or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Media Bias 2: The neverending saga
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Media Bias 2: The neverending saga - Page 2

post #41 of 82
This AP article states that the only reason Blanco became governor was because of racist David Duke-types voting for her against Jindal. Nick you can give the $50 to Hillary's re-election campaign in 2012.

I wish I could go into a counterfactual world in which this article did not mention Louisiana's history of racial politics, and did not mention that Jindal was able to overcome that, and Nick posted a thread about how biased the media is for not mentioning those things.

The fact is, David Duke won the majority of the white vote in Louisiana 10 years earlier. I don't see how an article about his election could NOT mention that, and not mention that he was able to overcome that.
post #42 of 82
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BRussell View Post

This AP article states that the only reason Blanco became governor was because of racist David Duke-types voting for her against Jindal. Nick you can give the $50 to Hillary's re-election campaign in 2012.

I wish I could go into a counterfactual world in which this article did not mention Louisiana's history of racial politics, and did not mention that Jindal was able to overcome that, and Nick posted a thread about how biased the media is for not mentioning those things.

The fact is, David Duke won the majority of the white vote in Louisiana 10 years earlier. I don't see how an article about his election could NOT mention that, and not mention that he was able to overcome that.

I meant it in the context of announcing her win, but I'll still take this. The vagueness was on my part.

It isn't a counterfactual world to note that no one will have mentioned this when she won. Perhaps it was announced later and buried on page A27 with regard to the study but on the day she won and carried those northern areas, I doubt there was an article linking her win and those racists when announcing her win.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #43 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northgate View Post

And that would be the same media that called Al Gore names like "serial liar" when it was demonstrably false. Right?

The point is that the media is out for themselves and ONLY themselves. This idea that they only stick it to conservatives is utterly absurd. They pick a narrative that they like and they stick to it. Period. Because they're certainly not doing my side any favors (Republicans are the "daddy" party and Democrats are the "mommy" party).


Uh, how was it "demonstrably false" again?
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 #44 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Actually Frank you are alleging a couple things that could be true, but appear to be very different from what the article itself is alleging. First you are alleging demographic change within certain districts/parishes due to white flight. This would mean that the people who voted for a David Duke are less likely to live in those same areas 16 years later. Based off their alleged beliefs, they would have fled those areas or as you noted, they would have engaged in white flight.

The second thing you allege, and this is different from what the article notes as well, is that Jindal won because the people who would have voted against him, depopulated the area due to Katrina and thus he won a bigger piece of a smaller pie.

Both of those could be true and still wouldn't prove what the article alleged, although they do make some interesting thinking.

I think it possible based off a couple points to note the article allegation as wrong. First the age of the two elections makes it very unlikely the same people in the same districts/parishes voted for Duke and Jindal. Second, just the behavior of racists themselves makes it very unlikely. The claim in the past was that the Dixiecrats moved to the Republican party due to the civil rights issue. (Even though the Republicans of the time voted for the same civil rights legislation in higher percentages than Democrats.)

So we know, at least according to those claims, that party loyalty does not ride above the loyalty to act like a racist. Within this governor's race, there was a rich, white Republican who switched parties in order to run against Jindal. The top two Democratic challenges were white males as well, and from what I have read at least one of them were rich enough to self-finance as well.

So even if we buy the newspaper contention, we have to believe that white racists would ignore three white males, two of them wealthy, one of them a Republican who had switched just for this election to run against Jindal, to vote for Jindal who is not of their race.

Sorry but if motivations are going to be claimed by certain people with regard to actions, they have to be consistent. If they are willing to move to avoid minorities (white flight) they aren't going to just go cast their vote for Jindal when they have clear alternatives that match their race.

Also we would have to believe, that in the people had not changed their behavior for 12 years, because Jindal ran the first time and lost in 2003. (Does that mean the racists were supporting Blanco instead since she won? I know Nagin endorsed Jindal over Blanco in 2003) Then a short four years later, we are to believe that they have now changed behaviors that they had followed for the previous 12 and perhaps up to 16 years, all to vote for Jindal.

That doesn't make much sense either.

Nick

You have to remember that this was a primary, if no one received a clear 50+ percent majority (which did happen in this case), a runoff would have occurred, as it did in 2003.

To do justice to the data at hand I would have to do absolute (change in votes) and relative (percent change in votes) deltas using Jindal's vote totals from the 2003 runoff as the baseline condition.

But I don't think I'll keep anyone interested in the actual statistical metrics, it's way too much information without actually writing a lengthy article.

As to the parishes I did mention, three of those were significantly affected by Hurricane Katrina (Orleans, Jefferson, and St. Bernard (comparing vote totals from those three parishes between 2003 and 2007 shows a net loss of 97,159 total votes, while the total net loss statewide was 108,830 votes)). While, St. Tammany (David Duke's parish) saw an uptake of 1,891 total votes between 2003 and 2007.

Three parishes stand out in terms of "white flight" in that general area; Livingston, St. Tammany, and St. Bernard, population growth and demographics (~90 percent white), and surprise the building of the Interstate system, and double surprise, desegregation and the civil rights movement, clearly show what has happened here (and on a nationwide basis), what has happened over the past 60 years or so. \
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #45 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by franksargent View Post

You have to remember that this was a primary, if no one received a clear 50+ percent majority (which did happen in this case), a runoff would have occurred, as it did in 2003.

To do justice to the data at hand I would have to do absolute (change in votes) and relative (percent change in votes) deltas using Jindal's vote totals from the 2003 runoff as the baseline condition.

But I don't think I'll keep anyone interested in the actual statistical metrics, it's way too much information without actually writing a lengthy article.

As to the parishes I did mention, three of those were significantly affected by Hurricane Katrina (Orleans, Jefferson, and St. Bernard (comparing vote totals from those three parishes between 2003 and 2007 shows a net loss of 97,159 total votes, while the total net loss statewide was 108,830 votes)). While, St. Tammany (David Duke's parish) saw an uptake of 1,891 total votes between 2003 and 2007.

Three parishes stand out in terms of "white flight" in that general area; Livingston, St. Tammany, and St. Bernard, population growth and demographics (~90 percent white), and surprise the building of the Interstate system, and double surprise, desegregation and the civil rights movement, clearly show what has happened here (and on a nationwide basis), what has happened over the past 60 years or so. \

I really think you're getting WAY too much into the technical details here, and thereby confusing the issue. You've made some arguments that the article is technically correct in its assertions. Even if we accept that (and I think there are contrary arguments anyway), the point is that the article is clearly making some implications that betray the author's political biases. The author is also gratuitously pointing out his perceptions of of conservatives being racists. What he's really saying is that the area has become more liberal. That is the key here. That kind of writing is not balanced.
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 #46 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

I really think you're getting WAY too much into the technical details here, and thereby confusing the issue. You've made some arguments that the article is technically correct in its assertions. Even if we accept that (and I think there are contrary arguments anyway), the point is that the article is clearly making some implications that betray the author's political biases. The author is also gratuitously pointing out his perceptions of of conservatives being racists. What he's really saying is that the area has become more liberal. That is the key here. That kind of writing is not balanced.

JINDAL WINS (NO Times-Picayune)

Quote:
Jindal paid particular attention to north Louisiana, a conservative region that was widely viewed as critical to Blanco's victory four years ago. In a candidate forum in Shreveport earlier this month, Jindal said that he had visited the region 77 times since declaring his candidacy.

The time and attention Jindal paid to rural areas appeared to pay off, as Saturday's returns showed him making significant gains in parishes where he was viewed as underperforming in 2003.

For example, Jindal won 54 percent of the vote in Rapides Parish, versus 44 percent in the 2003 runoff. His 55 percent of the vote in Grant Parish was 15 points above his 2003 figures, whereas in Acadia Parish his score went from 43 percent in 2003 to 54 percent on Saturday.

Low black turnout may be factor (Baton Rouge Advocate)

Quote:
But Elliott Stonecipher, a Shreveport demographer and political analyst, said there were signs that white turnout was running well ahead of votes cast by blacks.

African American turnout is going to be a good 10 points less than white turnout, Stonecipher said shortly after Jindal claimed victory.

It is playing out the way we have been saying for a week, he said.

Quote:
Less than normal black turnout, Ater noted, would hurt bids by Campbell, Boasso and Georges.

Then the vote that Jindal receives becomes disproportionate, Ater said.

Election day featured two key questions that were intertwined:

Would Jindal win the race for governor without a runoff?

Would black voters, who make up a huge part of the Democratic base, go to the polls, which experts said boosted chances for a runoff?

Quote:
The vote Saturday marked the first chance to gauge the impact of population losses in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina, many of whom were Democratic loyalists.

It is clear that the demographics have changed and the heavy turnout that Democrats could rely on from the African American community has been diminished, said Robert Hogan, associate professor of political science at LSU.

Jindal carries 60 parishes in landslide win (Baton Rouge Advocate)

Quote:
Jindals victory in 60 parishes was up from just 12 in the 2003 runoff when he lost to Gov. Kathleen Blanco.

The Republican drew one of every four of his total votes from just three parishes: East Baton Rouge, plus Jefferson and St. Tammany in the New Orleans area.

About 110,000 fewer voters cast ballots Saturday than the 2003 runoff for governor, said Greg Rigamer, a consultant who runs GCR & Associates, Inc. in New Orleans, which specializes in computerized tracking of elections.

Rigamer, who served as a consultant to Jindal this time after working for Blanco in 2003, calculated that nearly 60,000 of that vote drop took place in New Orleans, which used to be a treasure trove of support for Democratic contenders.

However, population losses since Hurricane Katrina have changed Louisianas political landscape. It demonstrates that the demographics of this state have changed, Hogan said.

Quote:
However, Jindal carried Campbells home parish of Bossier by a margin of 3-1 over Campbell.

It was one of several signs of his turnaround in north Louisiana since lack of support in that region was said to have played a major role in Jindals 2003 runoff loss.

Analysts said Jindals lopsided win stemmed from his intense campaigning since 2003, Blancos relatively late exit from the race and the lack of any well-established Democrats willing to enter the fray.

The anti-Jindal vote never solidified behind anybody, former Secretary of State Al Ater said Sunday.

Today's word is prescient.

Here's another link (or two);

1991 LA governor's race (DD versus EE)

LA census data (1900-1990)

So instead of second guessing the NYT's albeit brief report on page Z666, about the LA governor's race, perhaps you SHOULD leave it to the editors and expert analysis from the people who live in LA (and which the NYT appears to have relied upon for their brief page Z666 report), TYVM!
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #47 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Uh, how was it "demonstrably false" again?

Don't play coy. Come on!
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
post #48 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by franksargent View Post

JINDAL WINS (NO Times-Picayune)



Low black turnout may be factor (Baton Rouge Advocate)


Jindal carries 60 parishes in landslide win (Baton Rouge Advocate)

Today's word is prescient.

Here's another link (or two);

1991 LA governor's race (DD versus EE)

LA census data (1900-1990)

So instead of second guessing the NYT's albeit brief report on page Z666, about the LA governor's race, perhaps you SHOULD leave it to the editors and expert analysis from the people who live in LA (and which the NYT appears to have relied upon for their brief page Z666 report), TYVM!

You are missing the point in spectacular fashion.
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 #49 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northgate View Post

Don't play coy. Come on!

Try this.

Now I know it's NRO, but things like this pop up all over the place with Gore. Even if they are ALL unintentional, it shows Gore turns to deception frequently, even for minor points. No one in is right mind could believe he makes that many misstatements.

Also, I'll remind you that I think if the Dems are smart, they'd convince Gore to run as he's their best shot. I'm not attacking him, I'm just speaking the truth...something Gore has a lot of trouble doing, apparently.
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 #50 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

You are missing the point in spectacular fashion.

That your POV is the BIASED POV!

You guys (whomever "you guys" are) scream "BIAS" and when you're called out, get all dodgy, chase your own tail, and scream "BIAS" and when you're called out, get all dodgy, chase your own tail, ..., ad infinitum!

So, if your point is, that you don't have a point, I GET IT!
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #51 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by franksargent View Post

That your POV is the BIASED POV!

You guys (whomever "you guys" are) scream "BIAS" and when you're called out, get all dodgy, chase your own tail, and scream "BIAS" and when you're called out, get all dodgy, chase your own tail, ad infinitum!

So, if your point is, that you don't have a point, I GET IT!

There is no such thing as a biased POV. Bias creeps up when someone who is supposed to be impartial acts in a partisan or ideological way. Individuals acting as such can take any POV they wish. Therefore, the term "bias" does not apply to me or you or anyone here, unless we allow our POVs to interfere with our profession or in an area in which we are expected to act impartially.

In the case of the media, it's particularly bad, because they are supposed to act in the public interest. Dismissing media bias by saying "you guys see bias in everything" is not going to get you there, Frank. Otherwise, I could easily respond with the same the next time you bitch about Fox News. For all we know, it might be your POV that's "biased." So you can keep linking to election and census data for the last 100 years and it won't matter, because that's not the point. The fact that the author had to qualify the victory like that showed bias and showed he wished to make a political point in his article. That's the point.
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 #52 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

There is no such thing as a biased POV. Bias creeps up when someone who is supposed to be impartial acts in a partisan or ideological way. Individuals acting as such can take any POV they wish. Therefore, the term "bias" does not apply to me or you or anyone here, unless we allow our POVs to interfere with our profession or in an area in which we are expected to act impartially.

In the case of the media, it's particularly bad, because they are supposed to act in the public interest. Dismissing media bias by saying "you guys see bias in everything" is not going to get you there, Frank. Otherwise, I could easily respond with the same the next time you bitch about Fox News. For all we know, it might be your POV that's "biased." So you can keep linking to election and census data for the last 100 years and it won't matter, because that's not the point. The fact that the author had to qualify the victory like that showed bias and showed he wished to make a political point in his article. That's the point.

A political point about a political election?

See what I mean about chasing your own tail?

The only way I arrive at unbiased judgments is to look at data as OBJECTIVELY as possible, given the limitations and SUBJECTIVITY of the human condition. \
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #53 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by franksargent View Post

A political point about a political election?

See what I mean about chasing your own tail?

The only way I arrive at unbiased judgments is to look at data as OBJECTIVELY as possible, given the limitations and SUBJECTIVITY of the human condition. \

Being objective is one thing. That creates sound judgments. One can have a point of view and still be objective when looking at the facts.

As for the article. Unless it's an opinion piece, there should be no personal political points made in the news. And that's what he did. Now, defend that.
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 #54 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Being objective is one thing. That creates sound judgments. One can have a point of view and still be objective when looking at the facts.

As for the article. Unless it's an opinion piece, there should be no personal political points made in the news. And that's what he did. Now, defend that.

From your original post, the part that most "upset" your "bias" meter was;

Quote:
Yet Mr. Jindal, with his decisive victory on Saturday, appears to have overcome a significant racial hurdle that blocked him in 2003, according to analysts: race-based opposition in the deeply conservative northern and eastern parishes of Louisiana that once supported the Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke.

I've provided 18 links and one graphic from The Southern Poverty Law Center Hate Map

[LEFT][/LEFT]

BRussell also provided a definitive link titled Study Suggests Bias, Ex-Duke Voters Defeated Jindal linking Jindal's loss in 2003 to David Duke type supporters.

So that's 20 links in support of those three words that I"ve highlighted above, I've have already done a preliminary analysis from the OBJECTIVE data which appears to fully support those three words highlighted above.

It is fairly obvious to me, that this election will appear in a future peer reviewed political science journal, similar to what happened in 2003. And I'd fully expect it to present most of the verbiage that I've already presented, but with a peer review and editorial process, and of course will be written by expert analysis's from that region with a fuller understanding of the local's politics and demographics and history. It will also be written in a much clearer format, than I could ever do.

So at this point I "could" do what others with much more experience in political science (but perhaps less expertise than myself in statistical analyses) will do anyway. I could do a complete detailed statistical analysis myself, here for you, clearly demonstrating those three words outlined above are factual and correct. That that entire sentence is factual and correct.

But, from past experience in these threads, I already know that that exercise is futile, it will fall on deaf ears as it were, to the thread population in general, but specifically to those individuals that already hold "certain" biases! \ Hint, hint.

And all I have from your end is your POV that that statement is "biased."

Have a nice day.
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #55 of 82
Quote:
...The neverending saga...

post #56 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by franksargent View Post

From your original post, the part that most "upset" your "bias" meter was;



I've provided 18 links and one graphic from The Southern Poverty Law Center Hate Map

[LEFT][/LEFT]

BRussell also provided a definitive link titled Study Suggests Bias, Ex-Duke Voters Defeated Jindal linking Jindal's loss in 2003 to David Duke type supporters.

So that's 20 links in support of those three words that I"ve highlighted above, I've have already done a preliminary analysis from the OBJECTIVE data which appears to fully support those three words highlighted above.

It is fairly obvious to me, that this election will appear in a future peer reviewed political science journal, similar to what happened in 2003. And I'd fully expect it to present most of the verbiage that I've already presented, but with a peer review and editorial process, and of course will be written by expert analysis's from that region with a fuller understanding of the local's politics and demographics and history. It will also be written in a much clearer format, than I could ever do.

So at this point I "could" do what others with much more experience in political science (but perhaps less expertise than myself in statistical analyses) will do anyway. I could do a complete detailed statistical analysis myself, here for you, clearly demonstrating those three words outlined above are factual and correct. That that entire sentence is factual and correct.

But, from past experience in these threads, I already know that that exercise is futile, it will fall on deaf ears as it were, to the thread population in general, but specifically to those individuals that already hold "certain" biases! \ Hint, hint.

And all I have from your end is your POV that that statement is "biased."

Have a nice day.

It amazing how you folks, who I assume are reasonably intelligent, can just continue to miss the point over and over and over. I'll just stop there, because you're not going to see it. You still think this is about supporting the claim in the article. It's not. Good bye.
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 #57 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

It amazing how you folks, who I assume are reasonably intelligent, can just continue to miss the point over and over and over. I'll just stop there, because you're not going to see it. You still think this is about supporting the claim in the article. It's not. Good bye.

These four links are from the NYT, the first three are from the author of the NYT article that STARTED this thread claiming "bias" in the author's second article (BTW, the author WAS in LA during the election process);

An Improbable Favorite Emerges in Cajun Country

[CENTER]
FRANKLINTON, La., Oct. 17[/CENTER]

Quote:
He lost to Ms. Blanco in 2003 largely in places like this, Washington Parish, a hardscrabble rural area 70 miles north of New Orleans, where voters openly expressed unease four years ago about opting for someone of Mr. Jindal’s race. In areas where the Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke won in the 1991 governor’s race — here and in the deeply conservative parishes of north Louisiana — Mr. Jindal lost.

Indian-American Elected Louisiana’s Governor

[CENTER]
NEW ORLEANS, Oct. 20[/CENTER]

Quote:
Yet Mr. Jindal, with his decisive victory on Saturday, appears to have overcome a significant racial hurdle that blocked him in 2003, according to analysts: race-based opposition in the deeply conservative northern and eastern parishes of Louisiana that once supported the Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke.

A Son of Immigrants Rises in a Southern State

[CENTER]
NEW ORLEANS, Oct. 21[/CENTER]

Quote:
During that (2003) campaign, Mr. Jindal attacked liberals in radio advertisements and talked up his connections to Mr. Bush. The so-called bubba vote was nonetheless against him that year and he lost to the current governor, Kathleen Babineaux Blanco, who has chosen not to run again.

And finally a letter (Oct. 24) to the NYT editor;

An American Story

Quote:
... One piece of advice to Bobby: Go easy on conservatism. Ideology is a luxury of the upper class. But rebuild New Orleans. Care about the poor, the children, the elderly, the unemployed, blacks and Hispanics. ...

Quote:
... (Rev.) Nehemiah Thompson

South Plainfield, N.J., Oct. 22, 2007

The writer is general secretary, National Association of Asian Indian Christians in the U.S.A.

Also, at least TRY to read (in there entirety) the three LA news articles (and these four NYT "biased hit" pieces) that I provided links too in a previous post (with respect to Hurricane Katrina and loss of black voters primarilary from Orleans Parish).

Now, what was your point again, perhaps that we should IGNORE history?

Today's word is Abstraction.

Have a nice evening.
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #58 of 82


5000th post!*

*If you guys read 1/5th of them, I can die in peace.
post #59 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShawnJ View Post



5000th post!*

*If you guys read 1/5th of them, I can die in peace.



And to Governor Jindal, good luck.

Yer gonna need it.
post #60 of 82
I'd do it all over again for that cookie!
post #61 of 82
Dear God. I hate to say it, but SDW is right.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #62 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

Dear God. I hate to say it, but SDW is right.

Exactly!
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #63 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by @_@ Artman View Post


And to Governor Jindal, good luck.

Yer gonna need it.

I hate to say it. But I hope he grows eyes in the back of his head. He's gonna need them.

Duck!
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
post #64 of 82
ABC reporter tries to pester Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger into a "gotcha," but he fends her off and is about 10 seconds away from ripping off her arm and beating her to death with it.

Got to hand it to Ahnold. This bitch reporter tries to get some Katrina moment and fails miserably. This is what I hate about the MSM.
post #65 of 82
I've been generally impressed with him as a politician.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #66 of 82
Thread Starter 
I'm sure she will be filling a sexual harassment claim just as the next election rolls around.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #67 of 82
Media Bizarro 3: Fox continues to ask: Did al Qaeda burn California?

Quote:
"In a post-9/11 world, we have to consider all possibilities,"

"What a cost-effective means of terrorism,"

- Terror analyst Erick Stakelbeck

Not worth it's own topic, but thought I'd share the champions of unbiased news.
post #68 of 82
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by @_@ Artman View Post

ABC reporter tries to pester Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger into a "gotcha," but he fends her off and is about 10 seconds away from ripping off her arm and beating her to death with it.

Got to hand it to Ahnold. This bitch reporter tries to get some Katrina moment and fails miserably. This is what I hate about the MSM.

In 1996 I attended the Republican Convention in San Diego. At these things you go to events all week long where you get to interact with your own and other state delegations. The entire California delegation had dinner together at, I think it was Sea World. Now to give you an example of the size of the media, there were two media people there for every state delegate. We come out of the dinner and the media are all asking one question, "Do you think Pete Wilson has been intentionally slighted because he is not speaking on X night." (I believe he was speaking opening night instead of nominating night.) They stuck the mic in your face and if you didn't agree with the pointed question, they simply moved on and asked the question of the next person. There were roughly 200 people at this dinner. I'd guess that 190+ had no problem with the Wilson placement. However they went through and found the ten who did and culled the quotes from two or three of them from which they did their reporting.

I say this because the Arnold thing is a pure version of that. She cites "sources" to keep alleging the information. He stops her and notes that she is using these unnamed sources to advance her own attack.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #69 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

I've been generally impressed with him as a politician.

I've never supported a Republican in my life, but I think Arnold has so far been one of the best governors California has had. Definitely not perfect, but considering the circumstances, he's done a hell of a job.

In fact when he was runing and my family and friends were immediately saying how much of a joke it was, I said, "hey, he's obviously competent at managing his body and his cereer... maybe we should see what he can do". I'd rather have someone competent than another Bozo. Then when he hired Warren Buffett as an economic advisor, I was impressed. The way he dealt with the Gay marriage issue was also impressive, despite his Bushlike gaffe about "gay marriage between a man and a woman".

If he could run for the big P, I'd be ticking the R box over Hilary or Obama (but not Kucinich or Gore).

I'd like to see Trumpt or SDW make a claim like that about ANY Democrat. They can't. They're partisan.
post #70 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

I've never supported a Republican in my life, but I think Arnold has so far been one of the best governors California has had. Definitely not perfect, but considering the circumstances, he's done a hell of a job.

In fact when he was runing and my family and friends were immediately saying how much of a joke it was, I said, "hey, he's obviously competent at managing his body and his cereer... maybe we should see what he can do". I'd rather have someone competent than another Bozo. Then when he hired Warren Buffett as an economic advisor, I was impressed. The way he dealt with the Gay marriage issue was also impressive, despite his Bushlike gaffe about "gay marriage between a man and a woman".

If he could run for the big P, I'd be ticking the R box over Hilary or Obama (but not Kucinich or Gore).

I'd like to see Trumpt or SDW make a claim like that about ANY Democrat. They can't. They're partisan.

I've voted for Dems before. I voted for Ed Rendell, for example (and I regret it, believe me). Now, are there any Dems running for President that I would vote for over one of the GOP candidates? No. But that's because of who they are and what they believe. I would actually love to see the Dems become the Dems of old, the pre-Carter Dems like Johnson, even Kennedy, Truman, et al. But who is running like that?

Hillary: A leftist pretending she's a centrist, a political chameleon driven by raw political ambition. She's practically a sociopath.

Obama: I don't think the man is actually that smart. He's certainly naive...look at his statements on Pakistan. And despite his soaring rhetoric and commanding speaking voice (which I actually don't care for either, but still), he hasn't proposed anything I tend to agree with. I hear about universal health care and tax the rich and end the war and what not.

Edwards: I can't stand him. He's Obama without the speaking voice, and more liberal. He's exceptionally weak on security issues.

Kucinich: He's a joke. A pacifist with with socialist tendencies. He's beyond anti-war...I think he might vote to surrender if Canada declared war on us. He's THAT nuts. His recent appearance on Syrian TV was straight up anti-American. He went on a foreign news program and declared that the war was started over lies and what not. Oh, and he looks like a leprechaun, have a mentioned that. We'd get attacked just for his pot of gold.

Biden: I think he's kinda nuts, really. That said, at least he's better on security issues. He's said some truly nut-job things though and I'm pretty sure he'd end up starting WWIII.


Anyone else is immaterial at this point. Compare those folks to Thompson, RG, Romney and McCain. Either one would do a better job than the above candidates. So it's really not about party to me for the most part.
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 #71 of 82
I'm curious, SDW. In your noggin, what is the difference between "a leftist" and someone with "socialist tendencies"?
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #72 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

I'm curious, SDW. In your noggin, what is the difference between "a leftist" and someone with "socialist tendencies"?

I don't know. I'm on drugs.
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 #73 of 82
Well, I'm only going to accept that explanation for so long, you know.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #74 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

Well, I'm only going to accept that explanation for so long, you know.

What if I stay on drugs? Then you'd be discriminating against someone with a disability.
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 #75 of 82
Considering I'm disabled, that'd make me a self-hater! Woot! It's a two-fer!
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #76 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

I'm sure she will be filling a sexual harassment claim just as the next election rolls around.

Nick

He's already in his second term. Or is this considered his official first term? I'm not sure.
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
post #77 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Hillary: A leftist pretending she's a centrist, a political chameleon driven by raw political ambition. She's practically a sociopath.

Well, there you go, you've lost all credibility as a honest thinker right there.

I personally think Giuliani and Romeny are absolutely no different. They are EXACTLY the same species as Clinton. Unfortunately, that's what it takes these days to run for the presidency.

But in your world view Hillary is the only inflicted with this problem.

"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
post #78 of 82
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

I've never supported a Republican in my life, but I think Arnold has so far been one of the best governors California has had. Definitely not perfect, but considering the circumstances, he's done a hell of a job.

In fact when he was runing and my family and friends were immediately saying how much of a joke it was, I said, "hey, he's obviously competent at managing his body and his cereer... maybe we should see what he can do". I'd rather have someone competent than another Bozo. Then when he hired Warren Buffett as an economic advisor, I was impressed. The way he dealt with the Gay marriage issue was also impressive, despite his Bushlike gaffe about "gay marriage between a man and a woman".

If he could run for the big P, I'd be ticking the R box over Hilary or Obama (but not Kucinich or Gore).

I'd like to see Trumpt or SDW make a claim like that about ANY Democrat. They can't. They're partisan.

First I didn't vote for Arnold. I voted for McClintock. Arnold has not done nearly a good enough job with the budget. His bigget claim to fame will be taking debt and turning it into bonds. It doesn't get rid of the debt, it reclassifies it.

Tonton, I think what you fail to note is how easy or hard it is for a centrist to rise to a position whereby they could run for office in each party. You can consider voting for an Arnold for example because a pro-choice Republican can run for office within the party. Find me the blue-dog Democrats within the party today that are on MY ballot and I will vote for them. I've also voted for Diane Feinstein but don't know if I could today.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Northgate View Post

He's already in his second term. Or is this considered his official first term? I'm not sure.

Not sure either, but since they were brought up the previous two times, I don't doubt the third. LA Times at work again. I'm sure they will drop it around... oh Nov. 1st.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #79 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

First I didn't vote for Arnold. I voted for McClintock.

Of course you didn't. He's too far left for you. I didn't mean to imply you'd vote for any Republican no matter what... just that you'd never vote for a Democrat. And I guess I was wrong in SDW's case. Although evidently, Rendell was a big tax-cutter... no surprises there then.

Quote:
Arnold has not done nearly a good enough job with the budget. His bigget claim to fame will be taking debt and turning it into bonds. It doesn't get rid of the debt, it reclassifies it.

I'm curious to know who you think has done a better job with the budget in the last 20 years...

The California budget crisis is astronomical. Although we haven't seen a cure yet, it's hard to say there haven't been improvements during Arnold's reign.

Quote:
Tonton, I think what you fail to note is how easy or hard it is for a centrist to rise to a position whereby they could run for office in each party. You can consider voting for an Arnold for example because a pro-choice Republican can run for office within the party. Find me the blue-dog Democrats within the party today that are on MY ballot and I will vote for them. I've also voted for Diane Feinstein but don't know if I could today.

I'm impressed that you voted for Feinstein. And sorry that your views have changed since she first ran, because hers haven't. I guess had you been in Philly then you may have voted for Rendell as well... and I retract my claim. I was wrong.
post #80 of 82
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Of course you didn't. He's too far left for you. I didn't mean to imply you'd vote for any Republican no matter what... just that you'd never vote for a Democrat. And I guess I was wrong in SDW's case. Although evidently, Rendell was a big tax-cutter... no surprises there then.

If by too far left you mean that I knew McClintock would actually address the budget deficit instead of papering it over, then I guess you would be right.

While not perfect, Pete Wilson did much better than either Arnold or Davis.

Quote:
The California budget crisis is astronomical. Although we haven't seen a cure yet, it's hard to say there haven't been improvements during Arnold's reign.

I disagree. Arnold hasn't kept the budget from growing and hasn't stopped spending even during these best of times fiscally. Now the state is going to be (likely) heading into a severe downturn in terms of tax revenues and we will see how bad it really is now.

Quote:
I'm impressed that you voted for Feinstein. And sorry that your views have changed since she first ran, because hers haven't. I guess had you been in Philly then you may have voted for Rendell as well... and I retract my claim. I was wrong.

Feinstein has changed during her tenure in Washington. She has also gone more leftward since Boxer was elected and since the margin on her wins has increased.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Media Bias 2: The neverending saga