Comments
1 - 20 of 23 Comments Last updated Oct 21, 2013
First Prev
of 2
Next Last
Bob

Big Rapids, MI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1
Oct 17, 2013
 

Judged:

4

4

4

Who'd a thunk it......

The Houston Chronicle editorial board expressed remorse over its endorsement of Sen. Ted Cruz in the Senate race last year, saying he has failed to live up to their expectations.

“When we endorsed Ted Cruz in last November’s general election, we did so with many reservations and at least one specific recommendation - that he follow Hutchison’s example in his conduct as a senator. Obviously, he has not done so. Cruz has been part of the problem in specific situations where Hutchison would have been part of the solution,” the Texas paper board wrote in an editorial titled,“Why we miss Kay Bailey Hutchison”.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/10/houston...

LMFAO.....

Teddy - 2016!
Oneal

Three Rivers, MI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2
Oct 17, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

Yea, because we give two #$&*% what an editorial board thinks at this or any other point, TacoBob.

I think I've looked to the Houston Chronicle all of ZERO times for their political opinion.

BTW: The Podunk Gazette ran an article saying they wish Obama would go back to Kenya last week.

Swillary - 2016! I just can't wait for you D-Baggers to run a flabby white radical socialist and expect the black folk to turn out next time!

LOL
Bob

Big Rapids, MI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3
Oct 17, 2013
 

Judged:

4

4

4

Oneal wrote:
Yea, because we give two #$&*% what an editorial board thinks at this or any other point, TacoBob.
I think I've looked to the Houston Chronicle all of ZERO times for their political opinion.
BTW: The Podunk Gazette ran an article saying they wish Obama would go back to Kenya last week.
Swillary - 2016! I just can't wait for you D-Baggers to run a flabby white radical socialist and expect the black folk to turn out next time!
LOL
It matters little their editorial staff what a loser like you from out of their state thinks, but the fact remains that they threw their weight behind an idiot that was supposed to represent their readers.

I am happy to see that you are a subscriber to the Podunk Gazette..... It fits you!
pipedream

Grand Blanc, MI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4
Oct 17, 2013
 
O-no-balls has a lifelong subscription to the Billy-bob Express.

Since: Feb 10

Grand Rapids, MI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5
Oct 17, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

Bob wrote:
<quoted text>
It matters little their editorial staff what a loser like you from out of their state thinks, but the fact remains that they threw their weight behind an idiot that was supposed to represent their readers.
I am happy to see that you are a subscriber to the Podunk Gazette..... It fits you!
Yes, they did "throw their weight behind an idiot that was supposed to represent their readers." Twice. Once in '08 and again in '12 when they supported Obama.

Of course this is the paper that published a series of opinion articles by University of Texas journalism professor Robert Jensen that asserted the United States was "just as guilty" as the hijackers in committing acts of violence and compared that attack with the history of U.S. attacks on civilians in other countries.

And after a flood of public outrage, including statements from the U of Texas President denouncing Jensen's opinion, the Chronicle printed four more articles by Jensen, asserting his case.
pipedream

Grand Blanc, MI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6
Oct 17, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Hey Beaver Breath, why don't you ask the peoples of Vietnam, or Cambodia, or more recently, Iraq, what they think about years of U.S. bombings and killings?

Since: Feb 10

Grand Rapids, MI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7
Oct 17, 2013
 
pipedream wrote:
Hey Beaver Breath, why don't you ask the peoples of Vietnam, or Cambodia, or more recently, Iraq, what they think about years of U.S. bombings and killings?
And that has what to do with the Chronicle?
pipedream

Grand Blanc, MI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8
Oct 17, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

You were critical of the Chronicle, using the Jensen papers, as evidence of their lack of credibility or worthiness. You ought to take another look at what Jensen's message was in his articles.

Since: Feb 10

Grand Rapids, MI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9
Oct 17, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

pipedream wrote:
You were critical of the Chronicle, using the Jensen papers, as evidence of their lack of credibility or worthiness. You ought to take another look at what Jensen's message was in his articles.
I was critical of their publication of Jensen's message and their support of Obama regarding whether or not their support/non-support of Cruz meant anything. Their non-support of Cruz was expected and when they did support him it was with a lot of caveats. So changing wasn't really news.

I do wonder whether their editorial board truly represents the beliefs of their subscribers, or if their subscribers are much more right than the board.
Bob

Big Rapids, MI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10
Oct 17, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

FLBeaver wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, they did "throw their weight behind an idiot that was supposed to represent their readers." Twice. Once in '08 and again in '12 when they supported Obama.
Of course this is the paper that published a series of opinion articles by University of Texas journalism professor Robert Jensen that asserted the United States was "just as guilty" as the hijackers in committing acts of violence and compared that attack with the history of U.S. attacks on civilians in other countries.
And after a flood of public outrage, including statements from the U of Texas President denouncing Jensen's opinion, the Chronicle printed four more articles by Jensen, asserting his case.
Having a hard time staying on subject?

Please feel free to start another thread if you have a complaint about some of their other choices, but this one deals with the choice to support a bagger that could care less about anything but his own moment in the spotlight.

It's fairly obvious that his "all about me time" is over now that his drive to lead this country down the drain due to his fear of the ACA was a massive failure.
Bob

Big Rapids, MI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11
Oct 17, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

FLBeaver wrote:
<quoted text>
I was critical of their publication of Jensen's message and their support of Obama regarding whether or not their support/non-support of Cruz meant anything. Their non-support of Cruz was expected and when they did support him it was with a lot of caveats. So changing wasn't really news.
I do wonder whether their editorial board truly represents the beliefs of their subscribers, or if their subscribers are much more right than the board.
Then again they could just be fair and balanced.........

Where have I heard THAT before?

Since: Feb 10

Grand Rapids, MI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12
Oct 17, 2013
 
Bob wrote:
<quoted text>
Having a hard time staying on subject?
Please feel free to start another thread if you have a complaint about some of their other choices, but this one deals with the choice to support a bagger that could care less about anything but his own moment in the spotlight.
It's fairly obvious that his "all about me time" is over now that his drive to lead this country down the drain due to his fear of the ACA was a massive failure.
They chose to support Obama twice and then Cruz. Explain the logic in that? By what standard are Obama and Cruz similar in any way?
Bob

Big Rapids, MI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13
Oct 17, 2013
 
FLBeaver wrote:
<quoted text>
They chose to support Obama twice and then Cruz. Explain the logic in that? By what standard are Obama and Cruz similar in any way?
See the fair and balanced question above......

I know it's hard for your type to believe that, but it could be possible that they actually agree with parts of what both parties are aiming for.

Kinda like your basic RINO or Blue Dog Democrat.

I know, I know, angry old white people want things their way or no way. Stick with that!

Since: Feb 10

Grand Rapids, MI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#14
Oct 17, 2013
 
Bob wrote:
<quoted text>
See the fair and balanced question above......
I know it's hard for your type to believe that, but it could be possible that they actually agree with parts of what both parties are aiming for.
Kinda like your basic RINO or Blue Dog Democrat.
I know, I know, angry old white people want things their way or no way. Stick with that!
So exactly what do Cruz and Obama agree on that would cause the HC to endorse both?
Oneal

Three Rivers, MI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15
Oct 17, 2013
 
Bob wrote:
<quoted text>
It matters little what I have to say because I'm a total idiot!
I agree.
Bob

Big Rapids, MI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16
Oct 18, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

FLBeaver wrote:
<quoted text>
So exactly what do Cruz and Obama agree on that would cause the HC to endorse both?
You really are blinded by your partisanship aren't you?

Completely impossible for you to consider that the editorial staff may have found that some of the positions that Obama held were better than either McCain or Romney. The same thing with the support they gave to Cruz over his rivals.

It has nothing to do with these two agreeing to anything, they are simply making a choice. It's a funny little thing that moderates are capable of!
Bob

Big Rapids, MI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#17
Oct 18, 2013
 
Oneal wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree.
I guess this is the best a dropout from the Podunk ISD can do.....

vox veritatis

Grand Rapids, MI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#18
Oct 18, 2013
 
Bob wrote:
Having a hard time staying on subject?
Having a hard time staying away from the neighbor's sheep?

Since: Feb 10

Grand Rapids, MI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#19
Oct 18, 2013
 
Bob wrote:
<quoted text>
You really are blinded by your partisanship aren't you?
Completely impossible for you to consider that the editorial staff may have found that some of the positions that Obama held were better than either McCain or Romney. The same thing with the support they gave to Cruz over his rivals.
It has nothing to do with these two agreeing to anything, they are simply making a choice. It's a funny little thing that moderates are capable of!
No, I'm not blinded by partinship. I asked a simple question and so far hasn't gotten an answer. How is asking that being blinded by partianship?
Bob

Big Rapids, MI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20
Oct 18, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

FLBeaver wrote:
<quoted text>
No, I'm not blinded by partinship. I asked a simple question and so far hasn't gotten an answer. How is asking that being blinded by partianship?
I've answered it the only way it can be...... Over and over again.

Have your mother explain it to you!

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

19 Users are viewing the Grand Rapids Forum right now

Search the Grand Rapids Forum:
Title Updated Last By Comments
Juneteenth - " celebrating the end of slavery 2 hr Guru 806
Fifth Third Bank loses $202 million (Jul '08) 4 hr mat 217
New Year's Rapist Takes Plea Deal 5 hr Oneal 4
Is Terri Lynn Land a slumlord? (Jan '12) 18 hr Shes awful 79
Local News Women (Apr '09) Wed Red Wood 2,294
What about the Malaysian jetliner? Tue Gville Jim 56
College football roundup: Ohio State starts the... (Sep '13) Mon www 1,274
•••
•••
•••
•••

Grand Rapids Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

Grand Rapids People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Grand Rapids News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Grand Rapids
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••