It is DISGUSTING how low our standards have fallen

jarhead

jarhead

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
This last week I was more disgusted than I have been in a long time at the state of politics in this country as well as the medias role in trying to influence us. I'll start by saying that I am neither a mccain or obama supporter. I wanted Ron Paul and since he's out will vote independent. My first gripe is this new bullshit about palin and "gotcha" journalism. This whole thing boiled my blood. In a nutshell in case you hadn't seen it yet, she was at a food stand and one of the people in line asked her about pakistan. Her reply was contradictory to mccains the night before at the debate. This was all caught on tape(the whole thing is on youtube) and their camp is claiming they were set up, or "gotcha journalism" because she had to answer a question on the spot. At what point did our standards drop so low that we now longer require a potential president to be able ANSWER a FREAKING question on the spot? This woman could be president for God's sake. If she can't even do that, she has no business being in any public office much less the highest one. And the media feeds into this ****. The votes are more important than the voters. And you have the media perpetuating this idea-some jackass "analyst" on fox(which says alot right there) talking about the bailout made the comment that "our politicians are listening to their costituates, which means betty sue sitting at home in oklahoma decided the fate of this bailout and that's not right." I almost lost it. When did that become a BAD thing?! That is the way it was SUPPOSED to be. It's almost as if we are being trained to be accepting of this **** and these ideas.
 

Omen

Banned
Awards
1
  • Established
Glad someone else is pissed off like me.

People are f**king dumbed down, retarded and cowardly these days.

Walking down to get my groceries today, I feel I'm not the same f**king species as these mutherf**kers, it disgusts me how "weak/dumb" people have become.

To respond to the Sarah Palin issue, she's a f**king retard too, other than giving the president a blowjob(Hey bill
! you missed this one!), I have no idea what f**king use she is in the white house.
 
jon671

jon671

Member
Awards
1
  • Established
the medias role in trying to influence us.
The biggest evil in this country is television and all forms of advertising. I absolutely hate it, but I do video production for a living. I try and balance my projects and partake in nothing without some substance. Next project is a short documentary on a homeless man in my area, hopefully it can get some attention on him. He homeless, looks like he is almost dying and in a f*cking wheelchair, but the local senatorial race is raging like a mother. I truly believe I am a good person just because of the fact I don't snap and go Columbine on people
:aargh:
.
 
Rick28

Rick28

Member
Awards
1
  • Established
This last week I was more disgusted than I have been in a long time at the state of politics in this country as well as the medias role in trying to influence us. I'll start by saying that I am neither a mccain or obama supporter. I wanted Ron Paul and since he's out will vote independent. My first gripe is this new bullshit about palin and "gotcha" journalism. This whole thing boiled my blood. In a nutshell in case you hadn't seen it yet, she was at a food stand and one of the people in line asked her about pakistan. Her reply was contradictory to mccains the night before at the debate. This was all caught on tape(the whole thing is on youtube) and their camp is claiming they were set up, or "gotcha journalism" because she had to answer a question on the spot. At what point did our standards drop so low that we now longer require a potential president to be able ANSWER a FREAKING question on the spot? This woman could be president for God's sake. If she can't even do that, she has no business being in any public office much less the highest one. And the media feeds into this ****. The votes are more important than the voters. And you have the media perpetuating this idea-some jackass "analyst" on fox(which says alot right there) talking about the bailout made the comment that "our politicians are listening to their costituates, which means betty sue sitting at home in oklahoma decided the fate of this bailout and that's not right." I almost lost it. When did that become a BAD thing?! That is the way it was SUPPOSED to be. It's almost as if we are being trained to be accepting of this **** and these ideas.

I like your answer...by the way I am a supporter of Ron Paul too. I'm voting for the Constitutional Party. Chuck Baldwin '08,
Ron Paul endorsed him.
 
RobInKuwait

RobInKuwait

Registered User
Awards
1
  • Established
I like your answer...by the way I am a supporter of Ron Paul too. I'm voting for the Constitutional Party. Chuck Baldwin '08,
Ron Paul endorsed him.
Go Ron Paul!

I like Palin. I think most Republicans are more pissed that the "mainstream media" is in the tank for Obama. Everything is spun in his favor. Even a negative story has a positive spin on it. Palin's dirt pales in comparisons to Obama's, yet Americans who don't watch Fox News have only heard about his dirt through McCain's commercials.

You guys can hate on Fox News all day, but its the only network that has the intellectual honesty to play democrat and republican stories.
 
somewhatgifted

somewhatgifted

Registered User
Awards
1
  • Established
HAhaha fox news yer funny rob! Palin wants to make it illegal for a raped 15 year old, raped by her father , to get an abortion. You know why? becasue she THINKs in her PERSONAL opinion... that life begins at conception. SO the morning after pill is also going to be ILLEGAL if she gets the chance! I can only imagine how wonderful the world is going to be if she gets any input.

Everyone has faults but do you want your rights subject to miss Palins personal opinions????

Ron paul is hilarious because he and many others, myself included, are baffled by the rediculous circle jerk going on in the economy with nothing being done to do any good.
 
RobInKuwait

RobInKuwait

Registered User
Awards
1
  • Established
Everyone has faults but do you want your rights subject to miss Palins personal opinions????
Freedom of speech is a personal opinion written into the Bill of Rights. The right to bear arms is a personal opinion written into the Bill of Rights.

Any law out there is someone's personal opinion.

Just cause you don't agree with her interpretation of when life begins doesn't mean her opinion is stupid. Over 20% of Americans agree are against abortions in all circumstances.
 
Fastone

Fastone

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Freedom of speech is a personal opinion written into the Bill of Rights. The right to bear arms is a personal opinion written into the Bill of Rights.

Any law out there is someone's personal opinion.

Just cause you don't agree with her interpretation of when life begins doesn't mean her opinion is stupid. Over 20% of Americans agree are against abortions in all circumstances.
The point is who is she and that 20% to tell the rest of us how to live. Because they have a special God that the rest of us supposedly don't, they're special and should dictate to the rest of society what's right and wrong?. Something that they also don't realize or wish to acknowledge is that most so called liberals don't like abortion either, they just choose to leave that decision to the individual and their God.

:bruce3:
 
somewhatgifted

somewhatgifted

Registered User
Awards
1
  • Established
Whats the point of democracy when %20 dictates to the other apparently less important %80. And once again "her personal opinion."

Its my personal opinion that cell phones kill... OR.. Due to scientific studies.... i feel i am representing the majority of americans, according to recent polls, when i say... I will make cell phones illegal. This is a rough example of course.
 
slow-mun

slow-mun

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Whats the point of democracy when %20 dictates to the other apparently less important %80. And once again "her personal opinion."

Its my personal opinion that cell phones kill... OR.. Due to scientific studies.... i feel i am representing the majority of americans, according to recent polls, when i say... I will make cell phones illegal. This is a rough example of course.

:rofl::toofunny::lol:
 
RobInKuwait

RobInKuwait

Registered User
Awards
1
  • Established
Whats the point of democracy when %20 dictates to the other apparently less important %80. And once again "her personal opinion."

Its my personal opinion that cell phones kill... OR.. Due to scientific studies.... i feel i am representing the majority of americans, according to recent polls, when i say... I will make cell phones illegal. This is a rough example of course.
You're making a very complicated legal and moral issue very simplistic.

27% of people believe in abortions in all cases.
22% of people believe in no abortions in all cases.
51% of people believe in cases of rape or incest.

Tell me why what 27% of people believe is the law of the land? I

Another issue is that there are states in which upwards of 80-90% of the population are pro-life. Why shouldn't they have the power to make that a state law?

Me personally? I don't care one way or another, so I guess I'm pro-choice, but that doesn't mean I think that people that are pro-life are stupid. In an ideal world I'd be pro-life, but with all the entitlement programs my taxes pay for, abortion makes too much sense and I wish more people would do them.

I hate how much time and research I spend on posts responding to your ignorance and hairbrained conspiracy theories.
 

Turd

New member
Awards
0
Sarh Palin is a freaking joke. She claims she's so tough but can't answer the simplest of question. The Repubs have got her locked away from the media like some Rapunzel. The only time she does a decent interview is when she does a "do over" on Fox. The whole folksy thing is getting a bit old she seems more of a caricature than a person.
 
somewhatgifted

somewhatgifted

Registered User
Awards
1
  • Established
You're making a very complicated legal and moral issue very simplistic.

27% of people believe in abortions in all cases.
22% of people believe in no abortions in all cases.
51% of people believe in cases of rape or incest.

Tell me why what 27% of people believe is the law of the land? I

Another issue is that there are states in which upwards of 80-90% of the population are pro-life. Why shouldn't they have the power to make that a state law?

Me personally? I don't care one way or another, so I guess I'm pro-choice, but that doesn't mean I think that people that are pro-life are stupid. In an ideal world I'd be pro-life, but with all the entitlement programs my taxes pay for, abortion makes too much sense and I wish more people would do them.

I hate how much time and research I spend on posts responding to your ignorance and hairbrained conspiracy theories.

The point once again.... is that she didnt have a toughtout intelligent answer. She said it was her "personal opinion" not further validated or justified by anything. If she had done ANY research she would have had more of a reason that just her whims, compared to science or the peoples opinion.

So many politicians skirt real answers and i think we should demand somthing with atleast some substance ( the questioner demanded) "so what is your answer", instead of 100 words and none of them useful except to state a potential possibility. Noone wants to take a solid stance incase it hurts them, so they are neither here nor there. Palin takes a stances and when doing so in my opinion you should be able to back it up with more than "its my personal belief" shes a representative of the people not a dictator to them.

You "hate how much time you spend researching" my "hair brained theories"
Your admitting that you didnt know before hand and learned somthing!!
I (through my apparent ignorance) educated you on this topic.

You love throwing that phrase around and simply put there are no simple answers or one sentence explanations for this world, myself included. You my friend have alot of growing up to do until you realise what really matters in life is what you are missing, it cant be found on google, in a forum or taught in school. You lack a general respect for anyone who doesnt agree with you and use ignorance and some facts to vaidate dissrespect and intolerance to difference of opinion. Class, virtue, independance, respect and humility are words you should look up.
I am entitled to my opinions and i believe i have made a valid point here and dont understand how that makes me "hair brained" atleast in this instance.
 
LakeMountD

LakeMountD

Doctor Science
Awards
1
  • Established
talking about the bailout made the comment that "our politicians are listening to their costituates, which means betty sue sitting at home in oklahoma decided the fate of this bailout and that's not right." I almost lost it. When did that become a BAD thing?! That is the way it was SUPPOSED to be. It's almost as if we are being trained to be accepting of this **** and these ideas.
This is how it is supposed to be, yes. And I agree it should stay like that. But sometimes, especially in this case, I think the congressman should vote the way they feel would be best for the country because lets face it Betty Sue in Oklahoma never even took economics 101 and all she thinks about is, "those damn government people stealing my money and given it to the damn banks". Obviously that is an exaggeration and frankly we shouldn't have gotten to this point in the first place, but that doesn't change the fact that we are here. I absolutely hate the media but lets face it, don't just point the finger at Fox, I am disgusted by CNN and refuse to even give them a second of my time. Obama could be the first ever media elected president and it is absurd. Honestly though it goes back to the fact that many people make uneducated votes and that is just something we have to deal with. As the years go by people have forgotten more and more how powerful their vote can be. They vote off of ads on tv, the media, or what Joe Schmoe told them.

As for the bailout we can only point the fingers back at ourselves just as much as we can point them at the government. Yes the government should have seen this coming and prevented securitization (the real reason we are in the mess) but the bottom line is we were too irresponsible. People in this country seem to think that health care and owning a home are "rights". They are not rights, they are privileges. Nowhere in the constitution does it say we should have any of those things. The people have been quick to jump on the banks for giving them the money but the same people who are foreclosing had 80,000 family incomes and tried buying 300,000 houses. It is like going to a drug dealer, having him give you the drugs, then getting mad at him when you get addicted and he won't give you any more drugs because you can't afford them.
 
DAdams91982

DAdams91982

Board Sponsor
Awards
2
  • RockStar
  • Established
Yet AGAIN... people never cease to amaze me in their opinions.

Palin in office... will, and can se make abortion illegal... simple answer, no. Well one because congress is a democrat congress. Ah, we have balance.

Now reverse that, Obama wants to take away all guns... can he get that passed? Why yes, yes he can, congress is democrat... no balance there.

Adams
 
RobInKuwait

RobInKuwait

Registered User
Awards
1
  • Established
The point once again.... is that she didnt have a toughtout intelligent answer. She said it was her "personal opinion" not further validated or justified by anything. If she had done ANY research she would have had more of a reason that just her whims, compared to science or the peoples opinion.

So many politicians skirt real answers and i think we should demand somthing with atleast some substance ( the questioner demanded) "so what is your answer", instead of 100 words and none of them useful except to state a potential possibility. Noone wants to take a solid stance incase it hurts them, so they are neither here nor there. Palin takes a stances and when doing so in my opinion you should be able to back it up with more than "its my personal belief" shes a representative of the people not a dictator to them.

You "hate how much time you spend researching" my "hair brained theories"
Your admitting that you didnt know before hand and learned somthing!!
I (through my apparent ignorance) educated you on this topic.

You love throwing that phrase around and simply put there are no simple answers or one sentence explanations for this world, myself included. You my friend have alot of growing up to do until you realise what really matters in life is what you are missing, it cant be found on google, in a forum or taught in school. You lack a general respect for anyone who doesnt agree with you and use ignorance and some facts to vaidate dissrespect and intolerance to difference of opinion. Class, virtue, independance, respect and humility are words you should look up.
I am entitled to my opinions and i believe i have made a valid point here and dont understand how that makes me "hair brained" atleast in this instance.
It has nothing to do with agreeing or disagreeing with your beliefs. I routinely disagree with Fastone and Reaper329, but at least they have coherent thoughts and I can understand their point of views. You on the other hand have no coherent thoughts or unifying theme to your ideas. Posting with you is not a discussion or argument, its an exercise in futility.

PS- Learn to use spell check retard. I feel like I'm talking to a fifth grader.
 
somewhatgifted

somewhatgifted

Registered User
Awards
1
  • Established
It has nothing to do with agreeing or disagreeing with your beliefs. I routinely disagree with Fastone and Reaper329, but at least they have coherent thoughts and I can understand their point of views. You on the other hand have no coherent thoughts or unifying theme to your ideas. Posting with you is not a discussion or argument, its an exercise in futility.

PS- Learn to use spell check retard. I feel like I'm talking to a fifth grader.
Thank you Rob, you have proved my point yet again. It is suitable that you posted in this thread, considering how low you have fallen, assuming that you have been "higher".
 
RobInKuwait

RobInKuwait

Registered User
Awards
1
  • Established
Thank you Rob, you have proved my point yet again. It is suitable that you posted in this thread, considering how low you have fallen, assuming that you have been "higher".
I still haven't understood one of your points. That was my point.

:toofunny:
 
rolandajoint

rolandajoint

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
You guys can hate on Fox News all day, but its the only network that has the intellectual honesty to play democrat and republican stories.
rupert murdoch does not believe in honesty or fair play. fox news is one sided period. for example, the polls they showed after both presidential debates showed something like 80% of people thought mccain won the debate, yet ANY, yes capitalized because i mean it that much, ANY other poll shown on tv or the internet or a newspaper or a magazine, showed it fairly even, with either mccain slightly ahead or obama slightly ahead. the fact you trust fox news for information scared the f*cking sh*t outta me because i know millions of people do the same.

btw i hate to knock you for fox news, but i knock my own family and friends for watching it because it is straight up horse sh*t.
 
RobInKuwait

RobInKuwait

Registered User
Awards
1
  • Established
rupert murdoch does not believe in honesty or fair play. fox news is one sided period. for example, the polls they showed after both presidential debates showed something like 80% of people thought mccain won the debate, yet ANY, yes capitalized because i mean it that much, ANY other poll shown on tv or the internet or a newspaper or a magazine, showed it fairly even, with either mccain slightly ahead or obama slightly ahead. the fact you trust fox news for information scared the f*cking sh*t outta me because i know millions of people do the same.

btw i hate to knock you for fox news, but i knock my own family and friends for watching it because it is straight up horse sh*t.
You must've been watching a different Fox News, because their focus group said the last debate was 50/50. MSNBC and CNN said it was split the first day, and then the next day started saying that Obama slaughtered McCain.

Obviously you have to watch any network with a grain of salt. All I am saying, is that if you watch Fox News, you will see stories that are pro and anti McCain. That's more than I can say for CNN/MSNBC who play all pro-Obama stories.

I watch Fox News because it tends to be pro-business and pro-free market which matches my point of view.

Some examples of other networks: the ACORN voter fraud stories had about a 3 day lag, and Ayers had about a 1 week lag behind Fox News, meanwhile "Troopergate" has been played non-stop from day one on the other networks.
 

Turd

New member
Awards
0
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KTkqosRiyYo"]YouTube - Nearly unanimous vote for Obama = "split" on FOX[/ame]

Fox news slight bias

As far as the second debate I saw snap polling done minutes after the debate from nearly all channels showed Obama won by a huge margin. I didn't see 50/50 anywhere.
 
Dwight Schrute

Dwight Schrute

I am faster than 80% of all snakes
Awards
2
  • Legend!
  • Established
You must've been watching a different Fox News, because their focus group said the last debate was 50/50. MSNBC and CNN said it was split the first day, and then the next day started saying that Obama slaughtered McCain.

Obviously you have to watch any network with a grain of salt. All I am saying, is that if you watch Fox News, you will see stories that are pro and anti McCain. That's more than I can say for CNN/MSNBC who play all pro-Obama stories.

I watch Fox News because it tends to be pro-business and pro-free market which matches my point of view.

Some examples of other networks: the ACORN voter fraud stories had about a 3 day lag, and Ayers had about a 1 week lag behind Fox News, meanwhile "Troopergate" has been played non-stop from day one on the other networks.

Don't even bother. When even the people that work for these networks admit bias towards Obama, these people will still keep their earplugs in.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SiL62Hfn2hg"]YouTube - Lou Dobbs, Ed Rendell: The Media's in the Tank for Obama[/ame]



:)
 
RobInKuwait

RobInKuwait

Registered User
Awards
1
  • Established
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KTkqosRiyYo

Fox news slight bias

As far as the second debate I saw snap polling done minutes after the debate from nearly all channels showed Obama won by a huge margin. I didn't see 50/50 anywhere.
So, if you went to rural anywhere USA you think you wouldn't find overwhelming McCain support?

Cities like Dems, Rural likes Reps....there's exceptions, but very few.
 

Turd

New member
Awards
0
You must've been watching a different Fox News, because their focus group said the last debate was 50/50. MSNBC and CNN said it was split the first day, and then the next day started saying that Obama slaughtered McCain.
.
Polls the night of the debate.

Cnn 51% Obama 38%McCain
CBS 39% Obama 24%McCain
 

Turd

New member
Awards
0
So, if you went to rural anywhere USA you think you wouldn't find overwhelming McCain support?

Cities like Dems, Rural likes Reps....there's exceptions, but very few.
That has nothing to do with the obvoious bias in the video.
 
RobInKuwait

RobInKuwait

Registered User
Awards
1
  • Established
That has nothing to do with the obvoious bias in the video.
Didn't have volume on it before. :)

Thats pretty funny.

I will say that I have seen CNN do exactly the opposite in previous debates. Where it was 50/50 Obama-McCain in a room and they said that Obama had a distinct advantage.
 
RobInKuwait

RobInKuwait

Registered User
Awards
1
  • Established
Polls the night of the debate.

Cnn 51% Obama 38%McCain
CBS 39% Obama 24%McCain
What you're not factoring in is that most Republicans watch Fox News and most Dems watch other channels. Don't you think the channel's audience will help determine the polls?
 
Dwight Schrute

Dwight Schrute

I am faster than 80% of all snakes
Awards
2
  • Legend!
  • Established
That has nothing to do with the obvoious bias in the video.

And if you dig deeper you will see the demographic of that audience has about 24% Republicans. Netwoks polls means nothing. All of them.
 
Dwight Schrute

Dwight Schrute

I am faster than 80% of all snakes
Awards
2
  • Legend!
  • Established
What you're not factoring in is that most Republicans watch Fox News and most Dems watch other channels. Don't you think the channel's audience will help determine the polls?

No...that would make too much sense.
 
rolandajoint

rolandajoint

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
You must've been watching a different Fox News, because their focus group said the last debate was 50/50. MSNBC and CNN said it was split the first day, and then the next day started saying that Obama slaughtered McCain.

Obviously you have to watch any network with a grain of salt. All I am saying, is that if you watch Fox News, you will see stories that are pro and anti McCain. That's more than I can say for CNN/MSNBC who play all pro-Obama stories.

I watch Fox News because it tends to be pro-business and pro-free market which matches my point of view.

Some examples of other networks: the ACORN voter fraud stories had about a 3 day lag, and Ayers had about a 1 week lag behind Fox News, meanwhile "Troopergate" has been played non-stop from day one on the other networks.
literally RIGHT after the debate, fox showed their internet polls being like 80% for mccain. trust me. of course those arent out now, because they were just the instant polls, not the polls after everyone listens to commentary and actualy takes time to reflect on all the points made. which of course, yes, it shows obama won. i didnt look at polls really any other time other than after the debate. but the instant polls were showing that it was fairly even.

ive ben trying towatch fox news after the debates and what not. i basically form my opinion on my own after watching the material, which cannot be biased. then i switch to fox to see what their fantastic reporters have to say.

for example, after the first debate, they went to some correspondent at the mccain headquarters, and were saying, oh boy everyone here is thinking slam dunk, mccain is definitely the winner, he was awesome tonight, etc etc etc.

then they went to a correspondent at the obama headquarters, and the dood was saying stuff like, oh the mood here is a somber one, a lot of people arent as happy with the outcome of the debate, etc etc.

now granted you seem to watch a lot more fox news than me, or maybe tv news in general because i really dislike tv media, from what i see when i do chime in, the times i actually think its important, like after debates and stuff, it is more biased than i could have imagined.

and also the fact that the only interviews that palin seems to "shine", are the ones with hannity, but when its not in her own field of play, like with couric or gibson, she completely fails because she truly lacks the knowledge or common sense to answer simple questions, like what newspapers or magazines do you read? a stupid qustion, but seriously, how f*cking hard is it to say, wasilla times, newsweek, the economist, the palin bulletin, etc etc.
 
RobInKuwait

RobInKuwait

Registered User
Awards
1
  • Established
literally RIGHT after the debate, fox showed their internet polls being like 80% for mccain. trust me. of course those arent out now, because they were just the instant polls, not the polls after everyone listens to commentary and actualy takes time to reflect on all the points made. which of course, yes, it shows obama won. i didnt look at polls really any other time other than after the debate. but the instant polls were showing that it was fairly even.

ive ben trying towatch fox news after the debates and what not. i basically form my opinion on my own after watching the material, which cannot be biased. then i switch to fox to see what their fantastic reporters have to say.

for example, after the first debate, they went to some correspondent at the mccain headquarters, and were saying, oh boy everyone here is thinking slam dunk, mccain is definitely the winner, he was awesome tonight, etc etc etc.

then they went to a correspondent at the obama headquarters, and the dood was saying stuff like, oh the mood here is a somber one, a lot of people arent as happy with the outcome of the debate, etc etc.

now granted you seem to watch a lot more fox news than me, or maybe tv news in general because i really dislike tv media, from what i see when i do chime in, the times i actually think its important, like after debates and stuff, it is more biased than i could have imagined.

and also the fact that the only interviews that palin seems to "shine", are the ones with hannity, but when its not in her own field of play, like with couric or gibson, she completely fails because she truly lacks the knowledge or common sense to answer simple questions, like what newspapers or magazines do you read? a stupid qustion, but seriously, how f*cking hard is it to say, wasilla times, newsweek, the economist, the palin bulletin, etc etc.
You raise valid points. Fox is biased, but no more than CNN, nor is it in the same ballpark as MSNBC.

Palin did underperform at her couric and gibson interview. Not going to argue that point. At the same time, Obama and Biden were not given equal treatment in their gibson and couric interview. The treatment those two received by gibson and couric was comparable to the treatment Palin received from Hannity.

Mainstream media- liberal biased
Fox news- conservative biased
 
rolandajoint

rolandajoint

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
You raise valid points. Fox is biased, but no more than CNN, nor is it in the same ballpark as MSNBC.

Palin did underperform at her couric and gibson interview. Not going to argue that point. At the same time, Obama and Biden were not given equal treatment in their gibson and couric interview. The treatment those two received by gibson and couric was comparable to the treatment Palin received from Hannity.

Mainstream media- liberal biased
Fox news- conservative biased
yeah im definitely not going to argue the liberal bias. i just find the conservative bias to be so much more extreme. tho you prolly find the liberal bias so much more extreme. thats america i guess. oh well.

i do think obama and biden were treated better than palin, to an extent. tho they showed the side by side interviews of biden and palin by couric, and wow. i mean im not a huge fan of biden as ive basically only known abou him as long as ive known about palin, but he bent those questions over and railed the sh*t out of them. while palin, more resembled one of the moose that she hunts from her helicopter with her high powered rifle :D

kidding of course. biden simply answered the questions. nothing crazy with his answers, but in context of the side by side, it appeared that he did rape them.

have you had a chance to see bidens appearance in bigger stronger faster? its pretty comical to me. he almost says "bastards" in the hearing, but holds himself back and says "those guys" instead haha
 
RobInKuwait

RobInKuwait

Registered User
Awards
1
  • Established
yeah im definitely not going to argue the liberal bias. i just find the conservative bias to be so much more extreme. tho you prolly find the liberal bias so much more extreme. thats america i guess. oh well.

i do think obama and biden were treated better than palin, to an extent. tho they showed the side by side interviews of biden and palin by couric, and wow. i mean im not a huge fan of biden as ive basically only known abou him as long as ive known about palin, but he bent those questions over and railed the sh*t out of them. while palin, more resembled one of the moose that she hunts from her helicopter with her high powered rifle :D

kidding of course. biden simply answered the questions. nothing crazy with his answers, but in context of the side by side, it appeared that he did rape them.

have you had a chance to see bidens appearance in bigger stronger faster? its pretty comical to me. he almost says "bastards" in the hearing, but holds himself back and says "those guys" instead haha
No, I haven't seen bigger, stronger, faster yet. Maybe I can find it on the internet somewhere....

From what I understand, Biden is behind most current steroid legislation.
 
Dwight Schrute

Dwight Schrute

I am faster than 80% of all snakes
Awards
2
  • Legend!
  • Established
literally RIGHT after the debate, fox showed their internet polls being like 80% for mccain. trust me.
It was a text message poll. MSNBC was 88%-12%. They mean nothing.



ive ben trying towatch fox news after the debates and what not. i basically form my opinion on my own after watching the material, which cannot be biased. then i switch to fox to see what their fantastic reporters have to say.
Its usually Brit Hume (former ABC guy) and a panel of a conservative, liberal and moderate.

for example, after the first debate, they went to some correspondent at the mccain headquarters, and were saying, oh boy everyone here is thinking slam dunk, mccain is definitely the winner, he was awesome tonight, etc etc etc.
That's their job.

then they went to a correspondent at the obama headquarters, and the dood was saying stuff like, oh the mood here is a somber one, a lot of people arent as happy with the outcome of the debate, etc etc.
No, they went to Obama's surrogates who spun it just like the McCain camp. That's what they do..spin no matter what the outcome. They also had Howard Wolfson, the former head of communication of Hillary's campaign who said Obama won.

now granted you seem to watch a lot more fox news than me, or maybe tv news in general because i really dislike tv media, from what i see when i do chime in, the times i actually think its important, like after debates and stuff, it is more biased than i could have imagined.


and also the fact that the only interviews that palin seems to "shine", are the ones with hannity, but when its not in her own field of play, like with couric or gibson, she completely fails because she truly lacks the knowledge or common sense to answer simple questions, like what newspapers or magazines do you read? a stupid qustion, but seriously, how f*cking hard is it to say, wasilla times, newsweek, the economist, the palin bulletin, etc etc.
Oh you mean like how Obama basically avoided the Fox network for 9 months before actually giving them an interview?

If you really want to get into the media bias issue then lets jump right into it and start with the last 40 years of liberal slanted network news.....that point alone should tell you WHY Fox news is so popular.

It simply amazes me how people sit there and start in on Fox while ignoring the last 40 years of NBC, ABC and CBS in this country and the amount of people who have worked for those networks who freely admit that they all lean left not to mention 90% of the print publications in this nation.

So please, go right ahead....
 
Dwight Schrute

Dwight Schrute

I am faster than 80% of all snakes
Awards
2
  • Legend!
  • Established
yeah im definitely not going to argue the liberal bias. i just find the conservative bias to be so much more extreme. tho you prolly find the liberal bias so much more extreme. thats america i guess. oh well.

Are you out of your mind? Count the number of Republicans MSNBC has on from 5pm-1am every single day and you can count them with half your fingers on on hand.


Look how many liberal vs conservative journalists you have at the New York Times, Washington Post, Newsweek...its bascially and 8-2 average.

MSNBC has 2 Republicans on the whole network. One is in the morniing at 6am and the other is Pat Buchanan. Thats it. Count how many Republican or conservatives you have at NBC network. Oh thats right, O'Reilly asked Andrea Kramer and she couldn't name 1.


The notion that FOX is more extreme is just nonsense.

CNN has 2 major conservative contributors and the rest are either former Clinton employees or journalists from NBC and CBS.
 
rolandajoint

rolandajoint

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
It was a text message poll. MSNBC was 88%-12%. They mean nothing.



Its usually Brit Hume and a panel of a conservative, liberal and moderate.



That's their job.



No, they went to Obama's surrogates who spun it just like the McCain camp. That's what they do..spin no matter what the outcome. They also had Howard Wolfson, the former head of communication of Hillary's campaign who said Obama won.







Oh you mean like how Obama basically avoided the Fox network for 9 months before actually giving them an interview?

If you really want to get into the media bias issue then lets jump right into it and start with the last 40 years of liberal slanted network news.....that point alone should tell you WHY Fox news is so popular.

It simply amazes me how people sit there and start in on Fox while ignoring the last 40 years of NBC, ABC and CBS in this country and the amount of people who have worked for those networks who freely admit that they all lean left not to mention 90% of the print publications in this nation.

So please, go right ahead....
well seeing as how im barely 20, and paid attention to about zero politics until i was about 14, it may be a little hard for me to go 40 years into history. not to mention i dont value the issue of media bias enough to waste my time researching into 40 years. so ill take youre word for it.

but i still think conservative media is ridiculous. especially doods like hannity and rush, they scare the sh*t outta me because so many people are completely faithful to every word that comes out of their mouth.

and im not anti-palin because of what the media tells me, im anti-palin because she digs her own damn grave. and i think if obama was on hannity, the questions would be a little bias in terms of trying put words in his mouth. not to mention hannity seems to pretty much hate obama. i mean if hannity were to ask the same questions in the same environment, palin would still fail.

also, maybe this source is too liberal for you guys :frustrate but theres an article in newsweek, talking about palin. and you can say how bias it is or whatever, but it makes EXCELLENT points.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/160080/page/1 i highly recommend it.
 
Dwight Schrute

Dwight Schrute

I am faster than 80% of all snakes
Awards
2
  • Legend!
  • Established
well seeing as how im barely 20, and paid attention to about zero politics until i was about 14, it may be a little hard for me to go 40 years into history. not to mention i dont value the issue of media bias enough to waste my time researching into 40 years. so ill take youre word for it.
GO buy Bernie Goldbergs book "Bias". He worked for CBS for 25 years and its a very basic view of the entire news media.

but i still think conservative media is ridiculous. especially doods like hannity and rush, they scare the sh*t outta me because so many people are completely faithful to every word that comes out of their mouth.
Umm...take a look at the last 2 convenstion and the guys rioting wearing bandanas over their heads. They aren't conservatives.

You are taking the extremes and applying to the whole. Rush and Hannity are the polar opposites of Olbermann and Maddow. They are popular because they appeal to an audience that never had an outlet for 40 years.


and im not anti-palin because of what the media tells me, im anti-palin because she digs her own damn grave. and i think if obama was on hannity, the questions would be a little bias in terms of trying put words in his mouth. not to mention hannity seems to pretty much hate obama.
The same way Olbermann and MAddow ridicule Palin. I suggest you watch both sides.
i mean if hannity were to ask the same questions in the same environment, palin would still fail.
Thats because interviews like Hannity and Olbermann are meant to cater to a crowd.

also, maybe this source is too liberal for you guys :frustrate but theres an article in newsweek, talking about palin. and you can say how bias it is or whatever, but it makes EXCELLENT points.

Sam Harris on Sarah Palin and Elitism | Newsweek Politics: Campaign 2008 | Newsweek.com i highly recommend it.

Newsweek biased? No....they only have 8 liberals to 2 conservatives. The article is pure editorial. You could use almost all the same arguments for Obama...but they won't do that.

A little about teh Author:

"Harris is a founder of The Reason Project and author of The New York Times best sellers “The End of Faith” and “Letter to a Christian Nation.” His Web site is samharris.org."

Yeah, he's not biased. :rolleyes:
 
rolandajoint

rolandajoint

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
GO buy Bernie Goldbergs book "Bias". He worked for CBS for 25 years and its a very basic view of the entire news media.



Umm...take a look at the last 2 convenstion and the guys rioting wearing bandanas over their heads. They aren't conservatives.

You are taking the extremes and applying to the whole. Rush and Hannity are the polar opposites of Olbermann and Maddow. They are popular because they appeal to an audience that never had an outlet for 40 years.




The same way Olbermann and MAddow ridicule Palin. I suggest you watch both sides.


Thats because interviews like Hannity and Olbermann are meant to cater to a crowd.

also, maybe this source is too liberal for you guys :frustrate but theres an article in newsweek, talking about palin. and you can say how bias it is or whatever, but it makes EXCELLENT points.




Newsweek biased? No....they only have 8 liberals to 2 conservatives. The article is pure editorial. You could use almost all the same arguments for Obama...but they won't do that.
dood, regardless of the bias in newsweek, those are logical points. our standards turned to sh*t to cater to palin. after the debates, i hear people saying, well i thought palin did well, i mean she didnt fcuk up as bad as i thought she would.

more on topic of palin rather than media bias, shes a joke. no one should try to contend that. watch an interview, listen to her speeches, listen to her responses in the debate, she digs her own grave. she never really has anything good to say, so instead she just talks and talks. and its great that the mccain campaign had the idea to bring in a woman to take some attention off obama, but they should have at least brought in a woman with more credentials. or at least a degree relevant to politics.

palin is an average woman, who has done nothing extraordinary. and the only thing she really has, or had going for her, in my opinion, was the natural gas line, which among a few sources so far, say its far from a reality because the native americans dont want it, unless they get paid a hefty amount. palin did not even consult them before proposing the plan, and now, they are the determining factor on whether or not it gets built.

and the whole troopergate thing is a joke to me. i saw a little bit of it covered in a few articles off google news, and then saw something retarded about it on cnn, and it just looks like a giant mess to f*ck with palin, as it seems the ayers issue is trying to f*ck with obama.
 
rolandajoint

rolandajoint

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
what unbiased, two sided media sources should i be using for information? i honestly have no idea. i read everything and am skeptical of everything anyone says. so steer me in the right direction so i may be enlightened.
 
Dwight Schrute

Dwight Schrute

I am faster than 80% of all snakes
Awards
2
  • Legend!
  • Established
dood, regardless of the bias in newsweek, those are logical points. our standards turned to sh*t to cater to palin. after the debates, i hear people saying, well i thought palin did well, i mean she didnt fcuk up as bad as i thought she would.

Serisouly have you ever watched a debate other than during election?

What you fail to recognize is that the same points he makes are the same than can be brought up for PRESIDENTIAL candidate for the Democrats.



more on topic of palin rather than media bias, shes a joke. no one should try to contend that.
At your age, you're really not in the position to call anyone a joke. It makes you look rather foolish. Governors don't get involved in foreign policy. Clinton didn't, Reagan didn't, etc....at least know your history before calling someone a joke.

You do understand that many of the same argument Palin used were originally used by Bill Clinton right? You do understand that the first person to use the National Guard as foreign policy experience was Bill Clinton?

She isn't supposed to know about foreign policy....she is coached like Reagan and Clinton were in subjects they are not paid to know about. That's how its done and considering you're 20 years old and have zero experience or knowledge is any of this you are under this misconception that she should have this great depth of knowledge in foreign policy. You know how much foreign policy Obama has? 18 months of campaigning.

watch an interview, listen to her speeches, listen to her responses in the debate, she digs her own grave. she never really has anything good to say, so instead she just talks and talks. and its great that the mccain campaign had the idea to bring in a woman to take some attention off obama, but they should have at least brought in a woman with more credentials. or at least a degree relevant to politics.
I have listened to her. She sounds like a female Reagan. She sounds like a female Clinton. A governor who has to bluff her way through foreign policy that can connect to the general public the way Obama connects to his "crowd". They way Clinton and Reagan did. The way Kennedy did. All great politicians that really has zero experience in foreign policy.

The are all great bullshitters that appeal to a large segments of the population. They have such effect on these populations that they can effectively mask their shortcoming just by playing off the emotion of the people. IF you make someone feel good..make them believe in something, those same people will deny many of the negatives about that person. Obama has mastered it. Palin is right behind him.

Obama didn't come close to the knowledge of McCain in the first debate but he got through it and held his own. That's what politicians do. They are not bastions of knowledge. They are creatures of spin and deflection. They make decisions based on what other people tell them. The best ones make the right calls and get lucky.

palin is an average woman, who has done nothing extraordinary. and the only thing she really has, or had going for her, in my opinion, was the natural gas line, which among a few sources so far, say its far from a reality because the native americans dont want it, unless they get paid a hefty amount. palin did not even consult them before proposing the plan, and now, they are the determining factor on whether or not it gets built.


To state that she hasn't done anything extraordinary when she is a woman who became governor of a state and beat out an incumbent in her early 40's just shows that you really have absolutely no idea WTF you are talking about. What is scary is that it seems Newsweek and the news media is your sole education on this subject. Considering that fact, the last person on earth who should call anyone a joke or to state she hasn't done anything extraordinary, is you.




and the whole troopergate thing is a joke to me. i saw a little bit of it covered in a few articles off google news, and then saw something retarded about it on cnn, and it just looks like a giant mess to f*ck with palin, as it seems the ayers issue is trying to f*ck with obama.
yeah..ok.


:rolleyes:
 
Dwight Schrute

Dwight Schrute

I am faster than 80% of all snakes
Awards
2
  • Legend!
  • Established
what unbiased, two sided media sources should i be using for information? i honestly have no idea. i read everything and am skeptical of everything anyone says. so steer me in the right direction so i may be enlightened.

Stay in school. Go to the library. Read. SO when someone tells you that Biden made a complete blunder when explaining the role of the Vice President, you'll understand what they are talking about. The easiest people to BS are the ones who don't know the subject material to begin with.


Joe Biden doesn't understand the unitary executive theory.
by Erin Sheley
10/10/2008 12:00:00 AM




In last week's vice presidential debate, Joe Biden criticized **** Cheney's notion that the office of the vice president does not exist wholly within the executive branch of the government, blaming Cheney for "aggrandiz[ing] the power of a unitary executive." This is not the first time Biden has thrown around the concept of the "unitary executive" as a fancy-sounding stand-in for a whole parade of terribles: including, apparently, claims that the Bush administration has usurped power from Congress, inappropriately wielded executive discretion, and generally expanded executive authority so as to bring all of Middle-earth under the heel of Mordor.

At a press event last fall, for example, in response to the question of whether a future president would want to "give up the unitary power that Bush has accumulated," Biden launched into a rant about the commutation of Scooter Libby's sentence. Especially given Biden's propensity to describe himself as a constitutional law professor (he has taught as an adjunct at Widener Law School), it is important to point out that he is completely confused as to what the common constitutional interpretive theory of the unitary executive actually means.

Unitary executive theory holds, simply, that it is unconstitutional for Congress to create independent agencies that exercise executive power governed by officers the president cannot remove. This notion has precisely nothing to do with the extent of presidential power (to do things like detain enemy combatants, for example) but, rather, the distribution of this power. According to unitary executive theory, the constitutional principle of
separation of powers mandates that executive authority, whatever its scope, belongs solely to the president, in the executive branch.

The famous 1988 case Morrison v. Olson demonstrates this problem, in the context of a Judiciary Committee investigation of the Reagan administration's enforcement of the Superfund Act. The Committee requested that the attorney general appoint an independent counsel to explore allegations that Reagan officials had given false testimony during the Committee investigation. The administration challenged the constitutionality of the Independent Counsel Act on the grounds that an independent counsel who could not be removed by the president created a kind of "fourth branch" of government, wielding executive prosecutory authority and yet answerable to no one. The Supreme Court ultimately upheld the Act, over a dissent by Justice Scalia, on the grounds that an independent counsel, even if not answerable to the president, is nonetheless an executive official, uncontrolled by either of the other two branches of government. Under the theory of the unitary executive, such a fragmented executive branch would be unconstitutional.

Biden's misuse of the term in the debate was particularly humorous because he meant to criticize Cheney for inappropriately claiming legislative powers under Article I which--if one believes that the vice president, as an executive officer under Article II, should be solely answerable to the president--would in some senses violate the theory of the unitary executive. (As it is, however, Cheney's assertion rests upon the power vested in the Vice President by Article I, not Article II, to serve as President of the Senate). Likewise, Bush's use of the presidential pardon power with respect to Scooter Libby had nothing to do with a belief in the unitary executive, but was, rather, a straightforward exercise of discretion specifically vested in the president himself. Whether this discretion was improperly exercised is a political, not a constitutional, question.

University of Chicago law professor Cass Sunstein (by no means a supporter of the current administration, or of conservative constitutional theory) gives a more detailed explanation of the unitary executive here. On the very important point that unitary executive theory says nothing at all about the scope of presidential powers, but rather their distribution, see George Mason University law professor Ilya Somin here. Senator Biden would benefit from reading both
 
rolandajoint

rolandajoint

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
so just looked at all the threads you have made recently, and realize that most of them are posting articles (weekly standard?). so im just going to bow out at this point. someone with probably 20 years experience over me is obviously going to win this little debate, or slaughter as it would seem.

and youre wrong in that my education is the news media. my education thus far on any of the candidates is simply watching them speak. either from a debate, or an interview. and yes i watched the hannity interviews too.
 
Dwight Schrute

Dwight Schrute

I am faster than 80% of all snakes
Awards
2
  • Legend!
  • Established
so just looked at all the threads you have made recently, and realize that most of them are posting articles (weekly standard?). so im just going to bow out at this point. someone with probably 20 years experience over me is obviously going to win this little debate, or slaughter as it would seem.
I don't post that many articles. The Weekly Standard is one source and it by no means unbiased. The point being, if you actually follow this stuff for more than one election while understanding your own history, you can tell when these guys are just BS'ing you. The best politicians just hide it better.

and youre wrong in that my education is the news media. my education thus far on any of the candidates is simply watching them speak. either from a debate, or an interview. and yes i watched the hannity interviews too.
Listening to candidates is not an education..its actually the opposite.
 

Similar threads


Top