Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Left wing media.


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: Left wing media. Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Left wing media. - 9/22/2006 3:27:08 PM   
SirKenin


Posts: 2994
Joined: 10/31/2004
From: Barrie, ON Canada
Status: offline
I just read My post.. Never mind the CTV one.. I don't know what I was thinking with that one.  lol.  Ooops.  Add in there instead ABC.

_____________________________

Hi. I don't care. Thanks.

Wicca: Pretending to be an ancient religion since 1956

Catholic Church: Serving up guilt since 107 AD.

(in reply to SirKenin)
Profile   Post #: 41
RE: Left wing media. - 9/22/2006 4:03:43 PM   
SirKenin


Posts: 2994
Joined: 10/31/2004
From: Barrie, ON Canada
Status: offline
I was glancing through an article and I have to swallow My statements about the BBC.  It is every bit as left wing as CNN.

Being left-wing is all about being anti-war.  In the 1930's Churchill tried to use the BBC to convince the country that Hitler was a very serious threat and something had to be done immediately.  The BBC (and much of the rest of the media) rejected his cries, and the world was almost slaughtered at the hands of Nazi Germany.

Hitler FORCED the world to see that he was a serious threat, but the media did not see it and would not report it.  To this day they refuse to repent.  In fact, they still do it.  CNN has been actively downplaying the terrorist threat and actively preventing Bush from getting the message out that you are in danger.  They have been downplaying the war in Iraq and using it to further their anti-Bush agenda.

John Kerry was anti-war.  A war vet.  Supposedly well decorated.  Anti-war.  That is what being left-wing is all about.

Bush has tried to warn you that the terrorists are a serious threat.  You have ignored him.  The media has ignored him.  Until it was too late.  Then they go HOLY FUCKING SHIT!!!  LOOK WHAT BUSH DID!!!  And you tree huggers bought it, hook, line and sinker.  You come in here completely misguided and misinformed and try to pretend that you are intelligent and informed on the issue when really you are anything but.  When the truth is presented to you you either guffaw and repeat yourself or completely ignore it.  It is no small wonder that the one's who really DO know what they are talking about left.

You sing the praises of the left-wing media, the left-wing opposition, and the conspiracy theorists with absolutely no evidence.

Here is an article from the Weekly Standard wrote on February 16:

“For the last week, much of Britain has borne witness to an outpouring of grief the like of which has not been seen since the death of Diana, Princess of Wales. When Baron Hutton … a hitherto rather inconspicuous retired member [judge] of the British supreme court, delivered his much anticipated report at the end of January on the death of Dr. David Kelly, a British government weapons expert, a collective howl of anguish went up from the well-upholstered parts of the media establishment.

“Lord Hutton concluded that Tony Blair, the British prime minister, was not guilty of lying about the threat from Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction when he made the case for war more than a year ago. Nor had he or his government ‘sexed up,’ in the immortal phrase, intelligence information about the nature of the Iraq wmd threat. The prime minister had been accused of both in a notorious report by the British Broadcasting Corporation that aired in late May 2003.

“Nor, for good measure, declared Lord Hutton, had Blair improperly ‘outed’ Dr. Kelly, the previously anonymous source for the report. Kelly’s exposure led more or less directly to the scientist’s suicide in July.

“By contrast, Hutton’s report found the bbc profoundly guilty. The original story by its reporter, Andrew Gilligan, that the government had deliberately inserted a false claim into a published document concerning Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction, was unfounded. Worse, the bbc had failed to ensure proper editorial procedures to prevent such an erroneous report from being broadcast. Then, without having properly checked the story, the bbc’s management refused to back down from the report even though some of its own editorial staff were quietly expressing concern about its reliability.”:

“For the last week, much of Britain has borne witness to an outpouring of grief the like of which has not been seen since the death of Diana, Princess of Wales. When Baron Hutton … a hitherto rather inconspicuous retired member [judge] of the British supreme court, delivered his much anticipated report at the end of January on the death of Dr. David Kelly, a British government weapons expert, a collective howl of anguish went up from the well-upholstered parts of the media establishment.

“Lord Hutton concluded that Tony Blair, the British prime minister, was not guilty of lying about the threat from Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction when he made the case for war more than a year ago. Nor had he or his government ‘sexed up,’ in the immortal phrase, intelligence information about the nature of the Iraq wmd threat. The prime minister had been accused of both in a notorious report by the British Broadcasting Corporation that aired in late May 2003.

“Nor, for good measure, declared Lord Hutton, had Blair improperly ‘outed’ Dr. Kelly, the previously anonymous source for the report. Kelly’s exposure led more or less directly to the scientist’s suicide in July.

“By contrast, Hutton’s report found the bbc profoundly guilty. The original story by its reporter, Andrew Gilligan, that the government had deliberately inserted a false claim into a published document concerning Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction, was unfounded. Worse, the bbc had failed to ensure proper editorial procedures to prevent such an erroneous report from being broadcast. Then, without having properly checked the story, the bbc’s management refused to back down from the report even though some of its own editorial staff were quietly expressing concern about its reliability.”

So, I stand by what I said.  You are not centrists at all.  You are left-wing, even to the point of being extremists.  So, you see a reporting agency that blows sushine up your ass and spoon feeds you your daily dose of ever-so-comforting bullshit and you assume "centrist".  But to a true centrist it is simply bullshit.

_____________________________

Hi. I don't care. Thanks.

Wicca: Pretending to be an ancient religion since 1956

Catholic Church: Serving up guilt since 107 AD.

(in reply to SirKenin)
Profile   Post #: 42
RE: Left wing media. - 9/22/2006 4:28:45 PM   
SubNY278


Posts: 50
Joined: 2/6/2006
Status: offline
Wow, what a closed-minded, ignorant rant.  CNN is left-wing?  If it is, then I shudder to think at what is right-wing.  Oh wait....we have the Fox News Channel for that, managed by former Republican party operatives and yet masquerading as "fair and balanced" reporting.

Just last night I was watching a so very left wing report on CNN about Hugo Chavez, on Lou Dobbs tonight (quite the left-winger himself...sarcasm intended).  The report all but called him a terrorist.  While not choosing to take sides or start an argument about Chavez and his politics, that doesn't sound like something a tree-hugging network would report, does it? 

Fortunately I have had the opportunity to travel outside the United States, and it is when you travel abroad that you begin to see how far to the right that Americans and our government has gone, to the point where what is viewed as "left wing" here would probably be rather conservative for many societies abroad.

And no, being left-wing is not about being anti-war.  The left has helped wage many wars in its day around the world.  However, most on the left don't believe that a brutal, violent, warlike response is the solution to all the world's problems.  I suppose that makes the left tree-huggers.

As for Kerry, I didn't like his politics for other reasons, but I think it's a disgrace to belittle what he did for his country, because he disagrees with a current conflict.  Tell me again, where was Warhawk-in-Chief Bush during the Vietnam conflict?  Perhaps, just perhaps, it is possible for someone to have a conscience and a brain which they use, to realize that not all wars are the same.

On the topic of WMDs, even if there was shoddy reporting on the part of the BBC, I think it's naive to think that Blair knew nothing.  If he didn't, that would mean that he was duped by the Bush administration into taking his country into a war to find phantom WMDs.  Otherwise, if he did know that there were no WMDs, it really doesn't matter whether or not it appeared in this report, or that report, or whether some particular allegations made by one particular news outlet (which is state-owned for all intents and purposes) were right or wrong.  A lie is a lie even if someone else lies about the lie.

Finally, all I will say is that the further we foster violence, the more we will fan the flames of people who hate us for killing the innocent people who will inevitably die as a result of our actions.  This in turn leads to more terrorism.  Then again, you would think folks like Cheney and Rumsfeld would know....they were good friends with Saddam in the 80s and met with him personally to do business (business including selling the same chemical weapons that Saddam then used against the Kurds in the late 80s).  Notice how all the talk about North Korea has stopped.  Notice how no one is calling for sanctions against Pakistan because they have nuclear weapons (and harbor terrorists).  Notice no one cares how Pakistan is even run by a military dictatorship, just so as the dictator is "friendly" to us (just as Saddam was "friendly" to us once, just as Bin Laden even was an ally of the United States once when the CIA sold him weapons to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan).

Oh, and guess who is responsible for all of that.  Hint: it's not the "tree huggers."


(in reply to SirKenin)
Profile   Post #: 43
RE: Left wing media. - 9/22/2006 4:36:28 PM   
SirKenin


Posts: 2994
Joined: 10/31/2004
From: Barrie, ON Canada
Status: offline
You just proved you know jack shit about left-wing politics.  I suggest you start doing some research.  Start with Wikipedia (simply because I have read the article before and I did not have to go hunting for one)...

Vietnam and the Post-September 11 Anti-war Movements
The next large anti-war movement that involved the western left was that against the Vietnam War; it triggered much opposition beyond the ranks of the left and is generally thought of as part of a growing counter-culture movement which took up many different left-wing issues.
The American-led wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, which came in the wake of the September 11, 2001 attacks, led to new anti-war movements forming. Various social democratic political parties (such as Tony Blair's Labour Party) supported and sent their countries' troops to participate in these wars, seeing them as appropriate responses to the terrorist threat. Indeed, there have been defences of these wars from the basis of left-wing internationalist values.[9]. However, most of the left has opposed these wars, especially the war in Iraq. The war in Iraq was largely seen as unrelated to the attack on the US, and some have claimed that the war in Iraq is imperialist, that oil and control of the Middle East were the goals rather than liberation.
Some criticism has been levelled at various left-wing groups for forming anti-war coalitions with conservative organisations (such as the paleoconservative Antiwar.com) or with groups seen as as led by fundamentalist Islamists (such as the Muslim Association of Britain). One response has been to claim that the characterisation of Muslim groups as extremist is racist, and that broad united fronts are positive. There has also been some controversy over the Left's use of the Palestine issue in an anti-war context.
The anti-war movement was generally seen as re-invigorating left-wing movements, though there was a large current on the French Left (especially within ATTAC) that saw them as detracting from the economic issues of the anti-globalisation movement. In the U.S., much of the left-wing radicalisation was channelled into Anybody but Bush campaigns, which effectively meant supporting the pro-war centrist Democratic Party. In the U.K, anti-war feeling may have been a factor in a drop in support for the pro-war Labour Party and the cause of gains for the Liberal Democrats. Some of the left-wing groups that had been involved in the anti-war movement sought to harness the increase in popular radicalism through the setting up of a new political party called Respect. [10]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-wing#Vietnam_and_the_Post-September_11_Anti-war_Movements


Incidentally, you also proved your ignorance by trying to compare left-wingers in the US to left-wingers in other countries.  You can not do that for several reasons.  Different issues, different politics.

Like I said, several of you people spout your shit and you have no clue what you are talking about.  That is why for the most part I stay out of the politics threads.  They are laughable and sickeningly misinformed.  Besides, you can not teach a pig how to whistle.

< Message edited by SirKenin -- 9/22/2006 4:38:29 PM >


_____________________________

Hi. I don't care. Thanks.

Wicca: Pretending to be an ancient religion since 1956

Catholic Church: Serving up guilt since 107 AD.

(in reply to SubNY278)
Profile   Post #: 44
RE: Left wing media. - 9/22/2006 4:43:24 PM   
SubNY278


Posts: 50
Joined: 2/6/2006
Status: offline
Umm, well, gee....the left-wing is against the war in Iraq because Iraq had nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks.  And gee whiz....Iraq HAD NOTHING TO DO with the 9/11 attacks.  Oh, and they had no WMDs either (and WMDs they had in the past were sold to them courtesy of Uncle Sam). 

I'm not trying to compare different issues in different countries, because on many of the *same* (war, health care, etc.) issues, you see a sharp turn to the right if you ask a typical American over a typical, say, European.

Plus, an issue like the Iraq War is an international issue, no matter what America's unilateral attitude would have you believe. When countries like the UK and Poland and Italy are partners in the invasion of Iraq, then, well, sorry, it's not just a private issue between the United States and a poor nation like Iraq, it's an international issue.

You still haven't really explained how I know "jack shit" about left-wing politics, but you have proven that you know more than jack shit about cursing and insulting someone else instead of countering their argument.  Typically that's a tactic one resorts to if they have no other argument to make.

(in reply to SirKenin)
Profile   Post #: 45
RE: Left wing media. - 9/22/2006 4:45:49 PM   
LadyEllen


Posts: 10931
Joined: 6/30/2006
From: Stourport-England
Status: offline
SirK - its funny how people who might pose a threat to the party line in the UK seem to come to untimely ends isnt it? That The Daily Standard mentioned Diana and David Kelly in the same article is more than coincidental methinks - its the sort of link to something totally unrelated that a clever journalist might make in order to convey a certain view of certain events that have stunk of "unusual circumstances"

Look out for the untimely death of George Galloway sometime soon. He's too much of a loose cannon in the UK and has offended Bush by making his prosecution look stupid. Unforgiveable.

E

(in reply to SirKenin)
Profile   Post #: 46
RE: Left wing media. - 9/22/2006 4:53:40 PM   
NorthernGent


Posts: 8730
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline
Kenin,

You throw the anti-war thing at the left as if it is a source of shame. You fool - what is so good about sending people to die?



_____________________________

I have the courage to be a coward - but not beyond my limits.

Sooner or later, the man who wins is the man who thinks he can.

(in reply to LadyEllen)
Profile   Post #: 47
RE: Left wing media. - 9/22/2006 5:00:26 PM   
LadyEllen


Posts: 10931
Joined: 6/30/2006
From: Stourport-England
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent

Kenin,

You throw the anti-war thing at the left as if it is a source of shame. You fool - what is so good about sending people to die?




NG - I thought you were quite clever until this post. I'm disappointed. Sending people to die in a war is good because it proves how right it is to be right wing. The more deaths, the better - and then anyone who questions it is denounced as a traitor for not supporting our brave troops, instead of anyone listening to their criticism of the policy that led to war. I cant believe you missed such an obvious point! LOL!

E

(in reply to NorthernGent)
Profile   Post #: 48
RE: Left wing media. - 9/22/2006 5:51:52 PM   
SirKenin


Posts: 2994
Joined: 10/31/2004
From: Barrie, ON Canada
Status: offline
Hmmm.  See, this is what proves your bias and My point.   A leftie says "No war!!!  Bring the boys back home!!".  A rightie says "More war!!!  Feed the machine!!".   I see war as a necessary evil when the circumstances demand it.  Iraq was a threat.  Sufficient evidence was brought to the table.  The left-wing agenda (such as CNN) denies this.  It does not support the agenda.  The problem is that you do not have your facts straight.   Satellites transmit the latest thrill.  You can not escape the media overkill.  Left wing biased slop that supports your agenda.

For example.  Yes, one just popped into My head.  The 9/11 thread.  Complete, utter, foolish, nonsensical rubbish.  All of it.  What was brought out as supporting evidence?  Left-wing propaganda.  Google video conspiracy theories from the same minds as "Aliens have landed".  Complete trash.  All of it.  But you bought it.  I brought in scientific fact.  Scientific analysis of the demise of those buildings.  Complete with structural and smoke analysis.  It was completely ignored.

Thread after thread after thread.  Page after page after page.. Of left-wing sensationalist, propagandist drivel.  Then you expect Me to buy into the "fact" that CNN is not left-wing?  lol.  Not going to happen.

_____________________________

Hi. I don't care. Thanks.

Wicca: Pretending to be an ancient religion since 1956

Catholic Church: Serving up guilt since 107 AD.

(in reply to LadyEllen)
Profile   Post #: 49
RE: Left wing media. - 9/22/2006 5:59:05 PM   
SirKenin


Posts: 2994
Joined: 10/31/2004
From: Barrie, ON Canada
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: SubNY278

Umm, well, gee....the left-wing is against the war in Iraq because Iraq had nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks.


That is EXACTLY what the left-wing agenda is trying to get you to buy.  And you bought it.  Because you do not have your facts straight and you do not do your research for yourself.  You know why I do not watch the news?  Because I do not want to be inundated with....forgive My saying so....bullshit.  I know how they work.  Our stations here in Canada are the same, with the exception of possibly CBC which is really quite good.  When I want to know the real facts on an issue I research it for Myself from several different sources.  I pick out the commonalities and arrive at My conclusion.

quote:

You still haven't really explained how I know "jack shit" about left-wing politics....


Sure I did.  I pointed you in the direction of the facts that prove you wrong.  Start with Wikipedia.  It very, very clearly refutes everything you said.  Then head to Google and start doing your own research, instead of sitting there in your chair while the media machine spoon feeds you your favorite cereal.

I honestly have no respect for the media at all.  They are blood thirsty hounds.  It is all about control.  Power.  Of course the secondary issue is money.  Their actions are despicable.  Gaaahhh.  Disgusting. 

_____________________________

Hi. I don't care. Thanks.

Wicca: Pretending to be an ancient religion since 1956

Catholic Church: Serving up guilt since 107 AD.

(in reply to SubNY278)
Profile   Post #: 50
RE: Left wing media. - 9/22/2006 6:05:58 PM   
LadyEllen


Posts: 10931
Joined: 6/30/2006
From: Stourport-England
Status: offline
SirK - Well, in that case then I for one am more than happy that most CM posters seem to have a "left wing bias", and I hope that such bias is reflected in the whole US population. That way, maybe the US can start to pull away from the very negative image it has around the world right now as a result of the incompetence of the present right wing administration, as of the next election. Since I dont get a vote in that election, I will have to confine myself to such aspiration, though I hardly think its fair I have no representation in an election which may determine whether my son is sent to some dodgy war at age 17, simply because our leaders seem so anxious to please even if some idiot ends up the White House.

And I dont believe that a left wing administration would hesitate or fail to declare war in case of need by the way. They might be a little slower to action (better jaw-jaw, than war-war as a true statesman once said - Winston Churchill, a right winger I believe at the end), and they might not embark on war on extremely dubious grounds, but surely thats a better way to do things than the way the Bush administration has demonstrated?

E

(in reply to SirKenin)
Profile   Post #: 51
RE: Left wing media. - 9/22/2006 6:45:48 PM   
caitlyn


Posts: 3473
Joined: 12/22/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: SirKenin
quote:

ORIGINAL: SubNY278
Umm, well, gee....the left-wing is against the war in Iraq because Iraq had nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks.

That is EXACTLY what the left-wing agenda is trying to get you to buy.  And you bought it.  Because you do not have your facts straight and you do not do your research for yourself.  You know why I do not watch the news?  Because I do not want to be inundated with....forgive My saying so....bullshit.  I know how they work.  Our stations here in Canada are the same, with the exception of possibly CBC which is really quite good.  When I want to know the real facts on an issue I research it for Myself from several different sources.  I pick out the commonalities and arrive at My conclusion.



You were able to find out that Iraq had something to do with 9/11 ... very cool.
 
Would you please forward that to President Bush ... because he is damn sure looking hard for it. 

(in reply to SirKenin)
Profile   Post #: 52
RE: Left wing media. - 9/22/2006 7:48:23 PM   
SirKenin


Posts: 2994
Joined: 10/31/2004
From: Barrie, ON Canada
Status: offline
lol.  I put this in another thread, but I will reiterate here in brief.

You do not know what you are talking about.  Plain and simple.  Yes, Bush presented his case, but Bush did not send the troops to war.  Your Constitution expressly forbids that.  The United States Senate sent your troops to war.  All Bush did was sign on the dotted line.  What is so important about that fact?

1) Bush had no say.  As President of the Senate he has no vote, except to break a tie
2) The Senate was evenly divided for the 108th session between Democrats and Republicans
3) The Senate voted 77 to 23 to authorize military force against Iraq.  That is an overwhelming majority
4) This means that a huge number of Democrats voted for the Bill as well.

Since the Senate is voted seperately from the House of Representatives, it is a bipartisan Senate.  The President can make appointments if need be.

Like I said, nobody knows what they are talking about.  There is so much misinformation floating around it is disturbing..  People trying to sound like they are informed when they in fact are not.

_____________________________

Hi. I don't care. Thanks.

Wicca: Pretending to be an ancient religion since 1956

Catholic Church: Serving up guilt since 107 AD.

(in reply to caitlyn)
Profile   Post #: 53
RE: Left wing media. - 9/22/2006 8:11:00 PM   
SubNY278


Posts: 50
Joined: 2/6/2006
Status: offline
Funny you keep going on and on about the media, and yet, all your sources are coming from mainstream sources, except, it just so happens that they are the ones you hand-picked.  And Wikipedia is hardly the most authoritative source.  No college professor or high school teacher I know would accept any serious paper using Wikipedia as a source.

Who cares if the Senate authorized the war? It doesn't mean that it was the right thing to do.  It does show that most Congressmen are spineless, especially the so-called Democrats.

What I do agree with you on is that it's not all Bush's fault.  Everyone going on and on about Bush should stop and look at the way the American government is set up as a whole, see that Congress is just as complicit in the actions of the Bush administration, and to also realize that there is a whole cabinet as well, from the secretary of defense on down, who are also responsible for the actions of the Bush administration.  It's not like Bush sits there all day thinking up of the next country to invade or personally deciding to send another 100,000 troops for a tour of duty.  That's a simple-minded conception of government.  Bush may be the chief executive, but just like in any corporation, the chief executive doesn't necessarily control everything that happens beneath him, since there is a board of directors and other upper and middle management.

(in reply to SirKenin)
Profile   Post #: 54
RE: Left wing media. - 9/22/2006 8:28:46 PM   
caitlyn


Posts: 3473
Joined: 12/22/2004
Status: offline
Some friendly advice SirKenin ... you might want to look up who casts tie breaking votes in the United States Senate, prior to telling everyone else how poorly informed they are.

(in reply to SirKenin)
Profile   Post #: 55
RE: Left wing media. - 9/22/2006 8:29:00 PM   
SirKenin


Posts: 2994
Joined: 10/31/2004
From: Barrie, ON Canada
Status: offline
Wikipedia is bipartisan.  I do not call it a media source.  I call it a great start for a source of knowledge.  I told you to start there because it lays the groundwork for all that is to follow.  It is not a be all, end all, but it certainly does a good job of outlining the left-wing philosophy and anyone can edit it to correct it.

If you were paying attention, I then told you to go to Google.  That is where the real fun begins.

_____________________________

Hi. I don't care. Thanks.

Wicca: Pretending to be an ancient religion since 1956

Catholic Church: Serving up guilt since 107 AD.

(in reply to SubNY278)
Profile   Post #: 56
RE: Left wing media. - 9/22/2006 8:36:14 PM   
SubNY278


Posts: 50
Joined: 2/6/2006
Status: offline
Umm, unless you think I've been living under a rock, I know very well what both Google and Wikipedia are.  Problem is, neither of them are primary sources.  Other problem (as far as your argument is concerned) is that on Google, you can find any sort of crackpot argument you want and any source, left or right-leaning, you want.  So anyone that wants to argue anything can do a Google search and find something that'll back them up.  You'll have to do a lot better than that.

(in reply to SirKenin)
Profile   Post #: 57
RE: Left wing media. - 9/22/2006 8:39:07 PM   
SubNY278


Posts: 50
Joined: 2/6/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: caitlyn

Some friendly advice SirKenin ... you might want to look up who casts tie breaking votes in the United States Senate, prior to telling everyone else how poorly informed they are.


In fact that's information you can find on Wikipedia, or Google

(in reply to caitlyn)
Profile   Post #: 58
RE: Left wing media. - 9/22/2006 8:40:52 PM   
Lordandmaster


Posts: 10943
Joined: 6/22/2004
Status: offline
You're kidding, right?  Even the President of the United States admitted it.

Yay, we now have a voting public that is further to the right than our own president!

Why don't we just give up the two-party system and install the Republican Party as the American Party for all time...

quote:

ORIGINAL: SirKenin

quote:

ORIGINAL: SubNY278

Umm, well, gee....the left-wing is against the war in Iraq because Iraq had nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks.


That is EXACTLY what the left-wing agenda is trying to get you to buy.  And you bought it.

(in reply to SirKenin)
Profile   Post #: 59
RE: Left wing media. - 9/22/2006 8:46:17 PM   
SirKenin


Posts: 2994
Joined: 10/31/2004
From: Barrie, ON Canada
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: caitlyn

Some friendly advice SirKenin ... you might want to look up who casts tie breaking votes in the United States Senate, prior to telling everyone else how poorly informed they are.


I already know exactly who it is, and that advice is literally meaningless.  As President of the Senate, the President or Vice President of the United States casts the tie breaking vote.  But with a vote of 77-23 in favor of sending the USA to war, of what meaning is your advice?  That is not even close to a tie.

Would you like to know how many tie-breaking votes Bush has cast during his tenure?  None.  You know why?  Because interestingly enough it is Dick Cheney who is President of the Senate.

< Message edited by SirKenin -- 9/22/2006 8:52:52 PM >


_____________________________

Hi. I don't care. Thanks.

Wicca: Pretending to be an ancient religion since 1956

Catholic Church: Serving up guilt since 107 AD.

(in reply to caitlyn)
Profile   Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: Left wing media. Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.092