"Mark & Juanita" wrote in message
...

Did you read the cited article? If not, then you have no position to
make
any kind of statement regarding it. If you did, please cite, where, in
that
article there was any sort of smear

Did I say the artice contained smears? No? Then what are you talking
about?

If I posted a link to an article on DailyKOS or some other looney-left
website, would you take it seriously? Of course you wouldn't (neither would
I) because that outlet doesn't do journalism, they do advocacy and they
don't much care how far from the truth they have to stray in doing so. Well
guess what, The American Thinker is cut from the same cloth, and Ed Lasky is
a smear-monger, not a journalist--yet he's in charge of "news" at TAT (which
he co-founded). Publications with that sort of repuation don't get to sit
at the big table and be taken seriously, that's just the way it works.

-- all that were stated were events and
facts that happened along with some conclusions to be drawn. You might
not
like the facts, you might not like the conclusions, but that gives you no
place to call those things a smear.

Let me give you a hint:
Right wingnut, left wingnut == smear

How about "red greens" -- do you seriously have trouble understanding that
equating environmentalism with communism qualifies as a smear, and a
childish one at that?

Pot--kettle --black, buster, don't demand from others what you are not
prepared to do yourself.