It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


"Liberal" media exposed on MSNBC as pro-war neocons.

page: 1

log in


posted on Sep, 5 2013 @ 12:41 PM

I thought Conservatives were hawks and Liberals were doves?

Well, not anymore.

It began during the Ron Paul campaign. All of a sudden, the so called Liberal (along with Conservatives) began to attack his anti-war position calling him an "isolationist" because he thought it made more sense to talk to and trade with other nations as opposed to waging constant war.

But now its official, the "Liberal" media is just as hawkish as the so called "Conservative" news outlets, especially when it comes to the Middle East, wonder why...

Only person on this panel, Hillary Mann Leverett, dared to speak out against the establishment. So much so that even the host began to attack her...

The other disturbing aspect about this group is that these pro-war neocons from the Left are comprised of an executive editor and a senior correspondent for Newsweek and the Daily Beast...

The idea of unbiased "reporting" or "journalism" is a complete joke.

posted on Sep, 5 2013 @ 01:01 PM
I think it would be helpful for people to be aware of what a neocon really is.
There seems to be a lot of misconceptions about them:

Neoconservatism was the most influential and distinctive social trend to emerge in the 1970s, drawing its leaders from former leftists and liberal Democrats disillusioned with the political changes and popular democracy of the 1960s. Neoconservatives, called by wits "liberals mugged by reality," railed against radicalism disguised as liberalism and defended elitism. Unlike earlier conservative Republican leaders, such as Sen. Barry M. Goldwater and President Richard M. Nixon, the most prominent neoconservatives tended to be prolific intellectual writers, such as Daniel Patrick Moynihan, ... Irving Kristol, .... Jeanne Kirkpatrick,....


It's not a synonym for a Republican.......

posted on Sep, 5 2013 @ 01:25 PM
reply to post by gladtobehere

This has more to do with political tribalism than any matter of principal. Journalists tend to be liberals and support Obama, therefore, they will follow him down the rabbit hole on Syria or at least not push too terribly hard.

Everyone wants to be a slave, we just want to choose our master.

posted on Sep, 5 2013 @ 01:27 PM
The ultra Liberal / ultra Left Wing is 100% in favor of the Obama agenda.

Always has been, always will be.

Their primary goals and objectives go much further than just a few wars and military strikes.

Everybody needs to be extra careful not to fall for the latest tactics.

The loudest claims about Dems = Repubs are coming from the Left side.

Be careful about their new buzzwords and codes.

The latest is 'We are All Americans'. It's a ruse. They are using the tactic to make people feel 'comfortable'.

The Left / Liberal is digging deeper into their trenches after lighting the fuse.

Don't be fooled !!

They stand in favor of the NWO and *Hate* Individualism.

posted on Sep, 5 2013 @ 01:31 PM

Originally posted by DontTreadOnMe
It's not a synonym for a Republican.......

No, but it does comprise the majority of the modern Republican party representatives in DC. It is a liberalized, marginalized Republican...

Bottom line here is that, once you strip away the arguments which never seem to result in much of anything anyway (abortion, gun control, welfare reform, accessability to American oil), there's very little difference between the average Democrat and average Republican "leader" in DC. The differences exist to give the people the artificial belief of choice when, in reality, neither party is worth a tinker's damn... just like Obama, Boehner, Cantor, Ried, Pelosi, my God I could continue this list all day...

top topics

log in