Comments: Ted Rall blames 9/11 on Ronald Reagan
Is there any logical reason at all that any legitimate news agency is even contemplating putting or keeping this man (and I use the term loosely) on their payroll?
Yes, because people still buy their papaers regardless of his presence. Because people still buy the products or services that are listed on the pages he spews his garbage upon. No one is suffering financially because of association with him. The Free Market often ignores people like him. Posted by Marble at June 7, 2004 10:36 AM

He spews the socialist line they love so well in news agencies. He will never hurt for a job.

Posted by Deb at June 7, 2004 10:47 AM

http://www.historic-battles.com/Articles/soviet_invasion_of_afghanistan.htm

The biggest problem with Rall comments is not that he is being a ass-hole. But the fact that he is wrong. Jimmy Carter actually started CIA funding Afghan freedom fighters.

I too believe Reagan is responsible for our current terrorism problem, but because he pulled out of lebanon just showing the Arab would we were had no staying power.

Bush is much better president than Reagan every was.


Posted by Scott at June 7, 2004 10:56 AM

Funny. Perhaps Rall should ask the Grenadians how they feel about the invasion (and I concur that the reasons were iffy, but the overall goal of preventing communism's spread in our backyard was not). The country's Thanksgiving is their national holiday honoring the U.S. troops who ousted their Marxist-revolutionary government that sent the country into civil war. Hence, the now democracy annually celebrate the invasion that Rall so derides!

Posted by molotov at June 7, 2004 10:57 AM

I think Marble's got it right.

Posted by McGehee at June 7, 2004 11:30 AM

Marble (above) is partially correct. People with messages like Rall's can get and retain positions at newspaper, TV, or online media because people write in about them. The newspapers don't differentiate between good mail and bad mail, the fact that they're getting mail means people are reading them.

The worst thing that can happen is if people ignore them. If people send in angry mail or even cancel their subscriptions the newspapers just promote the writer/cartoonist/wacko as controversial.

Posted by Keith at June 7, 2004 11:39 AM

Keith, what I meant wasn't that we should ignore him, but that a free market often provides shelter for wastes of oxygen such as Rall.

Canceling your newspaper or refusing to buy Kraft™ Bacon-Ranch dressing because of Rall is too much for most consumers. It is easier for people to ignore scum than it is to take a stand.

I don't get any newspaper that he writes for (at least, I don't think he's carried in the Tampa Tribune) so I can't cancel my subscription. I would have to actually purchase the periodicals that carry his load in order to find out who happened to be advertising on his page and then complain directly to them.

If anyone has that information, I'd be more than happy to write the PR departments of those companies. Heck, maybe that's something Ted Rall is Full of Crap could help out with.

Posted by Marble at June 7, 2004 12:31 PM

Marble, I recognize that you weren't suggesting ignoring Rall (heretofore referred to as him, little "h") that was my suggestion. My thought was that all of the people upset at his posts are linking to them and driving his hit level up to unnatural levels and that he would continue to make similar statements as long as it gets him the attention he apparently craves.

On the other hand, insulting him until he goes away is a good plan too. :)

Posted by Keith at June 7, 2004 11:38 PM
Post a comment









Remember personal info?