TWITTER

3/10/2010 3:56:53 PM

headlines that rhyme, waste time!

3/10/2010 3:58:02 PM

^^^ Yeah I suppose the use of the phrase "TIPPING POINT," which generally means a point at no return in which everything goes to shit, was appropriate when describing that, wasn't it?

[Edited on March 10, 2010 at 3:58 PM. Reason : ]

3/10/2010 3:58:11 PM

There's an obvious negative connotation there, but why is this surprising?

It's well known that the more racist you are, the more likely you are to gravitate towards being a conservative.

3/10/2010 5:34:04 PM

unless you're a self-loathing white guy

3/10/2010 5:41:05 PM

then how to explain louis farrakhan, robert byrd, and rev. wright?

[Edited on March 10, 2010 at 5:43 PM. Reason : s]

3/10/2010 5:42:40 PM

a lot of this thread is funny and contains appropriate jabs at the sensationalism that permeates 24 hour news.

then again, a lot of it is baseless and pathetic. congrats God and moron for fully cementing yourselves in the latter.

3/10/2010 5:54:20 PM

cheap shots

I could take the same kind of cheap shots at MSNBC and NYTimes but it would bore me to tears.... I dislike posting the type of insult over and over

[Edited on March 10, 2010 at 5:56 PM. Reason : s]

3/10/2010 5:56:14 PM

Way to stick up for your respective cable news network with a tu quoque.

Weren't you once a self-styled non-partisan?

3/10/2010 6:25:27 PM

no, it was not a tu quoque. I didn't deny the legitimacy of your cheap shots. In fact, I said that they were cheap shots, which implies their own credibility (cheap shots usually land).


[Edited on March 10, 2010 at 6:35 PM. Reason : s]

3/10/2010 6:27:34 PM

http://mediamatters.org/research/201003100008

Fox news pushes the idea that DoJ is trying to spring terrorists from Guantanamo.

3/10/2010 6:37:50 PM

that's weird... I thought it was Obama's stated pledge to have everyone out of Guantanamo by now.

I guess Obama is a part of the vast right-wing conspiracy to destroy his reputation.

3/10/2010 6:46:44 PM

A failure at reading comprehension, or hyper-partisanship?

You never know with Solinari

3/10/2010 6:49:33 PM

lol hyper-partisanship... good one!

3/10/2010 7:28:20 PM

^^ it’s more likely willful ignorance and self-delusion, I think.

3/10/2010 7:37:45 PM

Quote :

"that's weird... I thought it was Obama's stated pledge to have everyone out of Guantanamo by now. I guess Obama is a part of the vast right-wing conspiracy to destroy his reputation."

Because everyone who is in prison is a hardened criminal just waiting to buttfuck your family's corpses in the skull, right?

3/11/2010 8:34:03 AM

JUST GIMME THAT CHANCE

3/11/2010 8:55:50 AM

I think we've given him an out on that pledge.

Obama: "I will shut down Guantanamo!"
America: "Yay we elect you!"
Obama: "OK lets do it!"
America: "Yea, about that...no"

3/11/2010 8:59:01 AM

I fully support getting rid of Gitmo, and I'm upset that he hasn't done it yet.

3/11/2010 9:34:28 AM

ehe

3/11/2010 11:56:23 AM

url fail

3/11/2010 11:56:53 AM

so with everything going on in the world people are donating 25 dollars so that a jew in siberia can celebrate passover? really???

3/11/2010 5:45:43 PM

um wat?

3/11/2010 9:56:13 PM

I take it you don't watch fox news commercials. They have commercials to fund a box of passover tools similar to those "adopt a starving child" ads

They show sad looking old jews and say things like
"these poor survivors of the holocaust often can't even celebrate passover"

and

"we should be helping them"

"give a jew the gift of passover"

3/11/2010 10:15:03 PM

o i c... now we've reached the point of disparaging their commercials.

as I said earlier, these types of attack can easily be interpreted as ringing endorsements, if that's the best you can come up with...

3/11/2010 10:28:20 PM

Its a huge injustice with all the suffering going on on earth and all the money that is needed for things like earthquake relief, hunger etc, for people to be donating money for luxury religious items.

This all plays into the American conservative theme that we must tithe jews and protect them because they are the chosen people in the old testament and the temple must be rebuilt/restored for the apocalypse to take place.

3/11/2010 10:42:05 PM

what the fuck

3/11/2010 11:48:26 PM

i don't know.... edomites maybe?

3/12/2010 7:33:12 AM

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/11/AR2010031102523.html

3/12/2010 4:17:34 PM

Big surprise that the former Executive Director for the liberal NYT has a problem with Roger Ailes.

so its not ok for Fox News to oppose Obama's policies.

But it was ok for CBS, CNN, and MSNBC to constantly bash Bush. So whats good for the goose is good for the gander.

While he is right that a majority of Americans want some form of healthcare reform does that mean people should just lay down and accept the current plan thats on the table?

3/13/2010 9:38:28 AM

no a good ammount of americans actually feel that way. we have to protect/serve the jews so that the antichrist can be born, the apocalypse can take place and christians can get into heaven.

3/13/2010 9:41:27 AM

yessssssssss

3/13/2010 10:36:56 AM

Rocket Maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaannnnnnnnnnnn

3/13/2010 11:26:12 AM

Quote :

"so its not ok for Fox News to oppose Obama's policies. But it was ok for CBS, CNN, and MSNBC to constantly bash Bush. So whats good for the goose is good for the gander. "

Do you really see things this way?

CBS, CNN and MSNBC don’t have any remotely as misleading as what Fox News has. They aren’t equal and opposite. During the Bush years, there was no leftist equivalent of O’reilly, Hannity, or Fox and Friends, and there is still no leftist equivalent of these guys or Glenn Beck.

Fox News though is a master of their craft, and they by far do the most effective job of using sound bytes, and graphics, and catch phrases to manipulate their viewers. They are a “news” channel in only the loosest sense of the word.

3/13/2010 11:55:16 AM

lol

3/13/2010 12:07:20 PM

Reality is funny, right?

This request has been made a thousand times, but where are the leftist equivalent of the usual Fox News jokers? Olbermann and Maddow are the closest, but Maddow at least has only recently gotten her own show.

3/13/2010 12:23:07 PM

beck also only just got his show numbnuts

3/13/2010 12:25:00 PM

where did i indicate that he didn’t?

3/13/2010 12:27:42 PM

ok so you can use him as an example even though he only just got his show, but we can't say anything about maddow... because she just got her show

and the kicker is - she got her show before beck!

3/13/2010 12:42:51 PM

I used both maddow and beck as examples, just 3 and 4 posts up. You need to brush up on your reading comprehension skills.

I do like though how you are trying to ignore the issue that Fox has no equivalent. Your diversion tactics means that you know that i'm right, you just have no canned response.

You should pretend we're speaking to each other in person, and just say what you would say in real life, which is, "hmm, that's a good point. Fox is pretty bad compared to those other channels."

See how easy that was?

3/13/2010 1:10:50 PM

lol... ok. Olbermann is a moderate and MSNBC treats conservatives nicely.

3/13/2010 1:27:25 PM

Quote :

"You need to brush up on your reading comprehension skills. "

Quote :

" ... Still, Schmitt's way of thinking about politics pervades the contemporary zeitgeist in which Republican conservatism has flourished, often in ways so prescient as to be eerie. In particular, his analysis helps explain the ways in which conservatives attack liberals and liberals, often reluctantly, defend themselves. ... "The political is the most intense and extreme antagonism," Schmitt wrote. War is the most violent form that politics takes, but, even short of war, politics still requires that you treat your opposition as antagonistic to everything in which you believe. It's not personal; you don't have to hate your enemy. But you do have to be prepared to vanquish him if necessary. Conservatives have absorbed Schmitt's conception of politics much more thoroughly than liberals. Ann H. Coulter, author of books with titles such as Treason: Liberal Treachery From the Cold War to the War on Terrorism and Slander: Liberal Lies About the American Right, regularly drops hints about how nice it would be if liberals were removed from the earth... "

http://www.stanford.edu/~weiler/Wolfe_on_Schmitt_044.pdf

[Edited on March 13, 2010 at 1:58 PM. Reason : ]

[Edited on March 13, 2010 at 2:00 PM. Reason : ]

3/13/2010 1:40:00 PM

^ Saul Alinsky, Michael Moore, etc.

you're making this too easy.

[Edited on March 13, 2010 at 2:27 PM. Reason : s]

3/13/2010 2:26:14 PM

Never heard of saul whoever, Michael Moore is practically a tea-partyer nowadays.

3/13/2010 3:02:05 PM

you've never heard of saul alinsky and you're gonna come in here talking shit about conservative communication tactics.

you fucking moron.

3/13/2010 3:12:33 PM

haha

we're talking about media influence, and you're going to bring up someone who most people have never heard of? They certainly meet the criteria for this discussion...

Like i said earlier:

Quote :

""You need to brush up on your reading comprehension skills. "

3/13/2010 3:43:05 PM

Of course, because commentary on Schmitt's (who even fewer people have heard of) influence on conservative authors has nothing to do with Alinsky's influence on liberal authors.

So... let's break this down.

Beck <-> Maddow (moron: invalid comparison)
O'Reilly <-> Olbermann (moron: invalid comparison)
Fox <-> MSNBC (moron: invalid comparison)
Schmitt/Conservative Authors <-> Alinsky/Liberal Authors (moron: invalid comparison)




This is getting boring... One of the reasons why I generally avoid getting into tit-for-tat games like this. Still, I'm even more bored here at work. Got any more conservative boogeymen for which you want me to show you "invalid" liberal examples?



[Edited on March 13, 2010 at 3:56 PM. Reason : s]

3/13/2010 3:51:28 PM

ha

you must have missed this part in my original post:

Quote :

" They aren’t equal and opposite. "

Glenn Beck isn't an equal counterpart to Maddow . You can't seriously be trying to say this.

(post Obama) O'reilly and Olbermann are probbably closer

And MSNBC is definitely not equal to Fox.

You've done a good job though in proving my point in a nice succinct way. Thanks.

[Edited on March 13, 2010 at 3:55 PM. Reason : ]

3/13/2010 3:54:57 PM

You're welcome!

By the way, since you're such a student of conservative media. I highly recommend you learn a little bit about your own side's roots. Dumbass.

I swear to god, this kid thinks he knows shit from shat about conservatives but then it turns out he doesn't even know to whom he owes his liberal theories.

[Edited on March 13, 2010 at 3:58 PM. Reason : s]

3/13/2010 3:57:48 PM

Quote :

"so its not ok for Fox News to oppose Obama's policies. But it was ok for CBS, CNN, and MSNBC to constantly bash Bush. So whats good for the goose is good for the gander. "

Nice two-wrongs make a right logical fallacy.

Nobody is excusing the other stations. Your justification is based on nothing more than emotion and illogical reasoning.

Quote :

"beck also only just got his show numbnuts"

Beck had a show on CNN Headline News before going to Fox.

Quote :

"ok so you can use him as an example even though he only just got his show, but we can't say anything about maddow... because she just got her show"

Ummm... Perhaps this argument would be a bit more valid had you actually compared Maddow to anyone.

And no where did moron say that you couldn't make the comparison.

Also, MSNBC/NBC isn't the only "liberal" news channel. Maybe you could have used someone from CNN, which I think has higher ratings than MSNBC.

Quote :

"lol... ok. Olbermann is a moderate and MSNBC treats conservatives nicely."

I'm just going to break this strawman before you really start groundwork. Nobody said that Olbermann was a moderate, except for you. Also, nobody said that MSNBC treats conservatives nicely. However, MSNBC is not the only "liberal" news channel, and it's kind of stupid to try to use them as a representation of all the other news channels.

Quote :

"^ Saul Alinsky, Michael Moore, etc. you're making this too easy."

Again, you're trying to employ the use of the two-wrongs make a right logical fallacy. Just because there are liberals who attack Fox News does not mean that it's ok for Fox News to return the favor. Neither sides should be attacking each other.

I saw Olbermann literally calling Beck names on his TV show. He wasn't refuting anything he said, just calling him names. I thought it was childish, as did my liberal roommate.

3/13/2010 3:58:41 PM