scout

Person #4779: 24 Posts

Recommended: 10 times

Posts   |   Comments

  1. Maybe it's repetative (0 Replies)

    because the problems they are concerned with haven’t gone away? What difference does it make to you if they don’t make more random comments? They’re obliviously most concerned about these care issues, which are thorny long term, & I’m guessing some may have a personal connection to. You don’t have to read it. One can’t be in depth on everything, and if no one was ultra-focused on anything nothing would be improved. There’s no litmus test you have to make a minimum # of comments on random subjects.

    scout   @   May 2, 2013 at 00:16 EST

  2. have to disagree (1 Reply)

    This is a huge story and it’s only been a little over a week. Moreover, the fog of battle, fear and relief is just lifting. So, now really is the time when a we could get away from the “pap”, as you say, and have a sober analysis and recounting of what happened. I agree that the evidence-free spoutings of yahoo congresspeople are not deserving of the front page, but the lengthy and very detailed account of these events from the Sunday paper is a must-read and good reporting- especially after the various stories had changed over the week. It was a great example of why we do still need newspapers.

    scout   @   Apr 29, 2013 at 21:15 EST

  3. Did somebody say... (0 Replies)

    ….drunk and ignorant?

    You really should stop digging, Brad Marston of FourTier Strategies.

    scout   @   Apr 25, 2013 at 00:12 EST

  4. Sorry, Brad Marston (0 Replies)

    of Fourtier Strategies, that you don’t find these fields fertile. Perhaps the slime you laid down has left them fallow?

    As stated above, you’re probably wise to quit at this point. But, if you ever want to share these (imaginary?) “reports” that you think would have justified asking “why as a trained Navy Seal Gomez watched other spectators rush to help the bombing victims and didn’t do the same”…I’m all ears.

    scout   @   Apr 24, 2013 at 23:29 EST

  5. of course (0 Replies)

    You contacted Mr. Gomez before you implied he was a physical coward and/or couldn’t be bothered to help bombing victims right in front of him?

    Brad, apparently at some point people paid you to give advice in a campaign (amazing as that seems). Let me give you some free…stop digging.

    scout   @   Apr 24, 2013 at 23:00 EST

  6. oh, ok (1 Reply)

    Some guy on twitter left you no choice but to try to make political hay out of this awful tragedy as the smoke was still clearing by launching a shockingly ugly personal attack on Mr. Gomez, based on nothing (what “reports” would have possibly made what you wrote o?). Got it.

    scout   @   Apr 24, 2013 at 22:55 EST

  7. wow (1 Reply)

    That was incredibly low, both in substance and timing. After the fact, apologizing was the of course right thing to do, and also in your self-interest as no doubt this attack was backfiring badly. Net-net, you’re still left well within the slime zone.

    You’ve actually left me a little stunned at your gall that you could say such a thing about Gomez in the aftermath of the bombing, and then a few days later try to get on a high horse and rebuke your fellow repubs for unfair attacks on your candidate and the proverbial circular firing squad.

    Thank you for the quick reply though. I was curious.

    scout   @   Apr 24, 2013 at 21:58 EST

  8. Does anyone know... (2 Replies)

    …what Brad Marston (of Fourtier Strategies) said on Twitter about the post Marathon bombing actions of Gabriel Gomez that caused Marston to issue this apology? Marston has always seemed slimy, but this must have been really low.

    And from the RMG comic relief department, old friend John Howard has endorsed Steve Lynch…because he thinks Lynch may not be as pro-SSM as he says he is and might just have the maverick streak to stand up to the evil transhumanists (natch).

    scout   @   Apr 24, 2013 at 20:13 EST

  9. CNN (0 Replies)

    said they had two sources, not sure about all the other outlets. CNN and the Globe both said is was a source that had been accurate.

    It was a couple hours confusion that got corrected in an incredibly fast moving, high interest and intense story.

    Just saying, the media are guilty of many sins- at least this one was an honest mistake that got corrected reasonably fast. The media often errs by giving the public too little information, I’d rather they err by giving too much (even bad info tells you something).

    scout   @   Apr 19, 2013 at 00:01 EST

  10. very very different (0 Replies)

    The run up to the war in Iraq was a many months long process of a nuanced situation where there was plenty of time for analysis & critical thinking (which the media failed miserably at). Moreover, there was plenty of accurate info available but, for the most part (McClatchy newspaper excepted), the media just chose not to report it.

    This is a couple of hours with a black and white situation- person arrested or not. I’m not saying this was great reporting, but the person(s) to blame are more the unnamed official(s) who spread this bad info far and wide.

    One way these two situations are similar is that it shows the need for the media to take back some power, and show officials (or non-officials) that if they feed info that turns out to be blatantly wrong then promises of anonymity are null and void.

    scout   @   Apr 17, 2013 at 22:12 EST

  11. can't really blame the media (3 Replies)

    If someone in authority tells them something as black and white (and newsworthy) as whether a person has been arrested, it’s hard to see how they can not report it. The person to blame in this federal official running through his/her rolodex telling every reporter in it this bad information. Reporters should protect their sources, but when they are so wrong as in this case (and had to have know their info was not really 100%), it would be very appropriate to out them. This official was really talking out of their a$$, and the public (as well as future unsuspecting reporters) deserves to know who it was.

    scout   @   Apr 17, 2013 at 20:19 EST

  12. apples and steak (0 Replies)

    Actually telling a group that they are banned and not scheduling a meeting at any given time are obviously two totally different things.

    scout   @   Apr 13, 2013 at 20:00 EST

  13. barf (0 Replies)

    n/t

    scout   @   Apr 10, 2013 at 23:05 EST

  14. brings to mind (1 Reply)

    David Frum’s too true comment that repub pols fear their base, while dem pols hate theirs. Obviously, actually liking and being inspired by the base would be ideal, but a little more fear on the dem side would be an improvement from the current situation.

    scout   @   Apr 10, 2013 at 22:06 EST

  15. ACORN fever (0 Replies)

    The right-wing media has been blaring made up stories of vote fraud bogeymen for so long and so hard that, to the unfortunate minds that are immersed in this stuff, the mere act of encouraging people to vote is highly suspicious.

    scout   @   Apr 10, 2013 at 20:18 EST

  16. correction (0 Replies)

    overseas, not oversees

    scout   @   Apr 8, 2013 at 23:30 EST

  17. Lynch struggled (1 Reply)

    His answer to a Markey comment about Lynch’s vote in favor of banning woman soldiers from accessing reproductive medical service on oversees military bases was an all-time bad answer- terribly muddled, verging on nonsensical. It seemed like he was taken by surprise. Meanwhile, Lynch also seemed unprepared for the totally predictable question about his recent evolution on gay rights, and lamely pretended not to understand the question.

    Markey was strong on a question about DOMA (he was one of only 62 house members to vote against it in the mid 90′s), but otherwise did tend to drone on. That’s something he should work on, else it will really get out of hand if/when he joins the Senate- where that condition is epidemic.

    scout   @   Apr 8, 2013 at 23:27 EST

  18. side note (1 Reply)

    Like what would flow through the Keystone pipeline, what has been flowing out of the pipeline in Arkansas is technically not oil.

    This is important because it lets the oil/not oil companies get out of setting aside $$$ to help clean up the inevitable spills.

    scout   @   Apr 5, 2013 at 15:45 EST

  19. What kind (0 Replies)

    of investigations involving a sibling do you recall Bill Bulger sticking his nose into?

    scout   @   Apr 1, 2013 at 23:36 EST

  20. thank you (1 Reply)

    This is great. The only thing that would make it better is if you published all the votes.

    scout   @   Apr 1, 2013 at 23:33 EST