at all. I don't care what Gannett
says about
>>>>>>> anything --  favoring my point of view or not.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It's called reality Mark
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Gannett News Service is reality to you? Not to
me. >>>>>> was, and remains, that leftists often point to
"military"
>>>>>>> publications with an intent to mislead their
audience into believing
>>>>>>> that same publications are somehow related to the
>>>>>>> government/military when they know that is so
much bullshit>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Will the Bush adherents  now ask for a
paper burning at all
>>>>>>>> military bases?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I doubt it, Bush adherents are for capitalism,
Gannett publishes as
>>>>>>> a capitalist company to make a profit, why
would anyone for freedom
>>>>>>> want to burn their papers? Rather, let them do
their thing, only a
>>>>>>> fool would not be able to see through a biased
piece. >>>>>> consistently disappointed in elections because
they want so badly to
>>>>>>> believe what the papers tell them, even as
they know in their heart
>>>>>>> of hearts that what they're reading is false>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5