ok this is getting retarded and I need to eat

im just gonna post this again

Alot of people are so angry about how Israel is handling things, along with the US, they will blindly support anyone who is fucking with that. Its not liberal its just retarded or maybe Anarchy, who knows. No liberal imo should support any Islamic state or group because they're ideals are completely backwards to liberal thinking. Not supporting Israel and the Iraq war, however, does not mean you're supporting Hezbolah or whoever else, it just simply means you feel that these things are making situations worse and causing us more pain and problems.
this is what i believe at least.

9/3/2006 1:48:51 PM

i hear you on all of that pretty much

and not to beat a dead horse...but i think there are more liberals that support hezbollah than conservatives...for whatever its worth

9/3/2006 1:50:24 PM

and for what its worth I believe you have to look beyond liberal and conservative when dealing with situations like this. Also, just being anti-Israel does not make you a liberal. Alot more goes into it.

9/3/2006 1:53:45 PM

^^ .... but like i said....i know for a fact alot of liberals support Hezbollah....when i find a conservative...ill let you know

9/3/2006 2:09:09 PM

According to the mainstream media, which is liberal, the liberal blogs are oh-so important in current political debate. For example, they give much of the credit for Joe Lieberman's primary loss to liberal blogs. You can't have it both ways, Dentaldamn ("ok.....[sic] Im [sic] sorry you guys have such a narrow view of liberalism that you believe everything you read on the internet [sic]" [Dentaldamn]).

By the way, your grammar sucks and your posts don't make any sense. I just thought that you should know.

[Edited on September 5, 2006 at 10:38 AM. Reason : Word]

9/5/2006 10:36:35 AM

Quote :

"hooksaw: I want objectivity--to the fullest extent possible."

How do you measure objectivity?

Quote :

"hooksaw: Are you saying that shoving a little kid next to an unexploded bomb is in any way objective--or appropriate?"

I'm guessing you missed the part where I said neither is objective. I'll try not to be so subtle next time when I say things like: "I mean, you've got to pick which bias you want. Corporate or government."

Corporate news has a goal: give the people what they'll buy in a way that will make them buy it from YOU, and not your competitor.

Government news has a smiliar role: give the people what they'll buy--in a way that reflects positively on the government.

Both seriously diminish the consumer's ability to get objective information from the news.

---

Quote :

"Alot of people are so angry about how Israel is handling things, along with the US, they will blindly support anyone who is fucking with that. Its not liberal its just retarded or maybe Anarchy, who knows. No liberal imo should support any Islamic state or group because they're ideals are completely backwards to liberal thinking. Not supporting Israel and the Iraq war, however, does not mean you're supporting Hezbolah or whoever else, it just simply means you feel that these things are making situations worse and causing us more pain and problems. this is what i believe at least."

Exactly.

9/5/2006 4:35:22 PM

"I steer clear of nuances" (John Wayne). You should try same, Gamecat.

Bullshit is bullshit, whether it's introduced subtly or by the truckload. How do I measure your bullshit? Meters--you probably prefer the metric system--or tonnage?

9/5/2006 4:41:45 PM

lol

Ok, so since my dichotomy says that the news is biased toward corporate or government interests, I'm full of shit...because I refuse to buy into your dichotomy that says it's biased towards the left and right.

interesting...

9/5/2006 4:44:08 PM

I know it'll be difficult, but try not to post "dichotomy" anymore. I'm sure that we all thank you in advance for that small kindness.

9/6/2006 10:55:29 AM

how can people not think (with the exception of fox news) that the mainstream media has a liberal bias? are some of you really that selective in what you choose to see and hear? if the media had a conservative bias do you think the president and the war on terror would be scrutinized and bashed constantly?

9/6/2006 10:56:59 AM

you think it has a liberal bias because you are to the right. anything to the left, even if it is moderate, you'll think is liberal.

I'm a liberal and think all the major news outlets are conservative.

Fucking conservative bias.

9/6/2006 10:59:24 AM

its all relative.

9/6/2006 10:59:41 AM

the charlotte observer and the news and observer definitely have liberal bias

thats not relative, thats just how it is

9/6/2006 11:02:21 AM

MY OPINION IS FACT DAMNIT

9/6/2006 11:03:05 AM

never read either of those newspapers eh?

9/6/2006 11:06:35 AM

they both have a major retarded slant

but they aren't conservative or liberal.

9/6/2006 11:31:31 AM

RETARDED BIAS!

9/6/2006 11:38:42 AM

^^^^^^^ UN-FUCKING-BELIEVABLE!

9/6/2006 9:53:03 PM

Quote :

"MY OPINION IS FACT DAMNIT"

sober46an3 FTW

9/6/2006 10:02:31 PM

lol

no liberal bias

give me a break

9/17/2006 9:22:08 PM

proof?

9/17/2006 9:30:25 PM

Maybe he's confusing "liberal bias" with "more-liberal-than-me bias"

9/17/2006 9:38:49 PM

or "more educated than me" bias

9/17/2006 9:39:30 PM

or corporate bias

9/17/2006 9:55:43 PM

http://epw.senate.gov/pressitem.cfm?id=257909&party=rep

12/4/2006 12:04:19 PM

since you're cross-posting the same article across multiple forums:

Quote :

"is an article from six months ago that just rehashes the same exact thing that's been said again and again in this thread supposed to prove something? is the ".gov" supposed to give it more weight or something? this is a republican party press release. talk about biased."

12/4/2006 1:33:49 PM

how does what you posted prove any sort of bias? you're going to need something more substatial than a press release from an organization shooting down a theory they are already known to oppose here. The article cites a few researchers at lesser-known universities as being authorities on whether or not this is true. why do you believe that they have more credibility than other scientists at much-greater funded universities that have arguements opposed to their argument. There's a big difference between Stanford and Alabama-Huntsville.


[Edited on December 4, 2006 at 7:34 PM. Reason : .]

12/4/2006 7:24:20 PM

remember all the research the nazis did.

yeeeeeesssssssssssss

12/4/2006 7:52:09 PM