Page 27 of 152 FirstFirst ... 172324252627282930313777127 ... LastLast
Results 391 to 405 of 2278
  1. #391
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Location
    California
    Posts
    24,156

    Re: No MSM bias to see here... move along..

    Just plain stupid... MSM playing CYA for their messiah's remarks. It seems the only ones dumber than Bama for originally making the statement are those trying to do damage control for him.

    CNN Analyst: Pennsylvanistan Is New Al Qaeda Hotbed

    According to CNN analyst Jack Cafferty Pennsylvanistan is the new terrorist breeding ground...

    CNN analyst Jack Cafferty claimed the 4.9% unemployment rate in Pennsylvania is enough for the bitter gun-toting Jesus-nuts in the Keystone State to go join an Al-Qaeda training camp:
    (17 seconds)


    This may be news to CNN and Jack Cafferty but Al-Qaeda also recruits doctors and wealthy rock stars.
    ...But not too many Bible thumpers.


    Maybe Jack missed this story back in July of last year...
    British Asian doctors were captured and arrested after they attacked the Glasgow airport, with one being badly burned. They were stopped by police and passer-bys. They weren't suffering with unemployment. (WPN)

    Patrick Ishmael has more Obama video.
    "The most dangerous myth is the demagoguery that business can be made to pay a larger share, thus relieving the individual. Politicians preaching this are either deliberately dishonest, or economically illiterate, and either one should scare us...
    Only people pay taxes, and people pay as consumers every tax that is assessed against a business."


    -The Gipper


  2. #392
    Joined
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Kern River Valley, CA
    Age
    66
    Posts
    9,453

    Re: No MSM bias to see here... move along..

    ^^ What an idiot

  3. #393
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Location
    California
    Posts
    24,156

    Re: No MSM bias to see here... move along..

    This weeks edition of "guess the party affiliation"..

    Lawmaker Indicted In Gun Incident

    Spoiler!
    "The most dangerous myth is the demagoguery that business can be made to pay a larger share, thus relieving the individual. Politicians preaching this are either deliberately dishonest, or economically illiterate, and either one should scare us...
    Only people pay taxes, and people pay as consumers every tax that is assessed against a business."


    -The Gipper


  4. #394
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Location
    California
    Posts
    24,156

    Re: No MSM bias to see here... move along..

    More on the Beeb's changing story..

    BBC: Yeah, We Rolled Over

    On Friday Canada's National Post asked:

    How does a BBC story that starts off saying, "Global temperatures this year will be lower than in 2007 ... This would mean global temperatures have not risen since 1998, prompting some to question climate change theory," become "Global temperatures will drop slightly this year ... But experts say we are still clearly in a long-term warming trend --and they forecast a new record high temperature within five years." All in the space of one hour and 16 minutes?
    The paper answered its own question, publishing a series of emails between the story's editor and climate change activist Jo Abbess exchanged during that one hour and 16 minutes. Abbess told the editor "It would be better if you did not quote the skeptics," and threatened that unless he changed the story, she would make their correspondence public, putting him in an "unfavourable light." He complied with a terse, "Have a look in 10 minutes and tell me you are happier. We have changed headline and more." Now the BBC has responded to charges that they rolled over for Ms. Abbess:

    Among my e-mail exchanges was one with an environmental campaigner who published our e-mails implying that we had changed our article as a result of her threat to publicly criticise our report. We didn’t change it for that reason. We changed it to improve the piece.
    So apparently their position is that "tell me you are happier" should not be construed as an indication of caving under pressure. Further, the editor now denies that there was any substantive change to the piece: "Was there any material change? I don’t think so." From "prompting some to question climate change theory" to "experts say we are still clearly in a long-term warming trend." Maybe 'material' doesn't mean what I think it means...
    "The most dangerous myth is the demagoguery that business can be made to pay a larger share, thus relieving the individual. Politicians preaching this are either deliberately dishonest, or economically illiterate, and either one should scare us...
    Only people pay taxes, and people pay as consumers every tax that is assessed against a business."


    -The Gipper


  5. #395
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Location
    California
    Posts
    24,156

    Re: No MSM bias to see here... move along..

    LAT confirms it.. us average white folks just don't get it. When we say Bama is an "elitist"... we really mean he is "arrogant"... which really means "uppity".. which really means we're just callin' him a n*gger right?

    LA Times op-ed reveals new racist code word: “Elitist”

    [W]hen his opponents branded him an elitist and an outsider, his race made it easier to drive a wedge between him and the white, rural voters he has courted. As an African American, he was supposedly looking down from a place he didn’t belong and looking in from a distance he could not cross.

    This could not happen as dramatically were it not for embedded racial attitudes. “Elitist” is another word for “arrogant,” which is another word for “uppity,” that old calumny applied to blacks who stood up for themselves…

    Furthermore, casting Obama as “out of touch” plays harmoniously with the traditional notion of blacks as “others” at the edge of the mainstream, separate from the whole.
    "The most dangerous myth is the demagoguery that business can be made to pay a larger share, thus relieving the individual. Politicians preaching this are either deliberately dishonest, or economically illiterate, and either one should scare us...
    Only people pay taxes, and people pay as consumers every tax that is assessed against a business."


    -The Gipper


  6. #396
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Location
    California
    Posts
    24,156

    Re: No MSM bias to see here... move along..

    AP Shills For Suspected Terrorist Employee, Again

    AP Shills For Suspected Terrorist Employee, Again

    Pulitzer Prize winning photographer Bilal Hussein was released today after two years in custody in Iraq on charges stemming from his suspected ties to terrorist groups.

    The AP, for whom Hussein works, makes it sound as if he were found innocent or something. The reality is an Iraqi tribunal found that the crimes he was charged with fell under an amnesty law passed earlier this year so there was no point in moving forward.

    But as always, the AP gives the benefit of the doubt to potential terrorist sympathizers.

    The U.S. military had accused Hussein of links to insurgents, but did not file specific charges. In December, military authorities brought Hussein's case into the Iraqi court system for possible trial.

    But an Iraqi judicial panel this month dismissed all proceedings against Hussein and ordered his release. A U.S. military statement on Monday said Hussein is no longer considered a threat.

    "I want to thank all the people working in AP. ... I have spent two years in prison even though I was innocent. I thank everybody," Hussein said after being freed.

    AP President Tom Curley said Hussein "is safely back with AP and his family, and it is a great relief to us."

    "Our heartfelt thanks to all of you who supported us during this difficult and challenging period," Curley said. "Bilal will now be spending some quiet time with his family and resting up."
    You can see some of the ‘work’ that led authorities to think Hussein may have been in league with killers here.
    "The most dangerous myth is the demagoguery that business can be made to pay a larger share, thus relieving the individual. Politicians preaching this are either deliberately dishonest, or economically illiterate, and either one should scare us...
    Only people pay taxes, and people pay as consumers every tax that is assessed against a business."


    -The Gipper


  7. #397
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Location
    California
    Posts
    24,156

    Re: No MSM bias to see here... move along..

    You Have Got To Be Kidding

    Who thought this was a good idea?

    "The most dangerous myth is the demagoguery that business can be made to pay a larger share, thus relieving the individual. Politicians preaching this are either deliberately dishonest, or economically illiterate, and either one should scare us...
    Only people pay taxes, and people pay as consumers every tax that is assessed against a business."


    -The Gipper


  8. #398
    Joined
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Kern River Valley, CA
    Age
    66
    Posts
    9,453

    Re: No MSM bias to see here... move along..

    Quote Originally Posted by AMDScooter View Post
    That’s got to be a joke not even Time is that stupid or are they?

  9. #399
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Location
    California
    Posts
    24,156

    Re: No MSM bias to see here... move along..

    Washington Post Publishes Terrorists

    Washington Post Publishes Terrorists

    The Washington Post published a column by Mahmoud al-Zahar of the terrorist outfit Hamas, arguing that this will help bring "clarity" to the discussion. LGF asks the obvious question:

    How many times is the Washington Post going to use that excuse? They’ve published op-eds by Hamas terrorist Mousa Abu Marzook, CAIR, the Muslim Brotherhood’s front group MAS, and the spiritual leader of Hizballah, Muhammad Hussein Fadlallah, just to name a few of the terrorists and sympathizers who have graced their pages. And they host a permanent eulogy to the father of modern terrorism.

    How much more clarity does the Washington Post need?
    In the interest of clarity, here's Hamas in its own words:

    Spoiler!


    Clear now? Clarity enough for the Washington Post?

    Hamas intends to kill every Jew in Israel and every American walking the face of the earth, through terrorism and any other means available. Maybe the Washington Post could fit that fact into an editor's note next time.
    "The most dangerous myth is the demagoguery that business can be made to pay a larger share, thus relieving the individual. Politicians preaching this are either deliberately dishonest, or economically illiterate, and either one should scare us...
    Only people pay taxes, and people pay as consumers every tax that is assessed against a business."


    -The Gipper


  10. #400
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Location
    California
    Posts
    24,156

    Re: No MSM bias to see here... move along..

    Quote Originally Posted by tucker View Post
    That’s got to be a joke not even Time is that stupid or are they?
    You don't give them the credit they deserve..

    Time Magazine, Stand-up Philosopher [krakatoa]

    From a Michelle Malkin piece about Time appropriating the flag-raising at Iwo Jima to push its editorial issue on Global Warming.

    A little admission in the linked article that jumped out at me [emphasis added]:

    [Time Managing Editor] Stengel also appeared on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” on April 17 and had no difficulty admitting the magazine needed to have a “point of view.”

    “I think since I’ve been back at the magazine, I have felt that one of the things that’s needed in journalism is that you have to have a point of view about things,” Stengel said. “You can’t always just say ‘on the one hand, on the other’ and you decide. People trust us to make decisions. We’re experts in what we do. So I thought, you know what, if we really feel strongly about something let's just say so.”
    They are experts -- on what exactly? Feeling strongly about things? So the operating rule at TIME appears to now be: When the journalist is an expert on something, it is permissible to abandon objectivity for the teaching moment at hand.

    Meh. As Ace keeps saying, it is refreshing for the MSM to finally start being open about their advocacy.

    But Stengel's remarks can't help but remind me of Bea Arthur's response to Mel Brooks's character Comicus, after he explains to her what his job entails.

    Dole Office Clerk: Occupation?
    Comicus: Stand-up philosopher.
    Dole Office Clerk: What?
    Comicus: Stand-up philosopher. I coalesce the vapors of human existence into a viable and meaningful comprehension.
    Dole Office Clerk: Oh, a •••••••• artist!

    Indeed.

    "We're Experts At What We Do:" [ace]: Oh, give me a g-darn break already. To the extent you are experts at all, assholes, you are experts at gathering information and writing it up. You are not experts on any of the fields you actually cover. (Exceptions for those few journalists who actually are legitimately experts in the substantive fields they report on-- but they are rare.)

    Reporters are scientific illiterates, and in fact illiterates on most subjects.

    This idea that a reporter is a general universal ad-hoc expert without portfolio in any damn subject he writes upon is an absurd one, fostered primarily by reporters themselves. It's ridiculous that glorified typists go on talking heads shows to wax authoritatively on constitutional law, "climate change," diplomacy, war strategy, etc. They ought to be embarrassed at the ridiculous pretense of it.

    But they're not.

    I've likened them to the Roman nomenclatura, the petty courtiers who would walk with Senators and inform their bosses of everyone's name. Yes, reporters know everyone's name and where everyone works. They have a glib understanding of who the players are and where they stand on various issues.

    But how such a penny-ante "skill" translates to general expertise on any subject they (superficially and ill-informedly) report on escapes me entirely.

    Reporters like Stengel hate the idea that they're just stenographers to people who actually know what the hell they're talking about (and whose opinions actually matter). But that is, ultimately, all they are. They are limited to "on the one hand, this guy says this, on the other hand, this other guy says that" reportage because they're reporters.

    Look it up. "Report" means "write up what some other guy says." Seriously, look it up. I'll wait.

    If you wanted actually be a scientist, tough shit, you should have taken the labwork in college instead of dicking around in communications.

    You don't get to play scientist just because you're dissatisfied with the rather lowly trade of reporting the words of other, better informed, more important people.
    "The most dangerous myth is the demagoguery that business can be made to pay a larger share, thus relieving the individual. Politicians preaching this are either deliberately dishonest, or economically illiterate, and either one should scare us...
    Only people pay taxes, and people pay as consumers every tax that is assessed against a business."


    -The Gipper


  11. #401
    Joined
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Kern River Valley, CA
    Age
    66
    Posts
    9,453

    Re: No MSM bias to see here... move along..

    Quote Originally Posted by AMDScooter View Post
    You don't give them the credit they deserve..

    Time Magazine, Stand-up Philosopher [krakatoa]
    Sheesh… MSM never ceases to amaze.

    Somebody should plant a flag in Stengel’s face.
    Last edited by tucker; 04-18-2008 at 08:35 PM.

  12. #402
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Location
    California
    Posts
    24,156

    Re: No MSM bias to see here... move along..

    Courtesy of the La La land Times today:

    MSM Bias of the Day

    MSM Bias of the Day

    John on April 22, 2008

    I guess I should never be surprised by anything in the LA Times. The paper has a long track record of liberal obsolescence. Still, today’s article titled Iran watching U.S. campaigns with hope for detente is an amazing piece of, uh, work. Author Jeffrey Fleishman begins:

    TEHRAN — If an Iranian woke up in America and glimpsed the front page of a newspaper, he’d be reminded of home: a teetering economy, a restless populace, a tough-talking leader.
    So in the first sentence we’ve roughly equated Iran to the US and Ahmadinejad to Bush. It gets worse, much worse. First there’s a lot of talk about detente and hints that Iran might be willing to stop killing our soldiers in Iraq if we’d unfreeze some of their assets. Then this stunner:

    Some analysts wonder whether the Islamic Republic, led by supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, wants a significant improvement in relations with the U.S. Since the Islamic Revolution in 1979, when militants in Tehran seized 52 American hostages and held them for 444 days, the weekly chants of “Death to America” have become a defining mantra, much in the same way Bush’s “axis of evil” resonates with American conservatives.
    One more equivalence for good measure:

    But, like the U.S., Iran is feeling the squeeze of an economy in turmoil and an uneasy population.
    With all of this set up, the story now gets to the actual news content which is, essentially, that Iranians would like to see either Obama or Hillary win the election:

    “If Mr. Obama won the election, it would be good,” said Hooshang Tale, a former member of parliament.
    And (of course) we have the passing mention of McCain’s “bomb Iran” statement. Finally, Fleishman concludes his piece with a quote to the effect that it’s all America’s fault:

    “If the Iranians feel less threatened by America, they’ll be more open. When you have 160,000 U.S. troops in Iraq, three American aircraft carriers in the Persian Gulf, and a president and vice president who keep talking about military options, it’s hard to think about Iranians being open.”
    Yeah, that’s tough. And when you have Quds Forces training militants, handing out cash to anyone who will attack US soldiers and transferring deadly EFP roadside bombs to Iraq by the truckload, it’s also hard to “be open.” Somehow none of that made it into Fleishman’s analysis.
    Jerks..
    "The most dangerous myth is the demagoguery that business can be made to pay a larger share, thus relieving the individual. Politicians preaching this are either deliberately dishonest, or economically illiterate, and either one should scare us...
    Only people pay taxes, and people pay as consumers every tax that is assessed against a business."


    -The Gipper


  13. #403
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Location
    California
    Posts
    24,156

    Re: No MSM bias to see here... move along..

    Heard the same type of BS reporting on NPR this morning in regard to the SF lawsuit against the VA by unnamed "veterans groups" claiming inadequate mental health care. To prop up the "unnamed" veterans groups they cited "Unamed reports". What a load of crap.

    Of course this was followed shortly thereafter with a story about the success of the Iraq gubberment in dealing with Mookey and the Basra "surprise". The only surprise in reality was on the part of the media who predicted utter failure before the program even started. A common theme.

    Followed by the news the Petraeus was about to take the lead of CENTCOM. Described as the architect of the strategy that led to the "tenuous" reduction in violence in Iraq.

    In short.. the usual nauseating morning NPR trifecta of bias..

    Biased Media Reports Outrageous Military Suicide Numbers

    Bob Owens noticed some very shoddy reporting today at the San Francisco Chronicle:

    SFGate reported:

    More than 120 veterans of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq commit suicide every week while the government stalls in granting returning troops the mental health treatment and benefits to which they are entitled, veterans advocates told a federal judge Monday in San Francisco.
    120 suicides every week???
    That comes out to 6,240 veteran suicides each year or 17 suicides every day.

    Actually, that number is about four times higher (1,858 in 2006) than the total military fatalities each year.
    That number is also 40 times higher than the total number of military suicides in 2006.
    In 2006, 155 US military members in all branches committed suicide:

    Click to Enlarge

    In fact the average number of suicides dropped during the Bush years compared to the Clinton years.

    But, leave it to the mainstream media to report some hugely inaccurate military fatality numbers and not question it.
    Did anyone read this before it was published???
    Unreal.

    Dan Collins adds this: "If one veteran of the wars kills himself weekly, it’s a tragedy. These morons have turned it into a farce."

    Previously:
    Since Clinton's Left Office Fewer Soldiers Kill Themselves
    MEDIA MISINFORMS: Fewer Soldiers Commit Suicide During Bush Years
    Sorry WaPo.. More Soldiers Committed Suicide When Clinton Was in Office
    Utterly repulsive..
    "The most dangerous myth is the demagoguery that business can be made to pay a larger share, thus relieving the individual. Politicians preaching this are either deliberately dishonest, or economically illiterate, and either one should scare us...
    Only people pay taxes, and people pay as consumers every tax that is assessed against a business."


    -The Gipper


  14. #404
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Location
    California
    Posts
    24,156

    Re: No MSM bias to see here... move along..

    Gee.. I hope not Mushmouth... is your leg still tinglin'? I also hope the MSM does not try to frame the narrative that the only way Bammma could lose if if us "racists" have our way. And when I say "racists".. I mean us Repug racists.. not to be confused with Bamma's racist/race baiting friends.. those are merely a "distraction".

    Matthews: Will NC GOP Run 'Overtly Racist' Campaign vs. Obama?
    "The most dangerous myth is the demagoguery that business can be made to pay a larger share, thus relieving the individual. Politicians preaching this are either deliberately dishonest, or economically illiterate, and either one should scare us...
    Only people pay taxes, and people pay as consumers every tax that is assessed against a business."


    -The Gipper


  15. #405
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Location
    California
    Posts
    24,156

    Re: No MSM bias to see here... move along..

    The MSM.. reaching new lows.... digging furiously. Of all the things they could have used to smear him.. they chose his military pension? Do yourselves a favor you pathetic group of losers.. leave his pension out of it.. he earned every cent and then some IMHO.

    McCain's Pension

    The Press: When it comes to smearing John McCain, the mainstream media don't sleep. Now it's "raising questions" about the disability pension he got for torture injuries as a prisoner of war. Where's the shame?

    Hard to believe, but true. The industrious beavers who "raise questions" about McCain's fitness for the presidency, citing his $58,000 disability pension, are this time from the Los Angeles Times.

    First, the Times' April 22 hit piece implied that, since McCain is in good enough shape to walk across the Grand Canyon, there's something dishonest about his tax-free disability pension. Second, it implied that McCain must be too handicapped to be president at all.

    Did they do any research on this? Like, oh, noticing the aforementioned McCain Grand Canyon crossing? In a word, no.

    This follows another piece from the New York Times that raised questions about McCain's qualifications for the presidency because he was born at a U.S. military base in Panama.

    See a pattern? It's as if McCain's years of honorable military service to our country have been reduced to merely a digging ground for the media's bid to discredit him. Not surprising — ever since the Vietnam War itself, the media have held the military in contempt.

    Let's go over again why McCain got that pension in the first place.

    McCain was a Navy fighter pilot. He was seriously injured after being shot down over Hanoi in 1966 and spent 5 1/2 years in a hellish communist prison.

    The Vietnamese communists twisted his broken arms behind his back and denied him medical treatment. They tried to force him to sign statements betraying his country. He also had to endure forced visits from traitorous anti-war peaceniks.

    In severe pain, McCain repeatedly refused early release to avoid becoming a propaganda tool of the enemy and to ensure that his men were freed first. After his 1973 release, he spent years in physical therapy to gain the limited mobility he now has.

    His $58,000 pension is paltry compared with the price he paid.

    No constitutional limits exist on disabled people serving as president. Nor does "disabled" mean "unable" — some disabled even hike the Grand Canyon. Raising such "fitness" questions in any other context would rightly be denounced as "able-ist" bigotry.

    So why do the media do this? Raising questions without reporting answers is a bid to sow doubt. And against honorable service to one's country, such questions are a smoke screen for a hit job.
    "The most dangerous myth is the demagoguery that business can be made to pay a larger share, thus relieving the individual. Politicians preaching this are either deliberately dishonest, or economically illiterate, and either one should scare us...
    Only people pay taxes, and people pay as consumers every tax that is assessed against a business."


    -The Gipper


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •