This is hilarious. It proves that indeed, "fact has a liberal bias."
What Should Sen. Larry Craig Have Done?
- Thread starter AAAintheBeltway
- Start date
This is hilarious. It proves that indeed, "fact has a liberal bias."
Not at all. There is nothing factual about their thuggish demand that the American Meteorological Society withdraw certification from weathermen who don't toe the Al Gore line. It's just another example of typical leftwing thought control run amok.
Pure projection, reichtard.Quote from Haroki:
LMAO-
Oh, there's a real unbiased source you've got there - archived articles include - "Emporer Bush", "W's war on the Environment", "the 2000 Campaign" which all about how Bush "stole" the election, "The Clinton Scandals", etc....
Why don't you just go straight to Dailykos for your talking points and just get it over with...
If the source is wrong, point out specific errors and spare us the illogical appeal to prejudice because they oppose your politics. Or perhaps logical fallacies are all you're capable of.
I see lotsa problems with this that you and your article don't address-
1- they self identify as centrists? Maybe in the world of journalism this could be true. But in the real world, their voting record says otherwise. Your article talks about their social concerns. But how does that jive with the fact that 81% of them voted AGAINST Nixon, even though he fulfilled his campaign promise and got the US almost completely out of the Vietnam War, and got North Vietnam to Paris to sign the Peace Accords - which was DEFINITELY the most important social issue of the day?
Nixon promised to do that during his FIRST term ("I have a secret plan to end the war"). Why would any intelligent person vote to re-elect a proven liar?
P.S. the Peace Accords (which began under Johnson btw) weren't signed until Nixon's 2nd term, i.e., after the election in 1972.
3- Publishers, owners, etc can be conservative OR liberal. Depends on where you go. But in the end, what do they want to do first - sell papers or get out a political agenda? Let's say they do fire a few that don't "toe the line". Who are they gonna hire to replace them? There are practically NO conservative upper level management types around. This is because , as their voting record shows, that the lower level guys are mostly liberal, and early on in a journalists career, an openly conservatively biased person will never get the oppurtunity to get the good assignments that would allow their careers to progress to the level of management.
Pure horsecrap. A conservative publisher would have zero problem finding conservative editors, etc., for the right price. According to your "logic", the Washington Times is just a myth because no newspaper could be that conservative. What stupidity.
And if all else fails, they can hire from outside, and corporations, including media corporations, do it ALL THE TIME. You really are clueless about how businesses are run.
And yes, the news rooms ARE managed by the workers - the liberally biased managers. That's why they're called "managers".
Including the proudly right-wing Washington Times, San Diego Union-Tribune and of course Fox News. Gee, how did everybody else but you miss their "liberal bias"?
That's the reality exposed in Bernard Goldberg's book "Bias". And he considers himself a liberal, not a "centrist".
LMAO!
I was hoping you'd be foolish enough to bring up BIAS:
I found the perfect book review on my first try:
* * *
speed reader's delight, June 12, 2003
By Anthony Sanchez (Fredericksburg, va United States)
This is a very clever book on developing speed reading. The author disguised it as a nonfiction account of the "liberal" news media, but as I discovered, if you only read the pages in which the author provides verifiable facts to support his reasoning, then you can finish the book before moving from the library book shelf. Imagine, two hundred pages in five minutes! I almost got finger blisters turning the pages so quickly.
I learned years ago in college that when reading a non-fiction book, other than, let's say, most memoirs, that if the book is without reference materials, a bibliography, or notes that allows the reader to verify the information, then the book is most likely a sham.
"Bias" has zero references that would allow the curious reader to independently authenticate the writer's claims. I also did not notice at least semi-complete transcripts to allow for the writer's alleged quotes to be understood in context. The author is strictly operating on a "trust me" basis. If that's good enough for you, then I have a 70's VW to sell you (only driven once, really would I lie!).
Regardless of your political orientation, the author should desire an intelligent audience. By stating his views as proven facts, the author violates the trust given by his audience to treat them with intellectual respect. Another book, "What Liberal Media? The Truth About Bias and the News" by Eric Alterman, actually considers the accusations of the Bias author and finds the claims lacking substance. Sure, Alterman is a liberal, but he gives a full forty pages of references (roughly a fifth of the Bias book's total pages) to back up his claims, and to allow the reader to look for her/himself. In sum, if you want to know who is "Biased" consider who is preferring to hide the information vs. who gives it to you to make up your own mind. I don't have to agree with all of Alterman's conclusions, but at least he gives me the opportunity to judge the facts on my own.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/cu...views.sort_by=+OverallRating&x=13&y=9&s=books
* * *
4- It claims that the press's jumping on Gore cost him the election. But again, it completely ignores the fact that Gore lost the Florida race for 1 reason - Elian Gonzales.
Pure psychosis. In fact, Gore likely would have won Florida if he'd demanded a statewide recount instead of cherrypicking certain counties.
I could go on and on, but you're totally oblivious to logic, so.... have a good day, you
sheep...
I said that this is hillarious. AAA simply doesn't get it - that the weather has a liberal bias. And his reply,
The Weather Channel does what?!
Quote from james_bond_3rd:
I said that this is hillarious. AAA simply doesn't get it - that the weather has a liberal bias. And his reply,
The Weather Channel does what?!
Suddenly it's my fault that you are in the dark?
This is no fun when satire and snark have to be explained.
Seriously though dude.... you gotta back off the talking points for once in your lame ass life. Do you not realize that you come across as a total caricature of a walking-talking-human-right-wing tool? I mean really man.... it's comical with you.
I mean for fuck sakes did you just characterize the Weather as liberal? What about the Discovery Channel? Are you afraid of them too? The History Channel? They freak you out? Lemme guess the Food Channel scares you too.
Do you get a fax everyday listing the channels from which you should be frightened? Of course...some of the extended cable channels are very SCARY and possibly liberal. Watch with fear.
Advice: Don't ever get the satellite....that's for sure gonna fuck up your whole world.
I mean for fuck sakes did you just characterize the Weather as liberal? What about the Discovery Channel? Are you afraid of them too? The History Channel? They freak you out? Lemme guess the Food Channel scares you too.
Do you get a fax everyday listing the channels from which you should be frightened? Of course...some of the extended cable channels are very SCARY and possibly liberal. Watch with fear.
Advice: Don't ever get the satellite....that's for sure gonna fuck up your whole world.
1-If the source is wrong, point out specific errors and spare us the illogical appeal to prejudice because they oppose your politics. Or perhaps logical fallacies are all you're capable of.
A-This a dumb line of argument, even for a libtard. See , now I can say why donât YOU point out the specific errors, blah, blah, blah and spare us the blah blah blah cuz they oppose YOUR politics. And then, of course the charges of logical fallacies I could level at you, etcâ¦â¦. Letâs avoid this college freshman level of debate and stick to the facts, shall we?
The fact is â the very stories I mentioned within are TITLED with a big liberal bias. An example would be â Emperor Bush. Now if it would have been titled something like âIs Bush Overstepping His Authority?â, then at least you could claim that they were investigating Bush with a neutral mind set. But the titles used pretty much blows that away. FACTâ¦..
2-Nixon promised to do that during his FIRST term ("I have a secret plan to end the war").
A- Ok, so you agree that he did what 2 previous Democrap Presidents couldnât do â namely he got a ton of guys off the ground and got âthem thar Asian boys to fight a war that they should be fightinââ (mangled quote from LBJ). But the job wasnât finished, and the American people voted 62% to put him back in the presidency so that he COULD finish the job. He did, but after Watergate, the libs in Congress â pissed that a Republican did what they couldnât â cut aid, publicly stating that they wouldnât support the south. Within a few months, the north invaded the south. And even with Ford pleading to give aid to the south, Dems refused, thereby abandoning an ally and ensuring that millions would be murdered by the various communist madmen that rose to power in Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia. They also took all the American lives lost in that war â a Democrat war started by Kennedy to make him look tough after the Bay of Pigs/ Cuban Missle crisis fiascoes â and totally dishonored them with their disdain for the sacrifice they had made. Your Democratic party did that. FACTâ¦â¦.
3-Why would any intelligent person vote to re-elect a proven liar?
A- I donât know what youâre talking about here. But hereâs one for you â why would any political party vote to NOT remove from office a proven liar like Clinton? He was disbarred, proven to be guilty of perjury, suborning perjury, lying to the American public, and obstructing justice. The SC was so incensed by this that, for the only time in history, ALL 9 (including justices that Clinton had appointed) refused to attend his State of the Union Address in protest for their attempt to destroy the Constitutional checks and balances. Your Democratic party did that. FACTâ¦.
4-P.S. the Peace Accords (which began under Johnson btw) weren't signed until Nixon's 2nd term, i.e., after the election in 1972.
A- Yes, thatâs right, Nixon ended the war in Vietnam. Thanks for mentioning thatâ¦.
5-Pure horsecrap. A conservative publisher would have zero problem finding conservative editors, etc., for the right price. According to your "logic", the Washington Times is just a myth because no newspaper could be that conservative. What stupidity.
And if all else fails, they can hire from outside, and corporations, including media corporations, do it ALL THE TIME. You really are clueless about how businesses are run.
A-Yes, as I said, there are âpractically noâ conservative managers, editors, etc. I never said that there were ânoâ guys to be found. Whatâs your point? Oh yeah, I forgot, libtards have a hard time arguing their point in a sensible manner. Rather, they prefer to misquote and purposefully lie about what the other guy is saying in order to make their point. This is a holdover from the days when there were NO alternative means to disseminate information â back when the big 3 ruled tv and there were no conservative papers with any kind of circulation. They still havenât got with the program yet, and prefer to live in the past. FACTâ¦â¦
6-Including the proudly right-wing Washington Times, San Diego Union-Tribune and of course Fox News. Gee, how did everybody else but you miss their "liberal bias"?
A- Well , thatâs about every conservative media that there is. DO you REALLY want me to list all the openly liberal media sources? Thereâs waaaaaaay more liberal media sources than there are conservative for an employer to pick from. FACTâ¦..
7-I was hoping you'd be foolish enough to bring up BIAS:
I found the perfect book review on my first try:
A- Yeah, that pretty easy to do when you sort by lowest rating first. What a stupid ploy. Please try to not embarrass yourself any more. But again, thatâs how a libtard attempts to make their point. FACTâ¦
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/cu...views.sort_by=-OverallRating&s=books&x=7&y=10
Subtitle: BLUNT -- no-holds-barred & fact-filled!!!, December 25, 2001
By Joel L. Gandelman (San Diego, CA USA) - See all my reviews
Former CBS reporter Bernard Goldberg's BIAS became politicized even before it was out on the market. And it's a shame.
This is a WONDERFUL, important, thought-provoking book and a GREAT READ...no matter WHAT your political stance is. Before this book was even in the general public's hands conservative talk-show hosts glorified it while some liberals (and news figures) badmouthed or down played it. But the bottom line is: Goldberg is a gifted writer who writes with incredible bluntness and supports most allegations with specific names, facts and quotations.
8-Pure psychosis. In fact, Gore likely would have won Florida if he'd demanded a statewide recount instead of cherrypicking certain counties.
A- He wouldnât have needed to recount at all if Clinton wouldnât have made such a big issue of returning a kid back to a father he had never met before, and who, under US, International, and common law, doesnât have any parental rights. Instead, they roughed up the local media, who were incensed at the idea that Clinton/Frankenstein were going to send the kid back to a country that they had fled. And broke into the house, pepper spraying everyone in sight , and pointing a machine gun at the poor, terrified kidâs head. Remember the photo? Your Democratic party did that. FACTâ¦.
Additionally, I notice youâve had no response about the whole Dan Rather/calling the polls closed thing. This also would have negated the necessity of dragging the country through the mud, cuz Gore would have lost, not by a couple of hundred, but according to a Democrat think tank headed by George Stephanopolous, by 8-12k. FACTâ¦..
"What Should Sen. Larry Craig Have Done? "
The honorable thing; fill a warm bath, slit his wrists and slowly bleed to death submersed in it.
If the Mafioso's ways are not his style, maybe he should follow the way of the Japanese. They've devised several ways to end a dishonorable life.
The honorable thing; fill a warm bath, slit his wrists and slowly bleed to death submersed in it.
If the Mafioso's ways are not his style, maybe he should follow the way of the Japanese. They've devised several ways to end a dishonorable life.