U.S. Politics

Page 391 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Jul 4, 2009
9,666
0
0
....the original....

WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—The House Oversight Committee Chairman Rep. Darrell Issa (R-California) today called for hearings to investigate why no one has paid any attention to him in the weeks of hearings he has called for thus far.
“There is mounting evidence that no one listens to me, not even one little bit,” he told reporters on Capitol Hill. “The goal of these hearings is to find out why.”
He said that he first became aware that people might not be listening to him when he read a recent poll indicating that Americans’ primary concerns are jobs and the economy.
“Anyone in his right mind would know that this nation’s No. 1 problem right now is Benghazi talking points,” he said.
The California congressman said that he also intended “to investigate the chain of events that have led to people changing the channel the moment they see my face.”

“There is a consensus out there that I am an odious, self-serving tool who uses congressional hearings to advance my own petty political agenda,” he said. “I think it’s important to know who created that impression.”

Finally, Mr. Issa said, he hoped that the new hearings would “determine, once and for all, to what extent my moral authority has been undermined by allegations that I have been involved in car theft and arson.”
“The question is, what do the American people know about me and when did they know it?” he said.

http://www.borowitzreport.com

....which was messaged liberally with pure organic oils and stuff to produce the unauthorized CN Forums mix....

WASHINGTON (The Blutto Report)—The Self Appointed US Political Thread Oversight Committee Chairman Rep. SoCalled SoCal (R-California) today called for hearings to investigate why no one has paid any attention to him in the weeks of pointless political posturing he has produced thus far.
“There is mounting evidence that no one listens to me, not even one little bit,” he told reporters on the CN Forums beat. “The goal of these hearings is to find out why.”
He said that he first became aware that people might not be listening to him when he read a recent poll indicating that forum member's primary concerns are jobs and the economy, things he is incapable of commenting is a reasonable and intelligent manner.
“Anyone in his right mind would know that this Forum's No. 1 problem right now is Benghazi talking points, and/or the scandal du jour” he said.
The California thread contributor said that he also intended “to investigate the chain of events that have led to people run from the thread the moment they see my postings.”

“There is a consensus out there that I am an odious, self-serving tool who uses thread postings to advance my own petty political agenda,” he said. “I think it’s important to know who created that impression.”

Finally, Mr. SoCal said, he hoped that the new hearings would “determine, once and for all, to what extent my moral authority has been undermined by unproven and outrageous allegations that I am a low grade paid GOP agent provocateur .”
“The question is, what do the CN Forum members know about me and when did they know it?” he said.

http://www.bluttoreport.com

.... it wasn't my fault it just seemed to write itself...like I was possessed or in possession or something eh....
 
Nov 8, 2012
12,104
0
0
blutto said:
....the original....

WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—The House Oversight Committee Chairman Rep. Darrell Issa (R-California) today called for hearings to investigate why no one has paid any attention to him in the weeks of hearings he has called for thus far.
“There is mounting evidence that no one listens to me, not even one little bit,” he told reporters on Capitol Hill. “The goal of these hearings is to find out why.”
He said that he first became aware that people might not be listening to him when he read a recent poll indicating that Americans’ primary concerns are jobs and the economy.
“Anyone in his right mind would know that this nation’s No. 1 problem right now is Benghazi talking points,” he said.
The California congressman said that he also intended “to investigate the chain of events that have led to people changing the channel the moment they see my face.”

“There is a consensus out there that I am an odious, self-serving tool who uses congressional hearings to advance my own petty political agenda,” he said. “I think it’s important to know who created that impression.”

Finally, Mr. Issa said, he hoped that the new hearings would “determine, once and for all, to what extent my moral authority has been undermined by allegations that I have been involved in car theft and arson.”
“The question is, what do the American people know about me and when did they know it?” he said.

http://www.borowitzreport.com

....which was messaged liberally with pure organic oils and stuff to produce the unauthorized CN Forums mix....

WASHINGTON (The Blutto Report)—The Self Appointed US Political Thread Oversight Committee Chairman Rep. SoCalled SoCal (R-California) today called for hearings to investigate why no one has paid any attention to him in the weeks of pointless political posturing he has produced thus far.
“There is mounting evidence that no one listens to me, not even one little bit,” he told reporters on the CN Forums beat. “The goal of these hearings is to find out why.”
He said that he first became aware that people might not be listening to him when he read a recent poll indicating that forum member's primary concerns are jobs and the economy, things he is incapable of commenting is a reasonable and intelligent manner.
“Anyone in his right mind would know that this Forum's No. 1 problem right now is Benghazi talking points, and/or the scandal du jour” he said.
The California thread contributor said that he also intended “to investigate the chain of events that have led to people run from the thread the moment they see my postings.”

“There is a consensus out there that I am an odious, self-serving tool who uses thread postings to advance my own petty political agenda,” he said. “I think it’s important to know who created that impression.”

Finally, Mr. SoCal said, he hoped that the new hearings would “determine, once and for all, to what extent my moral authority has been undermined by unproven and outrageous allegations that I am a low grade paid GOP agent provocateur .”
“The question is, what do the CN Forum members know about me and when did they know it?” he said.

http://www.bluttoreport.com

.... it wasn't my fault it just seemed to write itself...like I was possessed or in possession or something eh....

And all this time I thought you bereft of a sense of humor.

Well done.
 
Apr 20, 2009
1,190
0
0
speaking of daryl issa, there is an interesting profile of him in the new yorker from a couple of years ago.

while the author doesn't pull any punches about the congressman's past, he does show issa to be an earnest representative of the state of california.

FWIW: i had an acquaintance that worked for issa in the late 80s, early 90s. the acquaintance had butted heads with his boss during his employment, but years later when he was starting his own business, issa offered support.
 
Nov 8, 2012
12,104
0
0
VeloCity said:
Amazing how lazy the right really is. Just blame it on the media. So much easier.
Blame what on the media? A lack of curiosity? Journalistic integrity?

Hey, it's hard to ask real tough questions of the guy who is their savior. I think most in the MSM just don't want to know anything contrary to the narrative they bought in to.
 
Sep 10, 2009
5,663
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
Blame what on the media? A lack of curiosity? Journalistic integrity?

Hey, it's hard to ask real tough questions of the guy who is their savior. I think most in the MSM just don't want to know anything contrary to the narrative they bought in to.
Yep, just blame it on the Obama-loving liberal media. So much easier to live in a land of make believe where the only reason The Truth hasn't come out is because the media is conspiring to keep it covered up to protect Obama. Why they would do that I dunno, one would think that bringing down a prez is a pretty good career move for a journalist. But anyway, it's a lot like this:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/dana-milbank-accuse-and-ask-questions-later/2013/06/03/d107e9e0-cc9c-11e2-8845-d970ccb04497_story.html

A third House committee joined the stampede to examine the IRS on Monday, and its chairman did exactly what you would expect somebody to do before launching a fair and impartial investigation: He went on Fox News Channel and implicated the White House.

Asked by Fox’s Bill Hemmer what he hoped to learn at Monday afternoon’s hearing, Appropriations Committee Chairman Hal Rogers (R-Ky.) offered this bit of pre-hearing analysis:

“Of course, the enemies list out of the White House that IRS was engaged in shutting down or trying to shut down the conservative political viewpoint across the country — an enemies list that rivals that of another president some time ago.”

It was a sentence in need of a verb but packed with innuendo. And it is part of an approach by House Republicans that seems to follow the Lewis Carroll school of jurisprudence. Not only are they placing the sentence before the verdict, they’re putting the verdict before the trial.

Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), chairman of the House Oversight Committee, announced his conclusions on CNN Sunday, declaring White House press secretary Jay Carney a “paid liar” for saying that the targeting of conservative groups was the work of a “rogue” element operating out of the IRS’s Cincinnati office. “The reason that Lois Lerner tried to take the fifth is not because there is a rogue in Cincinnati,” Issa told CNN’s Candy Crowley. “It’s because this is a problem that was coordinated in all likelihood right out of Washington headquarters and we’re getting to proving it.”

Getting to proving it?

Congressional investigators have not produced evidence to link the harassment of conservative groups to the White House or to higher-ups in the Obama administration. But the lack of evidence that any political appointee was involved hasn’t stopped the lawmakers from assuming that it simply must be true. And so, they are going to hold hearings until they confirm their conclusions.
Like Benghazi, not in the least bit interested in what is or is not true, the only goal is to trying to make it fit a preconceived and preferred narrative that reflects what they want to believe because any other alternative is inconceivable. And then you wonder why the media doesn't take them very seriously.
 
Apr 20, 2009
1,190
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
Blame what on the media? A lack of curiosity? Journalistic integrity?

Hey, it's hard to ask real tough questions of the guy who is their savior. I think most in the MSM just don't want to know anything contrary to the narrative they bought in to.
it seems to me that the media's lack of curiosity and integrity isn't a left/right problem. they were just as incurious and sycophantic during bush's terms. there are a number of problems, some of which are the lack of investment in news gathering, decreasing paid readership, media conglomeration and lack of journalistic accountability. there are numerous other problems, all of which are coalescing into an increasingly partisan and uninformed/misinformed electorate.
 
Nov 8, 2012
12,104
0
0
gregod said:
it seems to me that the media's lack of curiosity and integrity isn't a left/right problem. they were just as incurious and sycophantic during bush's terms. there are a number of problems, some of which are the lack of investment in news gathering, decreasing paid readership, media conglomeration and lack of journalistic accountability. there are numerous other problems, all of which are coalescing into an increasingly partisan and uninformed/misinformed electorate.
Probably all of what you write and more. The MSM has fallen for a black, ivy league educated progressive. That's a hard combination for many in the MSM to resist;



Americans are clearly down on the news media this election year, with a record-high six in 10 expressing little or no trust in the mass media's ability to report the news fully, accurately, and fairly. This likely reflects the continuation of the trend seen in recent years, combined with the increased negativity toward the media that election years tend to bring. This is particularly consequential at a time when Americans need to rely on the media to learn about the platforms and perspectives of the two candidates vying to lead the country for the next four years.

The lower level of interest in news about national politics during this election year may also reflect the level of interest in the presidential election specifically. This survey was conducted immediately after the conclusion of both political conventions and thus may indicate the level of attention paid to those events in particular. Since this survey was conducted, Democrats' enthusiasm about voting has swelled nationally and in swing states.

On a broad level, Americans' high level of distrust in the media poses a challenge to democracy and to creating a fully engaged citizenry. Media sources must clearly do more to earn the trust of Americans, the majority of whom see the media as biased one way or the other. At the same time, there is an opportunity for others outside the "mass media" to serve as information sources that Americans do trust.
Interesting.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/157589/distrust-media-hits-new-high.aspx
 
Sep 10, 2009
5,663
0
0
Here's the media at work, Scott, digging below the surface just like you want them to.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/06/proof-the-irs-didnt-just-target-conservatives/276536/

Close to a third of the advocacy groups named by the Internal Revenue Service as recipients of special scrutiny during tax-exempt application reviews were liberal or neutral in political outlook, a leading nonpartisan tax newsletter reported after conducting an independent analysis of data released by the agency.

Non-conservative advocacy groups given special scrutiny by the IRS in or after 2010 included the Coffee Party USA, the alternative to the Tea Party movement that got a bunch of press in 2010, as well as such explicitly progressive groups as the Progressive Leadership Alliance of Nevada; Rebuild the Dream, founded by former Obama administration official Van Jones; and Progressives United Inc., which was founded by former Wisconsin senator Russ Feingold.
Well so much for that scandal.

Anyway, it's not the media that you don't like, it's that they're not part of the conservative echo chamber simply regurgitating Darryl Issa's talking points and telling you what you want to hear.
 
Sep 10, 2009
5,663
0
0
Not in the least bit interested in governing, just in being obstructionist for the sake of being obstructionist.

Just so we're clear, we've apparently reached the point at which a president nominating judges to fill existing vacancies is seen by Republicans as outrageous. They not only decry "court packing" -- a phrase they use but clearly do not understand -- they also feel "intimidated" and "embarrassed" by a basic governmental process outlined by the Constitution.
Embarrassing is certainly the word. But par for the course, really:

For instance, Dr. Sheldon Goldman, a professor of political science at the University of Massachusetts who focuses on judicial nominations, has developed what he calls an “Index of Obstruction and Delay” designed to measure levels of obstructionism. In research that will be released in a July article he co-authored for Judicature Journal, he has calculated that the level of obstruction of Obama circuit court nominees during the last Congress was unprecedented.

Goldman calculates his Index of Obstruction and Delay by adding together the number of unconfirmed nominations, plus the number of nominations that took more than 180 days to confirm (not including nominations towards the end of a given Congress) and dividing that by the total number of nominations. During the last Congress, Goldman calculates, the Index of Obstruction and Delay for Obama circuit court nominations was 0.9524.

“That’s the highest that’s ever been recorded,” he tells me. “In this last Congress it approached total obstruction or delay.”
Yep. Total obstruction or delay, the only thing the Rs are interested in these days. Well, that and the 39th Symbolic Repeal of Obamacare.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/06/04/obama-says-gop-obstructionism-of-nominations-is-unprecedented-what-if-hes-right/

Still, we should be thankful that it's not conservatives getting the opportunity to fill court vacancies.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/05/us/federal-judge-in-texas-is-accused-of-racial-bias.html?_r=0

The complaint, against Judge Edith H. Jones of Houston, who sits on the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, asserts that at a speech at the University of Pennsylvania Law School in February she said that blacks and Hispanics were more prone than others to commit violent crimes and that a death sentence was a service to defendants because it allowed them to make peace with God.
Jones was appointed by Reagan and rumored to be on GW Bush's short list of SC nominees. Never, ever let these people anywhere near power again.
 
Nov 8, 2012
12,104
0
0
VeloCity said:
Not in the least bit interested in governing, just in being obstructionist for the sake of being obstructionist.

Embarrassing is certainly the word. But par for the course, really:

Yep. Total obstruction or delay, the only thing the Rs are interested in these days. Well, that and the 39th Symbolic Repeal of Obamacare.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/06/04/obama-says-gop-obstructionism-of-nominations-is-unprecedented-what-if-hes-right/

Still, we should be thankful that it's not conservatives getting the opportunity to fill court vacancies.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/05/us/federal-judge-in-texas-is-accused-of-racial-bias.html?_r=0

Jones was appointed by Reagan and rumored to be on GW Bush's short list of SC nominees. Never, ever let these people anywhere near power again.

Obama reaps what has been sown.

He's taking further steps at division with his promotion of Susan Rice, another of the many paid liars on his team. As National Security Advisor :)rolleyes:) she'll be out of the reach of compelled congressional testimony. Yep, what a way to CYA and stick your thumb in the eyes of your opposition.

"In your face" to those that oppose and then whine like a little (blank) when there's less than full "cooperation."

Worst president in my lifetime and as I have said before, history will not be kind.
 
Nov 8, 2012
12,104
0
0
StyrbjornSterki said:
Six days later and another 3.2 million firearms background checks:

73,441,399 Gun Purchase Background Checks Under Obama

"The 73,441,399 background checks that have been completed under Barack Obama's presidency account for 43 percent of the 170,639,292 completed since 1998."




Works out to about 6.2 guns PER SECOND, 24/7. Do they have 24-hour gun stores in the US?
Obama is the best gun salesman there has ever been.

That certainly is one manufacturing sector he has helped tremendously.
 
Mar 10, 2009
7,279
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
Blame what on the media? A lack of curiosity? Journalistic integrity?

Hey, it's hard to ask real tough questions of the guy who is their savior. I think most in the MSM just don't want to know anything contrary to the narrative they bought in to.
Just quickly from wiki:

Mainstream media, or mass media, is generally applied to print publications, such as newspapers and magazines that contain the highest readership among the public, along with radio formats and television stations that contain the highest viewing and listener audience, respectively
Given that Fox News (or someone like Rush Limbaugh (14+m weekly audience or Sean Hannity 13.25+m weekly audience, or the Wall street Journal 2m circulation) has the highest viewership (or in RL/SH's case the highest listening audiences in the US, and the WSJ the highest circulation of any newspaper), in addition to their indisputable, and (by now) well established presence in the current mediascape, have they not now also become (part of) MSM?

I mean if MSM is determined based on their popularity, WSJ, Fox and RL/SH are among the most popular.

Or should we still consider them a sub or counterculture, even though some other cable stations, most notably MSNBC, have emulated FOX's business model?

Really, it seems that there is no lack of "conservative" media, measured by the numbers, or their popularity, or the narratives/ideas they bring in circulation.

I do find it interesting that conservatives use this highly academic (might I say Foucauldian - that radical french, left wing, philosopher) argument about the existence of a prevailing (in this case liberally biased) discourse, or power structure, that prevents (the opposite of Foucault's thoughts) the conservative's "truth" from reaching, or inculcating, the masses.

Heck, now i think of it, it even sounds Marxist to me, the idea of overthrowing the "dominant" bourgeois society, the Marxists/Communists will have to wait for, or actively rebel to change the dominant thought and value structure, just like conservatives hope/desire to (non-violently) "overthrow" the, according to their beliefs, dominant liberal society that is time and again reinforced by the media, the government, and schools.

And seriously, when you look at elections, half the voting population votes "conservative/republican" and the other half "liberal/democratic." Hardly evidence of a marginalized ideology that pushes up against the all encompassing and dominant "liberal" power structure.

In a more "conservative" vein (as opposed to using discourse theory), using a free market analogy, in this particular case we could be talking about a marketplace of ideas, isn't the prevailing "truth" merely the most demanded/most popular truth?

And in order to make the conservative "truth" the most popular truth, oughtn't conservatives try to produce, market, brand, and sell their "truth" better? Perhaps, one could say, that the product is broken and needs some love from Steve Jobs. Dedicated, entrepreneurial go-getters are capable of turning failing business around (and make a killing!), if not, you go bankrupt. Looking for excuses to justify failure is so ... "liberal"?
 
Dec 7, 2010
8,773
1
0
StyrbjornSterki said:
Six days later and another 3.2 million firearms background checks:

73,441,399 Gun Purchase Background Checks Under Obama

"The 73,441,399 background checks that have been completed under Barack Obama's presidency account for 43 percent of the 170,639,292 completed since 1998."




Works out to about 6.2 guns PER SECOND, 24/7. Do they have 24-hour gun stores in the US?
Don’t know but that is a great entrepreneurial idea you gave me.
The other idea I got from watching the news the other night is that I need to be in the online bulk ammunition business.
Great idea thanks again.
 
Nov 8, 2012
12,104
0
0
Bala Verde said:
Just quickly from wiki:



Given that Fox News (or someone like Rush Limbaugh (14+m weekly audience or Sean Hannity 13.25+m weekly audience, or the Wall street Journal 2m circulation) has the highest viewership (or in RL/SH's case the highest listening audiences in the US, and the WSJ the highest circulation of any newspaper), in addition to their indisputable, and (by now) well established presence in the current mediascape, have they not now also become (part of) MSM?

I mean if MSM is determined based on their popularity, WSJ, Fox and RL/SH are among the most popular.

Or should we still consider them a sub or counterculture, even though some other cable stations, most notably MSNBC, have emulated FOX's business model?

Really, it seems that there is no lack of "conservative" media, measured by the numbers, or their popularity, or the narratives/ideas they bring in circulation.

I do find it interesting that conservatives use this highly academic (might I say Foucauldian - that radical french, left wing, philosopher) argument about the existence of a prevailing (in this case liberally biased) discourse, or power structure, that prevents (the opposite of Foucault's thoughts) the conservative's "truth" from reaching, or inculcating, the masses.

Heck, now i think of it, it even sounds Marxist to me, the idea of overthrowing the "dominant" bourgeois society, the Marxists/Communists will have to wait for, or actively rebel to change the dominant thought and value structure, just like conservatives hope/desire to (non-violently) "overthrow" the, according to their beliefs, dominant liberal society that is time and again reinforced by the media, the government, and schools.

And seriously, when you look at elections, half the voting population votes "conservative/republican" and the other half "liberal/democratic." Hardly evidence of a marginalized ideology that pushes up against the all encompassing and dominant "liberal" power structure.

In a more "conservative" vein (as opposed to using discourse theory), using a free market analogy, in this particular case we could be talking about a marketplace of ideas, isn't the prevailing "truth" merely the most demanded/most popular truth?

And in order to make the conservative "truth" the most popular truth, oughtn't conservatives try to produce, market, brand, and sell their "truth" better? Perhaps, one could say, that the product is broken and needs some love from Steve Jobs. Dedicated, entrepreneurial go-getters are capable of turning failing business around (and make a killing!), if not, you go bankrupt. Looking for excuses to justify failure is so ... "liberal"?
Given that Fox News (or someone like Rush Limbaugh (14+m weekly audience or Sean Hannity 13.25+m weekly audience, or the Wall street Journal 2m circulation) has the highest viewership (or in RL/SH's case the highest listening audiences in the US, and the WSJ the highest circulation of any newspaper), in addition to their indisputable, and (by now) well established presence in the current mediascape, have they not now also become (part of) MSM?
I don't think many on the left consider Fox as a serious news organization. Certainly they are players in the media world. Certainly they dominate cable. Maybe MSM should be re-dubbed as "traditional media." Curiously I don't remember the present admin going after ABC, NBC, CBS, MSNBC, CNN, WSJ, The Grey Lady or any other media outlet the way they have gone after Fox, but ymmv.

Point is, there's not a lot of objective journalism going on among the news organizations, Fox included.

I do find it interesting that conservatives use this highly academic (might I say Foucauldian - that radical french, left wing, philosopher) argument about the existence of a prevailing (in this case liberally biased) discourse, or power structure, that prevents (the opposite of Foucault's thoughts) the conservative's "truth" from reaching, or inculcating, the masses.
I don't think there is much hiding the political leanings of most in the press anymore. There was a time when much of the press was curious and chased stories. There may be a few in the press this way, but it is fewer than it has been historically and becoming fewer by the day.

Coordination of reporting these days is much more aligned with political positions, on both sides.

In a more "conservative" vein (as opposed to using discourse theory), using a free market analogy, in this particular case we could be talking about a marketplace of ideas, isn't the prevailing "truth" merely the most demanded/most popular truth?
Yep. The best "packaged" and "marketed" "truth." If Rachel Maddow looked like Megyn Kelly she would definitely get better ratings.

 
Bala Verde said:
Just quickly from wiki:



Given that Fox News (or someone like Rush Limbaugh (14+m weekly audience or Sean Hannity 13.25+m weekly audience, or the Wall street Journal 2m circulation) has the highest viewership (or in RL/SH's case the highest listening audiences in the US, and the WSJ the highest circulation of any newspaper), in addition to their indisputable, and (by now) well established presence in the current mediascape, have they not now also become (part of) MSM?

I mean if MSM is determined based on their popularity, WSJ, Fox and RL/SH are among the most popular.

Or should we still consider them a sub or counterculture, even though some other cable stations, most notably MSNBC, have emulated FOX's business model?

Really, it seems that there is no lack of "conservative" media, measured by the numbers, or their popularity, or the narratives/ideas they bring in circulation.

I do find it interesting that conservatives use this highly academic (might I say Foucauldian - that radical french, left wing, philosopher) argument about the existence of a prevailing (in this case liberally biased) discourse, or power structure, that prevents (the opposite of Foucault's thoughts) the conservative's "truth" from reaching, or inculcating, the masses.

Heck, now i think of it, it even sounds Marxist to me, the idea of overthrowing the "dominant" bourgeois society, the Marxists/Communists will have to wait for, or actively rebel to change the dominant thought and value structure, just like conservatives hope/desire to (non-violently) "overthrow" the, according to their beliefs, dominant liberal society that is time and again reinforced by the media, the government, and schools.

And seriously, when you look at elections, half the voting population votes "conservative/republican" and the other half "liberal/democratic." Hardly evidence of a marginalized ideology that pushes up against the all encompassing and dominant "liberal" power structure.

In a more "conservative" vein (as opposed to using discourse theory), using a free market analogy, in this particular case we could be talking about a marketplace of ideas, isn't the prevailing "truth" merely the most demanded/most popular truth?

And in order to make the conservative "truth" the most popular truth, oughtn't conservatives try to produce, market, brand, and sell their "truth" better? Perhaps, one could say, that the product is broken and needs some love from Steve Jobs. Dedicated, entrepreneurial go-getters are capable of turning failing business around (and make a killing!), if not, you go bankrupt. Looking for excuses to justify failure is so ... "liberal"?
Fox Network has the most partisan news media on US television, Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity represent the most factious of talk show hosts. The sensational response of the Republican Party though has been to denounce, in no uncertain terms, the media as being a bias apparatus of the liberal agenda. Yet before this historical right-wing assembly, we were thoroughly convinced that Fox News was modeled off the BBC, that Rush Limbaugh was Heileman's mentor, that Murdoch didn't own the Wall Street Journal and that US journalism exuded liberty and courage from every pour.

Let's put it this way: that among the many unpleasant US issues, we were already in touch with, and for quite some time, the fact that the media is slanted. Our big mistake, if anything, was in not being capable of providing a firm enough response to this phenomenon. It's not, therefore, any republican revelation (that moreover has been shouted out in their media outlets) that's of much interest to liberals. If anything it’s the liberal response to it, that even just partially, or modestly, works toward providing adequate solutions. It's among the worst leftist traditions to get mobilized with palingenetic proposals and to threaten a revolution, to then only conclude that the world is incurable and it's better to retire and play bridge. We were capable of this before all by ourselves. Even before the republican hissy-fit.
 
Mar 18, 2009
14,634
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
Worst president in my lifetime and as I have said before, history will not be kind.
Obama has been a massive disapointment but he has a long long way to go to catch Dubya. Obama's presidency has simply played out as an extension of Bush's. The rhetoric is different but the actions are the same.
 
Mar 18, 2009
14,634
0
0
Glenn_Wilson said:
Don’t know but that is a great entrepreneurial idea you gave me.
The other idea I got from watching the news the other night is that I need to be in the online bulk ammunition business.
Great idea thanks again.
I got word that Cabela's was getting a new shipment of ammo so I got there early. Five people were in line before me. In no time, there were about twenty behind me. Sales were limited to one box per person.
 
Sep 30, 2010
202
0
9,030
brodeal wrote:
Obama has been a massive disapointment but he has a long long way to go to catch Dubya. Obama's presidency has simply played out as an extension of Bush's. The rhetoric is different but the actions are the same.

Exactly!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
May 27, 2012
6,458
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
Obama reaps what has been sown.

He's taking further steps at division with his promotion of Susan Rice, another of the many paid liars on his team. As National Security Advisor :)rolleyes:) she'll be out of the reach of compelled congressional testimony. Yep, what a way to CYA and stick your thumb in the eyes of your opposition.

"In your face" to those that oppose and then whine like a little (blank) when there's less than full "cooperation."

Worst president in my lifetime and as I have said before, history will not be kind.
Your side made fools of themselves smearing Rice, and it turns out that ALL of the charges leveled against here were COMPLETELY trumped up bullsh*t. Now you want to call Obama "divisive" for nominating someone he respects?

You have proven NOTHING in relation to her. NOTHING. Quit parroting the idiots who run your party on this one and admit the attack on her was fu*ked-up partisanship and nothing more.
 
Nov 8, 2012
12,104
0
0
ChewbaccaD said:
Your side made fools of themselves smearing Rice, and it turns out that ALL of the charges leveled against here were COMPLETELY trumped up bullsh*t. Now you want to call Obama "divisive" for nominating someone he respects?

You have proven NOTHING in relation to her. NOTHING. Quit parroting the idiots who run your party on this one and admit the attack on her was fu*ked-up partisanship and nothing more.
BS. Susan Rice smeared herself, all by herself. She's either nothing more than a mouthpiece for admin talking points du jour or she's an out and out liar. Kind of James Carneyesque only better looking.



JAMES CARVILLE: "My guess is that he wanted her to be Secretary of State and he felt like she kind of got railroaded there and this is kind of in your face appointment, but he obviously thinks a great deal of Ambassador Rice. Like I say, he wanted her to be Secretary of State. She's not confirmable and it's like a message that he's going to stick by. He views her as a competent person and probably as a friend of his. You know, I think it's an in your face appointment and he feels good about making it."
Carville is hardly a right winger and hardly running the R party and Obama thinking someone to be competent is certainly not to be viewed as a ringing endorsement.

Now, appointing Rice is certainly BO's prerogative, just stop whining about lack of cooperation from the other side.

Oh, and I do hope Reid shuts down the filibuster. On the heels of the IRS and DOJ garbage... the optics of that action will just be too good.:)
 
Mar 17, 2009
2,295
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
Obama is the best gun salesman there has ever been.

That certainly is one manufacturing sector he has helped tremendously.
another great job creation program that he won't get credit for :D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
MarieDGarzai Non-Cycling Discussions 2
Similar threads
The Politics of Sport

ASK THE COMMUNITY