Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
PBS, NPR, PMSNBC, ABC,CBS, NEWSWEEK, TIME, CHICAGO TRIB, LA TIMES, BOSTON GLOBE, NY TIMES..............
Perfectly Objective........If only liberals and progressives could be heard !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Tip for the leftwing , pussified hysterics...........Dont like Fox, change the channel the juvenile meltdowns are embarrassing
MSNBC does have a stated slant, I'll give you that. Everything else you just don't like because by and large they do it right. How often are reporters at those other places sighted for lies and distortions. And if you're HONEST with yourself you'll see hardly ever. Yet routinely it has been documented by objective third parties that Fox as a PRACTICE distorts and lies.
You can choose to have your head up Faux's assholes all you want.
PBS, NPR, PMSNBC, ABC,CBS, NEWSWEEK, TIME, CHICAGO TRIB, LA TIMES, BOSTON GLOBE, NY TIMES..............
Perfectly Objective........If only liberals and progressives could be heard !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Tip for the leftwing , pussified hysterics...........Dont like Fox, change the channel the juvenile meltdowns are embarrassing
MSNBC does have a stated slant, I'll give you that. Everything else you just don't like because by and large they do it right. How often are reporters at those other places sighted for lies and distortions. And if you're HONEST with yourself you'll see hardly ever. Yet routinely it has been documented by objective third parties that Fox as a PRACTICE distorts and lies.
You can choose to have your head up Faux's assholes all you want.
The other side has reporters ? Not MSNBC from what I can tell. You can watch The Rachael Maddow Comedy Hour and never see another soul.....you might get some souless types like Eugene R., and the loses from Salon and HuffPo.
Reporters.....hahahahahaha
Rachel Maddow's most prejudicial tactic, like with so many partisan pundits on both ends of the spectrum, is the lie of omission.
It is what she does not reveal that makes her a woman with zero integrity.
Rachel Maddow's most prejudicial tactic, like with so many partisan pundits on both ends of the spectrum, is the lie of omission.
It is what she does not reveal that makes her a woman with zero integrity.
What exactly does she omit? Do you have any specific examples? I'm being serious. I have my own issues with her at times, but I'd like to see what you're referring to.
Who gives a fuck about "as far as the deficit is concerned?" In one case, you get to spend your money. In the other, politicians spend it. Anyone who thinks that's not a difference or that the deficit is the only thing that matters is a bootlicking moron.
The People elected a Congress to decide how their tax dollars are spent.
Maybe you've not read the Constitution?
How does that alter what I said?
Here's a hint: it doesn't, dipshit.
So if a state or local government uses the services of a Financial company, the later has committed a crime of the former ever loses any money? If local governments don't want undertake any sort of financial risk, then they have no business investing in the market. No one is guaranteed against loss in the market.
When the bank lies or deliberately misrepresents the risks involved in the product they are selling, it could be criminal, yes.
Who was arrested for lying? . . . . . . Oh yeah, no one.
Rachel Maddow's most prejudicial tactic, like with so many partisan pundits on both ends of the spectrum, is the lie of omission.
It is what she does not reveal that makes her a woman with zero integrity.
What exactly does she omit? Do you have any specific examples? I'm being serious. I have my own issues with her at times, but I'd like to see what you're referring to.
I have a specific example. She had Congressman DeFazio on her show once, and they were bitching about some attack ads paid for by a PAC. She and DeFazio implied that Citizen United allowed for secret donors to make these attacks and for all we know they could be from China.
What she omitted is that the law requires the names of the PAC donors to be revealed. And on a topic on here I even posted the guy's name. Some business owner in New Jersey, IIRC. And I think there may have been one other guy.
If Maddow was honest, she would have stated who the donors were instead of trying to get her viewers to believe they were anonymous Chinamen.
(reader: I've increased the size of part of the quote for emphasis, the original did not have the extra font size)What exactly does she omit? Do you have any specific examples? I'm being serious. I have my own issues with her at times, but I'd like to see what you're referring to.
I have a specific example. She had Congressman DeFazio on her show once, and they were bitching about some attack ads paid for by a PAC. She and DeFazio implied that Citizen United allowed for secret donors to make these attacks and for all we know they could be from China.
What she omitted is that the law requires the names of the PAC donors to be revealed. And on a topic on here I even posted the guy's name. Some business owner in New Jersey, IIRC. And I think there may have been one other guy.
If Maddow was honest, she would have stated who the donors were instead of trying to get her viewers to believe they were anonymous Chinamen.
Her other recent lie of omission is "women get paid 75% of men" or whatever. If you adjust for education, experience and choice of profession, however, that gap shrinks pretty fast.
(reader: I've increased the size of part of the quote for emphasis, the original did not have the extra font size)I have a specific example. She had Congressman DeFazio on her show once, and they were bitching about some attack ads paid for by a PAC. She and DeFazio implied that Citizen United allowed for secret donors to make these attacks and for all we know they could be from China.
What she omitted is that the law requires the names of the PAC donors to be revealed. And on a topic on here I even posted the guy's name. Some business owner in New Jersey, IIRC. And I think there may have been one other guy.
If Maddow was honest, she would have stated who the donors were instead of trying to get her viewers to believe they were anonymous Chinamen.
Her other recent lie of omission is "women get paid 75% of men" or whatever. If you adjust for education, experience and choice of profession, however, that gap shrinks pretty fast.
lol!
THANK YOU. I just genuinely wish everyone would watch that PBS Frontline.
IS THAT TRUE, OR DID YOU HEAR IT ON PBS ????
Show me one instance of PBS using the Yellow Journalism tactics that Fox has been shown to use TIME AFTER TIME AFTER TIME and we'll talk. Until then, go blow Ronald Reagan's corpse.
Whats just f---ing comical is that if their was a completely "fair" tax code , democrats would still be clamoring every year for higher taxes because incompetent, civil servant, mindless bureaucrats will always need to spend more too cover the future unfunded promises they make to re-elect themselves........... HOPE THAT HELPS
A "fair" tax code will solve nothing.....not even satify the mindless envy of occupyers for a day
Now back to the issue of government finances. I actually think it is better to cut spending before considering the tax issue(except in recession/recovery--then cutting taxes is needed to help the economy). Why don't both parties agree on doing this first?
With a run-away financial situation on hand, I find the lack of spending cuts in the government very troubling.
PBS, NPR, PMSNBC, ABC,CBS, NEWSWEEK, TIME, CHICAGO TRIB, LA TIMES, BOSTON GLOBE, NY TIMES..............
Perfectly Objective........If only liberals and progressives could be heard !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Tip for the leftwing , pussified hysterics...........Dont like Fox, change the channel the juvenile meltdowns are embarrassing
MSNBC does have a stated slant, I'll give you that. Everything else you just don't like because by and large they do it right. How often are reporters at those other places sighted for lies and distortions. And if you're HONEST with yourself you'll see hardly ever. Yet routinely it has been documented by objective third parties that Fox as a PRACTICE distorts and lies.
You can choose to have your head up Faux's assholes all you want.
She has an interview guest every night, and regularly has other people come on for different segments. She always asks what she got wrong first, too. So she's pretty fair, unless you want to see her not being so, that's up to you, Snuggles.
The People elected a Congress to decide how their tax dollars are spent.
Maybe you've not read the Constitution?
How does that alter what I said?
Here's a hint: it doesn't, dipshit.
i made no claim to alter history.
How does that alter what I said?
Here's a hint: it doesn't, dipshit.
i made no claim to alter history.
Again, what does the fact that Congress is elected have to do with wether a tax cut is different than a spending increase?
(reader: I've increased the size of part of the quote for emphasis, the original did not have the extra font size)Her other recent lie of omission is "women get paid 75% of men" or whatever. If you adjust for education, experience and choice of profession, however, that gap shrinks pretty fast.
lol!
I can't remember if she said "73%" or "78%" and couldn't be bothered to Google it.
Nonetheless, whether its 73% or 75% or 78%, not qualifying the number is a lie of omission.
40 Economists Say The GOP Has Abandoned Economic Reality | ThinkProgress
Before the Conservadopes scream "HATE SITE" and plug their fingers, note the first fucking sentence in the article:
So now economists are starting to see the same things as everyone else outside the Limbaugh/Beck/Faux News bubble. And I think even Republicans in Congress are starting to wake up to reality. Boehner pretty much told the GOP members of Congress that told him to SHUT THE GOVERNMENT DOWN over Obamacare to fuck off recently too. Orin Hatch wants to compromise on the tax issue.
Grover and the Tea Party's days of power are quickly coming to an end because after two years, America's independent voters are starting to see how off their tits the GOP is.
wow... 40 whole economists. Out of 14,600 in the US alone. How many people are currently employed as a Economists in the United States?
Do the math, dumb ass.
.002% of active US economists hold that opinion.
Oh. So you don't get how surveys work either, Hall Monitor Jones? Sucks for you to not get advanced concepts.
