主题：【美国大选手记六十四】向大选日冲刺（上） -- 尼伯龙根·蜗藤
家园 del 家园 噩梦？ 太夸张了吧？写大选手记的整个过程当中，绝大部分时间都是挺开心和兴奋的，因为选情激烈，精彩纷呈，有很多事情可以写，值得写。而且对我而言，大选的过程是我最为关注的，至于结果，反正是美国人自己选的，我完全犯不着因为奥巴马就让自己陷于“噩梦”之中。
- 复 噩梦？
家园 Then I don't understand why you get so defensive from time to time.
Once the articles' out, you have little control over what people think about them.
We draw our own conclusions, some you might like, some you might not.
"I can say whatever I please" is a weak excuse and it won't exempt you from critics.
Acting like an armadillo under attack is hardly an effective strategy nor is convincing.
家园 my reason is simple &clear i don't mind at all if sb holds different views or standing from myself as long as he/she truely understands where i stand and respect what i believe in when writing these articles.
but i cannot accept any personal attack. and i'm tired of those people who had no idea (or clear idea) of the motivation, principles, stands and the style my writing followed, but chose to go ahead anyway to repeatedly argue that i should walk an "unbiased" line when writing these articles or act more like a journalist.
as you may have already known quite well, i had already expressed many times that i don't at all buy the idea that it's possible to be "unbiased" when discussing or analyzing politics, and it was not and would never be my attempt to try to be unbiased in my writing without any personal touches.
家园 You expressed your opinion quite clearly.
I just don't agree with you on various topics. Of course I respect your choice, but meanwhile you just can't expect everyone to respect your style of words or for that matter - your political views.
Respect is earned and quite obviously somebody will despise you for the very reason some others admire you for. After all, politic issue by its nature would provoke such bipolar attitudes, both parties would believe their own reasoning very dearly.
What I'm trying to say is: by tap into this area, you kinda open the box of negative comments. You stand on a soapbox and make a rather loud noise, be prepared for the incoming rotten eggs & tomatoes.
You can explain, you can counter-strike some valuable arguments, but you can't let yourself be cornered by all the haters or people just don't agree, it's rather immature for sb as sophisticated as you. You may disagree but hey that's my observation.
Oh, and you can never stop these things from happening. C'est la vie, moving on.
家园 支持！ 恭喜：你意外获得【通宝】一枚
鲜花已经成功送出。
此次送花为【有效送花赞扬，涨乐善、声望】
家园 主要是后面信息的完整性丢掉了 篇幅太不对称了。
无论他怎么说马儿，都随他。但是双方之间的“事实陈述”部分不对称，这就让人难以忍受了。
客观事实必须摆完整，有的一笔带过，比方说民主党如何攻击麦肯和佩林内讧；有的就详加描写，比如水管工事件。
这样就让人开始无法忍受了。你说我是知道民主党怎么攻击他们内讧的这还好，你要换作不知道的，就指望看您的文章弄清楚咋回事呢，这可咋整？你可以说民主党攻击得不厚道，攻击得很SB，这都随你，可你得把这是事情咋回事说明白吧……ok，有详有略，这都随您了，可是总不能suppose读者知道，就光提这么几句吧？
所谓“连事实部分都没法全信了”就是这个意思。你看，那个有事实为证，证明共和党人自己攻击佩林是胡扯的事情，说得多详细呐……
至于听到change就想吐这个，嘿嘿嘿。
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7-W4GWjN2kg
坚持看完者就是胜利。
顺便再提一个事。我最近听一个中国人说，那奥巴马呀，我听他辩论，他好有领袖气质呀~~~
我差点没被茶水呛死过去。。。。。改天呐，我也去做结巴好了……
家园 信息完整性 我在手记19中就已经说过我写的是手记，不是新闻报道，既无客观中立的责任，更无装扮客观中立的意愿。如果你要追求“信息完整”，大可遍览所有有关的新闻媒体报道。我小小一个手记系列，哪里有能耐满足你对“信息完整性”的饥渴。
我绝对相信没人会把我写的系列作为了解大选的主要渠道，更没觉得自己有义务要保证每个人获得“完整”的大选信息。
家园 Obama 跟 McCain 的辩论超无聊 一个不是辩才，另一个是安眠专家
Biden vs Palin 才有趣
但是 Obama 的公众演讲非常有力，非常能拉抬气氛，那种气势很总统。相比之下 McCain 的表现我只能用怪异来形容，语气，表情，手势都很不知所谓，而且后期 Buzz word abuse 的倾向令人难以容忍。
前两天那个总统30分里的松木椭圆办公室快把我逗坏了，至少 O 有政治幽默感