KENNEDY HAS A BRAIN TUMOR
POSTED BY: AURaptor
UPDATED: Saturday, June 14, 2008 05:36
VIEWED: 10557
PAGE 9 of 10
But didn't you hear? It's been proven by mere dint of 'Rappy saying it over and over! As the right knows all too well, a lie told often enough becomes the truth.
All together now, parrots:
"RRrrraaawwwwwk! WMD! WMD! WMD!
Stay the Course! Stay the Course!"
Mike
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence[sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions
I can't help the sinking feeling that my country is now being run by people who read "1984" not as a cautionary tale, but rather as an instruction manual. - Michael Mock
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Umm, y'all DO know that F*X "news" learned their shrill trade of bias and distortion at the knee of the Sinclair Broadcast Group, right ?
Remember I am originally from Baltimore, where the bias and bastardy of Sinclair is quite legendary, especially since it's their main office and they've been meddling in local politics ever since they started backing Schaeffer, a universally hated sumbitch who's only salvation in the political area is the moral and intellectual poverty of his opponents, which sadly, isn't saying very much about either side.
As far as print media, one need look no further than any paper which is a descendant of the original Hearst publishing empire, damn near singlehandedly guilty of inciting a needless war over a fictional and frivilous cause, and doesn't THAT sound familiar ?
From "Remember the maine!" to yellowcake and mushroom clouds, the Hearst bunch has never met a war they didn't love or encourage.
And golly gee, isn't it INTERESTING how from the original robber barons, media moguls and other scum, to the red scare warmongers and trade union busters, to the business plot and fascist support in europe as well as trading with the enemy, and the eventual military industrial complex spawned in the fifties and continuing today to push for war, war, war and profit, profit, profit...
How the same NAMES pop up, over and over again.
So don't blame F*X "news" for carrying on the time honored tradition that's in truth been going on since 1906 - it's just that with the advent of the internet, which they HATE, we now tend to catch them at this shit since they no longer have a total lock on the information that reaches us.
In the real world, there's lies, damn lies, and whatever sludge is on the mainstream news networks.
-Frem
*Support Links
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinclair_Broadcast_Group
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Sinclair_Broadcast_Group
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Donald_Schaefer
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Randolph_Hearst
http://freepress.org/columns/display/7/2005/1123
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Oh, and Nobody wants to thank you for staying topical...
No, Nobody really wants to know what happened over in the "What if no Iraq war" thread.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Oh, but Fremmie, you know nothing you've cited can be trusted, since so much of it came from Wiki, right? I mean, Wiki only counts as factual info if it supports the position of the right!
Mike
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence[sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions
I can't help the sinking feeling that my country is now being run by people who read "1984" not as a cautionary tale, but rather as an instruction manual. - Michael Mock
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Oh, and Nobody wants to thank you for staying topical...
No, Nobody really wants to know what happened over in the "What if no Iraq war" thread.
What happened? Last I looked, you posted a bunch of gibberish and a bunch of links. I've been a bit busy and haven't really had a chance to look at them yet or rebut them...
Meanwhile, here's a bunch of other links:
Women's rights:
http://www.nancyreaganisabagofonions.com
Rebuilding:
http://www.bushorchimp.com
http://www.youforgotpoland.org/mjames/yfp/
yourself.Mike
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence[sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions
I can't help the sinking feeling that my country is now being run by people who read "1984" not as a cautionary tale, but rather as an instruction manual. - Michael Mock
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:- I'll give you that, but it doesn't mean a damn thing when talking about the NEWS media, now does it. THAT is what I'm referring to, CBS, NBC, ABC, MSNBC, and the bulk of the print/ news paper media is decisively Left wing. Only FOX NEWS even tries to offer up an objective to 'right' slant.
Originally posted by Kwicko:
See? You haven't PROVEN anything - you've merely given opinions.
You consider Olbermann a self-absorbed primadonna, yet consider O'Reilly an "entertainer" - they run exactly the same kind of shows! One has a bit of a left-wing bent, and one a decidedly right-wing bent, but they report on the same stories and they both spin them.
Quote:
I know you think Faux News is the only one that "gets it right", but they've been caught lying more than Dan Rather. The only people who don't know that are people who only get their news from Faux News.
Caught 'lying' ? By who... Media Matters? The Daily KOS ? Nice try.
Quote:
As for "treasonous" actions by the NY Times, they were treasonous because the White House ASKED them not to report the story? So if they merely ASK now, and you don't comply, it's treason? But in your book, outting a covert operative during a time of war is NOT treasonous, right? In your world - and Dick Nixon's - it's not a crime if the President does it.
Mike
The White House didn't out any covert operatives, the Plames/Wilson's outted THEMSELVES. Joe Wilson lied, and that's been undeniably proven, so this whole fiasco about them is nothing but a colossal farce on their part to bring down the Administration.
As for the NYT ( again, a Liberal news paper ) running w/ a story which the President asks you NOT to run, why in the hell would they go against the President's wishes in matters of national security ? Even if the matter is a toss up, why not err on the side of security ? No rules or laws were being broken as is, but releasing the story only ended up striking a blow against those trying to fight the terrorist. It's simply nonsensical.
Listen, we could do this all day, rehashing the 1000's of cases which prove the news media in predominantly LEFT wing. It's a story which has been done ad nausium , but because I have a life, I'm not going to waste my time trying to convince you otherwise.
Best I can do for you now is to point to FOX NEWS , which rates #1 on cable for most watched network, and let you try to figure out the rest on your own.
It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager
" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Tenuous now, since he's not his preacher and Obama has distanced himself a great deal. Not my spin at all.
Originally posted by AURaptor:
20 + yrs is anything but a "tenuous" relationship, citizen. C'mon now, stop the spinning.
Quote:Not really, they've been blown out of all proportion by 19th century style nationalists, this is verging on the personal AU
And Wright's comments are worse than you think, but you don't even want to acknowledge that anyways.
.Quote:Please, I've given you one example where the entire US media has unfairly exaggerated in one direction, and completely ignored another. You've just stated that the "media is left". It's not a refutation. You've got to show how it is, if all you've got is "foxnews is best, foxnews says so" and "the media is liberal, I heard it some place, it is, really it is", you should take a step back and really think about why it is you think the whole media is liberally biased.
The majority of the U.S. media is utterly beholden to the Left wing, and only FOX comes close to getting things right (accurate)
If you've come to that conclusion via your own thought process, you'll be able to give an example or two about where there's been a demonstrated bias (and no, criticising George Bush for once doesn't count). If it's just based on what some guy said, what 'everyone knows', or 'what's been said a million times' then you probably won't be able to back up your statement, and you're just building your house on sand.
Quote:I don't think once in a post indicates 'fondness'. Besides I did give reasons (and bloody good ones at that) for why what I said was irrelevant, was irrelevant. The same courtesy would be nice, please.
Hagee and Parsley ? Irrelevant, as you are fond of saying.
This is getting boring. You're making flat statements as if they're established fact with no attempt to back them up. Hagee and Parsley are irrelevant because...
Quote:Bush said ‘Urgent Threat’, and other Synonyms of ‘imminent threat’, but Donald Rumsfeld and other members of Bush’s administration DID say ‘imminent threat’. In other words, Bush’s administration while clarifying and restaiting the White House and George Bush's opinion, said flat out that Iraq was an imminent threat; George Bush himself alluded to it and said it flat out with different wording. They said Iraq could launch WMDs in 45 minutes at that very moment for crying out loud. I'm starting to feel like Winston Smith...
Bush never said Iraq was an imminent threat, but that we should act BEFORE it becomes one. I'm absolutely sure of this.
Quote:It's totally deniable, because there's no evidence to support it. Beyond that, it's just plain silly. Saddam had Weapons of Mass Destruction that were deployed for launch in 45 minutes, that could threaten the United States of America and its allies, but were easily movable to be hidden under a berry bush in Syria? Erm, ok. If it’s undeniable stagger me with your evidence, you’re making the claim, the burden of evidence is on you.
I think it's undeniable there WERE WMD in Iraq, but they were spirited away to Syria before we got there. And even if not, Saddam planned on reconstituting his WMD program, once the U.N. was out of his hair, so it's clear, he wasn't going to play by the rules.
Quote:Did you read what I wrote? I clearly stated that whether you agree with his policies or not, he was playing on peoples fears. If you say “Saddam has teh WMDs and hez gonna blowed up your shit!!!11!!!” you are playing on peoples fears, whether he has the ‘WMDs’ or not. It’s really rather simple. The evidence for where he played on peoples fears is where he says “these guys you should be afraid of, we’re gonna get them”.
There's no evidence was playing on anyone's fears. He was acting in a prudent, responsible manner.
Quote:Whe
Actually, the Gore, Durbin, Murtha points were to show them, Democrats, being un-American. I proved that point rather conclusively, thank you.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:In which
As for the NYT ( again, a Liberal news paper )
Judith Miller parroted WMD claims w/o question? Liberal???? Wow.
---------------------------------
Let's party like it's 1929.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:Quote:- I'll give you that, but it doesn't mean a damn thing when talking about the NEWS media, now does it. THAT is what I'm referring to, CBS, NBC, ABC, MSNBC, and the bulk of the print/ news paper media is decisively Left wing. Only FOX NEWS even tries to offer up an objective to 'right' slant.
Originally posted by Kwicko:
See? You haven't PROVEN anything - you've merely given opinions.
You consider Olbermann a self-absorbed primadonna, yet consider O'Reilly an "entertainer" - they run exactly the same kind of shows! One has a bit of a left-wing bent, and one a decidedly right-wing bent, but they report on the same stories and they both spin them.Quote:
I know you think Faux News is the only one that "gets it right", but they've been caught lying more than Dan Rather. The only people who don't know that are people who only get their news from Faux News.
Caught 'lying' ? By who... Media Matters? The Daily KOS ? Nice try.Quote:
As for "treasonous" actions by the NY Times, they were treasonous because the White House ASKED them not to report the story? So if they merely ASK now, and you don't comply, it's treason? But in your book, outting a covert operative during a time of war is NOT treasonous, right? In your world - and Dick Nixon's - it's not a crime if the President does it.
Mike
The White House didn't out any covert operatives, the Plames/Wilson's outted THEMSELVES. Joe Wilson lied, and that's been undeniably proven, so this whole fiasco about them is nothing but a colossal farce on their part to bring down the Administration.
As for the NYT ( again, a Liberal news paper ) running w/ a story which the President asks you NOT to run, why in the hell would they go against the President's wishes in matters of national security ? Even if the matter is a toss up, why not err on the side of security ? No rules or laws were being broken as is, but releasing the story only ended up striking a blow against those trying to fight the terrorist. It's simply nonsensical.
Listen, we could do this all day, rehashing the 1000's of cases which prove the news media in predominantly LEFT wing. It's a story which has been done ad nausium , but because I have a life, I'm not going to waste my time trying to convince you otherwise.
Best I can do for you now is to point to FOX NEWS , which rates #1 on cable for most watched network, and let you try to figure out the rest on your own.
It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager
" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "
Okay... That's actually funny. :)
Thanks for putting a little humor into things.
Mike
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence[sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions
I can't help the sinking feeling that my country is now being run by people who read "1984" not as a cautionary tale, but rather as an instruction manual. - Michael Mock
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
AuRaptor Wrote
Quote:
Best I can do for you now is to point to FOX NEWS , which rates #1 on cable for most watched network, and let you try to figure out the rest on your own.
To which I replied, and laid down the following challenge:
Quote:
Ah, so on the day when MSNBC passes them in the ratings, will you then bow down, admit your mistakes, and sanctify MSNBC as the only "right" news network, simply because they're tops in ratings? C'mon, now - COMMIT to it! If MSNBC surpasses Fox News in the ratings, you will proclaim them the ultimate arbiter of all truth and knowledge. Take the bet. I triple-dog dare you. You know in your heart that it will never happen, so what have you got to lose?
Good thing you didn't take that bet, since Countdown With Keith Olbermann beat The O'Reilly Factor in three out of five days last week...
It still troubles me, though. If the media is so left-biased, then how on earth could Fox News be the #1-rated cable news network? It doesn't compute. If they're all so liberal, and that's what sells, then how is it that an un-liberal cable network has the top ratings?
Mike
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence[sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions
I can't help the sinking feeling that my country is now being run by people who read "1984" not as a cautionary tale, but rather as an instruction manual. - Michael Mock
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME