or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › My Statement to Nations That Hate the US
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

My Statement to Nations That Hate the US - Page 10

post #361 of 512
[quote]Originally posted by jimmac:
<strong>Dr. Schmitt,

So then what the hell are you doing here? </strong><hr></blockquote>

Jimmac, without reading what has been said since i posted (just got home and am eating)and before we continue in the vein of proving opinions (what a ludicruis statement) and before i slander sp .whatever for all i am worth.

What i am doing here is not about converting you to a tie wearing staunch republican. It's about forcing you to question your side of this, and in so doing questioning my own.

Now to spwhatever, to you i have to say you missed that point so many times i give up on you. Look my little aspiring prophet the road to enlightenment is not paved with answers where in those around you concede, it's paved with questions that help you grow. From your posts and your rebutle i can only deduce that you have no questions it's black and white and that's that. Well guess what so were the views of jim jones, and many others. Get over yourself and grow, your a pathetic example of the narrowmindedness need to form a nazi party.

and in parting let me say, to you sp, have some punch! I hear it's cherry.

[ 06-17-2002: Message edited by: Ruhx ]</p>
post #362 of 512
<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />

What a disgrace to start the 10th page with his rubbish.
post #363 of 512
I stopped reading this thread about 6 pages ago, but I came across this article which seemed like a good link in light of the original post:

<a href="http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/g/a/2001/10/19/notes101901.DTL" target="_blank">http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/g/a/2001/10/19/notes101901.DTL</a>

Food for thought.
No, the bazaar cannot satisfy users. Neither can the cathedral. Nothing can satisfy users, because software is written to enable rather than satisfy, and because most users are mewling malcontents...
Reply
No, the bazaar cannot satisfy users. Neither can the cathedral. Nothing can satisfy users, because software is written to enable rather than satisfy, and because most users are mewling malcontents...
Reply
post #364 of 512
[quote]Originally posted by sjpsu:
<strong> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />

What a disgrace to start the 10th page with his rubbish.</strong><hr></blockquote>

the only disgrace is your once again missing a clear point because your head is in your a... enjoy life nutbird
post #365 of 512
[quote]Originally posted by sjpsu:
<strong>The President's sex life should be no business of ours regardless of location. Whether he does it in the White House or Motel 6, it his private affair and responsibility. He should not be made accountable to the American people for his private sex life.</strong><hr></blockquote>

<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> private in the oval office no less <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
post #366 of 512
[quote]Originally posted by sjpsu:
<strong>^ Jimmac, refrain from sparring with this guy. It's like Tyson vs. a toddler. He obviously doesn't respect you enough to proof-read his posts for major spelling, sentence structure, diction, and puncuation errors. Foreign language translations sound better than this. <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />



What???

[ 06-17-2002: Message edited by: sjpsu ]</strong><hr></blockquote>

I can see how not being able to see the horse for all the hair could confuse you on that. Try again and read all the way through before your superior intellect dictates that your emotional instability should write a post.

But what perfect diction you have! Gold star! Good job, you get an a this semester sally.

<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
post #367 of 512
Thread Starter 
[quote]Originally posted by stimuli:
<strong>I stopped reading this thread about 6 pages ago, but I came across this article which seemed like a good link in light of the original post:

<a href="http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/g/a/2001/10/19/notes101901.DTL" target="_blank">http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/g/a/2001/10/19/notes101901.DTL</a>

Food for thought.</strong><hr></blockquote>


This is, without a doubt, the most idiotic thing I have ever read. I was midway through quoting and "systematically destroying" the article, when I lost interest. Suffice it to say the writer has bought into every ultra-left idea that there ever was, namely that Bush is dumb, Cheney is a crook, Rumsfeld is a liar, we shouldn't bomb a poor nation, the only good things about America are money and sex and drugs, and most importantly, that we can ignore this horrific attack on America.

My father said it best the other night: "Some people could just go on pretending 9/11 never happened....and their lives would pretty much be the same".

I would like to know what the writer's solution is. He never seemed to state one.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #368 of 512
Stimuli, read those 5 pages you've skipped over. They're dramatic, fun to read, and addictive! I thoroughly enjoyed your "whispers in a stadium full of knee-jerks" comment!
post #369 of 512
Ruhx, how old are you? I would feel terrible about insulting the elderly.
post #370 of 512
Thread Starter 
[quote] You use this as an example of liberal bias

It seems to me that I hear the same thing repeated non-stop from the conservative majority on these boards: namely, they are constantly saying that they hate Europeans because Europeans do not respect Bush's intellect. Does that mean that those people on these boards are exhibiting a liberal bias?!?!??! Or are they merely parrots of that vast media Communist conspiracy? <hr></blockquote>

1) Yes. I do use it as an example of bias by a supposed NEWS REPORTER.

2) I don't hate Europeans.


[quote]The President's sex life should be no business of ours regardless of location. Whether he does it in the White House or Motel 6, it his private affair and responsibility. He should not be made accountable to the American people for his private sex life. <hr></blockquote>

Are you kidding? The oval office? Please. Should he be accountable for lying?

[quote]Both you guys are wiggling now, What you're saying would not be in keeping with your assertion that liberals control the media.

To the other fellow : I didn't prove anyone's point with that other than to illustrate that for even consevatives it got more attention ( with all the ugly things going on in the world ) than it deserved.

I never saw any evidence of it being subtle. As a matter of fact that notion is laughable by your own admission " I agree that the media went ballistic with coverage ".

Still in check. <hr></blockquote>

1) Not wiggling. Not at all. I never said liberals control the media, which I assume means "own" (except Mr, Turner).

2) Missing subtle liberal bias is my whole point. Many don't even know when it is employed.

3) Amount of coverage and type of coverage are two different things.

[quote]Bush arrogance. The reporter was David Gregory of NBC. Bush failed to realize that many foreign reporters speak English at his Press Conferences.....<hr></blockquote>

Right. Bush is arrogant? Please. We all know David Gregory is the king of humility. <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />

[quote]You people disgust me. You are a bunch of poindexter's who need to get off the computer and get a life. Your pointless bickering will change nothing. <hr></blockquote>

ummmm..........
(PS: We like it)

[quote]I'm attempting to be the voice of reason in a group of argumentative, egotistical "geeks". The cro-magnum mentallity in the posts is almost laughable. <hr></blockquote>

Good attempt. I'm sure you read all 10 pages of the thread, too. Jack ass.

[quote]Stimuli, read those 5 pages you've skipped over. They're dramatic, fun to read, and addictive! I thoroughly enjoyed your "whispers in a stadium full of knee-jerks" comment! <hr></blockquote>

This has been a fun thread. I never thought it would go this far. :eek:
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #371 of 512
here's a little on the kyoto protocol and President Bush's refusals.

<a href="http://www.nationalcenter.org/TSR50801.html" target="_blank">http://www.nationalcenter.org/TSR50801.html</a>

It has a great link to other reports on kyoto

<a href="http://www.nationalcenter.org/TSR50801b.html" target="_blank">http://www.nationalcenter.org/TSR50801b.html</a>

These far sighted do gooders spend more trying to force companies to spend money than it would take to design and implement pollution reduction devices.

How about this:

Bush presented a voluntary plan on Thursday to slow the growth of heat-trapping gases blamed for global warming. The plan was in contrast to the mandatory limits sought in the 1997 Kyoto Treaty.

<a href="http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/asiapcf/east/02/15/japan.climate/?related" target="_blank">http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/asiapcf/east/02/15/japan.climate/?related</a>

Mandatory limits that were set to hit hardest against the US? Hmm nations that hate us?

or maybe this:

Another (student at the global warming talks) dressed as a cow, referring to scientific reports that methane from flatulent cattle contributes to global warming. "Do you think my gases are causing a climate catastrophe?" the cow's sign read. "That's crap!"

<a href="http://www.usatoday.com/news/healthscience/science/climate/2001-07-18-bonn-protests.htm" target="_blank">http://www.usatoday.com/news/healthscience/science/climate/2001-07-18-bonn-protests.htm</a>

Tax money wasted on finding out if cows are killing the earth. I remember that one, what were you greenpeace lovers going to do kill all the cows to help the world? Another fine example of dollars wasted on stupidity that could have been spent to design and implement pollution filters.


Here's a bit more just for the sake of laughter at the radicals expense:

<a href="http://www.citizenreviewonline.org/mar_2002/enviros_get_defensive.htm" target="_blank">http://www.citizenreviewonline.org/mar_2002/enviros_get_defensive.htm</a>

[ 06-17-2002: Message edited by: Ruhx ]</p>
post #372 of 512
[quote]Originally posted by sjpsu:
<strong>Ruhx, how old are you? I would feel terrible about insulting the elderly.</strong><hr></blockquote>

This would matter how? I do not like you nor do i want any part of my personal life to involve you. Again and for good measure P*ss off.
post #373 of 512
Ruhx,

" What i am doing here is not about converting you to a tie wearing staunch republican. It's about forcing you to question your side of this, and in so doing questioning my own ".

My post wasn't directed at you but, Dr. Schmitt. Read a little closer.

But, for what it's worth still in check.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #374 of 512
Thread Starter 
Well, that's it. This thread has been officially reduced to linking to stories with people dressed up in costume, discussing cow flatulence as it relates to global warming.

GAME OVER <img src="confused.gif" border="0">

[ 06-17-2002: Message edited by: SDW2001 ]</p>
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #375 of 512
Sjpsu,

Now careful about the elderly comments. I've got be older than him.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #376 of 512
My Statement to Nations that LOVE the US:

Thanks Canada! We love you too!
post #377 of 512
" GAME OVER "

<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #378 of 512
I had to post this bit:

The World Resources Institute has posted a special media alert on its website: "WRI is urging journalists to exercise caution in reporting on or reviewing the new book, 'The Skeptical Environmentalist.'"

That's not biased at work or any kind of call to limit free speech. Nope.
post #379 of 512
[quote]Originally posted by jimmac:
<strong>Ruhx,

" What i am doing here is not about converting you to a tie wearing staunch republican. It's about forcing you to question your side of this, and in so doing questioning my own ".

My post wasn't directed at you but, Dr. Schmitt. Read a little closer.

But, for what it's worth still in check. </strong><hr></blockquote>

No Jimmac, i know they weren't i was posting my thoughts after a bit of a break and some perspective nothing more.
post #380 of 512
[quote]Originally posted by SDW2001:
<strong>Well, that's it. This thread has been officially reduced to linking to stories with people dressed up in costume, discussing cow flatulence as it relates to global warming.

GAME OVER :confused:

[ 06-17-2002: Message edited by: SDW2001 ]</strong><hr></blockquote>

SDW, those links are for the benefit of the greenpeace lover. That particular link is actually for a bit of perspective on what a radical looks like in real life, be it left or right. I couldn't help but question the outcome of methane research done though.
post #381 of 512
[quote]Originally posted by jimmac:
<strong>Both you guys are wiggling now, What you're saying would not be in keeping with your assertion that liberals control the media.

To the other fellow : I didn't prove anyone's point with that other than to illustrate that for even consevatives it got more attention ( with all the ugly things going on in the world ) than it deserved.

I never saw any evidence of it being subtle. As a matter of fact that notion is laughable by your own admission " I agree that the media went ballistic with coverage ".

Still in check.

[ 06-17-2002: Message edited by: jimmac ]</strong><hr></blockquote>

To continue with the dicussion on this one, i made my point and can further by saying who better to see and use the desensitisation issue than those who claim it is the problem? But it wasn't the republicans beating it to death. It was the media machine. If you want to stand firm and say the fact that the media is about money isn't at issue here, i can not make an arguement against that, but i can darn sure show you some profit margins
post #382 of 512
post #383 of 512
An opinion from what looks to be a small time web publication.

Still just one person's statement doesn't make it true ( unless you really believe everything you read everywhere ). It's easy to use a name like " Newsweek " and bend the situation anyway you want.

Still doesn't address the question.

Still in check.

ps. Sounds kind of biased also.

[ 06-18-2002: Message edited by: jimmac ]</p>
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #384 of 512
Ruhx, no one really cares about what you have to say. Put the links away and play nice now.
post #385 of 512
Thread Starter 
Well,

That article is certainly written from a conservative point of view. But one cannnot ignore that it presents some very hard facts as well. And then there is this quote:

[quote] Commenting on the intrinsic bias of the press in a May 24 editorial in the Wall Street Journal, Bernard Goldberg, a former correspondent for CBS News, said: "It is this inability to see liberal views as liberal that is at the heart of the entire problem." <hr></blockquote>

Exactly. That is EXACTLY what I have been trying to say. You guys trying to argue that the media, as a whole, is not biased to the left is a joke. As I said, it is so biased it doesn't even know it. It is second nature!


sjpsu:

[quote]Ruhx, no one really cares about what you have to say. Put the links away and play nice now. <hr></blockquote>

I don't think it's up you.

jimmac:

[quote] Still in check. <hr></blockquote>

As if you have proven there is not bias in the media as a whole? As if we are struggling to prove it? I will try and return later with documentation. But, in the interim, anyone who doesn't believe there is tremendous bias in the media needs to hear this term:

"Election 2000"

'nuff said.

:cool:

[ 06-18-2002: Message edited by: SDW2001 ]

[ 06-18-2002: Message edited by: SDW2001 ]</p>
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #386 of 512
Thread Starter 
Oh, and though I don't have a link to this, I know for certain this accurate:

The press votes democratic by a 9 to 1 margin. No bias could ever come from that! <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #387 of 512
The contention that "Center" is actually far more rightward than the main networks would want you to believe is unfounded. It's a political ploy used by Fox News to report on only conservative issues. Fox reports on many far right stories. Can we say the same for far left stories? And in the rare occasion that they do report those stories, what kind of anti-liberal tilt contributes to its reporting? Think about that combined with a fictional far-right "center" and you have true conservative bias at Fox.
post #388 of 512
SDW,

The question still hasn't been answered. Not even properly addressed. How's it possible? It represents a major hole in the idea that the media is controlled by liberals. So yes, still in check.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #389 of 512
This is all very simple... The media is controlled by large corporations - there is no such thing as an independant station with national coverage on its own cable channel simply because the independant media does not have the money. Why? Because indy media is not backed by large corporations.

Therefore...

All major publications/broadcasts are told from above to promote corporate interests. What are these corporate interests? They are the same ones that the Republicrats have. No large media network will ever question the war on terrorism because that is biting the hand that feeds them - it would go against the owners interests. Say a defense contractor is on the board of directors at CNN and an oil company on NBC - why in god's name would either of these stations air a story about the evils of oil consumption or the failure of the war on terrorism? Thus - the media has an agenda - plain and simple and you guys need to recognize that.

Here is a good site to show you why America is truly hated. And by the way SDW, please read through all the way through the articles on this page. It was also not written by some 'bleeding-heart liberal' either. It was an ex-CIA man, someone you can identify with.


<a href="http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Stockwell/John_Stockwell.html" target="_blank">web page</a>
post #390 of 512
See now here is the other side. The truth ( and I know it's not nearly as exciting ) is that the media is in show business. For themselves. I'm sure pressure is put on them from a lot of places and at times they lean one way or the other. But, at their heart is the desire to make a buck. Pure and really very simple.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #391 of 512
Thread Starter 
You guys are absolutely kidding yourselves. The problem isn't always in the ownership, it is in the news directors, anchors, reporters, etc.

And, the press DOES vote 9-1 democratic as I said. That is a hard number to spin.

I would also say there is a difference between political "leaning" and flat out bias. My perceptions over the past years are as follows:

CNN: Left leaning.
MSNBC; Left leaning
ABC: Left BIAS
CBS Left BIAS
FoxNews: Conservative leaning
NBC: Left leaning, but only slightly.

And just so you folks know, the liberal bias in hollywood is even worse in my opinion, though at least that isn't portrayed as news.

Jimmac, I think my first part of the post addressed your question.

PS: Just to prove that I'm not out to "only hear my views" I am an avid watcher of the liberal leaning The West Wing TV drama. I know that's just a TV show, but there is no question that show leans hard left. It even directly pokes at Bush and was created by a flaming, screaming liberal, Aaron Sorkin. I watch it anyway because it is entertaining. So there.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #392 of 512
[quote]Originally posted by SDW2001:
<strong>You guys are absolutely kidding yourselves. The problem isn't always in the ownership, it is in the news directors, anchors, reporters, etc.

And, the press DOES vote 9-1 democratic as I said. That is a hard number to spin.

I would also say there is a difference between political "leaning" and flat out bias. My perceptions over the past years are as follows:

CNN: Left leaning.
MSNBC; Left leaning
ABC: Left BIAS
CBS Left BIAS
FoxNews: Conservative leaning
NBC: Left leaning, but only slightly.

And just so you folks know, the liberal bias in hollywood is even worse in my opinion, though at least that isn't portrayed as news.

Jimmac, I think my first part of the post addressed your question.

PS: Just to prove that I'm not out to "only hear my views" I am an avid watcher of the liberal leaning The West Wing TV drama. I know that's just a TV show, but there is no question that show leans hard left. It even directly pokes at Bush and was created by a flaming, screaming liberal, Aaron Sorkin. I watch it anyway because it is entertaining. So there.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Excuse the humble question of a foreigner : but how it's possible that 80 % of the media are leftie if halp the population of the US is republican. Does it means that all republicans read Fox new or that republicans read less than liberals ?
post #393 of 512
Thread Starter 
[quote]Originally posted by powerdoc:
<strong>
Excuse the humble question of a foreigner : but how it's possible that 80 % of the media are leftie if halp the population of the US is republican. Does it means that all republicans read Fox new or that republicans read less than liberals ?</strong><hr></blockquote>

You are assuming that the media is split 50/50. As I said it is most definitely not. It votes 9 to 1 democratic, as I have now said twice before. That is 90% liberal views......much of which leaks onto the air.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #394 of 512
[quote]Originally posted by SDW2001:
<strong>

You are assuming that the media is split 50/50. As I said it is most definitely not. It votes 9 to 1 democratic, as I have now said twice before. That is 90% liberal views......much of which leaks onto the air.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Do you mean that republicans are obliged to read Liberal newspapers ?
post #395 of 512
[quote]Originally posted by SDW2001:
<strong>

You are assuming that the media is split 50/50. As I said it is most definitely not. It votes 9 to 1 democratic, as I have now said twice before. That is 90% liberal views......much of which leaks onto the air.</strong><hr></blockquote>

hehe are you Bill Orielly or son of his !? ..
His is one of the biggest @$$H0773 I've ever seen in my entire life.
post #396 of 512
[quote]Originally posted by powerdoc:
<strong>
Does it means that all republicans read Fox new or that republicans read less than liberals ?</strong><hr></blockquote>

<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> I've sorely missed powerdoc's opinion. Hilarious.
post #397 of 512
Considering the fact that the last 20 or so posts have nothing to do with the stated topic, shouldn't you guys just start another thread?........................
post #398 of 512
What would we call it?

Also, mods, WHAT HAPPENED TO TWO OF OUR PAGES? We had 10 pages this morning. Right now we only have 8??
post #399 of 512
[quote]Originally posted by sjpsu:
<strong>What would we call it?

Also, mods, WHAT HAPPENED TO TWO OF OUR PAGES? We had 10 pages this morning. Right now we only have 8??</strong><hr></blockquote>

It's because there is now 50 post per pages (including the original post : 49 + 1).
post #400 of 512
SDW,

Well you stated some of the indirect reasons you think liberals control the media ( at least that's what you're infering here once again ) but, you didn't address my question at all.

You're doing a good jig around it but still haven't explained how ( if what you say is true ) this could have happened.

Still in check.

[ 06-19-2002: Message edited by: jimmac ]</p>
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › My Statement to Nations That Hate the US