Why Are Liberals Always Trying to Silence Those With Opposing Viewpoints?

[Foxfyre]

I guess you started watching MSNBC yesterday---

No, actually he's right. She doesn't use hate speech as conservatives define hate speech except on an extremely limited basis. She does use hate speech as liberals define hate speech, but because she is so liberal, she isn't held accountable for that by the left. The worst I've heard her say lately is 'tea bagger'. The old double standard and all that.

Rachel's problem is that she is so blatantly selectively biased and occasionally dishonest in her commentary to create as negative an image of the GOP or Conservatives ot Tea Partiers, etc. as possible, that it is difficult to take her seriously even when he is sometimes right. And because she is so shallow and consistently ragging on the right while providing little of substance to support her opinions, she also becomes exceedingly boring very quickly.

That's completely untrue. I don't watch her on a regular basis, but Thank God I did catch this exchange with Ron Paul. Rachel Maddow is consistently respectful (and doesn't talk over) anyone who appears on her program that makes sense. But she WILL smack down the lunatic comments and allegations.

Ron Paul was Rachel's only guest, Maggie. When O'Reilly interviewed Obama one on one, he was entirely respectful as he is to any other guest who is his only guest for a segment. That is true of all the others too. I was not speaking of how Rachel treats guests, however. I was speaking of her dishonest methods of trashing conservatives and conservative ideas. Even in the Tea Party clips she used in her segment with Ron Paul, she zeroed in on what were likely a very small number of "Hitler" or pointedly critical signs targeted at President Obama, and showed very few of the typical Tea Party signs that are evident at such gatherings. And that is dishonest.

 

[drsmith1072]

Seems to me what you really want to talk about is abortion. Knock yourself up. Oops, out.

Not fair, Maggie. What those supporting the Tebow ad, assuming that it is as we understand it to be, is that it is a non-political, non moralistic pro life message. The way I understand it, it does not take a position pro or against legalized abortion. It simply illustrates one family's very difficult decision that had a happy ending.

I would not object to a Planned Parenthood ad that illustrated a family that also did not take a pro or against legalized abortion position, but simply told a story about a family's very difficult decision and that Planned Parenthood was there to help them make it.

And I bet CBS would have run that ad too.

But those who are so stridently pro abortion don't seem to want an alternate point of view expressed at all, at least where anybody might see it.

It's not that I'm pro-abortion it's just that I REALLY don't trust Focus on the Family to make a non-political or moralist ad.

I agree and don't trust them either. My main concern is that they will portray it as the RIGHT choice (meaning any other option is wrong) and where tebow's mother is concerned it may have been the right choicefor her. However, her choice may not be the right choice for everyone. The fact remains that she had a choice and if focus on the family had it's way that choice would be removed.

 

[Ragnar]

I can understand Olberdouche but I am yet to see a clip of Maddow, "spreading hate."

I guess you started watching MSNBC yesterday---

No, actually he's right. She doesn't use hate speech as conservatives define hate speech except on an extremely limited basis. She does use hate speech as liberals define hate speech, but because she is so liberal, she isn't held accountable for that by the left. The worst I've heard her say lately is 'tea bagger'. The old double standard and all that.

Rachel's problem is that she is so blatantly selectively biased and occasionally dishonest in her commentary to create as negative an image of the GOP or Conservatives ot Tea Partiers, etc. as possible, that it is difficult to take her seriously even when he is sometimes right. And because she is so shallow and consistently ragging on the right while providing little of substance to support her opinions, she also becomes exceedingly boring very quickly.

That's pretty much what I've seen as well.

Maddow Excels as Exemplar - of Intellectual Dishonesty | NewsBusters.org

 

[drsmith1072]

No, actually he's right. She doesn't use hate speech as conservatives define hate speech except on an extremely limited basis. She does use hate speech as liberals define hate speech, but because she is so liberal, she isn't held accountable for that by the left. The worst I've heard her say lately is 'tea bagger'. The old double standard and all that.

Rachel's problem is that she is so blatantly selectively biased and occasionally dishonest in her commentary to create as negative an image of the GOP or Conservatives ot Tea Partiers, etc. as possible, that it is difficult to take her seriously even when he is sometimes right. And because she is so shallow and consistently ragging on the right while providing little of substance to support her opinions, she also becomes exceedingly boring very quickly.

That's completely untrue. I don't watch her on a regular basis, but Thank God I did catch this exchange with Ron Paul. Rachel Maddow is consistently respectful (and doesn't talk over) anyone who appears on her program that makes sense. But she WILL smack down the lunatic comments and allegations.

Ron Paul was Rachel's only guest, Maggie. When O'Reilly interviewed Obama one on one, he was entirely respectful as he is to any other guest who is his only guest for a segment. That is true of all the others too. I was not speaking of how Rachel treats guests, however. I was speaking of her dishonest methods of trashing conservatives and conservative ideas. Even in the Tea Party clips she used in her segment with Ron Paul, she zeroed in on what were likely a very small number of "Hitler" or pointedly critical signs targeted at President Obama, and showed very few of the typical Tea Party signs that are evident at such gatherings. And that is dishonest.

LOL and foxnews lists embarrassed republicans as democrats. They have also presented views of large crowds from one event and claimed it was of a different event that they were now tying to promote. You pretend as is foxnews isn't selective or dishonest in what they choose to air and that is just beyond absurd. LOL

Furthermore, you whine about her selection of clips concerning the tea party movement but the fact remains that these people are part of the movement. Apparently there is no shortage of clips concerning these views so it would seem that they are far more prevalent than you would like to admit. In the clips shown there were wide angles taken and many many signs so do you have evidence to support your claim that these views are not typical of the tea party??

Oh and do you have a clip of the oreilly interview that you mentioned?

 

[LibocalypseNow]

GE/NBC works for this White House. How much Bailout/Stimulus cash have they received or are set to receive from this White House? Lots of "Green Stimulus" Cash in the pipeline for GE no? NBC is a mouthpiece for this White House. I believe they should investigate this very shady relationship. You just can't compare NBC with CNN,Fox News,or any other credible News source because of their close ties with this White House. It really is like comparing Apples & Oranges. NBC is not credible News. This is just fact.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

I thought liberals preached tolerance and acceptance of all points of view?

Newsmax - Liberals Huddle Over Tim Tebow Ad

Then you thought wrong.

 

[Father Time]

Do you guys have the same ire for conservative groups like the PTC who demand that the FCC censor out stuff they don't like?

 

[Cal]

Isn't Abortion Illegal in the Philippines?..If so his Mom must have been considering an Illegal Abortion.

Either way, I could care less whether this ad runs..It's not gonna change any minds. I would like to see Focus on the FAMILY run ads supporting HCR and other pro-life, pro-FAMILY agendas. Also, Why don't they run an anti-dealth penalty ad while their at it?