Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: Notesfiles $Revision: 1.6.2.17 $; site uicsl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxj!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!uiucdcs!uicsl!pollack
From: pollack@uicsl.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Gag me with the Natl Rev.
Message-ID: <28100012@uicsl.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 30-Sep-84 14:12:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: uicsl.28100012
Posted: Sun Sep 30 14:12:00 1984
Date-Received: Fri, 5-Oct-84 04:32:25 EDT
Lines: 21
Nf-ID: #N:uicsl:28100012:000:599
Nf-From: uicsl!pollack    Sep 30 13:12:00 1984




Quoting from years-old issues of the National Review as authoritative
"truth" is getting out of hand. Especially when followed by a line like
"Lets put this canard to rest."  Or when discussing the "Cuban takeover"
of Grenada.

I can quote to you from In These Times or Mother Jones, but I won't force
a third party's tendentious editorializing down your throat as the "truth".

But if the "truth" from the National Review keeps gagging the net,
I will!

Remember Newton's Third Law...

Jordan.

By the way, propaganda has nothing to do with what political
party reporters and editors vote for.