Re: [OT] Re:This URL crashes Konqueror.....?
On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 11:11:20 -0500
"Roberto C. Sanchez" <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 12, 2007 at 09:46:59AM +0000, Liam O'Toole wrote:
> > A tad unfair. The authors point out that the proposed escalation is
> > unpopular, that it will make a bad situation worse, and that the US
> > Congress can put a stop to it. Every authoritative opinion I've
> > read on the subject supports these points.
> Actually, they use the phrase "the vast majority" without any sort of
> substantiation. Not just that, but they refer to the new Democratic
> control of the congress as evidence that "the vast majority" wants the
> US out of Iraq. Of course, never mind the fact that the majority was
> slim, if not very slim. The of course, there is the historical trend
> of control of congress changing in the sixth year of a two-term
> president's tenure. I understand that dissatisfaction with the
> direction of the situation in Iraq is frustrating to many, but they
> give much more credit to that reason that should be due it.
Opinion polls suggest that the US public opposes escalation by a margin
of about 2 to 1. Whether that constitutes "the vast majority" is a
moot point. As for the majority in Congress, it is indeed slim, but
weren't only some of the seats up for grabs? In any event, many
Republicans are also expressing unease, to put it mildly, so I would
say that the overall majority is pretty convincing.
> They also don't cite any of these authoritative sources. I'm not
> saying that they don't exist, just that they did not cite them. The
> entire site just smacks of hyporbole.
True, but that is often the case with political sites, especially
single-issue ones. Mind you it is also true of more respected
sites also, such as online newspapers.