 |
reply posted on 7-1-2004 @ 05:20 PM by darkwraith
|
[Edited on 15-1-2004 by darkwraith]
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 7-1-2004 @ 05:41 PM by darkwraith
|
 Originally posted by Thomas Crowne
Originally posted by BelowtheRadar
Anti-big government works for me. Conservativism is supposed to be anti-big government. Bush screwed that up nicely.
Guess i'll try libertarian... 
*sigh*
Bush is not a conservative. Anybody who understands conservatism knows better than that.
Is he a boob? Of course not. He has proven himself to be a shrewd operator and was running circles around the democrats even before the attack on
9-11-2001.
Are there people here that do not chant "Death To Bush", but realize he has some good points, and gets the job done generally, yet still have issues
with him? Certainly. Not everyone here is a child or is immature.
If you are looking for a site that is nothing but knee-jerkers who blindly swallow the "news" that was fed to the public unrivaled for years until a
new source came along, I'm sure you will find it. Go look for it. Then you can sit around and sing from the liberal hymnal with others just like
you. Or, you can stick around and learn while at the same time offering another point of view to others. That is what we have here. Differing
points of view, politically. We like it that way, elsewise we'd all go to sites where all the people are in lock step.
How is this a political scandal, by the way?
[Edited on 7-1-2004 by Thomas Crowne]
NO OFFENSE, BUT YOU CERTAINLY ARE SELECTIVELY BRIGHT WHEN YOU WANT TO BE.
ITS A SCANDAL BECAUSE A CHANNEL WHO CLAIMS TO OWN THE COPYRIGHT ON 'FAIR AND BALANCED' IS A SHREWDLY MANIPULATED FRONT FOR AN EXTREME RIGHT WING
VIEWPOINT AND
PROPAGANDA/PRO-WAR OUTLET. THEY HAVE DONE MORE TO OFFEND OUR ALLIES AND PUMP UP THE MILITARISM THAN ANY DICTATOR IN THE THIRD WORLD COULD
HAVE. 
[Edited on 7-1-2004 by darkwraith]
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 7-1-2004 @ 05:52 PM by Colonel
|
PREACH IT! SPEAK THE TRUTH TO POWER!  
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 7-1-2004 @ 05:54 PM by Milk
|
Or at least press your caps lock button again! Holy #, that is annoying... What does that prove? I will donate a keyboard if you caps lock button is
broken...
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 7-1-2004 @ 05:58 PM by Colonel
|
Originally posted by Milk
Or at least press your caps lock button again! Holy #, that is annoying... What does that prove? I will donate a keyboard if you caps lock button is
broken...
Its time people got angry at being lied to by FAUX News. I'm not angry at FAUX because I stopped watching FAUX years ago. And everytime I just
happen to pass by it on the way to C-Span, I get an ill feeling... 
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 7-1-2004 @ 06:12 PM by lilblam
|
Ok how about...
Let's all just stop BASHING FOX news, and Bush. And hating either. So what if both are full of one-sided rhetoric? So what if both can be more full
of sh1t than a Mexican 100-yr old bullpen? Let's not attack Bush-supporters, what's so hard about calmly, objectively stating your points as to why
Bush cannot be trusted and so forth. Let people do what they want, worry about yourself. If you want to change people's minds, do it with respect for
their free will to ignore you if they choose to do so. They may be ignorant, dumb, blind, retarded, and what not but why should that bother you at
all? Then u're just like our government, trying to make everyone think like they do and if anyone objects to their policies, they are WRONG and most
likely terrorists. Anyone objecting to Sharon's blood-thirsty policies is an anti-semite also? Hmm it appears he believes that. Weird world.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 7-1-2004 @ 06:16 PM by Colonel
|
Originally posted by lilblam
Let's all just stop BASHING FOX news, and Bush. And hating either. Let's not attack Bush-supporters, .
This is the mudpit so the answer is NO. 
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 7-1-2004 @ 06:30 PM by lilblam
|
Ah
I see. Well point taken!
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 7-1-2004 @ 06:49 PM by darkwraith
|
[Edited on 15-1-2004 by darkwraith]
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 7-1-2004 @ 07:08 PM by DiRtYDeViL
|
Fox news is news? It would do Joseph Goebbels proud.
oh yea since you watch fox you probably don't know who Joseph Goebbels was.
www.us-israel.org...
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 7-1-2004 @ 08:10 PM by Bob88
|
Everyone has an opinion - and a strong one - of Fox. yet, no one watches it!?!
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 7-1-2004 @ 09:00 PM by Thomas Crowne
|
Bob, you know that absurd rantings, sentences empty of knowledge or based upon fact is a prerequisite of the knee-jerk dems. Why, look at Colonel,
the moderator, who can't help but violate by make three and four words postings of nothing more than agreeing with another poster who says absolutely
nothing of substance or value, just as he.
What it boils down to is a small percentage of the population hates Fox News because it doesn't tow the liberal agenda line and actually gives the
nation a chance at hearing what the majority of us want to hear to begin with, the news without the sickening liberal warp, tilt and lie. In opther
words, they are demonstrating the hatred of what they always give lip service to - freedom of speech. To them, freedom of press and speech is
crucial, only if they control it.
What a sickening, pathetic mindset.
By the way, Wraith, no selective intelligence here, it is only that there are fleeting moments that you are able to comprehend the awesome brilliance
with which God blessed me.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 7-1-2004 @ 09:09 PM by darkwraith
|
Selective intelligence, at best. With broad spaces in between utterances.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 7-1-2004 @ 09:10 PM by DiRtYDeViL
|
People always confuse brilliance with ignorance.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 7-1-2004 @ 09:29 PM by Seekerof
|
Originally posted by John bull 1
The BBC is not controlled by the UK government.
Infact the charter of the BBC forbids it.
Get your facts right THENEO.
Why do you think the Hutton Inquiry pits the BBC against the government.
[Edited on 7-1-2004 by John bull 1]
Thats interesting that you mention what you have JohnBull1, have you read this?
"The BBC Television Licence:
A TV Ownership Tax That Is Not So Easily Avoided"
Link:
www.turnoffyourtv.com...
In this article, Mr. Kaufman says that the BBC is a "government agency that has the power to tax and enforce laws." Pay to watch TV? And if
one doesn't get a license, then the BBC can take action? If thats not a form of a government agency, what is it? Enforced capitalism? This licensing
covers the TV, DVD/VCR players also?
Also found this:
"The "Do I need a TV Licence if I only watch pre-recorded videos?" mini-FAQ"
Link:
www.jifvik.org...
Excerpt:
"The TV Licensing Authority (TVLA) recently removed this helpful paragraph from the FAQ part of their site:
Q What if I only watch videos?
If a television or video recorder (VCR) can receive signals, then you need a licence. However, you don't need a licence if the equipment is not
connected to an aerial, satellite receiver or cable and you only use it to watch pre-recorded tapes. This sometimes happens in schools and
colleges.
The information on their site now (as of 8th Dec 2000 when I am writing this page) is not clear about this setup, for example under "Licence
Evaders" it says:
Using a TV without the correct licence is a criminal offence. If you use a television or other equipment capable of receiving broadcast television
programmes - such as a TV-enabled computer - without a licence you could face prosecution and a fine of up to £1,000.
- which says that it is unlicensed use of the device, not ownership, that is illegal, whereas on the front page it says:
If you install or use a television receiver then you are required by law to have a TV licence.
- which implies that installing a TV, but never using it, still requires a licence."
I 'bolded' "required by law....", because if the BBC is not a "government agency, with the power to tax and enforce laws", then
what gives them this right to enforce said "law"?
This reminds me of "Big Brother watching" material. ANd people are gripping and crying over the "Patriot Act"? Wow.
regards
seekerof
[Edited on 7-1-2004 by Seekerof]
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 7-1-2004 @ 10:08 PM by Colonel
|
Originally posted by Thomas Crowne
What it boils down to is a small percentage of the population hates Fox News because it doesn't tow the liberal agenda line and actually gives the
nation a chance at hearing what the majority of us want to hear to begin with, the news without the sickening liberal warp, tilt and lie. In opther
words, they are demonstrating the hatred of what they always give lip service to - freedom of speech. To them, freedom of press and speech is
crucial, only if they control it.
Oh, so because I'm not enthralled with all the flashy dramatic colors, powerful nazi music, and some authoritarian voice saying, "Fox News--Fair and
Balanced" means that ther's something wrong with me?
What's wrong with "This is CNN."
If you gotta drumbeat in my head that you're "fair and balanced" all the time, means to me you're probably not.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 7-1-2004 @ 10:35 PM by KrazyIvan
|
Originally posted by darkwraith
EITHER THE FOX NEWS DISINFORMATION CAMPAIGN HAS COMPLETELY ROBOTIZED HALF THE USERS HERE, OR THIS ABOVE TOP SECRET BOARD IS A HANG-OUT FOR
BU#ES, MILITARY, G-MEN, AND GOVMNT SPOOKS
BECAUSE THE INFO BEING SPREAD AROUND HERE IS AS
ABOUT AS FACTUAL AS THE MAINE BEING BLOWN UP BY THE SPANISH....
WHAT GIVES? 
whats wrong with being military?
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 7-1-2004 @ 11:20 PM by Ocelot
|
I call the Fox News Channel... the "Dumb People Who Can't Think for Themselves News Channel" 
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 7-1-2004 @ 11:27 PM by RANT
|
Wow
I saw this thread start this morning and already 70 some of the most vitriolic retorts you could imagine have been added.
Why all this effort to defend Fox? Kind of like the "news" stories from this week: "Halliburton Pets Kittens," or whatever nonsense defense of
Halliburton some were spewing. And the "Republicans are Happier" breaking news thread.
You notice in spite of a somewhat liberal and extremely skeptical majority on these boards.... very few rush to defend against these absurd right wing
allegetions, at least compared to Fox groupies defending it's tabloid network.
It must be that the TRUTH hurts.
Let's make this simple: When ANYONE can show me a CNN payroll contributor that constantly broadcasts derogatory references to Republicans, like
Retardicans... then I'll agree that the likes of Fox with it's MANCOW types calling Democrats DUMMYCRATS is Fair & Balanced.
It's painfully obvious. Fox is a joke. It's the cable version of Rush Limbaugh... namecalling and low brow. The Pro Wresling of
Information ENTERTAINMENT.
Of course THAT get's ratings. I watch it. It makes me feel like a frickin genius.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 7-1-2004 @ 11:29 PM by Ocelot
|
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
