Is there a truly unbias news program on TV?

[SkyWater]

The term neocon is just what the left has decided to try and offend the right with. The prefix, neo, simply means new. So, I guess being called a "New conservative" is somehow supposed to be derogatory in some weird leftist kind of way.

Neocon is a self-appointed designation that holds very little in common with conservatism. It's definitley not a projected term since Irving Kristol is often credited with the movement from his book "Thoughts From a Neoconservative."

There are many prominent conservatives who have been pointing out the Bush admin is not conservative and the neocons have effectively left us with voting for two liberals this November. Some good reading is Victor Gold's book "The Invasion of the Party Snatchers..." which is an expository on how the political marriage between the Religious Right and the Neocons have taken my party very far away from conservatism.


Buchanan, Buckley, Larry Hunter, Ross Douthat's book The Grand New Party, and Mickey Edward's book "Reclaiming Conservatism" have also pointed out the Bush admin is not conservative. Some neocons like Francis Fukuyama have rescinded the doctrine and admitted it cannot work after seeing the failures in iraq and afghanistan. A troubling aspect about outlets like Fox is for the past 5 years people like bill kristol have been proven wrong time and again yet they still get billed as "experts" and remain as commentators.

 

[CharlestonChad]

Says the guy who switched from Ron Paul to Barack Obama.

My #1 issue is anti-war. Paul wanted us out of Iraq more than Obama. Obama wants us out of Iraq more than McCain. Paul quit. Obama did not. Barack Obama 2008. Change we can Believe in.

 

[CharlestonChad]

I rather have a confused political identity, than be blindly partisan, and unwilling to point out the faults of my chosen party, like some people in here.

Oh and before you cry generalization, please Note I said SOME PEOPLE not ALL, kinda like what I said YOU GUYS, and NOT ALL LIBERALS.

or do you not remember saying this


In response to me, when I did not say one word about liberals, and only referred to YOU GUYS who throw around the NEO-CON label.

My mistake may be having faith that you might actually get the difference sooner or later.

So angry. I'm sorry if I called you out for continuing to make vague generalizations like you have saying liberals call all conservative neocons.

edit: You're partisan as hell dude. No different than any other biased but not extreme poster on here. You're not extreme, but you tote the GOP talking points. You make almost no criticisms of the GOPs soon to be candidate, yet several times a day you bring the ePain down on Obama. Sure, you're not blindly partisan. lol. That's funny. Maybe niave partisan is a better term. You are partisan, yet are unaware.

 

[Paulie]

My #1 issue is anti-war. Paul wanted us out of Iraq more than Obama. Obama wants us out of Iraq more than McCain. Paul quit. Obama did not. Barack Obama 2008. Change we can Believe in.

So you would have been willing to concede ALL those domestic positions, just for the Iraq pullout and defense scale down?

I mean, at least with Paul you knew exactly what you'd get. The man hasn't said a THING in his career that he hasn't matched with his votes. With Obama, you're already seeing the tell-tale signs of his typical establishment politician flip flopping and pandering.

Are you really sure you can trust the guy?

 

[SkyWater]

Larry Hunter has chosen barack on the very basis of Iraq and other liberal policies and said point blank he sees much more danger in basically a third term for bush versus obama's brand of liberalism. Pretty messed up when a lifelong conservative chooses a Dem because that candidate's policies aren't as liberal as the Rep candidate's.

 

[Paulie]

Larry Hunter has chosen barack on the very basis of Iraq and other liberal policies and said point blank he sees much more danger in basically a third term for bush versus obama's brand of liberalism. Pretty messed up when a lifelong conservative chooses a Dem because that candidate's policies aren't as liberal as the Rep candidate's.

I'm not sure if McCain is farther left than Obama, but with Obama you KNOW you're getting socialism. With McCain, you have to wait until he double crosses you to find out he really was just a socialist all along. Voters like being double crossed, I think. They'd rather feel like at the time they cast their vote, they're not necessarily fucking up quite yet, and are willing to take a chance on it.

Eh, whatever. Either way, it's more socialism for us.

We had other choices though, and we can never say we didn't.

 

[CharlestonChad]

So you would have been willing to concede ALL those domestic positions, just for the Iraq pullout and defense scale down?

I mean, at least with Paul you knew exactly what you'd get. The man hasn't said a THING in his career that he hasn't matched with his votes. With Obama, you're already seeing the tell-tale signs of his typical establishment politician flip flopping and pandering.

Are you really sure you can trust the guy?

I like Baracks social positions better than Paul's, so I'm not conceding that much . Also, Barack will have a democratic congress, which means he can get things done and not be a lame duck. Paul would have been a lame duck, except on Iraq.

I consider Iraq the most important issue facing this nation. MY generation has been sent to fight a war over land and oil, yet we were told it was for our safety. We have been lied to by the politicians and government, yet we will see absolutely no benefit from our actions. In fact, I consider withdrawing from Iraq essential to keeping another world war from exploding. If we don't, guess what, I get to get drafted, along with some of my brothers, to go defend our nation against the repercussions of a failed attempt at imperialism. This is the issue that has the most effect on me.

 

[SkyWater]

I like Baracks social positions better than Paul's, so I'm not conceding that much . Also, Barack will have a democratic congress, which means he can get things done and not be a lame duck. Paul would have been a lame duck, except on Iraq.

I consider Iraq the most important issue facing this nation. MY generation has been sent to fight a war over land and oil, yet we were told it was for our safety. We have been lied to by the politicians and government, yet we will see absolutely no benefit from our actions. In fact, I consider withdrawing from Iraq essential to keeping another world war from exploding. If we don't, guess what, I get to get drafted, along with some of my brothers, to go defend our nation against the repercussions of a failed attempt at imperialism. This is the issue that has the most effect on me.

Obama will not bring our troops home. He can't unless we want to re-visit 1929 5x over.

 

[CharlestonChad]

Obama will not bring our troops home. He can't unless we want to re-visit 1929 5x over.

Not spending a few trillion dollars in Iraq will cause the Great Depression x 5?

 

[SkyWater]

Not spending a few trillion dollars in Iraq will cause the Great Depression x 5?

Correct... much of the reason for invading revolves around the global value of the USD. In Nov. 2000 Saddam changed oil trading from USD to Euros and the obvious fallout is a weaker dollar.
http://archives.cnn.com/2000/WORLD/meast/10/30/iraq.un.euro.reut/

Know what other nations have been toying with switching from USD to Euros? Iran and Venezuela. Think it's an accident we've been sabre rattling those nations? When we tossed out Saddam the US became a de facto OPEC member and has aided in the rising oil costs because our money gets printed on the basis of globally traded oil...not how much gold we have in Ft. Knox. Why do people think we have such a strong alliance to nations like Saudi Arabia? It has a worse human rights' record than Iraq and supports terrorism against Israel.

Our economy is much more fragile than people realize and with Indonesia pulling out of OPEC this year as the Euros gains strength over the USD things are looking funky.

Nobody actually truly believes we are in the middle east to fight "terrorism" or Islam do they? Heck, we even set up an Islamic Theocracy in Iraq! Lol...if I don't laugh my head will spontaneously combust from pure frustration.

 

[Charles_Main]

So now it's a few trillion eh. What happened to 700 Billion? lol

 

[CharlestonChad]

So now it's a few trillion eh. What happened to 700 Billion? lol

ha. We already spent 700 billion. Reading comprehension is your friend, Chuck.

 

[Charles_Main]

ha. We already spent 700 billion. Reading comprehension is your friend, Chuck.

Yes, we have spent 700 billion in 5 years, and are soon to get out, so how again will it ever be "a few trillion?"

 

[SkyWater]

Yes, we have spent 700 billion in 5 years, and are soon to get out, so how again will it ever be "a few trillion?"

We're getting out of iraq soon? When was that press conference held? Or is this more mystical divining of Dubya's Benchwarmers? When was it Rumsfeld said the "insurgency is in its last throes?" Why is it war supporters act like the war is over? As if our troops aren't still dying? As for the financial costs of Iraq, we will be paying for it for the rest of our natural lives. Where is the money for the large permanent bases in Iraq going to come from? Should we stop paying benefits and providing healthcare to Troops who now have no arms and legs, or eyes and ears? Do people even have the faintest hint about how our military spending is billed? (Hint: not everything falls under the Department of Defense). But hey, we got saddam so it was all worth it, right? Although personally, I don't think saddam's life was worth over 4,100 of our Troops' lives but guess iam a crazy kind of patriot for believing our Troops should not be treated like pawns on the cocktail knapkin diagrams of megalomaniacs.

 

[sealybobo]

So angry. I'm sorry if I called you out for continuing to make vague generalizations like you have saying liberals call all conservative neocons.

edit: You're partisan as hell dude. No different than any other biased but not extreme poster on here. You're not extreme, but you tote the GOP talking points. You make almost no criticisms of the GOPs soon to be candidate, yet several times a day you bring the ePain down on Obama. Sure, you're not blindly partisan. lol. That's funny. Maybe niave partisan is a better term. You are partisan, yet are unaware.

I agree. he admits bush let him down but seems more angry towards obama than mccain. so he's going to vote for barr, a former righty. he even admitted that he knows barr sucks and won't win, but wants to send the gop a message. he wil never vote democratic. and I'm sure he won't be happy with obama no matter how well he does and will vote for romney if he runs in 2012.
even though voting for barr could put mccain in the white house. probably because deep down he believes mccain will revert back to the mccain of 2000. and if he picks romney as vp, he might even vote for mccain.

 

[SkyWater]

In a risky move to address the op again...

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=ISO-8859-1&q=McClellan+admits+fox+news

This shouldn't be considered "news" to anyone who follows politics.

 

[CharlestonChad]

Yes, we have spent 700 billion in 5 years, and are soon to get out, so how again will it ever be "a few trillion?"

700billion divided by 5 equals? 140billion per year. McCain "we will be in iraq until we win...we could be there for 100 years" 700+140y=total spending.

 

[SkyWater]

700billion divided by 5 equals? 140billion per year. McCain "we will be in iraq until we win...we could be there for 100 years" 700+140y=total spending.

Great point that is too often overlooked. During the Soda Campaign the Bush admin made claims it would cost around $50 billion. Well, to be fair, their microphones might have accidentally cut off and their full statement in context was "$50 billion for the first week." Hey, it's no less absurd than people claiming the Admin never tried to make an Alkida connection is it?

We keep seeing this "Victory" rhetoric but has there ever been a clear definition of victory? Plus, peeps act like if this mystery victory actually happened that somehow we would stop spending money...because we all know when you're driving your truck on your neighbor's property you aren't actually burning gas you have to pay for. Once your neighbor declares defeat everything becomes free! Lol

 

[KMAN]

Charles, you know it's hard to have to disagree with you on EVERY issue you discuss on this forum. This is no exception. Fox is by far the most biased media outlet on television. I admit that CNN and the other big dogs slant left, but no where to the degree of slant that fox gives the GOP. You continue to claim you are against the GOP and McCain, yet you solely defend their media and their candidate while condemning Obama and the left media. A true Libertarian would be equally sick of both, yet you clearly favor McCain to Obama. I'll let you figure out what that means.

But that's not the question... This thread is for finding another balanced TV show like Hannity and Colmes... Do you know of one?

 

[KMAN]

Its a scripted show and Colmes constantly gets his ass kicked. Are you kidding me?

That isn't news, its "infotainment." There is rarely news anywhere on television.

Do you have proof or is this just opinion?