MSNBC is a bunch of twats but Fox is certainly made worse by the throngs of retards who watch it.

More power to them for capitalizing on mass stupidity. MSNBC should learn from them.

10/19/2012 12:10:52 PM

True. but Foxnews has many, many more faithful followers.

[Edited on October 19, 2012 at 12:22 PM. Reason : ]

10/19/2012 12:14:46 PM

MSNBC definitely slants left, but FOX is basically a GOP propaganda machine. They are not comparable.

CNN is the worst though. In their quest to appear "neutral", the only direction they slant is stupid.

[Edited on October 19, 2012 at 12:20 PM. Reason : :]

10/19/2012 12:19:27 PM

i disagree, i think MSNBC is far worse than CNN, and slants much farther to stupid (in my limited viewing of both stations)

10/19/2012 12:23:35 PM

The argument that there is a liberal equivalent to fox news is absurd. CNN? Really, that to me looks like it has actual news on it not related to politics, whereas fox is just about "THIS IS WHAT YOU SHOULD THINK!!!"

Much much more biased than CNN.

10/19/2012 12:31:24 PM

^^Watch Wolf Blitzer for more than 5 minutes and you'll agree. CNN's only redeeming quality is Soledad O'Brien.

10/19/2012 12:40:07 PM

i'm not saying CNN is any good, i'm just saying MSNBC is far worse

10/19/2012 12:41:17 PM

I'm asking about you personally, y0willy. Do you deliberately spread shit you know to be fallacious?

10/19/2012 1:13:32 PM

No?

10/19/2012 1:35:47 PM

Is that so

http://brentroad.com/message_topic.aspx?topic=556098&page=122#15461794

10/19/2012 1:55:54 PM

Oh and what have we here.

http://brentroad.com/message_topic.aspx?topic=556098&page=130#15569886

10/19/2012 1:57:01 PM

What's your point?

10/19/2012 1:58:38 PM

I listed three things that were bullshit, fallacious talking points based on taking things out of context. All you had to say in response were "Liberals do it too." I asked you if you did it personally, you said "no." So I posted you saying two of those three things. If you still don't get my point, it's "yes, you do."

10/19/2012 2:00:18 PM

In your opinion.

Thanks for establishing that.

10/19/2012 2:02:07 PM

You missed you chance on the last page to say "None of those are actually bullshit"

10/19/2012 2:03:24 PM

You didn't build that!

10/19/2012 2:04:02 PM

Did you hear what Obama said about the attacks in Libya? He said it was "...Optimal"!

Is there any doubt he's a secret muslim?

10/19/2012 3:00:33 PM

Secret muslim? No.

Douche? Yes.

10/20/2012 12:23:16 AM

Oh, and...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissistic_personality_disorder#Diagnosis

Quote :

"The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders fourth edition, DSM IV-TR, a widely used manual for diagnosing mental disorders, defines narcissistic personality disorder (in Axis II Cluster B) as: A pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), need for admiration, and lack of empathy, beginning by early adulthood and present in a variety of contexts, as indicated by five (or more) of the following: 1. Has a grandiose sense of self-importance (e.g., exaggerates achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements) 2. Is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love 3. Believes that he or she is "special" and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people (or institutions) 4. Requires excessive admiration 5. Has a sense of entitlement, i.e., unreasonable expectations of especially favorable treatment or automatic compliance with his or her expectations 6. Is interpersonally exploitative, i.e., takes advantage of others to achieve his or her own ends 7. Lacks empathy: is unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others 8. Is often envious of others or believes others are envious of him or her 9. Shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes"

Relevant.

10/20/2012 12:23:40 AM

^ you realize that applies far more to Romney than Obama?

Esp. #7 and #8 and #3

#7 doesn't even apply to Obama.

10/20/2012 12:35:49 AM

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/21/world/iran-said-ready-to-talk-to-us-about-nuclear-program.html?hp&_r=0

Can't wait to hear the spin from the right on this.

10/20/2012 6:13:38 PM

Same spin as the sanctions: Romney would have done it sooner and better.

10/20/2012 6:19:56 PM

Romney will use his "yoi had four years" line

10/20/2012 7:40:31 PM

http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2012/al-monitor/israelsecurityiran.html#ixzz2A2DySOjZ

Quote :

"Romney has said, Anybody could have decided to finish bin Laden. Even [Jimmy] Carter. This again was a mistaken concept. President Obama didn’t just decide [one day to kill bin Laden]. The operation to end the life of bin Laden necessitated multiple points of decision by him. I know from operations I have been involved with on a smaller scale. They are very intricate. You don’t just give the order and wait in your office for commanders to come three months later and say it’s done. No. This kind of operation, which is accident prone, hands on operation, one has to make one decision after the other […] It took courage and cool headedness and leadership. Anyone who says it was an easy thing to decide, doesn’t understand what he’s talking about. [Such comments] show a total lack of understanding of what this kind of operation means."

10/22/2012 1:21:21 PM

jesus tapdancing christ, we killed Osama Bin Laden in a nuclear-armed sovereign nation with no permission and essentially no political fallout from that nation. (butthurt Islamists that hate our guts anyways elsewhere notwithstanding)

It boggles my mind not giving the Administration foreign policy credit for this. If the operation had failed, if Seals had been captured and it turned into Tehran Embassy 2: Electric Boogaloo, conservatives would be hanging Obama for it. They wouldn't be crying that we're not blaming the Seals enough or that the President didn't actually make any decisions or actions.

I have to question the intellectual honesty of anyone that doesn't give Obama credit for OBL. Not every ounce of the credit of course, trained military men did the work, but c'mon.

10/22/2012 1:37:58 PM

Quote :

"jesus tapdancing christ, we killed Osama Bin Laden in a nuclear-armed sovereign nation with no permission and essentially no political fallout from that nation."

How is this a plus for the administration? Sounds like extremely reckless behavior to me. What if something had gone wrong? It's okay to gamble with American lives, as long as it's a win?

10/22/2012 2:09:54 PM

Nothing come without risk. Killing OBL was a must and that risk was acceptable to pretty much everyone but the staunchest pacifists.

10/22/2012 2:12:23 PM

why was it a must?

10/22/2012 2:19:31 PM

Well you could either:
1. Do nothing - Allowing him to possibly commit another attack and harm more innocent people
2. Capture him - Which would cause terrorists to capture innocent hostages and demand his release

Killing him is pretty much the best option whether you're talking retribution, prevention, justice, or just in a utilitarian sense of preventing the deaths of innocent people.

10/22/2012 3:10:52 PM

Quote :

"Do nothing - Allowing him to possibly commit another attack and harm more innocent people"

It's only a bad thing if it's Americans that are dying.

It's perfectly okay for OUR government to kill INNOCENT people in other countries, RIGHT

10/22/2012 3:31:22 PM

No one has said that, unless you're implying that OBL was innocent.

10/22/2012 3:35:27 PM

He's an actor is a global conspiracy.

The only thing he's guilty of is being written off the show.

10/22/2012 3:39:17 PM

Quote :

"What if something had gone wrong?"

nothing did go wrong (other than the downed Chopper)

that's kind of the point......

10/22/2012 3:43:18 PM

Quote :

"No one has said that, unless you're implying that OBL was innocent."

I'm implying that the real terrorists are our government and many of you are egging it on which is worse than "do nothing"

10/22/2012 3:49:23 PM

Right, we're having a specific conversation and you're spouting off generalities and platitudes. Got it.

10/22/2012 4:12:04 PM

Do me a favor and keep those generalities and platitudes in mind when discussing the "specifics". kk thxs

10/22/2012 5:25:55 PM

Quote :

"How is this a plus for the administration? Sounds like extremely reckless behavior to me. What if something had gone wrong? It's okay to gamble with American lives, as long as it's a win?"

I agree with destroyer. It's like shooting a gun into a crowd but saying it's alright because you're good enough to not hit anybody.

10/22/2012 7:00:08 PM

No, it's like hunting down the most wanted terrorist in the history of our country and using the political clout that our government has spent centuries creating to pull it off without significant political damage.

I mean, if you want to frame it in the "any initiation of force including the retribution for thousands of American deaths is wrong" manner, then yes, it was a bad thing.

10/22/2012 8:14:48 PM

http://www.brentroad.com/message_topic.aspx?topic=607396&page=1

10/23/2012 9:37:25 AM

Quote :

"I agree with destroyer. It's like shooting a gun into a crowd but saying it's alright because you're good enough to not hit anybody."

Ah, the old, "Best defense against shooting sprees is more CCW's in theaters" defense.

10/23/2012 9:44:28 AM

4 more years of credibility watching!!!!

11/6/2012 6:58:47 PM

LOL. i thought the same thing but now i'm doubting it.

11/6/2012 7:07:41 PM

+4

11/7/2012 1:52:32 AM

nevermind

[Edited on November 7, 2012 at 12:02 PM. Reason : old conversation]

11/7/2012 12:02:04 PM

This was the first credibility watch in the Soap Box....so many followed.....lol...anyways, I wonder who will replace Hillary?

11/7/2012 6:35:08 PM

this is really, really great:

http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/obama-cries-as-he-thanks-campaign-staff-after

11/8/2012 9:48:51 PM

Crying is for pussies unless you're mourning the death of white america

11/9/2012 9:28:48 AM

Obama has been pretty shitty overall toward whistleblowers, but he did just sign the "Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act." Its supposed to give better protections to government whistleblowers

so +tree fiddy

11/28/2012 12:13:32 PM

I don't persecute whistle-blowers because I say I don't persecute whistle-blowers.

11/28/2012 12:26:01 PM

Allegedly it closes loopholes in previous whistleblower protections that allowed whistleblowers to be prosecuted under the Espionage Act.

11/28/2012 12:32:00 PM