|
|
Post by bushissatan on Jul 8, 2004 9:46:03 GMT -5
If there is any bias in the media it is definitly to the right. FOX news is a joke and anyone who watches it and takes it seriously needs to open their eyes. As far as the left plucking on heart springs to get news across to the "weak-mined" of this country, I think you have it backwards. Anyone who cannot see that Bush and Cheney are in the pocket of big business, need to take off the blinders and face up to reality. This administration is working on the 40 year plan to keep republicans in office and to merge large corporrations and the goverment together. If we allow corporate greed(ie Cheney and Bush) to get away with this, America will cease to exist as a democracy and we will be governed not is what is best for the people, rather what is best for the bottom line. I cannot believe the utter ignorance i hear from right wing conservatives. If you are not a billionaire corporate exec, it is NOT in your best interest to be a republican. I doubt there is anyone on this sight that fits that mold. Its one thing to be conseravtive in your personal viewpoints, but wholly another to let that blind you to the fact that this administration is taking this country to its demise. Is the media pulling at heart strings by conveying this type of message??? Darn right they are...I love this coutry and anyone who doesn't get emotional about where things are headed because of this administration is no patriot and should have no part in making the decisions of this Great Nation.
|
|
|
|
Post by scummybear on Jul 8, 2004 20:58:21 GMT -5
What would you do that is any better than what is being done right now? What would YOU do? Besides post the same message in a thousand different forums and threads? Patriot? Yeeeahh Riiiighht.
If the libs were to get thieir way,
America would cease to exist as
anything but target practice.
Hey, yeah, lets punish corporate America, and "the rich" buy taxing them into oblivion. Then we can count on the Big giant tit of government to make us happy. . .
until it dries up and rots off.
|
|
|
|
Post by MooreLies on Nov 4, 2004 16:45:46 GMT -5
Hey, yeah, lets punish corporate America, and "the rich" buy taxing them into oblivion. Then we can count on the Big giant tit of government to make us happy. . . until it dries up and rots off. Yes.."The RICH" are just absolutely sucking us all dry....(sarcasm) Sadly "The Rich" have come to include everyone from Bill Gates (the truly rich) to anyone who owns a small business. Mom and Pop need to really get hit hard. The nerve of them to open a shop selling trinkets, antiques or pizzas and subs. Those dirty Capitalist pigs! Don't they know they should be working for the government? I actually like Bill Gates and hope he continues...I also like Mom and Pop. When John Kerry and the other Mass. liberals says he wants to tax the rich he is talking about you, he plays to everyones fear. No one thinks they enough money and to cry out "tax the rich" is just buffalo chips. It's just a code word for I'm going give you some goodies that you didn't earn if you vote for me and keep me in power. The left has been passing out goodies for votes for over 40 years. When a Democrats got caught a few weeks ago trading crack cocaine for voter registrations it was truly symbolic of their whole strategy for 30+ years. They have passed out trillions of dollars to inner cities, African Americans, minorities and any special interest group that would vote for them. One note on the liberal media. It has been liberal for 40+ years. The leftist are outraged that someone would dare have a balanced view of the world. Fox News has one!....yes one! outspoken, assertive and unashamed Republican. That is Sean Hannity. They have no other Republicans. O'Reilly is an independant like myself, yes he is conservative like myself but he is so mainstream its ridiculous that the lefties are so offended by him. Rush who is not really my cup o tea but I admire his honesty had to go underground for years to get his conservative message out. AM radio is really underground guerilla marketing to the working people. Why in Gods name in the so called free'est society on earth did Rush or other conservatives have to go on AM radio to tell people what the government was up to? Now we have the Internet. Far Left (communist)countries such as Cuba and China and Korea and the Middle Eastern (not communist) countries severly limit the Internet access for its citizens. These are all friends of the American left. Why else would John Kerry be honored by showing his picture in a North Vietnamese tribute to communism? Its sad that good liberals who want to do right have been so fooled by the democratic parties dirty deeds. Fortunately people are getting more and more educated and it seems from this years voter turnout that Americans are more concerned than ever before. More people voted for GWB than any other candidate in American history. Democrats need to regroup, get relevant to the people and come back in 2008. Don't come waltzing in with a socialist/neo-communist like Hillary Clinton. That will be a death sentence for demos. Don't allow a lying, racist hateful 400 LB bag of pig shit like Michael Moore to become your hero. Thats a French hero not an American one. The French were in bed with saddam and selling the bastard weapons against UN sanctions and they gave Michael Moore the longest standing ovation in history at Cannes. This guy was welcomed at the Democratic National Convention. This is why the dems lost. Michael Moore is the best friend conservatives have and a major reason why Bush won. The Americans smelled the bullshit a mile away and voted in thier best interest. |
|
Mike
German Shepard
Posts: 15
|
Post by Mike on Nov 22, 2004 17:11:29 GMT -5
Bush used fear to get re-elected and was very lucky that the Democrats ran a candidate who does not connect well with people on a personal level. If the Democrats had had a truly charismatic, level-headed leader to run against Bush, Bush would've lost by a huge margin. As it is, he won by three percent and the Right is calling it a mandate. Three percent is a mandate, and I'm a '53 Oldsmobile.
|
|
|
|
Post by DoubleX on Nov 22, 2004 21:26:36 GMT -5
Who said the terrorists weren't going to hit us again? He didn't use fear to get re-elected. The terrorists gave us the fear and Bush is making sure we can feel safe again. The thing about terrorists is that they don't give a flying hoot who is President. They just want to kill us all. Is that not something worth fearing? One reason we re-elected Bush is because of his satance on the war. He was firm with his decision on defending America had he kept with it all the way.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ian on Nov 23, 2004 7:15:07 GMT -5
Well done DoubleX.
|
|
Mike
German Shepard
Posts: 15
|
Post by Mike on Nov 23, 2004 21:01:38 GMT -5
During WWII, did FDR or any of his spokespeople once say that if his opponent were elected that Hitler would win the war? He was a statesman, and statesmen aren't bottom-feeders. There's a post on this board somewhere describing what no-account leaders have done through the centuries: tell the people that he (the leader) and ONLY he can save them from their enemies. The post quoted one of the Caesar's saying it, so it's been going on for a long time.
Before Bush, I have never heard of such a tactic being used with the exception of the anti-Goldwater ad that implied that if Goldwater were elected we'd have a nuclear exchange with Russia. That was a filthy thing to do to Senator Goldwater, who was a good man. He would have done nothing of the sort to encourage or bring on such an exchange, but the ad is credited with scaring the pants off the public into voting the other way.
So today we have Dick Cheney, who "had other priorities" when it was time for him to wear his country's uniform, telling us that to not vote for Bush would let AlQ win the terror war. I have nothing but contempt for people who use fear to win votes or confidence.
Caesar also said that after you've scared people into affirming your leadership, you can do anything you want with them, tell them to do whatever you please, and they'll do it. Bush, Rove, Cheney-- all these people, people who didn't serve their country but look down their noses on others who didn't, know the power of scaring people. It sure worked for them.
|
|
|
|
Post by MO on Nov 23, 2004 22:13:49 GMT -5
Pish posh! There were disgusting dirty tricks played out on the part of the sKerry campaign. Things have been getting nastier all the time and I fault Republicans for being too much the gentlemen. They aren't in the mud nearly as much, or President Bush would have had his perfectly qualified Hispanic nominee to the federal bench.
I don't want to hear that "Cheney didn't serve" crap. The Dems twice ran a draft dodger against two war heroes, and said service was irrelevant. They lowered the bar; they've no right to complain about it now.
The Dems trotted out their usual scare tactics of people starving and old people not getting their social security checks, as well as portraying Bush as a dangerous warmonger. Fear tactics work both ways, and always have.
Your candidate lost! Get over it!
|
|
Mike
German Shepard
Posts: 15
|
Post by Mike on Nov 24, 2004 9:19:54 GMT -5
That's true about Clinton and what the Dems said, but don't you see that that underscores my point? The Dems aren't above trying to get out of embarrassing situations without taking responsibility either.
I don't like hypocrisy regardless of its source. The Dems said Clinton's indiscretions were his own business. Baloney. When you're president you lose the right to complete privacy. I wanted Clinton to step down after the Lewinsky affair because he betrayed his family and besmirched the office.
Cheney told us to elect Bush or we'd get attacked again; that's scare tactics of the first order. Besides we WERE attacked on BUSH's watch.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vagrant on Dec 11, 2004 16:42:32 GMT -5
And on Carter's, on Reagan's, and on Clinton's
What's your point?
|
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Latin on Apr 24, 2005 22:13:28 GMT -5
And on Carter's, on Reagan's, and on Clinton's What's your point? regarding clinton, were you referring to the attack that occured 5 1/2 weeks after he took office? isnt that a little early in his administration to put all of the blame on him, especially since he then prevented an attempt to bomb the Lincoln Tunnel linking New Jersey and Manhattan, an attack on a flight from Los Angeles to the Philippines, a truck bomb plot against the US embassy in Tirana, Albania, attacks against UN headquarters, the FBI building, the Israeli embassy in Washington, the Lincoln and Holland tunnels, the LA and Boston airports, and the george washington bridge? jeebus, thats a lot of attacks to thwart, and im pretty sure i forgot some. he also had richard clarke on his staff as the national antiterrorism coordinator (a job that clinton made), who made a comprehensive plan to take out al Queda which included breaking up al Queda cells and arrest personnel, systematically attacking financial support for its activities, freezing its assets, stopping its funding through fake charities, giving aid to gov'ts having trouble with al Qaeda, and scaling up covert action in afghanistan to eliminate training camps and find bin Laden. A Bush official actually said it covered everything that the Bush staff has done since 9/11. of course, the difference here is that this was made just before bush took office, and clinton trusted bush to act upon it. clarke laid out the plan to condoleezza rice, who was impressed with him and immediately asked him to stay as head of the counterterrorism office. this plan was alos presented to cheney, but not acted upon for the whole nine months leading up to 9/11. review: bush's administration did not use an already complete plan that would have stopped 9/11, then only after 3000 people died, did they use measures to combat al Qaeda, which were very similar to the ones in the plan. |
|
|
|
Post by freedomwarrior on Jun 25, 2009 19:09:40 GMT -5
All the main stream media is run by globalist bankers just like this country
|
|
|
|
Post by freedomwarrior on Jun 25, 2009 19:11:38 GMT -5
If you want the truth you have to research it yourself the Media is telling you all lies
|
|
|
|
Post by midcan5 on Aug 6, 2009 7:46:52 GMT -5
I have been reading David Edwards, 'Burning All Illusions,' and while i take some of it with a grain of salt, it does outline reasons MSM cannot be controversial or even liberal in reporting information. Corporations own and control media, they require sponsorship and revenue, there is just no way they will kill their own by reporting on outsourcing, poor wages and working conditions, or business decisions that hurt the American worker. When was the last time you have seen news similar to the work Eugene Smith used to do in photography on a major network? images.google.com/images?hl=en&q=eugene+smith+photographs&gbv=2&aq=0&oq=eugene+smith&aqi=g2 |
|
