California Girl's examples of liberal media agenda

[WillowTree]

what exactly is this "common fucking sense"?

 

[California Girl]

what exactly is this "common fucking sense"?

Common fucking sense is something that a few people on this forum need to get. NYC links to a thread I started.... not to back up any opinion, fact or argument... but to entertain the board.... and calls me a 'pathological liar' because of it. How funny is that?

Edit: Maybe it's my fault. I credit others with a basic level of intellect. My bad. I should know better than to think people understand the difference between the two scenarios. *Note to self: remember the stupid*

 

[Moonglow]

what exactly is this "common fucking sense"?

Common fucking sense is something that a few people on this forum need to get. NYC links to a thread I started.... not to back up any opinion, fact or argument... but to entertain the board.... and calls me a 'pathological liar' because of it. How funny is that?

so funny we forgot to laugh.....

and

you never descibed "common fucking sense".
Or is it Valley Girl hangover from 1985?

 

[California Girl]

what exactly is this "common fucking sense"?

Common fucking sense is something that a few people on this forum need to get. NYC links to a thread I started.... not to back up any opinion, fact or argument... but to entertain the board.... and calls me a 'pathological liar' because of it. How funny is that?

so funny we forgot to laugh.....

and

you never descibed "common fucking sense".
Or is it Valley Girl hangover from 1985?

We? You're speaking on behalf of the board now? Congratulations. I guess I missed the announcement where you were elected spokesperson.

Of course, one does require an IQ over room temperature to get my humor... which explains why you don't laugh.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I don't post you tube clips, except in the music threads.

I don't link to the media - because they are incapable of distinguishing fact from opinion. You form your own opinions, based on whatever bullshit you want. Doesn't bother me. I will maintain my opinions, based on hard, factual evidence.

I do not waste my time on forum wars. They bore me.... and I'm doing a real job. For which I get paid. You want me to work for you, pay me.

That's quite a remarkable lie, since, just in June, you started this thread

http://www.usmessageboard.com/3715841-post1.html

wherein your OP links to the Guardian.

I'll bet there's an amusing explanation for this LIE.

(see why I call her a pathological liar???)

And yet you clearly miss why I call you an idiot. I don't link to media as a source to back up an argument or opinion.

I linked to a fucking story for a fun topic.

Your obsessive need to choose 'winning' over intelligence or even common fucking sense is impressive.

See, and I can make my points without resorting to attention seeking text.

Loser.

So you want us all to understand that you never have or never will back up anything you claim with actual evidence?

Okay....................

 

[Trajan]

One person's name will suffice for one example, by CBS. Dan Rather. If it doesn't ring a bell, Google it yourself.

What did Dan Rather do that would in any way distort or lie about a news story that was politically motivated?

Dan Rather fell for a planted forgery scheme engineered by Karl Rove.

I have to grudgingly give props to Rove for that one, in the evil genius category.

dude..thats the fucking best, you have ( and I thought that poll thread a few months ago was the end all be all) totally topped yourself....

you sir- R A Loon....

 

[rightwinger]

She is saving us from the Liberal Lamestream Media

 

[NYcarbineer]

What did Dan Rather do that would in any way distort or lie about a news story that was politically motivated?

Dan Rather fell for a planted forgery scheme engineered by Karl Rove.

I have to grudgingly give props to Rove for that one, in the evil genius category.

dude..thats the fucking best, you have ( and I thought that poll thread a few months ago was the end all be all) totally topped yourself....

you sir- R A Loon....

There's as much evidence for that as there is for your claim that Dan Rather knowingly used a forged document to try to bring down George Bush.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I don't post you tube clips, except in the music threads.

I don't link to the media - because they are incapable of distinguishing fact from opinion.

You form your own opinions, based on whatever bullshit you want. Doesn't bother me. I will maintain my opinions, based on hard, factual evidence.

I do not waste my time on forum wars. They bore me.... and I'm doing a real job. For which I get paid. You want me to work for you, pay me.

CG, this morning:

Even I provide some background via a media link..... if I'm starting a discussion.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/3887154-post14.html

 

[NYcarbineer]

I don't post you tube clips, except in the music threads.

I don't link to the media - because they are incapable of distinguishing fact from opinion.

You form your own opinions, based on whatever bullshit you want. Doesn't bother me. I will maintain my opinions, based on hard, factual evidence. I do not waste my time on forum wars. They bore me.... and I'm doing a real job. For which I get paid. You want me to work for you, pay me.

Just curious, where, specifically, do you allegedly get your 'hard, factual evidence' (which incidentally you never post)

if you don't get it from 'the media'?

Seriously, give us some examples of hard factual evidence that you obtained on any major current issue that came from somewhere other than a media source.

 

[California Girl]

I don't post you tube clips, except in the music threads.

I don't link to the media - because they are incapable of distinguishing fact from opinion.

You form your own opinions, based on whatever bullshit you want. Doesn't bother me. I will maintain my opinions, based on hard, factual evidence. I do not waste my time on forum wars. They bore me.... and I'm doing a real job. For which I get paid. You want me to work for you, pay me.

Just curious, where, specifically, do you allegedly get your 'hard, factual evidence' (which incidentally you never post)

if you don't get it from 'the media'?

Seriously, give us some examples of hard factual evidence that you obtained on any major current issue that came from somewhere other than a media source.

I tend not to form my opinions based on one article. I find that, in order to form intellectually valid opinions, one needs to study, research, read, and consider ALL the evidence - not just the stuff that suits your view.

I appreciate that it is difficult to understand.... I am not an overly emotional person, I don't read a story and take it as absolutely true.... which is why I rarely join in the 'breaking news' stories on the forum. For example, the Ft Hood shooting.... this place when into overdrive repeating whatever some talking head said, speculation on the number of dead, the number of shooters, etc, etc, etc. I dislike feeding frenzies. I prefer calm, rational comment.

As I have explained before, I have - because of my job - access to information directly from sources, rather than from the media. And, if it's something I feel strongly about, sometimes I will go as far as to either call or email an organization or individual to get specifics. For example, with the heated (and rather pathetic) debate on crowd sizes at political events. Since I know where the media used to get solid crowd figures, I contacted that expert to get a view.

If people would be more rational and less partisan, they would appreciate how ridiculous it is to accept everything the media say as accurate. Time and again, the media has been wrong, or has out and out lied. If you don't understand that, fine. But calling me a liar because you don't understand me is pathetic. Not that I give a shit what you think. The thoughts of a fool are not of interest to me.

 

[rightwinger]

I don't post you tube clips, except in the music threads.

I don't link to the media - because they are incapable of distinguishing fact from opinion.

You form your own opinions, based on whatever bullshit you want. Doesn't bother me. I will maintain my opinions, based on hard, factual evidence. I do not waste my time on forum wars. They bore me.... and I'm doing a real job. For which I get paid. You want me to work for you, pay me.

Just curious, where, specifically, do you allegedly get your 'hard, factual evidence' (which incidentally you never post)

if you don't get it from 'the media'?

Seriously, give us some examples of hard factual evidence that you obtained on any major current issue that came from somewhere other than a media source.

I tend not to form my opinions based on one article. I find that, in order to form intellectually valid opinions, one needs to study, research, read, and consider ALL the evidence - not just the stuff that suits your view.

I appreciate that it is difficult to understand.... I am not an overly emotional person, I don't read a story and take it as absolutely true.... which is why I rarely join in the 'breaking news' stories on the forum. For example, the Ft Hood shooting.... this place when into overdrive repeating whatever some talking head said, speculation on the number of dead, the number of shooters, etc, etc, etc. I dislike feeding frenzies. I prefer calm, rational comment.

As I have explained before, I have - because of my job - access to information directly from sources, rather than from the media. And, if it's something I feel strongly about, sometimes I will go as far as to either call or email an organization or individual to get specifics. For example, with the heated (and rather pathetic) debate on crowd sizes at political events. Since I know where the media used to get solid crowd figures, I contacted that expert to get a view.

If people would be more rational and less partisan, they would appreciate how ridiculous it is to accept everything the media say as accurate. Time and again, the media has been wrong, or has out and out lied. If you don't understand that, fine. But calling me a liar because you don't understand me is pathetic. Not that I give a shit what you think. The thoughts of a fool are not of interest to me.

I, for one, never trust the liberal media for my information

Everything I know, I learn from Interweb Message Boards. If you read it on the interweb...it must be true

Can't get more dependable than that

 

[NYcarbineer]

I don't post you tube clips, except in the music threads.

I don't link to the media - because they are incapable of distinguishing fact from opinion.

You form your own opinions, based on whatever bullshit you want. Doesn't bother me. I will maintain my opinions, based on hard, factual evidence. I do not waste my time on forum wars. They bore me.... and I'm doing a real job. For which I get paid. You want me to work for you, pay me.

Just curious, where, specifically, do you allegedly get your 'hard, factual evidence' (which incidentally you never post)

if you don't get it from 'the media'?

Seriously, give us some examples of hard factual evidence that you obtained on any major current issue that came from somewhere other than a media source.

I tend not to form my opinions based on one article. I find that, in order to form intellectually valid opinions, one needs to study, research, read, and consider ALL the evidence - not just the stuff that suits your view.

I appreciate that it is difficult to understand.... I am not an overly emotional person, I don't read a story and take it as absolutely true.... which is why I rarely join in the 'breaking news' stories on the forum. For example, the Ft Hood shooting.... this place when into overdrive repeating whatever some talking head said, speculation on the number of dead, the number of shooters, etc, etc, etc. I dislike feeding frenzies. I prefer calm, rational comment.

As I have explained before, I have - because of my job - access to information directly from sources, rather than from the media. And, if it's something I feel strongly about, sometimes I will go as far as to either call or email an organization or individual to get specifics. For example, with the heated (and rather pathetic) debate on crowd sizes at political events. Since I know where the media used to get solid crowd figures, I contacted that expert to get a view.

If people would be more rational and less partisan, they would appreciate how ridiculous it is to accept everything the media say as accurate. Time and again, the media has been wrong, or has out and out lied. If you don't understand that, fine. But calling me a liar because you don't understand me is pathetic. Not that I give a shit what you think. The thoughts of a fool are not of interest to me.

Since I have seen you repeatedly comment on the topics of threads that were based on one article (and oddly enough invariably a pro-conservative/anti-liberal article) one version of a story,

as if that story were true,

I KNOW the above post is horseshit.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Just curious, where, specifically, do you allegedly get your 'hard, factual evidence' (which incidentally you never post)

if you don't get it from 'the media'?

Seriously, give us some examples of hard factual evidence that you obtained on any major current issue that came from somewhere other than a media source.

I tend not to form my opinions based on one article. I find that, in order to form intellectually valid opinions, one needs to study, research, read, and consider ALL the evidence - not just the stuff that suits your view.

I appreciate that it is difficult to understand.... I am not an overly emotional person, I don't read a story and take it as absolutely true.... which is why I rarely join in the 'breaking news' stories on the forum. For example, the Ft Hood shooting.... this place when into overdrive repeating whatever some talking head said, speculation on the number of dead, the number of shooters, etc, etc, etc. I dislike feeding frenzies. I prefer calm, rational comment.

As I have explained before, I have - because of my job - access to information directly from sources, rather than from the media. And, if it's something I feel strongly about, sometimes I will go as far as to either call or email an organization or individual to get specifics. For example, with the heated (and rather pathetic) debate on crowd sizes at political events. Since I know where the media used to get solid crowd figures, I contacted that expert to get a view.

If people would be more rational and less partisan, they would appreciate how ridiculous it is to accept everything the media say as accurate. Time and again, the media has been wrong, or has out and out lied. If you don't understand that, fine. But calling me a liar because you don't understand me is pathetic. Not that I give a shit what you think. The thoughts of a fool are not of interest to me.

I, for one, never trust the liberal media for my information

Everything I know, I learn from Interweb Message Boards. If you read it on the interweb...it must be true

Can't get more dependable than that

CG is simply manufacturing a rationale for being able to justify not having to back up anything she claims with actual evidence.

 

[CountofTuscany]

Hi California Girl. Just in case you forgot, I'm making a new thread just for you to post your examples of where ABC, NBC or CBS has deliberately falsified a story, or manipulated the truth in order to promote a liberal agenda. Please post your video clips here along with related documentation of where this was a deliberate attempt on behalf of the liberal media.

Thanks.

Please, get a life.

 

[rightwinger]

I tend not to form my opinions based on one article. I find that, in order to form intellectually valid opinions, one needs to study, research, read, and consider ALL the evidence - not just the stuff that suits your view.

I appreciate that it is difficult to understand.... I am not an overly emotional person, I don't read a story and take it as absolutely true.... which is why I rarely join in the 'breaking news' stories on the forum. For example, the Ft Hood shooting.... this place when into overdrive repeating whatever some talking head said, speculation on the number of dead, the number of shooters, etc, etc, etc. I dislike feeding frenzies. I prefer calm, rational comment.

As I have explained before, I have - because of my job - access to information directly from sources, rather than from the media. And, if it's something I feel strongly about, sometimes I will go as far as to either call or email an organization or individual to get specifics. For example, with the heated (and rather pathetic) debate on crowd sizes at political events. Since I know where the media used to get solid crowd figures, I contacted that expert to get a view.

If people would be more rational and less partisan, they would appreciate how ridiculous it is to accept everything the media say as accurate. Time and again, the media has been wrong, or has out and out lied. If you don't understand that, fine. But calling me a liar because you don't understand me is pathetic. Not that I give a shit what you think. The thoughts of a fool are not of interest to me.

I, for one, never trust the liberal media for my information

Everything I know, I learn from Interweb Message Boards. If you read it on the interweb...it must be true

Can't get more dependable than that

CG is simply manufacturing a rationale for being able to justify not having to back up anything she claims with actual evidence.

You have to understand that California Girl is intellectually superior to most of us and does not have to abide by the same rules. She is here to teach us not to hear what we have to say

 

[MarcATL]

I, for one, never trust the liberal media for my information

Everything I know, I learn from Interweb Message Boards. If you read it on the interweb...it must be true

Can't get more dependable than that

CG is simply manufacturing a rationale for being able to justify not having to back up anything she claims with actual evidence.

You have to understand that California Girl is intellectually superior to most of us and does not have to abide by the same rules. She is here to teach us not to hear what we have to say

Not to mention...she ALWAYS has the inside track. So she's DEFINITELY a credible source...ALWAYS.

 

[driveby]

CG is simply manufacturing a rationale for being able to justify not having to back up anything she claims with actual evidence.

You have to understand that California Girl is intellectually superior to most of us and does not have to abide by the same rules. She is here to teach us not to hear what we have to say

Not to mention...she ALWAYS has the inside track. So she's DEFINITELY a credible source...ALWAYS.

Funny coming from a bunch of moobats that think the huff n' puff post, daily kos and unthink progress are DEFINITELY credible sources...ALWAYS.

 

[California Girl]

Just curious, where, specifically, do you allegedly get your 'hard, factual evidence' (which incidentally you never post)

if you don't get it from 'the media'?

Seriously, give us some examples of hard factual evidence that you obtained on any major current issue that came from somewhere other than a media source.

I tend not to form my opinions based on one article. I find that, in order to form intellectually valid opinions, one needs to study, research, read, and consider ALL the evidence - not just the stuff that suits your view.

I appreciate that it is difficult to understand.... I am not an overly emotional person, I don't read a story and take it as absolutely true.... which is why I rarely join in the 'breaking news' stories on the forum. For example, the Ft Hood shooting.... this place when into overdrive repeating whatever some talking head said, speculation on the number of dead, the number of shooters, etc, etc, etc. I dislike feeding frenzies. I prefer calm, rational comment.

As I have explained before, I have - because of my job - access to information directly from sources, rather than from the media. And, if it's something I feel strongly about, sometimes I will go as far as to either call or email an organization or individual to get specifics. For example, with the heated (and rather pathetic) debate on crowd sizes at political events. Since I know where the media used to get solid crowd figures, I contacted that expert to get a view.

If people would be more rational and less partisan, they would appreciate how ridiculous it is to accept everything the media say as accurate. Time and again, the media has been wrong, or has out and out lied. If you don't understand that, fine. But calling me a liar because you don't understand me is pathetic. Not that I give a shit what you think. The thoughts of a fool are not of interest to me.

I, for one, never trust the liberal media for my information

Everything I know, I learn from Interweb Message Boards. If you read it on the interweb...it must be true

Can't get more dependable than that

I am not at all surprised by that.

 

[California Girl]

You have to understand that California Girl is intellectually superior to most of us and does not have to abide by the same rules. She is here to teach us not to hear what we have to say

Not to mention...she ALWAYS has the inside track. So she's DEFINITELY a credible source...ALWAYS.

Funny coming from a bunch of moobats that think the huff n' puff post, daily kos and unthink progress are DEFINITELY credible sources...ALWAYS.

So you get what I mean by not accepting the media as a source for accurate information. I'm not surprised. It's a pity that more people don't.... and I mean both on the left and the right. I find, generally speaking, that the media tend to present a biased view of whatever information they are claiming to present. One only needs to analyse their articles to find that out. I'm actually quite surprised that so many people don't see it.