Liberal Media At It Again

[red states rule]

As long as it's legal what's the problem?

You should have the same standards for your president and his twisted minions that you have for others.

How many times have you cons tried to defend the shady actions of this White House with the argument "Can you prove that any laws were broken?"

Nobody gives to Republicans in the amount of Soros

The point is, Dems have a serious problem taking his money and yet not giving him what he wants

 

[Rosotar]

Here is the facts on Soros and how he flows money to the left
Soros has set up a complicated political operation designed to do two things: buy influence among some liberal politicians, and smear people with whom he disagrees.

You say "facts" here RSR but I don't see any facts. All I see is you throwing some bullshit out there and trying to call it a fact with no source to back it up. Where do you get this information? Some radical, right-wing, uber commentator I'm betting.

Now here's a chart of how Soros and a few other wealthy radicals who help him are funneling money into the political process. Stay with me on this. Most of Soros' political money flows through his Open Society Institute. You see it there on the left, which is almost unlimited funding.

Since 2001, according to federal documents, the Open Society Institute has given nearly $20 million to the Tides Foundation right below that. An astounding amount.

Now Tides, in turn, funnels the money to a variety of radical hatchet men who are all well paid. For example, Tides has donated millions to the vile propaganda outfit Media Matters, which specializes in distorting comments made by politicians, pundits, and media people. Media Matters is an Internet site, but directly feeds its propaganda to some mainstream media people including elements at NBC News, columnist Frank Rich and Paul Krugman at The New York Times, columnist Jonathan Alter at Newsweek, and Bill Moyers at PBS. — In fact, as president of the Shoeman Center Foundation, Moyers oversaw at least a $500,000 transfer of money to Media Matters
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,268043,00.html

Figures....."FOX news of all sources!

That's hilarious in light of you trying to claim that FOX is not biased to the right!

Hey RSR, Rupert Murdock is a VERY rich man too and FOX is not the only media outlet he owns!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2162658.stm

 

[red states rule]

You say "facts" here RSR but I don't see any facts. All I see is you throwing some bullshit out there and trying to call it a fact with no source to back it up. Where do you get this information? Some radical, right-wing, uber commentator I'm betting.





Figures....."FOX news of all sources!

That's hilarious in light of you trying to claim that FOX is not biased to the right!

Hey RSR, Rupert Murdock is a VERY rich man too and FOX is not the only media outlet he owns!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2162658.stm

Do a Google search - the facts are correct

Soros is paying for the Democrat party and their websites

Along with Moveon.org

 

[Rosotar]

Once upon a time the NEWS was supposed to be unbiased reporting of facts. Journalists prided themselves on being fair and not creating stories or embelishing them, nor did they push their own private political agenda in the words or news reports they provided..

Bullshit!

When it comes to war coverage "once upon a time" the only "news" Americans were allowed to receive were DOD press releases which were heavily slanted in favor of our government. They were little more than pro-war propaganda.

What country or planet did you grow up on?

Maybe you prefer simply being lied to by your government and calling it "news?"

That's pretty sad and it's definately not very American!

That is simply not true now nor has it been for a long time. In Iraq reporters for the major networks don't even leave the green zone, they pay Iraqis to "get" stories for them...

Kind of like American politicians and high ranking commanders?

Their bias is so strong they avoid reporting good news and concentrate on any negative thing they can find,...

That's because the "good news" from Iraq isn't really good. I challenge you to name one "good" thing that's happened in Iraq that has turned the tide of violence and bloodshed and the downward spiral of the situation there that your so called "liberal" media has failed to report on.

I'll be waiting.

even using negative words when reporting successes.,

Well if you can't provide a specific example then you're just parroting conservative talking points which kind of makes you a HUGE hypocrite in the context of this thread.

Anyone remember a certain CBS headliner that falsified a report about Bush just before the election? His entire defense was "well it may be a forgery, but the information is true".

Of course we remember it!

The Conservative media jumped all over it and used it to brainwash their sheep into believing that all the media other than FOX news was biased to the left.

Looks like it worked on you!

BTW....the information IS true in spite of the particular source being bogus. They should have gone with on of the many other available sources.

and then tried to influence an election by reporting it just before the vote ( they were rushed to report early because someone was going to expose their story, the original plan was to do the report a few days before the vote)..

You mean like Alberto Gonzales replacing federal prosecutors in order to influence an election?

Main stream media news is biased to the left. For years they denied it but now the defense has shifted to " don't look at our bias, check out Fox").

And FOX's lame defense is "Don't look at our bias check out EVERYBODY IN THE WORLD BUT US!"

That's not logical or reasonable is it? That everybody else in the whole entire world who happens to be reporting the same things is biased but FOX news isn't?

Man...talk about your conspiracy theories!

Talk about bias.... no main stream network would even show or discuss the "swiftboat" claims other than to label them lies,").

Maybe that's because the "swiftboat vets' were a bunch of lying, self-serving, political hacks on Rupert Murdoch's payroll who were simply willing to sell out their military service for their corrupt political party. They had no credibility outside of the FOX news sheep herd.

but they ran every story that claimed Bush was awol from the National Guard or that his daddy used influence to get him in to the Guard..

Maybe because that story has more credibility?

Bush was AWOL from a routine flight physical. This disqualified him for further service. Typically a guy would spend time in the brig for this but not Dubya.

They even trotted out the bogus claim that Bush stole the election in 2000...

Who says this claim is bogus? Just because you say it doesn't make it true!

Only Bush didn't steal the election per se. He's so dim-witted he couldn't steal sand from an Arab. The election was stolen by operatives much more powerful than Dubya. He just happened to be the first useful idiot in line for the job of puppet.

And after the 2004 election they tried to claim that republican operatives had used hidden codes in the machines the press and the democrats demanded be used to to steal that election. of course if one does a little research one finds out that just as many companies that sell those machines are owned and run by Liberal Democrats.

Even if you could show me your "research" you lying hack, what difference would it make? Nobody cares who owns the companies who sell the machines the question is who makes them and maintains them?

Who controls all the operating codes that upload their data?

Do me a favor Gunny, do a little more of your "research" (LOL) and get back to me on that and we'll try to extract your foot from your mouth OK?

 

[Annie]

Bullshit!

When it comes to war coverage "once upon a time" the only "news" Americans were allowed to receive were DOD press releases which were heavily slanted in favor of our government. They were little more than pro-war propaganda.

What country or planet did you grow up on?

Maybe you prefer simply being lied to by your government and calling it "news?"

That's pretty sad and it's definately not very American!

What you are saying and claiming is unadulterated bullshit, which you spew forth with as much vehemence as you are able to muster via the printed word. Which does NOT make you or your opinion correct.

There were plenty of news articles and op-eds warning of the possibility of civil war, not to mention too few troops. While I personally had no issue with trying the 'light force strategy', I do fault the administration for not switching sooner to a surge or whatever. However, that does not alter the fact of whether or not it was the right war at the right time. That too was debated in the press.

Kind of like American politicians and high ranking commanders?

Seems you pontificate much, but read little. May I suggest some that have been there, like Michael Yon, Bill Roggio, etc? You are correct about politicians to the best of my knowledge, but woefully uninformed about high ranking commanders.

That's because the "good news" from Iraq isn't really good. I challenge you to name one "good" thing that's happened in Iraq that has turned the tide of violence and bloodshed and the downward spiral of the situation there that your so called "liberal" media has failed to report on.

I'll be waiting.

Begin with Iraq the Model and scroll. Then check out some of those I posted just above.

Well if you can't provide a specific example then you're just parroting conservative talking points which kind of makes you a HUGE hypocrite in the context of this thread.

Not me, you perhaps.

Of course we remember it!

The Conservative media jumped all over it and used it to brainwash their sheep into believing that all the media other than FOX news was biased to the left.

Looks like it worked on you!

BTW....the information IS true in spite of the particular source being bogus. They should have gone with on of the many other available sources.

That may be the most nonsensical writing I've read today.

You mean like Alberto Gonzales replacing federal prosecutors in order to influence an election?

Off topic? I guess you are going with throw as much shi* and see how much will stick?

And FOX's lame defense is "Don't look at our bias check out EVERYBODY IN THE WORLD BUT US!"

That's not logical or reasonable is it? That everybody else in the whole entire world who happens to be reporting the same things is biased but FOX news isn't?

Man...talk about your conspiracy theories!

I'm not hear to defend any media, but will say what you are claiming above, holds in spades for yourself. Other than 'media matters' there have been no authoritative studies that have found more bias at FOX than other sources. There was a joint study by Stanford and U of Chicago that found FOX less biased than any other MSM source, which of course they aren't. But I'm sure that wouldn't influence your biases.

Maybe that's because the "swiftboat vets' were a bunch of lying, self-serving, political hacks on Rupert Murdoch's payroll who were simply willing to sell out their military service for their corrupt political party. They had no credibility outside of the FOX news sheep herd.



Maybe because that story has more credibility?

Bush was AWOL from a routine flight physical. This disqualified him for further service. Typically a guy would spend time in the brig for this but not Dubya.

One must stand in wonder of your complaints about others. Seriously, do your read what you post?

Who says this claim is bogus? Just because you say it doesn't make it true!

Only Bush didn't steal the election per se. He's so dim-witted he couldn't steal sand from an Arab. The election was stolen by operatives much more powerful than Dubya. He just happened to be the first useful idiot in line for the job of puppet.

Well... from the bastion of the far right,

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/media/media_watch/jan-june01/recount_4-3.html

Even if you could show me your "research" you lying hack, what difference would it make? Nobody cares who owns the companies who sell the machines the question is who makes them and maintains them?

Who controls all the operating codes that upload their data?

Do me a favor Gunny, do a little more of your "research" (LOL) and get back to me on that and we'll try to extract your foot from your mouth OK?

Wow, you really showed Gunny.

 

[Gunny]

Yeah right.

Just like the White House promised that NO would be rebuilt better than it was before.

Hasn't happened yet.

What point are you trying to make here Ret.GySgt.?

You just quoted a statement that says bush has over extended our resources with his foible in Iraq and now we can't even take care of our own country's needs.

Was that your intention?

National Guard Has Manpower, Assets Needed for Kansas Relief EffortBy Donna Miles
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON (5/8/2007) – National Guard troops responding to a tornado that devastated Greensburg, Kan., have the manpower and resources they need and can tap into additional support if they need it, defense officials said today.

"If the National Guard has it, Kansas will receive it," said Army Lt. Gen. H Stephen Blum, chief of the National Guard Bureau.

more ... http://www.ngb.army.mil/news/archives/2007/05/050807-Assets_needed.aspx

It appears the National Guard disagrees with your assertion.

 

[actsnoblemartin]

Christ: i have no comment on the matter, and dont use my name in vain

 

[actsnoblemartin]

What the hell is this crap?.

Footbaths?. At air airport?. How about confessional for all the catholics, and who knows what the buddhists, wiccans, jews, and pagans will demand next.


American, stop being such a bunch of wussies, and stop cow towing to the suck lambs, er muslims

 

[Care4all]

Do a Google search - the facts are correct

Soros is paying for the Democrat party and their websites

Along with Moveon.org

fyi!

ANTI-W. $OROS: I QUIT POLITICS
By MAGGIE HABERMAN-New York Post
September 29, 2006 -- Billionaire liberal financier George Soros, who spent millions of his fortune trying to oust President Bush in 2004, yesterday said he hopes to stay out of politics from now on.

"In the future, I'd very much like to get disengaged from politics," Soros said at a Council on Foreign Relations meeting on the Upper East Side. "I'm interested in policy and not in politics."

 

[Gunny]

What you are saying and claiming is unadulterated bullshit, which you spew forth with as much vehemence as you are able to muster via the printed word. Which does NOT make you or your opinion correct.

There were plenty of news articles and op-eds warning of the possibility of civil war, not to mention too few troops. While I personally had no issue with trying the 'light force strategy', I do fault the administration for not switching sooner to a surge or whatever. However, that does not alter the fact of whether or not it was the right war at the right time. That too was debated in the press.Seems you pontificate much, but read little. May I suggest some that have been there, like Michael Yon, Bill Roggio, etc? You are correct about politicians to the best of my knowledge, but woefully uninformed about high ranking commanders. Begin with Iraq the Model and scroll. Then check out some of those I posted just above. Not me, you perhaps. That may be the most nonsensical writing I've read today. Off topic? I guess you are going with throw as much shi* and see how much will stick?


I'm not hear to defend any media, but will say what you are claiming above, holds in spades for yourself. Other than 'media matters' there have been no authoritative studies that have found more bias at FOX than other sources. There was a joint study by Stanford and U of Chicago that found FOX less biased than any other MSM source, which of course they aren't. But I'm sure that wouldn't influence your biases. One must stand in wonder of your complaints about others. Seriously, do your read what you post? Well... from the bastion of the far right,

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/media/media_watch/jan-june01/recount_4-3.html



Wow, you really showed Gunny.

Yeah, he showed him alright.

 

[loosecannon]

Now, Pres Bush and the Iraq war is to blame for the tornado cleanup

What is interesting is that only the editorialist who wrote the article blamed Bush for anything. Which explains why no mention of Bush's declaration of a state of emergency was relevant.

Sounds like somebody(s) imagines a vast left wing conspiracy where there is none.

 

[actsnoblemartin]

First of all, I want to let you I'm Jewish.

Second, Soros makes me ashamed to be a jew, he is a disgrace, and a peace of dog crap, and as far as im concerned, he is a america-hater, self hating jew, and a dip shit.

I cant stand liberal jews, except for liberman.

I do however love conservative jews, and conservative christians

I dont care if its politically correct, its how i feel

 

[actsnoblemartin]

The media is a vast left wing conspiracy

 

[Gunny]

First of all, I want to let you I'm Jewish.

Second, Soros makes me ashamed to be a jew, he is a disgrace, and a peace of dog crap, and as far as im concerned, he is a america-hater, self hating jew, and a dip shit.

I cant stand liberal jews, except for liberman.

I do however love conservative jews, and conservative christians

I dont care if its politically correct, its how i feel

Martin...

would you PLEASE pay attention to what thread you're posting in?

Thanks.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

A little fly makes ridiculous claims and DEMANDS proof while spouting things like " Bush was Awol" " it is true that the forgery was accurate" and on and on. All with absolutely no proof provided.

Little military history and law for you...

A military member on flight status can legally remove themself from flight status at ANY time. One way to do it is to NOT take the physical. Failure to take a physical for a voluntary status is not illegal, it is not AWOL, it is not something one can legally be forced to do. In this case " an order" to take a physical is symantics. The order simply provides the member with the notification that they must take the physical or they will be removed from flight status. A status that is completely voluntary.

Bush flew an obsolete aircraft and logged more hours in that dangerous bird then required too. He volunteered for duty in Viet Nam, but his aircraft was an interceptor and had no useful role in Viet Nam. He volunteered for a test program that the Air force tried , to see if they could find a use for the aircraft. He was turned down because he was a junior pilot and they wanted more experienced pilots.

As to the Rather piece, be so kind as to provide some documentation, since you have claimed now that numerous sources existed. Seems if numerous sources existed that after 5 years of research and digging Mapes could have found something other than a forgery to run with. A Forgery, I will add, that they were told was a forgery. The general that supposedly was involved in the forged document had retired a YEAR before the document was supposedly written. Not only was it a forgery it was a fantasy document. Nothing in the document was true, none of it had ever happened.

The author of the Forgery is a disgruntled former officer in the Guard that had an axe to grind with Governor Bush. He fabricated the Document to get even for what he considered unfair treatment. This was general knowledge that mapes and rather and the entire research team KNEW. Their expert told them the document was a fake. They said thank you, we have no need of your services anymore.

As to the idiotic claim that DoD ran or runs the news, even in WW2 that wasn't true. Independent reporters , that were not controlled by the War department filed their own stories, the only control the Military had was the right to censor classified information from reports submitted by war correspondence.

You live in a fantasy world. feel free to post your loony toons attacks and rebuttals but don't be suprised when you get treated like the 12 year old that needs medication for his delusions.

 

[red states rule]

fyi!

ANTI-W. $OROS: I QUIT POLITICS
By MAGGIE HABERMAN-New York Post
September 29, 2006 -- Billionaire liberal financier George Soros, who spent millions of his fortune trying to oust President Bush in 2004, yesterday said he hopes to stay out of politics from now on.

"In the future, I'd very much like to get disengaged from politics," Soros said at a Council on Foreign Relations meeting on the Upper East Side. "I'm interested in policy and not in politics."

Then why is he still funding left wing groups?

 

[red states rule]

What is interesting is that only the editorialist who wrote the article blamed Bush for anything. Which explains why no mention of Bush's declaration of a state of emergency was relevant.

Sounds like somebody(s) imagines a vast left wing conspiracy where there is none.

CNN Reveals Truth About Sebelius’s Iraq-Ruined-Kansas Line, But Still Spins It Her Way
Posted by Matthew Balan on May 8, 2007 - 17:43.
Apparently, CNN can't get enough of Kathleen Sebelius, the Democrat governor of Kansas. She made two appearances on CNN on Monday, once on "American Morning," and the other time on "The Situation Room." Both times, she tried to blame the Iraq war for any hampered reactions to the devastation caused by a tornado in Greensburg, Kansas. The same evening, the "Paula Zahn Now" program featured another segment on the supposed equipment shortages Governor Sibelius has highlighted in her media appearances. Even though the segment's sound bytes supported the governor's line, CNN Pentagon correspondent Jamie McIntyre and Major General Tod Bunting of the Kansas National Guard made several points that reveal the truth of the situation.

One thing that was missing from all 3 CNN programs were any Republican responses to the governor's line. Both the White House and Kansas Senator Sam Brownback (who is also a Republican candidate for president) both disputed Sebelius's claims that there was a shortage of National Guard resources.

for complete article

http://newsbusters.org/node/12611

 

[Care4all]

Then why is he still funding left wing groups?

WHO says he is? that might answer your question!!! hehehe

care

 

[red states rule]

Soros has set up a complicated political operation designed to do two things: buy influence among some liberal politicians, and smear people with whom he disagrees.

Now here's a chart of how Soros and a few other wealthy radicals who help him are funneling money into the political process. Stay with me on this. Most of Soros' political money flows through his Open Society Institute. You see it there on the left, which is almost unlimited funding.

Since 2001, according to federal documents, the Open Society Institute has given nearly $20 million to the Tides Foundation right below that. An astounding amount.

Now Tides, in turn, funnels the money to a variety of radical hatchet men who are all well paid. For example, Tides has donated millions to the vile propaganda outfit Media Matters, which specializes in distorting comments made by politicians, pundits, and media people. Media Matters is an Internet site, but directly feeds its propaganda to some mainstream media people including elements at NBC News, columnist Frank Rich and Paul Krugman at The New York Times, columnist Jonathan Alter at Newsweek, and Bill Moyers at PBS. — In fact, as president of the Shoeman Center Foundation, Moyers oversaw at least a $500,000 transfer of money to Media Matters.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,268043,00.html

 

[Care4all]

Soros has set up a complicated political operation designed to do two things: buy influence among some liberal politicians, and smear people with whom he disagrees.

Now here's a chart of how Soros and a few other wealthy radicals who help him are funneling money into the political process. Stay with me on this. Most of Soros' political money flows through his Open Society Institute. You see it there on the left, which is almost unlimited funding.

Since 2001, according to federal documents, the Open Society Institute has given nearly $20 million to the Tides Foundation right below that. An astounding amount.

Now Tides, in turn, funnels the money to a variety of radical hatchet men who are all well paid. For example, Tides has donated millions to the vile propaganda outfit Media Matters, which specializes in distorting comments made by politicians, pundits, and media people. Media Matters is an Internet site, but directly feeds its propaganda to some mainstream media people including elements at NBC News, columnist Frank Rich and Paul Krugman at The New York Times, columnist Jonathan Alter at Newsweek, and Bill Moyers at PBS. — In fact, as president of the Shoeman Center Foundation, Moyers oversaw at least a $500,000 transfer of money to Media Matters.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,268043,00.html

Oh, I am NOT questioning Soro's involvement, especially in the 2004 election and how much money of his own he indirectly put in to it!

All I am saying is that I saw him on an interview with some "Money" show on the 24/7 and he said that he was getting out of politics....not going to spend his money on it anymore...he was disillusioned with the waste of money because the Dems didn't win....at least that is how he came off to me in the interview.

So, when you posted this, I did a google and found some links that showed what I had thought....after the tv interview, and that is that these political groups won't be getting his money anymore....

This is not to say that he will not change his mind, but this is where it stands now...

it was just an FYI....you can continue to disbelieve it if you WISH!