B_VinylBoy
Sexy Member
- Joined
- Nov 30, 2007
- Posts
- 10,363
- Media
- 0
- Likes
- 68
- Points
- 123
- Location
- Boston, MA / New York, NY
- Sexuality
- 90% Gay, 10% Straight
- Gender
- Male
And yet there's still the myth of the "liberal media".it's all about ratings. you people haven't figured it out yet. the masses don't go for your left leaning bullshit.
You know, when I read things like this it actually makes me wish that there was a major news organization in the US that was actually communist or socialist, so idiots could see what communism and socialism actually are (Hint: They're not the same thing). The face of socialism is not Keith Olbermann.Turns out he's just a greedy piece of shit that wants more money. See, even the most ardent socialists are nothing but fucking hypocrites.
it's all about ratings. you people haven't figured it out yet. the masses don't go for your left leaning bullshit.
It's her Lesbian Rage that works my nerves.
Keith olberman was a piece of work, full of liberal propaganda. Let me ask you keith olberman fans and the rest of you liberal idiots, who created "political correctness"? You stinking liberals created it to stifle free speech, in a country where we have free speech rights, the liberals are the only ones that want to be heard. Free speech means both sides saying freely what they want to say, with no right to impinge on the others right. Its funny how us conservatives constantly say you have the right to say what you want even if you are wrong but we would fight to defend your right to say whatever it is you want to say. But not a commie liberal like Olberman who's sole purpose is the squelching of free speech and for only one sides view. Well folks that not what the USA is about.
No, showing respect to the radical right will accomplish nothing. The wingnuts have made it abundantly clear for years that anyone who disagrees with their political ideology is human garbage and should literally be forced to capitulate or die. There's no civil response to a person who is so full of themselves that they think anyone who is different needs to be eliminated. There is no place in a civilized society for the eliminationist rhetoric they espouse at every chance.
So, I have adopted the logical position that anyone who wishes ill will towards me, my family or friends is in fact my enemy. Not because I have a problem with them, but because they have a problem with me and are actively seeking ways to destroy me. I have no choice but to actively defend myself, and that's exactly what I do each and every day of my life. I meet fire with fire and anyone who crosses my path had damned well better be ready to go all the way, because I sure as hell am.
Personally, I'm done playing games with these wingnuts and pretending that they are just regular, hardworking, loyal Americans too. They're not regular Americans, they are dangerous, radical freaks. Do not trust these people, do not associate with them and do not do business with them. Treat them like the domestic enemy that they have defined themselves as.
------------------------------------
It is not the duty of the attacked to open a dialogue with the attacker. If wingnuts want to be treated like decent human beings worthy of being heard and respected, then all they have to do is behave like decent human beings worthy of being heard and respected.
Instead, the wingnuts choose to alienate others and self-segregate themselves along ideological lines. THEY chose this path. THEY defined all Americans with different values as traitors and the enemy of 'their' America.
The wingnuts are the aggressor and only they can end the acrimony by ending their hatred of the world, by apologizing, and by proving through good deeds over time that they are good people.
In the mean time, I stay vigiliant at all times. The man who trusts his enemy is the man who dies first.
There's much more where that came from. ^Words Have Consequences
We do not yet know whether the Arizona massacre was directly fueled by rightwing rhetoric. But we do know this: one of the most dangerous myths promulgated by the media and political establishment is that there is a comparable level of extremism among conservatives and liberals, that left and right are mirror images.
Even the most cursory perusal of rightwing radio, television, blogs and assorted punditry illustrates a profound distinction: in large measure, the right’s overarching purpose is to stoke hatred of the left, of liberalism. The right’s messaging infrastructure, meticulously constructed and refined over decades, promotes an image of liberals as traitors and America-haters, unworthy of their country and bent on destroying it. There is simply no comparable propaganda effort on the left.
The imbalance is stark: Democrats and liberals rail against the right’s ideas; the right rails against the left’s very existence. -- Peter Daou
No, showing respect to the radical right will accomplish nothing. The wingnuts have made it abundantly clear for years that anyone who disagrees with their political ideology is human garbage and should literally be forced to capitulate or die. There's no civil response to a person who is so full of themselves that they think anyone who is different needs to be eliminated. There is no place in a civilized society for the eliminationist rhetoric they espouse at every chance.
So, I have adopted the logical position that anyone who wishes ill will towards me, my family or friends is in fact my enemy. Not because I have a problem with them, but because they have a problem with me and are actively seeking ways to destroy me. I have no choice but to actively defend myself, and that's exactly what I do each and every day of my life. I meet fire with fire and anyone who crosses my path had damned well better be ready to go all the way, because I sure as hell am.
Personally, I'm done playing games with these wingnuts and pretending that they are just regular, hardworking, loyal Americans too. They're not regular Americans, they are dangerous, radical freaks. Do not trust these people, do not associate with them and do not do business with them. Treat them like the domestic enemy that they have defined themselves as.
It is not the duty of the attacked to open a dialogue with the attacker. If wingnuts want to be treated like decent human beings worthy of being heard and respected, then all they have to do is behave like decent human beings worthy of being heard and respected.
Instead, the wingnuts choose to alienate others and self-segregate themselves along ideological lines. THEY chose this path. THEY defined all Americans with different values as traitors and the enemy of 'their' America.
The wingnuts are the aggressor and only they can end the acrimony by ending their hatred of the world, by apologizing, and by proving through good deeds over time that they are good people.
In the mean time, I stay vigiliant at all times. The man who trusts his enemy is the man who dies first.
You know, I thought it was kinda scary yesterday night. I just saw the movie "Machete", great gory movie along the lines of "Desperado", and it had a corrupt Texan politician with a strong stand on illegal immigration. Looking at his political advertising, which was about as comically evil as possible while still being airable on television, it occurred to me that it could actually be a real political ad for a Texan Tea Party candidate. (or for Sarah Palin)
I think when your political stance becomes that alarmingly close to that of a comically evil movie politician's, it's time to reevaluate where you stand.
I don't know what's worse, this thread in general or the attacks on anyone who has 100% straight in their profile.
But you see, that's a false equivalency. It's total bullshit spread by the right and allowed to go unchallenged by the media. The truth is there is no significant radical leftwing extremism that remotely approaches what is common on the right. Largely because it philosophically goes against everything the left is about, namely inclusiveness, openmindedness, cooperation and compassion - qualities that are in short supply on the right.Reverse that: showing respect to the radical left wing nuts will accomplish absoluteley nothing. The wingnuts have made it abundantly clear for years that anyone who disagrees with their political ideology is human garbage and should literally be forced to capitulate or die. There's no civil response to a person who is so full of themselves that they think anyone who is different needs to be eliminated. There is no place in a civilized society for the eliminationist rhetoric they espouse at every chance. . . .
[Full title of the column displayed this time around.]Words Have Consequences
We do not yet know whether the Arizona massacre was directly fueled by rightwing rhetoric. But we do know this: one of the most dangerous myths promulgated by the media and political establishment is that there is a comparable level of extremism among conservatives and liberals, that left and right are mirror images.
Even the most cursory perusal of rightwing radio, television, blogs and assorted punditry illustrates a profound distinction: in large measure, the right’s overarching purpose is to stoke hatred of the left, of liberalism. The right’s messaging infrastructure, meticulously constructed and refined over decades, promotes an image of liberals as traitors and America-haters, unworthy of their country and bent on destroying it. There is simply no comparable propaganda effort on the left.
The imbalance is stark: Democrats and liberals rail against the right’s ideas; the right rails against the left’s very existence. -- Peter Daou
Reverse that: showing respect to the radical left wing nuts will accomplish absoluteley nothing. The wingnuts have made it abundantly clear for years that anyone who disagrees with their political ideology is human garbage and should literally be forced to capitulate or die...
But you see, that's a false equivalency. It's total bullshit spread by the right and allowed to go unchallenged by the media. The truth is there is no significant radical leftwing extremism that remotely approaches what is common on the right.
Facts? Who needs facts?? We have teabags!!! :biggrin2:Big_E, there are a couple of a crucial difference between talltpaguy's argument and your inversion of it.
First of all, tallpaguy's argument can be supported by the facts, while yours in just an empty assertion.
I, for one, would never say that any media organization should have an equal amount of liberal and conservative content. However, the content should have integrity. It should be well and thoroughly researched, intelligently analyzed, and should not be influenced by political or corporate interests. Were that the case, I suspect that journalism would have a "liberal bias," and I think that's exactly as it should be. That's because true liberalism is about the freedom and well-being of the people and the nation as a whole, whereas conservatism has all too often demonstrated itself as being primarily concerned with revenue, profit, expansion, economic domination, and the preservation of the rich and privileged, at the expense of the "common man."
Objective, professional, rational, poised and penetrating journalism has just lost one of its pillars.
Contractual obligations notwithstanding, he would be such a seminal addition to the Fox News team. How about a "Hannity & Olbermann"?
Four pages now, and there's still no sign of any Conservative who has posted their thoughts on this thread of ever reading the article.![]()
When you learn the correct definition of "freedom" that is when you realize that liberal ideology destroys freedom and that the conservative ideology is the only way to be truly 'free'.