PDA

View Full Version : Scott Brown Thinks Voting Is A Liberal Conspiracy



MadMan1978
08-11-2012, 09:38 AM
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/08/10/scott-brown-thinks-voting-is-a-liberal-conspiracy/

mikesilvia
08-11-2012, 12:23 PM
Sorry Michael, but that is by far one of the worst articles I've ever read. No source regarding Brown, no quotes from Scott Brown, just pure opinion. It's shows much of what the site is about. No RSS feed, a Facebook widget that is compressed and looks like crap (top left) and more ads than content on the page just to start. Apparently, anyone can write for that site and actually sourcing the premise of your article is not required. It's reminds me of Harry Reid, "I know, just trust me. Don't worry about sources and facts."

The site could gain some credibility if it actually fixed some of the issues!

Wickabee
08-11-2012, 12:41 PM
Sorry Michael, but that is by far one of the worst articles I've ever read. No source regarding Brown, no quotes from Scott Brown, just pure opinion. It's shows much of what the site is about. No RSS feed, a Facebook widget that is compressed and looks like crap (top left) and more ads than content on the page just to start. Apparently, anyone can write for that site and actually sourcing the premise of your article is not required. It's reminds me of Harry Reid, "I know, just trust me. Don't worry about sources and facts."

The site could gain some credibility if it actually fixed some of the issues!
So whose is the giant quote in the middle of the article? As for the rest, it is no worse than any of the stuff you link up. Or does a RSS feed suddenly make something legitimate?

MadMan1978
08-11-2012, 12:48 PM
Sorry Michael, but that is by far one of the worst articles I've ever read. No source regarding Brown, no quotes from Scott Brown, just pure opinion. It's shows much of what the site is about. No RSS feed, a Facebook widget that is compressed and looks like crap (top left) and more ads than content on the page just to start. Apparently, anyone can write for that site and actually sourcing the premise of your article is not required. It's reminds me of Harry Reid, "I know, just trust me. Don't worry about sources and facts."

The site could gain some credibility if it actually fixed some of the issues!


Sorry Mike 100% disagree. the facts are there and Scott brown should be voted out!
the FACTS are there! or are you reading more tea bagger sites?
No worse then the town hall site

mikesilvia
08-11-2012, 12:57 PM
So whose is the giant quote in the middle of the article? As for the rest, it is no worse than any of the stuff you link up. Or does a RSS feed suddenly make something legitimate?

You clearly don't read any of the articles that I post up. Maybe the RSS feeds that automatically post (Michael's sites, DailyKos, etc), but not mine. I post of articles from Townhall.com, RealClear Politics, Politico, CNN and other places that actually source their facts.

No offense to ho built it, but this site Michael posts up looks like a 10 year-old built it. Sorry, but you lose credibility when 1) you site not built well and 2) riddled with more ads than content. If you can't put a little time into your website, you are probably not spending too much time editing article and researching facts. You may be the best cook in the world, but if I walk into it and their is trash on the floor and flies flying around I'm probably not going to try the food.

I saw those quotes, but didn't realize it was Scott Brown's. I thought it was Amelia Warren Tyagi, the head of Demos. I was bedazzled by the ads. It was hard to concentrate on the article.

That website reminds of the bushlies.com and other sites built by a kid in their basement and posted around the website as reputable news.

mikesilvia
08-11-2012, 01:48 PM
Addicting Info started as a resource to discredit all the lies and propaganda that the right-wing spreads. When I undertook the project I thought I would probably have about 100 different articles about a number of different myths, and people could sort through them at will.

http://www.addictinginfo.org/donate/

The about us. Terrible grammar and is a blog.

Wickabee
08-12-2012, 12:04 AM
You clearly don't read any of the articles that I post up.
You clearly have no idea.

INTIMADATOR2007
08-12-2012, 06:21 AM
July 27, 2012
By Justin "Filthy Liberal Scum" Rosario (http://www.addictinginfo.org/author/justinrosario/)

Maybe one of the writers name for the site gives us a little more info into what we are reading from the site ? And they should clear up some or a alot of the language in those articals , it might give them a little more credablity .

MadMan1978
08-12-2012, 10:00 AM
I would give this article 100% Creditability.

I did my research on the issue and Scott Brown is wrong in this case. The slant from the writer is what you dislike, like any right wing tea bagger would add their slant to their own articles. Remember all is fair in love, war and politics.

MadMan1978
08-12-2012, 11:47 AM
Scott Brown Decries Legally Mandated Voter Registration Effort, Says It’s A Conspiracy To Elect His Opponent (http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/08/08/659481/scott-brown-legally-mandated-voter-registration/)

mikesilvia
08-12-2012, 01:11 PM
Michael, I would likely side with Brown on this issue. Let's take this point:


I want every legal vote to count, but it’s outrageous to use taxpayer dollars to register welfare recipients as part of a special effort to boost one political party over another.

I'm all for providing access for all voters, but there needs to be a little initiative on the voters part. The voter needs to put 2 minutes of effort. Any person can request information by mail or register at so many locations. We make it so easy to register to vote. Democrats seem to want to almost force people to register that will vote Democrat. They don't want ALL people to register to vote, just the people likely to cote for them. Should the government be used to register likely Democrat voters and ignore likely Republican voters?

Democrats immediately push out half truths that Brown is trying to suppress the vote. Aren't your suppressing the vote if you only attempt to register people that will vote for you? Is that really the American way? That's fine if you are a private citizen, but the government led by Democrats shouldn't be only trying to register likely Democrat voters. They should be targeting ALL non-registered voters.

I have a feeling why Massachusetts is a one party system (when was the last time the state senate or house was Republican?). Once a party gets entrenched they use the government to further ensure the other party never gets a strong voice.

MadMan1978
08-12-2012, 01:17 PM
Michael, I would likely side with Brown on this issue. Let's take this point:

I'm all for providing access for all voters, but there needs to be a little initiative on the voters part. The voter needs to put 2 minutes of effort. Any person can request information by mail or register at so many locations. We make it so easy to register to vote. Democrats seem to want to almost force people to register that will vote Democrat. They don't want ALL people to register to vote, just the people likely to cote for them. Should the government be used to register likely Democrat voters and ignore likely Republican voters?

Democrats immediately push out half truths that Brown is trying to suppress the vote. Aren't your suppressing the vote if you only attempt to register people that will vote for you? Is that really the American way? That's fine if you are a private citizen, but the government led by Democrats shouldn't be only trying to register likely Democrat voters. They should be targeting ALL non-registered voters.

I have a feeling why Massachusetts is a one party system (when was the last time the state senate or house was Republican?). Once a party gets entrenched they use the government to further ensure the other party never gets a strong voice.

What half truth on this Mike? what are you trying to sell again?


Now moving forward
-Be honest
How many will register? and how many will really vote? real percentages? I would say less then 30% register and over half of them may vote.
and who says in this article or any of these articles then they are being forced to vote one way or another? really just more teapublican statements...


I really think you are over reaching here AGAIN!


but you know what we should start a XM Radio Show!

mikesilvia
08-12-2012, 01:24 PM
I stand by my points. I think this happens in Republican strongholds as well like Idaho, Texas, etc. Once a party gets entrenched, they use the government to further entrench themselves.