NationStates Jolt Archive

Anyone who refuses to believe that should simply look at today's "Opinion" section:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/06/10/opinion/main700913.shtml

Not surprisingly, all of their articles are either politically-neutral or Conservative.

They bash Kerry by saying he's been desperately trying to stay in the national news, and ventures into "cuckoo clock territory", because of his statements that the Downing Street memo is important:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/06/10/opinion/main700913.shtml

They give some compliments to Hillary Clinton, but then say she doesn't really deserve any credit for her political accomplishments and that she secretly supports abortion:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/06/09/opinion/main700679.shtml

They criticize Kerry and Edwards for attacking the wealthy elite, while being wealthy themselves:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/06/06/opinion/meyer/main700011.shtml

And they say Howard Dean should be impeached:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/06/08/opinion/main700517.shtml

CBS? Liberal? Shut the fuck up!

Solution? Turn the news off when politics come up, or watch a different channel. Or is this about something else? Latley I've ignored all National News shows, and news about them. I'll take the local news and keep my sanity.

And they say Howard Dean should be impeached:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/06/08/opinion/main700517.shtml
I'm inclined to agree with this one. Dean is acting like a bit of a nutbag of late...

WHAT!!! Are you suggesting that there might be another news channel besides FoxNews that is leaning to conservative values!!! Say it aint so!!!

So that brings the Conservative new count to....2!!!

It must be a conspiracy!!

CBS? Liberal? Shut the fuck up!
Suuuuuuuurrrrrrrrrrrrrrre...and "Rathergate" never happened.

Suuuuuuuurrrrrrrrrrrrrrre...and "Rathergate" never happened.

Because, of course, one is automatically a liberal once one says anything bad about Bush.

I long ago gave up on national and local news. I voted for blessed ignorance when I realized the conservatives and liberals were all voting the same way

They bash Kerry by saying he's been desperately trying to stay in the national news, and ventures into "cuckoo clock territory", because of his statements that the Downing Street memo is important:

It isn’t biased if it’s a fact.

They give some compliments to Hillary Clinton, but then say she doesn't really deserve any credit for her political accomplishments and that she secretly supports abortion:

Last time I checked, protecting people from the lies of a crafty politician trying to appear centrist was not biased, just good reporting.

They criticize Kerry and Edwards for attacking the wealthy elite, while being wealthy themselves:

Well, they are and they do that. What? Do you want the news to say, “Wealthy elites criticize other wealthy elites for being wealthy and it’s a good thing.” Please. :rolleyes:

And they say Howard Dean should be impeached:

Now this I disagree with. He’s doing so much good for the Republicans. :D

Because, of course, one is automatically a liberal once one says anything bad about Bush.
Then, by your definition, I'm a liberal because I've said *plenty* bad about Bush. Of course, if you hadn't noticed, I'm *not* a liberal -- definitely not in the modern sense of the word.

I could go on and show the percentages of news personnel (reporters, editors, producers, etc) that vote for and contribute to the Democrat party AND how the mainstream media is biased liberally by leaving out inconvenient parts of the "truth" that would put things into context, but you would still whine and moan. *yawns*

I think I'll go watch a movie. This thread has already become tedious.

Two words: Dan Rather

I'm inclined to agree with this one. Dean is acting like a bit of a nutbag of late...

Yes, calling the Republicans what they really are? That would be like calling Nazi's harsh and represive in Nazi Germany. Insane. You're asking for a beatdown when you stand up to the regime like that and you have to be nuts to try. I'm glad he's making the effort though.

I love Dean, he speaks the truth :)


He's a white Christian former republican he knows who he's dealing with.

But wait, if CBS is LIBERALLY-BIASED, how could they have nothing but Conservative commentary in their "Opinions" section?

Then, by your definition, I'm a liberal because I've said *plenty* bad about Bush. Of course, if you hadn't noticed, I'm *not* a liberal -- definitely not in the modern sense of the word.

I could go on and show the percentages of news personnel (reporters, editors, producers, etc) that vote for and contribute to the Democrat party AND how the mainstream media is biased liberally by leaving out inconvenient parts of the "truth" that would put things into context, but you would still whine and moan. *yawns*
You can go ahead and do that, and yet--the media is covering "the faults of the FBI", but not Downing Street, and CBS's editorials are all Conservative.

There's lies, damn lies, and statistics, buddy!

Its times like this I am glad there is the Daily Show. :rolleyes:

Last time I checked, protecting people from the lies of a crafty politician trying to appear centrist was not biased, just good reporting.

It's not the news' job to protect anybody. That's BAD reporting. The news job is to tell us what's happening, not to tell us who we should and shouldn't trust. Op/Ed programs have over-run the news and destroyed it.

It isn’t biased if it’s a fact.

It isn't a fact that saying that the Downing Street memo means you might be crazy. Even if it's true, it's not a fact. It may be true that you have to be gullible to buy the Brooklyn Bridge but it isn't a fact. I don't know if you remember your elementary school education but facts are something that can be demonstrably proven in a 2+2=4 fashion not in a "blue is prettier than brown" fashion.

That said, the Downing Street Memo is most definatly important.

Last time I checked, protecting people from the lies of a crafty politician trying to appear centrist was not biased, just good reporting.

Then why aren't they telling us about the Downing Street memo that pretty much proves that Bush lied to get us into a war? That he's pulling resources away from the "War On Terror" for the War For Halliburton?

There's nothing secret about Hillary's pro-choice position. To make it look like a secret is not "exposing the lies of a supposed centrist" as you so retardedly put it, but a network trying to appear centrist by exposing selective truth.


Well, they are and they do that. What? Do you want the news to say, “Wealthy elites criticize other wealthy elites for being wealthy and it’s a good thing.” Please. :rolleyes:

They don't criticize the wealthy elites for being wealthy, they criticize them for being irresponsible with their wealth and their efforts to make others poor. This is what I'm talking about when I say that republicans value evil. "Kerry's trying to do good with his wealth. What a pussy. Now Bush, there's a man's man. Rotten to the core. Corrupt bastard who'd disembowel you for a nickel if he knew that a nickel was what poor people call one one hundred billionth of 5 billion dollars. That's the sort of decicivness I can respect."

Then Kerry goes "uh, you know he's trying to screw you right?" and you tell him "fuck you you rich bastard, Bush is a God fearing man of the people who runs a farm." Pathetic.



Now this I disagree with. He’s doing so much good for the Republicans. :D

No, the Republicans are trying to make it look that way, but he's speaking truth to power and he's raising record amounts of money for the Democrats.

There are some republicans who are claiming that he's failing in this task because the republicans are raising more, but Republicans always raise more. They represent the rich and the stupid. That just means that the rich corporate heads who subsidise the Republican party are afraid that the people are waking up and have deeper pockets. The Democrats are getting more smaller donations from individuals who care about the contry, the Republicans are getting more from rich people who want their interests protected.

I think that we all had proof of the Republican Bias of CBS when they refused to run their movie about Reagan.

Suuuuuuuurrrrrrrrrrrrrrre...and "Rathergate" never happened.

So Bush lies to the American public to waste hundreds of American lives in order to gain control of the sale of Iraq oil and Rather not sufficiently researching a piece of material sent to him from a fraudulent source get's a "...gate?"

I think there are quite a few "...gates" going around inside the White House before Rather deserves to get his.

Yes, calling the Republicans what they really are? That would be like calling Nazi's harsh and represive in Nazi Germany. Insane. You're asking for a beatdown when you stand up to the regime like that and you have to be nuts to try. I'm glad he's making the effort though.

Good Lord, you don't honestly believe that, do you? That the Republicans are on par with the Nazis?

Why are there so many dissidents in positions of prominence, then? The politicians, entertainer, filmmakers, etc, who consistently bash the Bush administration? Why haven't they been silenced?

Really, just a little bit of logic can make the world so much clearer.

I hate CBS for one reason and one reason only-they cancelled Joan of Arcadia. DAMN YOU, CBS!

CBS is neither liberal nor conservative. They adopt whichever position they believe will garner the highest ratings.

CBS is neither liberal nor conservative. They adopt whichever position they believe will garner the highest ratings.
Which is apparently the position of CANCELLING JOAN OF ARCADIA! :mad: :D

All news networks are biased(some are more extreme than others)...except the very local ones, but those only cover the very big pieces of national news and politics..

That's why my news of choice is The Daily Show. They aren't biased, they make fun of everyone equally(unless a group is really screwing up for some reason).


"Today George W. Bush took his presidential oath with the words "I solemnly swear...". At that particular moment, 49% of Americans also solemnly swore."

All news networks are biased(some are more extreme than others)...except the very local ones, but those only cover the very big pieces of national news and politics..

That's why my news of choice is The Daily Show. They aren't biased, they make fun of everyone equally(unless a group is really screwing up for some reason).


"Today George W. Bush took his presidential oath with the words "I solemnly swear...". At that particular moment, 49% of Americans also solemnly swore."
I get my news from Best Week Ever because I don't care about anything. :p

All the network news is either depressing and biased, and I don't like it 'cause it makes me sad. So, I Googled "happy news" and the third or fourth website it gave me was called "Uppity-Negro.com." I have since lost all faith in humanity.

There are some republicans who are claiming that he's failing in this task because the republicans are raising more, but Republicans always raise more. They represent the rich and the stupid. That just means that the rich corporate heads who subsidise the Republican party are afraid that the people are waking up and have deeper pockets. The Democrats are getting more smaller donations from individuals who care about the contry, the Republicans are getting more from rich people who want their interests protected.

BAM (http://washingtontimes.com/op-ed/20030707-090426-8917r.htm)

You set yourself up for that one. :D

I've learned that the more I learn about politics and read about them in newspapers and see on tv the more I try to avoid them. It seems that no matter how many people vote, and no matter how many people 'change the world' its all the same thing. He said, she said bull sh*t.

If cbs is right-wing, big deal, if its left-wing, big deal. There is no such thing as an independant news agency that is big time, they all care about the same thing, where their money is coming from the most.

I'm inclined to agree with this one. Dean is acting like a bit of a nutbag of late...

You just now figured that out?

I love Dean, he speaks the truth :)

Well this Republican has always worked an honest day in his life. My Father works an honest day everyday in his life. :rolleyes:

He's a white Christian former republican he knows who he's dealing with.

Way to be an ignorant person.

Good Lord, you don't honestly believe that, do you? That the Republicans are on par with the Nazis?

Why are there so many dissidents in positions of prominence, then? The politicians, entertainer, filmmakers, etc, who consistently bash the Bush administration? Why haven't they been silenced?

Really, just a little bit of logic can make the world so much clearer.

No, I'm not saying that the Republicans are on par with the Nazi's, just the the Republicans are an evil ruling power that squashes all dissent in ways that are harmful to the democratic process. Everything that they do is to a fairly small fraction of a degree to which the Nazi's did it.

BTW Hitler didn't start out as a dictator. He came to power through the democratic process. It wasn't until after he came to power that he was able to have high profile people killed for speaking out against him. Until then he relied on voter intimidation and prompting the anger of his supporters in the public. Just like the Republican party relies on violent Rednecks and College Republicans.

But they respond to criticism fairly harshly, and to put your career on the line by opposing them is seen by many Democrats these days to be political suicide, and to rely on virtue rather than ideology and millions of dollars from millionaire supporters is, from the Republican perspective, crazy. So whether you look at it from the perspective of a Democrat or Republican it could be seen as crazy what Dean is doing. If you're an activist, or have a conscience however, it might just be trying to make the country and the world a better place. And any politician will tell you that that's nuts.

And I know that logic makes things clearer. That's why republicans are so anti-intellectual these days. If people knew how to use things like logic and reason they'd stop voting republican.

If cbs is right-wing, big deal, if its left-wing, big deal. There is no such thing as an independant news agency that is big time, they all care about the same thing, where their money is coming from the most.

The problem is, if you know how it's slanted, then you know how to adjust your perception to compensate. If you're wearing sunglasses then you still manage to tell what color everything is by mentally compensating.

The problem is, republicans are telling you that you're watching CBS through a blue filter, when you're actually watching it through a red filter. When you try to mentally adjust for the color shift you end up thinking that the truth is off in fascismville instead of centristtown.

I think that we all had proof of the Republican Bias of CBS when they refused to run their movie about Reagan.

You just refuted everything about this thread with this line :rolleyes:

No, I'm not saying that the Republicans are on par with the Nazi's, just the the Republicans are an evil ruling power that squashes all dissent in ways that are harmful to the democratic process. Everything that they do is to a fairly small fraction of a degree to which the Nazi's did it.

BTW Hitler didn't start out as a dictator. He came to power through the democratic process. It wasn't until after he came to power that he was able to have high profile people killed for speaking out against him. Until then he relied on voter intimidation and prompting the anger of his supporters in the public. Just like the Republican party relies on violent Rednecks and College Republicans.

But they respond to criticism fairly harshly, and to put your career on the line by opposing them is seen by many Democrats these days to be political suicide, and to rely on virtue rather than ideology and millions of dollars from millionaire supporters is, from the Republican perspective, crazy. So whether you look at it from the perspective of a Democrat or Republican it could be seen as crazy what Dean is doing. If you're an activist, or have a conscience however, it might just be trying to make the country and the world a better place. And any politician will tell you that that's nuts.

And I know that logic makes things clearer. That's why republicans are so anti-intellectual these days. If people knew how to use things like logic and reason they'd stop voting republican.



So...according to your logic....you should be dead and/or otherwise silenced and unable to make that post...

No, I'm not saying that the Republicans are on par with the Nazi's, just the the Republicans are an evil ruling power that squashes all dissent in ways that are harmful to the democratic process. Everything that they do is to a fairly small fraction of a degree to which the Nazi's did it.

While we're on the topic of Republicans being Nazis, George W. Bush's grandfather Prescott S. Bush set up and continued to do business with Union Banking Corporation, which "existed solely for the benefit of Fritz Thyssen, a German industrialist. Thyssen was an early supporter of the Third Reich and became known as "Hitler's angel." Brown Brothers Harriman, which Prescott Bush co-managed continued to do business with UBC. "As German troops swept across Europe...no one at Brown Brothers Harriman stepped forward to decry their continuing business ties with Germany." This does not mean in any that Prescott Bush supported the Nazi cause per se, but that he supported the Nazi regime financially for his own benefit. "'If Prescott Bush were alive today,' said John Loftus* in 2002, 'I would move to have him indicted for giving aid and comfort to the enemy in a time of war.'"

"No intelligence documents...suggest that Prescott endorsed Nazi ideals...Rather, he appears to be nothing more than a businessman very much in the mold of his father-in-law, George Herbert Walker, whose priorities--first, last, and always--were to make money."**

You can read an entire article on it here (http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,1312540,00.html)

*a former prosecutor in the Justice Department's Nazi War Crimes Unit.
**All quotes from The Family by Kitty Kelly.

BAM (http://washingtontimes.com/op-ed/20030707-090426-8917r.htm)

You set yourself up for that one. :D
I like how Domici has patently ignored this link (which SEVERELY PWNED HIS ASS) and keeps spouting his rhetoric. *roflmgdmfao*

Anyone who refuses to believe that should simply look at today's "Opinion" section:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/06/10/opinion/main700913.shtml

Not surprisingly, all of their articles are either politically-neutral or Conservative.

They bash Kerry by saying he's been desperately trying to stay in the national news, and ventures into "cuckoo clock territory", because of his statements that the Downing Street memo is important:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/06/10/opinion/main700913.shtml

They give some compliments to Hillary Clinton, but then say she doesn't really deserve any credit for her political accomplishments and that she secretly supports abortion:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/06/09/opinion/main700679.shtml

They criticize Kerry and Edwards for attacking the wealthy elite, while being wealthy themselves:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/06/06/opinion/meyer/main700011.shtml

And they say Howard Dean should be impeached:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/06/08/opinion/main700517.shtml

CBS? Liberal? Shut the fuck up!
NEWS FLASH: Just because someone doesn't say things the way YOU want them said does not necessarily make them "government controlled," "right wing," "conservatve," or any of the various things you like to toss around as what you consider to be insults.

"Kerry's trying to do good with his wealth.


The Democrats are getting more smaller donations from individuals who care about the contry, the Republicans are getting more from rich people who want their interests protected.
For the first.

Bwahahahahahahahahaha. Oh that's a good one. Haven't actually looked into his financial history or that of his wives have you?

As for the second. Not true, the republicans tend to have a much greater amount of small doners.

NEWS FLASH: Just because someone doesn't say things the way YOU want them said does not necessarily make them "government controlled," "right wing," "conservatve," or any of the various things you like to toss around as what you consider to be insults.
So keep the same thing in mind if you claim there is a "liberal media."

So keep the same thing in mind if you claim there is a "liberal media."

At least we know that their is a liberal media. :D

At least we know that their is a liberal media. :D
*there
* "liberal media"

And what is your proof of a "liberal media"? I'd like to know.

*there
* "liberal media"

And what is your proof of a "liberal media"? I'd like to know.

Oh I don't know. Just the fact that most of the media seems to blast every republican and no democrats. :rolleyes:

Though I will give them credit for distancing themselves from Dean's tirade

No, I'm not saying that the Republicans are on par with the Nazi's, just the the Republicans are an evil ruling power that squashes all dissent in ways that are harmful to the democratic process. Everything that they do is to a fairly small fraction of a degree to which the Nazi's did it.

BTW Hitler didn't start out as a dictator. He came to power through the democratic process. It wasn't until after he came to power that he was able to have high profile people killed for speaking out against him. Until then he relied on voter intimidation and prompting the anger of his supporters in the public. Just like the Republican party relies on violent Rednecks and College Republicans.

But they respond to criticism fairly harshly, and to put your career on the line by opposing them is seen by many Democrats these days to be political suicide, and to rely on virtue rather than ideology and millions of dollars from millionaire supporters is, from the Republican perspective, crazy. So whether you look at it from the perspective of a Democrat or Republican it could be seen as crazy what Dean is doing. If you're an activist, or have a conscience however, it might just be trying to make the country and the world a better place. And any politician will tell you that that's nuts.

And I know that logic makes things clearer. That's why republicans are so anti-intellectual these days. If people knew how to use things like logic and reason they'd stop voting republican.


And what exactly is so good about the Democrat party?

Yes, of course everyone makes a big deal that ONE news corporation is Right-wing, yet it's perfectly ok that just about every other news corporation except Fox is so left-wing it's not even funny

I love right-wing people and conservatives, in fact I am one.

Oh I don't know. Just the fact that most of the media seems to blast every republican and no democrats. :rolleyes:

So anything that disproves a Republican arguement you need solid proof, but anything that supports a Republican arguement you can get by on inferences and conjectures that are not at all true? And I won't even get into facts and proof that states FOX News is conservatively biased, where they really do blast about 90% of Democrats and 100% of vocferous Democrats.

Good Lord, you don't honestly believe that, do you? That the Republicans are on par with the Nazis?

Yes, Domici does. Read some of his/her other posts. I think Howard Dean is his/her hero. :(

So anything that disproves a Republican arguement you need solid proof, but anything that supports a Republican arguement you can get by on inferences and conjectures that are not at all true? And I won't even get into facts and proof that states FOX News is conservatively biased, where they really do blast about 90% of Democrats and 100% of vocferous Democrats.

I already know that Fox News is conservative. Hell, they are crushing CNN and MSNBC in the ratings. Go Figure. :rolleyes:

As for your other assertions, false. I ask for proof of all things.

No, I'm not saying that the Republicans are on par with the Nazi's, just the the Republicans are an evil ruling power that squashes all dissent in ways that are harmful to the democratic process. Everything that they do is to a fairly small fraction of a degree to which the Nazi's did it.

He/she doesn't think they are Nazi's, they just use Nazi tactics. Way to go Mr. Spock...um...er...Domici.

just about every other news corporation except Fox is so left-wing it's not even funny
That's funny, I don't remember any news corporations supporting the downfall of capitalism or social control of the means of production...
Oh right, that's because the news corporations aren't really all that left-wing. And neither are the Democrats, for that matter.

I already know that Fox News is conservative. Hell, they are crushing CNN and MSNBC in the ratings. Go Figure. :rolleyes:

As for your other assertions, false. I ask for proof of all things.
With the exception of whether or not there is a "liberal media." I never heard you ask for proof there, you just gave inferences as proof. And I wonder why FOX News is ahead in ratings? (I thought polls and ratings didn't matter to you, or was that someone else?) Maybe it's their tactics of coming across as a credible news source when they really aren't, but like I said, I'm not gonna get into all that.

With the exception of whether or not there is a "liberal media." I never heard you ask for proof there, you just gave inferences as proof. And I wonder why FOX News is ahead in ratings? (I thought polls and ratings didn't matter to you, or was that someone else?) Maybe it's their tactics of coming across as a credible news source when they really aren't, but like I said, I'm not gonna get into all that.

Tell me a story that they got wrong on Fox News!

That's funny, I don't remember any news corporations supporting the downfall of capitalism or social control of the means of production...
Oh right, that's because the news corporations aren't really all that left-wing. And neither are the Democrats, for that matter.

What makes me laugh is that in the US and the UK people seem to think we have mainstream left wing politics, yeah because the Lib dems want Castro as their new leader :rolleyes:

Tell me a story that they got wrong on Fox News!
What I meant by "credible news source" was their consumer fraud of the slogan "fair and balanced," their excessive use of graphics, animations, and the American flag to come off as a huge, unbiased news source to the average American who then believes that what FOX News says is the unbiased truth, such as Kerry being French, and being Kim Jong Crazy's best friend or whatever they said about that. They use their "FOX News Alert" to cover the stupidest of topics, like divorces in the celeb world when it was origianlly desiged to cover things such as the Columbine massacre. They give use different tactics of sound graphics and speech to manipulate ANY story into a far right-wing claim and come across as "centrist" and I've even heard them being "less liberal than the rest." That is totally rediculous and FOX News is a grave danger to the integrity of this country, and the well-being of the American people.

Before Reagan's death, on his birthday, they sent a correspondent to his Presidential library to cover a non-existent party. The exaggerated the importance by far, they made it look like a huge deal when people trickled in and they boiled over the top when a class of like 3rd graders came and tortured us with "Happy Birthday." It's not that they flat out lie (disregarding "The Factor") but present stories through a heavy red lense and make it come across as clear.

He/she doesn't think they are Nazi's, they just use Nazi tactics. Way to go Mr. Spock...um...er...Domici.

I've said it before.

The Republicans are less bad than the Nazi's, but it would be nice if they were also unlike the Nazi's.

Nazi's locked up many millions of people in concentration camps to be tortured because of their ethnicity or their political affiliations, allowing millions of them to die, or outright killing them.

Republicans locked up thousands of people in concentration camps to be tortured because of their ethnicity or their political affiliations. Some of them have been allowed to die of exposure, and some have been outright killed, but the numbers are, as yet, unknown.

Nazi's came to power through the democratic process (with voter fraud and intimidation), and then established political, but unethical strategies to strip opposition parties of all power, and then stripped the people of civil liberties in the name of national security against the Jews.

Republicans came to power through the democratic process (with voter fraud and intimidation), and then established political, but unethical strategies to strip opposition parties of all power and then began to strip the people of civil liberties in the name of national security against muslims.

Nazi's sought to equate all political dissent (communism, labor unionism, domcratic parties etc.) with one nebulous catagory (Jews) whose definition expanded to suit the charges against inconvenient groups. And they convinced the German people that being accused of being a part of this group meant that you didn't need to be treated with the same rights as normal people.

Republicans seek to equate all political dissent (environmentalism, marijuana reform, the Democratic party) with one nebulous catagory (terrorism) whose definition is expanded to suit charges against the politically inconvenient group. Now they're convincing the American people that simply being accused of being such a person means that things like due process and the Geneva convention don't apply to you, even though they've never established that you are such a person.

To accuse someone of being a Nazi is usually rediculous hyperbole. But in this case it's true. But you also have to take a look at the propoganda of Chairman Mao to really appreciate what the Republicans are doing these days.

I've said it before.

The Republicans are less bad than the Nazi's, but it would be nice if they were also unlike the Nazi's.

Nazi's locked up many millions of people in concentration camps to be tortured because of their ethnicity or their political affiliations, allowing millions of them to die, or outright killing them.

Republicans locked up thousands of people in concentration camps to be tortured because of their ethnicity or their political affiliations. Some of them have been allowed to die of exposure, and some have been outright killed, but the numbers are, as yet, unknown.

Nazi's came to power through the democratic process (with voter fraud and intimidation), and then established political, but unethical strategies to strip opposition parties of all power, and then stripped the people of civil liberties in the name of national security against the Jews.

Republicans came to power through the democratic process (with voter fraud and intimidation), and then established political, but unethical strategies to strip opposition parties of all power and then began to strip the people of civil liberties in the name of national security against muslims.

Nazi's sought to equate all political dissent (communism, labor unionism, domcratic parties etc.) with one nebulous catagory (Jews) whose definition expanded to suit the charges against inconvenient groups. And they convinced the German people that being accused of being a part of this group meant that you didn't need to be treated with the same rights as normal people.

Republicans seek to equate all political dissent (environmentalism, marijuana reform, the Democratic party) with one nebulous catagory (terrorism) whose definition is expanded to suit charges against the politically inconvenient group. Now they're convincing the American people that simply being accused of being such a person means that things like due process and the Geneva convention don't apply to you, even though they've never established that you are such a person.

To accuse someone of being a Nazi is usually rediculous hyperbole. But in this case it's true. But you also have to take a look at the propoganda of Chairman Mao to really appreciate what the Republicans are doing these days.

Believe me I'm not a fan of the republicans or Bush but I can't aggre with the severity of what your claiming. But your entitled to your opinion and I'm gonna leave it there

What I meant by "credible news source" was their consumer fraud of the slogan "fair and balanced," their excessive use of graphics, animations, and the American flag to come off as a huge, unbiased news source to the average American who then believes that what FOX News says is the unbiased truth, such as Kerry being French, and being Kim Jong Crazy's best friend or whatever they said about that.

That's one hell of a run on sentence. 1) They have people from both sides on an issue there. That's being fair and balanced. 2) The Graphics are cool. It tells you what type of story is up coming. 3) WHat's wrong with that? I'm not seeing how that can make a news station uncredible. 4) Its an American Station. Why can't they show the US Flag? These points in no way makes Fox News uncredible. Your grasping at straws. now on to the rest of your points.

I never heard of Kerry being French on Fox News. Never heard him being considered Kim Jong's best friend by the Fox News people either. They haven't said any of this. Probably people they had on said it but there's a difference between guests and hosts. You still haven't answered my question.

They use their "FOX News Alert" to cover the stupidest of topics, like divorces in the celeb world when it was origianlly desiged to cover things such as the Columbine massacre.

Ok, I agree that gets under my skin as well. I won't deny that it doesn't.

They give use different tactics of sound graphics and speech to manipulate ANY story into a far right-wing claim and come across as "centrist" and I've even heard them being "less liberal than the rest."

They do? How? Oh wait, they don't! Nevermind.

That is totally rediculous and FOX News is a grave danger to the integrity of this country, and the well-being of the American people.

LMFAO!

Before Reagan's death, on his birthday, they sent a correspondent to his Presidential library to cover a non-existent party.

Oh? I remember a party being there. :rolleyes:

The exaggerated the importance by far, they made it look like a huge deal when people trickled in and they boiled over the top when a class of like 3rd graders came and tortured us with "Happy Birthday."

Oh brother. So much for a non-existent party then eh? You just destroyed your own arguement here. :rolleyes:

It's not that they flat out lie (disregarding "The Factor")

At least Bill admits when he's wrong. So how is he lying?

but present stories through a heavy red lense and make it come across as clear.

Now are you going to tell me a story they got wrong?

So...according to your logic....you should be dead and/or otherwise silenced and unable to make that post...

No there was a significant period of political pluralism before Hitler had the power to simply point to any random person and say "I'd like that person dead."

Up until then there were other parties and political voices that had a say, but they kept getting shouted down and voted out in the political arena, and threatened and attacked in the private one.

That's where we are now. If it keeps up then the people who say that "questioning the choices that the president has made is giving aid and comfort to those who wish our country harm." I.E. they're trying to make it capital crime to speak your mind, but they don't have that power yet.

I've said it before.

The Republicans are less bad than the Nazi's, but it would be nice if they were also unlike the Nazi's.

-snip-
IIRC (and I could be wrong...it's early and I'm not quite awake yet): In WWII, the president that rounded up Japanese in the US and put them into concentration camps was a...wait for it...Democrat!

Carry on. I gotta run to the store. :p

I've said it before.

The Republicans are less bad than the Nazi's, but it would be nice if they were also unlike the Nazi's.

Nazi's locked up many millions of people in concentration camps to be tortured because of their ethnicity or their political affiliations, allowing millions of them to die, or outright killing them.

Republicans locked up thousands of people in concentration camps to be tortured because of their ethnicity or their political affiliations. Some of them have been allowed to die of exposure, and some have been outright killed, but the numbers are, as yet, unknown.
Factual basis? Please don't tell me you've been reading Amnesty's rants. I've yet to see even the most sensationalistic media corporations report of such incidents. Don't forget that FDR was a fascist to the Nisei, let them be portrayed as subhuman (along with the Germans), and didn't give a shit about the Chinese until AFTER the war.
Nazi's came to power through the democratic process (with voter fraud and intimidation), and then established political, but unethical strategies to strip opposition parties of all power, and then stripped the people of civil liberties in the name of national security against the Jews.
Republicans came to power through the democratic process (with voter fraud and intimidation), and then established political, but unethical strategies to strip opposition parties of all power and then began to strip the people of civil liberties in the name of national security against muslims.
Voter fraud is a Democrat tactic. CSM reported many incidents of hacking voting machines and slashing the tires of Republican voters on behalf the Democrats. Both parties are equally guilty of the scare vote. One says the government will control your lives, the other says morality will be wiped out of existence.

Since you mention the Jews, the biggest supporters of Israel are conservatives, and Bush embraced that until Arafat's death. I'd have to say I can't agree with his "reaching out" tactic, but I'd rather have a Palestinian co-habitant state along with Israel than a complete Palestinian regime. Even Newsweek says that Israel is the freest country in the Middle East.

Nazi's sought to equate all political dissent (communism, labor unionism, domcratic parties etc.) with one nebulous catagory (Jews) whose definition expanded to suit the charges against inconvenient groups. And they convinced the German people that being accused of being a part of this group meant that you didn't need to be treated with the same rights as normal people.

Republicans seek to equate all political dissent (environmentalism, marijuana reform, the Democratic party) with one nebulous catagory (terrorism) whose definition is expanded to suit charges against the politically inconvenient group. Now they're convincing the American people that simply being accused of being such a person means that things like due process and the Geneva convention don't apply to you, even though they've never established that you are such a person.
Geneva only applies to POW's, making your point about political dissidents moot. Guantanamo bay's slowly releasing their detainees after investigations. I'd rather have a Guantanamo Bay detention than be the victim of a McCarthyist witch hunt. And you ignore the fact that most Republicans nowadays are motioning to strike the strongest clauses of the Patriot Act. Under the Democrats, there would be no political dissidence at all (just look at what happened in the Senate).

To accuse someone of being a Nazi is usually rediculous hyperbole. But in this case it's true. But you also have to take a look at the propoganda of Chairman Mao to really appreciate what the Republicans are doing these days.
I simply need to read your post or listen to a Dean speech to appreciate what "Bushler" is doing. He's a shitty public relator, but at least he has a spine and proposes solutions to the problems--some things the Democrats really lack nowadays, unless its in opposition to the Republican agenda.

IIRC (and I could be wrong...it's early and I'm not quite awake yet): In WWII, the president that rounded up Japanese in the US and put them into concentration camps was a...wait for it...Democrat!

Carry on. I gotta run to the store. :p

Yup. Prior to the Civil Rights era much of the Democratic party was what the Republican party is now. There was something of a role reversal between JFK and Nixon.

Factual basis? Please don't tell me you've been reading Amnesty's rants. I've yet to see even the most sensationalistic media corporations report of such incidents.

This is where I have trouble taking modern "conservatives" seriously.
"Amnesty international says that America is less that perfect so I'm not going to listen to anything they have to say. They're opposed to civil rights violations so of course they're biased against Bush, just because he wipes his ass all over civil rights. So I don't believe that Bush violates civil rights because Amnesty International says so.

Voter fraud is a Democrat tactic. CSM reported many incidents of hacking voting machines and slashing the tires of Republican voters on behalf the Democrats. Both parties are equally guilty of the scare vote. One says the government will control your lives, the other says morality will be wiped out of existence.

So you think it's perfectly valid for the chairmen of State Republican Parties to also be the secretaries of state responsible for enforcing voting laws? You think that the Democrats were in a position to engage in voter fraud anywhere near the level of Ohio where the guy who made the machines said "I believe it is my job to deliver the votes of the state of Ohio for Bush."?

The Republicans have been so absurd on this topic.
Dems "Republicans are trying to reduce voter turnout by not providing the machines on which to vote and throwing out legitimate votes. The republican politicians are trying to purge voter rolls in democratic districts.

Repubs "Well you Democrats are going and campaigning. You're pointing out all the horrible things that Bush has done so that people won't vote for him."
Pathetic.

Since you mention the Jews, the biggest supporters of Israel are conservatives, and Bush embraced that until Arafat's death. I'd have to say I can't agree with his "reaching out" tactic, but I'd rather have a Palestinian co-habitant state along with Israel than a complete Palestinian regime. Even Newsweek says that Israel is the freest country in the Middle East.

I mentioned Jews as Hitler's pet project. He used Jew as an overarching category that he likened all of his opponents to. Bush is doing the same with terrorism. Anything that he's opposed to, he says it's a kind of terrorism.

BTW, the Republicans are not noteworthy in their support of "Jews," but rather Ariel Sharon. A devisive figure to whom many Jews are opposed.

Geneva only applies to POW's, making your point about political dissidents moot. Guantanamo bay's slowly releasing their detainees after investigations. I'd rather have a Guantanamo Bay detention than be the victim of a McCarthyist witch hunt. And you ignore the fact that most Republicans nowadays are motioning to strike the strongest clauses of the Patriot Act. Under the Democrats, there would be no political dissidence at all (just look at what happened in the Senate).

What about due process? My point was that you can't just point to someone and say "they're a criminal" or "they're a terrorist." You need to demonstrate that first. They rounded people up and in some cases actually bought them from their political enemies. They were not captured on the field of battle, so they're not enemy combatants. They're civilians being held without trial.



I simply need to read your post or listen to a Dean speech to appreciate what "Bushler" is doing. He's a shitty public relator, but at least he has a spine and proposes solutions to the problems--some things the Democrats really lack nowadays, unless its in opposition to the Republican agenda.

Wow. I'm flattered. To be put on the level of Howard Dean. Even by someone who's as opposed to, in fact especially by someone as opposed to him as you, that tells me I'm really on the right track, morally speaking.

Anyone who refuses to believe that should simply look at today's "Opinion" section:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/06/10/opinion/main700913.shtml

Not surprisingly, all of their articles are either politically-neutral or Conservative.

They bash Kerry by saying he's been desperately trying to stay in the national news, and ventures into "cuckoo clock territory", because of his statements that the Downing Street memo is important:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/06/10/opinion/main700913.shtml

They give some compliments to Hillary Clinton, but then say she doesn't really deserve any credit for her political accomplishments and that she secretly supports abortion:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/06/09/opinion/main700679.shtml

They criticize Kerry and Edwards for attacking the wealthy elite, while being wealthy themselves:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/06/06/opinion/meyer/main700011.shtml

And they say Howard Dean should be impeached:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/06/08/opinion/main700517.shtml

CBS? Liberal? Shut the fuck up!

They were, up until Dan Rather's retirement, solidly liberal. And so says the likes of Walter Cronkite and other reporters past and present at CBS.

However, due to the fact that their news organization is at the bottom of the ratings heap, and has been there for some time, they are probably waking up to the idea that there are far more Republicans watching TV and buying advertisers products than there are Democrats.

You need only look at the ratings domination by Fox News to see that trend.

They were, up until Dan Rather's retirement, solidly liberal. And so says the likes of Walter Cronkite and other reporters past and present at CBS.

However, due to the fact that their news organization is at the bottom of the ratings heap, and has been there for some time, they are probably waking up to the idea that there are far more Republicans watching TV and buying advertisers products than there are Democrats.

You need only look at the ratings domination by Fox News to see that trend.

I think its a shame that a news station has to be either left or right wing. What happened to impartial news. It probably never existed but you just don't see such blatent attempts at political bias in the UK.

I think its a shame that a news station has to be either left or right wing. What happened to impartial news. It probably never existed but you just don't see such blatent attempts at political bias in the UK.

Actually, the BBC during Operation Iraqi Freedom had that. The British Flagship Ark Royal pulled it due to the blantant bias.

I think its a shame that a news station has to be either left or right wing. What happened to impartial news. It probably never existed but you just don't see such blatent attempts at political bias in the UK.

You're obviously not someone who reads the UK newspapers.

Being left, right, or center is important, as it sells adverts.

For the longest time, by Walter Cronkite's admission and observation, CBS has been deliberately liberal - since the 1960s. He's written at length about it, and says that most journalists up until recently in the US were anti-Right at the very least.

Now the country's philosophical bent is sweeping right. So the news organizations have been following.

You're obviously not someone who reads the UK newspapers.

Being left, right, or center is important, as it sells adverts.

For the longest time, by Walter Cronkite's admission and observation, CBS has been deliberately liberal - since the 1960s. He's written at length about it, and says that most journalists up until recently in the US were anti-Right at the very least.

Now the country's philosophical bent is sweeping right. So the news organizations have been following.

I was just talking about the news on TV.

I know our newspapers are highly politically orientated, with the tabloids being right leaning. The broardsheets are slightly more central with The Times on one side and The Guardian on the other, I myself buy The Independent and read The Times and Guardian online to see what stories appear in all three to get a general idea of whats going on.
But your right I don't read papers like The Sun or The Daily Mail as I have a higher reading age than 10

Our TV stations on the otherhand seem pretty impartial though.

Actually, the BBC during Operation Iraqi Freedom had that. The British Flagship Ark Royal pulled it due to the blantant bias.

LOL, I found that all quite amusing because a lot of people thought that the BBC, which is tecnically part of the government was going to blindly support the government. So when the BBC questioned the governments decision to go to war, a lot of people called it left leaning but I still reckon it was pretty impartial. Except of the incident over "sexing up the dossier" accusation

LOL, I found that all quite amusing because a lot of people thought that the BBC, which is tecnically part of the government was going to blindly support the government. So when the BBC questioned the governments decision to go to war, a lot of people called it left leaning but I still reckon it was pretty impartial. Except of the incident over "sexing up the dossier" accusation

"Sexing up" is a problem with a lot of news organizations today. It's also a product of both politics and the desire to increase ratings.

"Sexing up" is a problem with a lot of news organizations today. It's also a product of both politics and the desire to increase ratings.

agreed but the BBC accuseed the government of "sexing up" the document and landed them in hot water