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.