Un-replied to letter to Mr Joshua Greenman

Mr Greenman; Sir, I scarcely know where to begin in dissecting your article which appears here: http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2011/02/04/2011-02-04_republicans_wrote_the_political_dictionary_its_proof_democrats_dont_control_the_.html?page=0 However, please allow me to level the playing field by removing several of the liberal's favourite cards from play. You'll note, I hope, that I did not say your favourite cards, I said the liberal's favourite cards. I say this because during every discussion I've had with a self-described liberal I've been called "small-minded," a "racist," (because I continually speak out against President Obama), and "stupid" because I obviously don't understand what he is trying to accomplish. Please note this distinction as it will become most important at the end of this missive. We'll begin with the race card and the gender card. These cards, Mr Greenman, are now off the table. You cannot call these cards into play. That link is here: http://gregb1967.blogspot.com/2009/08/article-let-them-eat-cake-democrats.html Next, I will remove your anti healthcare reform card from play: http://gregb1967.blogspot.com/2010/06/dissecting-5-facts-about-anti-reform.html I'm also going to remove your "uninformed" and "name-calling" cards from play. The discussion of these can be found at the link immediately above. For review, the following cards are off the table. Please note them, as, if you follow the pattern, you'll be tempted to reach for at least two of them. One of them I'm certain you'll reach for at least three times. These cards are: the race card, the gender card, the anti healthcare reform card, the "idiot" or "uninformed" card, and the name-calling card. You cannot call these cards into play. But now Mr Greenman, it is now time for us to play our (as one Democratic Senator I wrote called it) "...most dangerous game." But Mr Greenman, even Senator Sherrod Brown (D-OH) had to admit that he admired the way I leveled the playing field (whilst at the same time assuring me he had no intention of calling those cards into play.) Believe it or not, but Senator Brown actually wrote me a reply. He did not send a form letter. I must admit to you (as I did to him) that I admire him for that. Mr Greenman, I'm now going to call your attention to a UCLA media study which can be found here: http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/Media-Bias-Is-Real-Finds-UCLA-6664.aspx Yes, Mr Greenman, I'm aware that the date of this study is 14-DEC-2005. But I also trust that you are aware that, to date, this studies' conclusions have yet to be found erroneous. I'll leave it to you to read the article, but I will quote part of it: " While the editorial page of The Wall Street Journal is conservative, the newspaper's news pages are liberal, even more liberal than The New York Times. The Drudge Report may have a right-wing reputation, but it leans left. Coverage by public television and radio is conservative compared to the rest of the mainstream media. Meanwhile, almost all major media outlets tilt to the left. " " "Overall, the major media outlets are quite moderate compared to members of Congress, but even so, there is a quantifiable and significant bias in that nearly all of them lean to the left," said co-author Jeffrey Milyo, University of Missouri economist and public policy scholar. " That, Mr Greenman, is part of that study. This, however, leads me right back to your article: " And in an increasingly fragmented Internet, the Drudge Report continues to drives more political traffic than any other website. In italics and bold, to boot. " (link is your sites' and is left intact.) And yet Mr Greenman, in the aforementioned survey, the Drudge Report scored 51. This is one point left-of-centre. (At this point, I would, however, point out the spelling. It is from your paper's site and is not mine.) As for "ObamaCare," I would correct one of your statements. Republicans were not complaining that he played too passive a role in shaping it, many of them were complaining that he had done it behind closed doors. I'll remind you, Mr Greenman, of "the Louisiana Purchase" : " Votes are being bought left and right to pass this health care reform bill that evolved into something that almost nobody in the left or right, not to mention the majority of the people, want but that Harry Reid is ramming down everybody’s throats for no reason other than to massage the ego of the arrogant Obama. " (*) And : " As polls have consistently shown, the more Americans learn about Democratic plans for health care, the more the opposition grows. Mr. Reid appreciates this dynamic, which is why he wrote his bill behind closed doors, when only Santa could have any real idea of who's earning a place on the naughty list. " (emphasis added.) This, I take it, is part of Mr Obama's commitment to "transparency." The truth, Mr Greenman? Come on. You and I both know how many votes were purchased so Mr Obama could have his reform bill. You and I both know that the list of waivers has grown to over 700. The truth? If Mr Obama's bill is so wonderful and will fix so many things, than why are there over 700 exemptions? The truth, Mr Greenman? This is part of that "...dangerous game." that I played with Senator Brown in that I demanded the truth from him. Yes, you read that correctly, I demanded the truth. Mr Greenman, I believe the time is long past for our elected officials on both sides of the aisle to remember that they were sent to Washington to serve their constituents, and their constituents' interests. Many of them, sadly, appear to have forgotten this. This next, Mr Greenman, is a very serious question for you and is part of our "...dangerous game," as Senator Brown called it. (Senator Kris Jordan (R-OH) actually admired my "family jewels" or "cojones" with which I wrote my missive to him. But I digress.) Here is our question, Mr Greenman, and you'll note the way in which I phrase it: Is it just barely possible that you might be part of the problem? Be very very careful with your answer; for if you answer "no," you'll immediately be saying that you are perfect. And here is our exit question, the "$64,000 Dollar Question" as it were: Is it just barely possible that your conclusions might be wrong? Is it just barely possible that you approach your stories with a preconceived idea of where they should lead? And: Is it just barely possible that you might tend to disregard certain facts that do not fit your stories? Yes, I know; those are actually three exit questions. Yet my point remains. And, for reference, my IQ is 127 according to my fourth standardized IQ test in the last eleven months. Mr Greenman this score, 127, is on the high end of "above average" and is three points shy of "gifted."Good day to you Sir, and thank you for reading this missive.(*) - http://www.joplinglobe.com/editorial/local_story_355233643.html