RE: Lies lies lies and more lies.

RE: Lies lies lies and more lies. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

tazzygirl -> RE: Lies lies lies and more lies. (9/13/2009 8:55:52 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail Why are you talking to and answering yourself you goddam goof? LOL. Ron ~grins Cus i didnt look around to see who else was listening!!!

Arpig -> RE: Lies lies lies and more lies. (9/13/2009 9:00:44 AM)
quote: I will go along too, unless they both play the exact same clip, with the same exact reporting about the clip. tazzy babe...if that ever happens then start a friggin thread about it...that would be news [:D]

tazzygirl -> RE: Lies lies lies and more lies. (9/13/2009 9:49:17 AM)
You got it Arpig!!! One day!!! It will happen!!! I have a dream!!!!! That has little to do about those two organizations... but.. hey.. its my dream [;)]

SpinnerofTales -> RE: Lies lies lies and more lies. (9/13/2009 11:23:28 AM)
The problem with news sites, in fact all major news outlets in fact, is that six major corporations own 99% of them. This isn't a matter of politics. It's a matter of corporation policy. These sites are not dedicated to news or even left or right wing policy. They are dedicated to selling soap and beer. If slanting a news story one way sells more soap or beer they will certainly slant it so. If slanting it the other way sells more soap and beer, then that is the way things will be slanted. Unfortuantly, most of us are so busy looking for political agendas that we miss this fact and forget that we could effect a change just by buying our soap and beer from the news outlets that present actual news rather than picking a side and becoming a demographic.

Brain -> RE: Lies lies lies and more lies. (9/13/2009 12:44:23 PM)
I am not interested in coming to a phony agreement about what I can and cannot use for a link when I am dealing with right wing whack jobs that could care less about facts and reason and the truth. You can’t come to an agreement with people who don’t believe in rules and believe that the end justifies the means. If I am debating with people on these boards or threads and they are crazy for God so that logic and facts and reason do not apply and they think that the American government is illegitimate then there is no point in setting up any rules about what links people can post. These religious nuts are destructive and will do or say anything they have to because they believe God is on their side. I can’t deal with craziness like that. As a former Religious Right leader, who was raised (and home-schooled by my Evangelical-leader parents, Francis and Edith Schaeffer) in the movement, let me explain just why the ordinary rules of decency don't apply to the right these days. Let me also answer this question: Who are these people? Protecting Your Children From Satan Not only do the Religious Right distrust facts to them facts are evil. You are "satanic" if you believe in evolution. You're also satanic if you believe health-care reform is about anything but death panels and abortions. You're satanic if you don't believe that gay people are evil or if you think sex education is sensible. You're satanic if you don't believe in Satan! Long term the Religious Right subculture has to be understood, then exposed for what it is: an anti-democracy movement built on willful lies with potentially violent underpinnings in the thrall of an apocalyptic cult of revenge on everyone not like "us." It is also the useful tool of corporate lobbyists. Who use these shock troops of the proudly ignorant for non-ideological reasons. Glenn Beck and The 9/12 Marchers: Subversives From Within http://www.huffingtonpost.com/frank-schaeffer/glenn-beck-and-the-912-ma_b_284387.html

Arpig -> RE: Lies lies lies and more lies. (9/13/2009 2:36:30 PM)
quote: What do you consider 'legitimate' news sources? quote: Asked and answered already...do try to keep up.

Arpig -> RE: Lies lies lies and more lies. (9/13/2009 2:44:41 PM)
quote: I am not interested in coming to a phony agreement about what I can and cannot use for a link when I am dealing with right wing whack jobs that could care less about facts and reason and the truth. You can’t come to an agreement with people who don’t believe in rules and believe that the end justifies the means. You mean people just like you? But then again you are the guy who thinks Judge Judy is some sort of philosopher or authority figure, so you can see just how surprised I am that you defend your right to post things from any left-wing whack job site you please....I really expected nothing less from you. quote: If I am debating with people on these boards or threads and they are crazy for God so that logic and facts and reason do not apply and they think that the American government is illegitimate then there is no point in setting up any rules about what links people can post. These religious nuts are destructive and will do or say anything they have to because they believe God is on their side. I can’t deal with craziness like that. As opposed to trying to debate with somebody like you who will sooner or later always end up trying to bring religious beliefs into any discussion just so you can call the other person crazy due to their religious beliefs and therefore dismiss them. You are just as religious about your unbelief as Oral Roberts is about his belief A religious nut is a religious nut regardless of just what he believes (or doesn't believe)..

MissAnimus -> RE: Lies lies lies and more lies. (9/13/2009 5:14:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Brain And grassroots protests paid for by corporations. Say it ain’t so. It ain't so. I am not paid by a corporation.

Lucylastic -> RE: Lies lies lies and more lies. (9/13/2009 5:31:54 PM)
k for me, Fox News, CNN News, BBC, CBC, AP, Reuters are credible sources, but once it becomes an opinion piece, Fox and CNN are out. Breitbart, Drudge, WND Bloomberg, Ramussen, Daily mail, None of the Suns, News of the world, (basically any Murdoch paper/comanny)are def not acceptable altho I do read them sometimes. I enjoy Huff post, but dont think they are "credible" without links to the original story, Politico, I have some issues with. Ive never watched ABC< CBs< MSNBC or anyother station news(well I occasionally watch clips from Maddow and Olbermann). I watch CBC In canada also the local City pulse news(for toronto news) I have and do watch Hannity, Beck, Rush occasionally, just to see what they are up to I subscribe to google news for twenty subjects and both fox and CNN are my news for the day And I wonder why my work has been taking longer than it should, argh

Irishknight -> RE: Lies lies lies and more lies. (9/14/2009 4:17:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Brain I am not interested in coming to a phony agreement about what I can and cannot use for a link when I am dealing with right wing whack jobs that could care less about facts and reason and the truth. You can’t come to an agreement with people who don’t believe in rules and believe that the end justifies the means. If I am debating with people on these boards or threads and they are crazy for God so that logic and facts and reason do not apply and they think that the American government is illegitimate then there is no point in setting up any rules about what links people can post. These religious nuts are destructive and will do or say anything they have to because they believe God is on their side. I can’t deal with craziness like that. You seem to be saying that anyone who does not hold your personal viewpoint is not only wrong but less sane than you. You seem to be an intelligent person but lumping all into the same category is always a mistake. Not all who are religous are insane cultists. Not all who believe in science and facts are atheists. When you go on a tirade belittling all in a given group you merely make yourself sound like an uneducated bigot who should be wearing white robes and burning people who are different. I think you are better than that from reading many of your posts.

tiemeupalso -> RE: Lies lies lies and more lies. (9/15/2009 11:09:55 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomImus quote: ORIGINAL: Arpig You know,its just as stupid for those on the left to link to an MSNBC clip as it is for a righty to link to a Fox clip. When are we all going to agree that neither of these is a legitimate news source...they are extended editorials not news. I hereby take a vow: I will not link to an MSNBC or a Fox clip,,,,who's next...anybody else got the guts to do the same? So that makes CNN a worthy news source? (cough). They are all pretty much guilty when it comes to spin and agenda. I don't think it's stupid to provide any given link as support to an OP. It's the reader's responsibility to filter out the proverbial wheat from the chaff and investigate other sources to get a more balanced view of the issue. What do you consider 'legitimate' news sources? CNN is not a legit news source.hell on 9/11/09 they reported that a Coast Guard practice was another terrorist attack,and that shots had been fired.the report of the shots being fired was triggered by someone, on a Coast Guard frequency,saying "bang bang bang"over the radio. thats what i call checking your facts!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

tazzygirl -> RE: Lies lies lies and more lies. (9/15/2009 1:39:09 PM)
From the Video by the Coast Guard..... Channel 81.. a marine frequency... a discreet channel.. that was intercepted by a member of the public. quote: A law enforcement official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said federal agents scrambled to the river scene after the initial reports, because the local FBI office had not been told ahead of time about the Coast Guard exercise. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because the official was not authorized to discuss the incident. Coast Guard spokesman John Edwards said references to shots fired on the river Friday were picked up in radio chatter heard by CNN television. As part of its exercise, the Coast Guard aired simulated instructions to participants to fire 10 rounds, Edwards said. But there were no shots actually fired and no suspicious boats, Edwards said. http://www.wkrg.com/national/article/coast-guard-training-sparks-attack-rumors/343291/Sep-11-2009_12-10-pm/ Was their reporting legit? I think so. They reported on what they heard... as proven by the article and the video. Did they rush? hmm.. possibly.. but even local FBI didnt know it was a training exercise. And, before anyone states im against the Coast Guard.... i grew up in that branch of the military. My father served in the CC for over 20 years. I have nothing but respect for those men and women who would give up their lives for any one of us... as any branch of the military would. This, to me, was simply a case of not enough information given to those who really should be "in the know"

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875