This message was self-deleted by its author

[gejohnston]

85. Bloomburg and Giuliani

Don't get much classist and authoritarian than those two.

If you seriously trust Tom DeLay's press secretary to write an accurate and non-misleading and non-right-wing series of articles in the Washington Times, then you're probably on the wrong website. It's "relevant" in the sense that it is written about the topic of gun policy, but in that case Paul Ryan's talking points about how Obama is gutting medicare would be "relevant" to the health care debate.

Can you provide evidence that her article is misleading? Since neither of us have tried to register a gun in DC, you don't have the slightest idea. Are you saying Think Progress wouldn't or hasn't written misleading or inaccurate? Rather than bitching about the source, show were she was full of shit. Ryan is a red herring on this issue.

I'll say it again, if there's a legitimate point to be made, then you can find someone other than right-wing teabaggers making it.

When someone from Think Progress decides to go through the process to see what it is like, please be sure to mention it. So, if some writer at Think Progress says you can buy a machine gun at a gun show, should we instantly believe it and ignore the fact that you can't (and suddenly starts supporting Bush's "terror watch list&quot ? Could you dispute any of the facts in Miller's series? With the Think Progress piece, all I had to do is post a copy of the National Firearms Act. You didn't even try. Just because they are wrong on 99 things does not mean they are wrong on the 100th. For someone who claims to be open minded and bases their opinions on empirical data, you depend on a lot of stereotypes and logical fallacies. Of course, you would call me a right wing NRAbot for simply pointing out the poor research and writing.
So why haven't you chided secularmotion for providing using the right wing Daily Mail? Is it because it is Brit or because you agree with the content? Sounds kind of hypocritical to me.