Pages

Jump to bottom

9 comments

1 [deleted]  Sun, Aug 29, 2010 6:32:18am
2 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Sun, Aug 29, 2010 6:33:12am

PS: I don’t think you should have “Koch” and “Brothers” as two different tags.

3 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Sun, Aug 29, 2010 7:57:33am

Okay, and my post was deleted why exactly?

4 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Sun, Aug 29, 2010 8:04:41am

For the record, I was simply linking to the LGF article that referenced the New Yorker article mentioned in the NYT article and linking to an article by Matt Welch on reason.com. I guess the latter was why my comment was deleted. I have no clue why. Whether you disagree with the points or denounce the stances made therein: It did not seem to be either inflammatory or extremist or slanderous, so I really don’t get the deletion of my comment. What was the no-no?

5 Randall Gross  Sun, Aug 29, 2010 9:12:40am

Well there was a Direct link to a site (reason.com) that has Robert Stacy McCain and Napolitano as contributors those site links usually get deleted — next time link the cache if it’s a stinky or suspect site?

6 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Sun, Aug 29, 2010 9:56:06am

re: #5 Thanos

Well there was a Direct link to a site (reason.com) that has Robert Stacy McCain and Napolitano as contributors those site links usually get deleted — next time link the cache if it’s a stinky or suspect site?

First of all: RSM’s contribution to Reason seem to have been just two in 2006. Furthermore: Napolitano is a nutjob and crank, especially when it comes to conspiracy theorists, his pro-life stance and his infatuation with Austrian Economics. Then again his writings have also featured in the LA Times and the NY Times. Should you be disallowed from linking to any article of those outlets because they’ve also featured Napolitano?

7 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Sun, Aug 29, 2010 10:03:02am

Oh, and for the record, here is Charles’ explanation and my reply.

To any “monitor” reading: I disagree with the premise that reason.com is somehow beyond the pale and cannot be linked under any circumstances. I also find it highly irritating when in one of these not-so-obvious cases of judgement by association there is no apparent explanation. A simple one-sentence reasoning would be much appreciated.

8 Stan the Demanded Plan  Sun, Aug 29, 2010 10:36:33am

This was a great article by Rich. Thanks for posting.

9 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Mon, Aug 30, 2010 1:14:05am

I also wanted to point out that Charles himself has linked to reason.com several times in the past — not in order to expose any shennanigans at reason.com but rather to expose shennanigans of Lew Rockwell and Ron Paul:

[Link: littlegreenfootballs.com…]

[Link: littlegreenfootballs.com…]


This page has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT
LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal
Cash.app
Recent PagesClick to refresh
Ranked-Choice Voting Has Challenged the Status Quo. Its Popularity Will Be Tested in November. JUNEAU — Alaska’s new election system — with open primaries and ranked voting — has been a model for those in other states who are frustrated by political polarization and a sense that voters lack real choice at the ...
Cheechako
Yesterday
Views: 62 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 0