Funny, I looked up the word "plenty" in the dictionary and it did not have a picture of Alan Colmes.
Sure Fox has a bias, and it's a bias to the right, but they aren't NEARLY as far to the right as their competition is biased to the left.
I suppose you could see it that way, if you were a fascist. All the other corporate networks failed to report the fact that Gore would have won Florida in a statewide recount, cheered the Iraq war, had two war supporters for every dove yet give right wing assholes like Glenn Beck their own shows, and have to be drug kicking and screaming into reporting on Republican scandals like the U.S. Attorney purge.
The entire mainstream media has a proven, conservative bias. Deal with it.
Fox News gives people what they want to see as news, which seems to be republican talking points and talking heads yelling at each other. If liberally biased news got decent ratings, Fox News would be democratic lap dogs.
Fox News has never had anything but right wing talking heads. There are 24 hours in a day - if they wanted to get a left wing asshole to match their right wing assholes, they could get Hugo Chavez to do a show via satellite and see if it would make more money. They have never tried.
Your excuse is bullshit. But of course, you knew that already.
Tell me, what did the USA do to the Islamic world that was as bad as what the USA did to Japan during World War II?
Propped up Saddam when he fought Iran, bombed "economic targets" in Iraq, Abu Garib, Haditha, disbanded their military, and created instability leading to a civil war and the deaths of more than 600,000 Iraqis. As a percentage of population, that's about the same as 7 million Americans dying for someone else's arrogance and incompetence.
Has the Islamic world ever been firebombed, or nuked, or completely surrounded and starved?
Yes, no, yes and yes. Any more stupid questions you'd like answered?
Gore 2000 is a different man than Gore 2007 regardless of what he'd like to say
Aside from the body fat percentage, (hopefully) the only difference would be that he wouldn't listen to idiotic Dem campaign consultants. Just how many presidential elections do Dems have to lose before they learn that the "don't dignify that attack with a response" approach to right wing attacks is a recipe for failure? It worked so well in the 1988 and 2000 elections that Kerry's team did it again in 2004. Any Dem consultant that proposes this today needs to be taken out back, pistol whipped, fired, and then pistol whipped again.
Though his quote on his influence WRT the internet was poorly worded
No it wasn't. It was a perfectly reasonable thing to say, given the facts. But media and the RNC ignored the facts, ignored the context of his answer, deliberately misquoted him, and made a BFD about it. As opposed to, oh say...Bush taking credit for passing health care legislation when he was governor of Texas that he actually vetoed, or Cheney claiming that he had never laid eyes on John Edwards before their debate, when they had actually met three separate times.
You forgot one: massive hypocrisy. Also check. Thompson gave a speech passionately calling for a pardon of Scooter Libby while also passionately calling for the rule of law in the same speech. Or how he claims to be a social conservative while parading around with his trophy wife that is younger than the daughter he had with his old wife, whom he divorced. Oh, and not to mention the right wings hatred of Hollywood, yet they line up to go down on actors who give them the time of day (Reagan). It's no wonder the IOKIYAR wing of the party likes him.
stay and do what needs doing to do it right (McCain's choice)
"Doing it right" at this point would require at least 500,000 troops, and thats just for the city of Baghdad. And until he manages to either build a huge international coalition, like the first President Bush, or start up a draft, he's not "doing it right", he's for the status quo. And the status quo is a big meat grinder for our troops.
Besides, McCain is all for pulling the troops out when things aren't going well...if there's a Democrat in office.
Okay, here's one: during military actions, the U.S. military routinely hits military and economic targets. What do you think the Pentagon and the World Trade Center are? By our own rules, the only people to have died from terrorism on 911 were those in the airplanes. How would you like it if Iran's military grabbed some of our soldiers while they were off duty and out of uniform, invented a term like "unlawful combatant", and kept them prisoners without a hearing or any rights? How about foreign governments waterboarding our citizens?
I've gotta say that's really just flamebait. People who think this should try getting their information from more than one media source at once-- or from non-media sources.
Pot calling kettle...
Talk to some of the guys who've been over there. The Iraqis knew we were coming. They had plenty of time to remove their weapons.
This is one of the right wing's lamest arguments, somewhere between "cut and run" and the "he didn't want to scare the children" excuse for Bush reading My Pet Goat instead of getting on the phone with NORAD. Saddam hiding his WMD's in the face of an invasion is like a gun nut hiding his.45 and shotgun during a robbery because he doesn't want them to get stolen. It is just mindbogglingly stupid reasoning. We had weapons inspectors on the ground and while they were kicked out we still had satellite photos. If Saddam had tried moving his weapons, we would have known about it.
I'm sorry, but you Bush bashers had me for a time, but there's simply too much greed in the world to believe CNN is really interested in reporting the truth.
"Bush bashing"? Any American who is not appalled by this presidents actions either doesn't follow the news - at all - or doesn't deserve their citizenship. And CNN, are you kidding me? The network that has to have two ultra conservative voices for every moderate while giving right wing bigots like Glenn Beck their own shows? The network that carried water for the president all throughout the Iraq invasion? The network that has started calling those opposed to the war "the antiwar crowd"?
PNAC or Project for the New American Century, proposed originally to Clinton a new way forward for the USA, including; huge expansion of military forces, preemptive intervention to peoples & countries hostile to it and preserving an international order in the interests of the USA.
As indicated by a couple of the replies to your post, one problem seems to be willful ignorance.
The real problem is the willful ignorance of the mainstream media. They were so obsessed with finding "fibs" and "exaggurations" with Al Gore in 2000 that they completely ignored it when Bush took credit for passing health care legislation in Texas that he actually, um, vetoed as governor.
But the press still seems to take Cheney seriously, even though he has much credibility as Baghdad Bob, after still insisting that Iraq was involved with 911 long after the nuttiest wingnuts dropped that line, and claimed in a 2004 debate that he had never seen John Edwards before, even thought they met on three separate occasions.
I don't recall hearing *any* politician, regardless of the country they are in, but especially the Congressional ones, apologize, or otherwise admit they were wrong regarding these WMDs.
It was not just our President who was convinced, but Congress was as well
Yes, Congress was convinced, convinced by the intelligence fed to them by the administration.
and one from Mr. "I invented the Interwebs"
Any more bullshit talking points you'd like to rattle off here? How about Love Story or Love Canal? Pelosi One? Plame was not covert? As long as you're making shit up, go hog wild.
and I quote here
Why stop with two? Why not give out the whole list of quotes from Clinton administration officials saying Saddam was a bad guy that wanted WMD? It's a few pages long. The problem with the list, is that there are no quotes saying that Saddam was such an imminent threat that we had to take him out now, no time for diplomacy or weapons inspectors.
Just to nit a pick, Bungie's titles were dual Windows & Mac release starting with the first Myth game, IIRC. But it did definitely debut at a Macworld Expo...I remember showing a PC gamer a clip of the game footage, and he said "there's no way that's rendered in real time." Then of course, Bungie sold out to Microsoft, Halo was delayed and transformed into a console title, and by the time it came out the graphics were average at best instead of amazing.
The other thing that pissed me off about the sellout was how they ripped multiplayer out of Oni before releasing the game. Fuckers....
"never as successful in the marketplace as Apple had hoped" (from your link) does not equal "market failure." The Newton didn't fail. It was spun off into a wholly owned, proftiable subsidiary. The Newton was killed, by Steve Jobs, when he came back to the company. The fact that the Newton was Scully's baby might have something to do with that.
That's how much gas is a gallon in my town, and that's a lot less than in other parts of the country. Environmentalism saves you money right now, and will save you a lot more money down the road if we avert the worst of the damage now.
Yeah? Then explain why, out of dozens of manufacturers, not a single one has managed to dent Apple's marketshare. And please, before you make any retarded comparisons to the Windows monopoly, keep in mind that there are large swaths of applications that only run on Windows. There is nothing to prevent you from buying a Rio or a Zune for less money and filling it up with the exact same music for equal or lesser prices.
There is nothing preventing anyone from listening to the exact same music for similar prices on equally priced or cheaper players. It's not "hype" that keeps the iPod on top, it's the fact that no company has made a product that competitive.
He missed the whole "Han shot first" thing. Of course that was from like 1998, so maybe that one's obsolete now... I dunno.
Some of the books have their moments. I'm reading the "Legacy of the Force" series right now, and one part has some assassins trying to kill Han, Leia, and some politicians at a summit. Han shoots some with his blaster, and Leia gets some with her lightsabre. When they're checking on the rest of the party, someone asks Leia if Han is okay.
Slashdot Mirror
Cute but unfounded.
It's founded on the fact that conservatives have done nothing but run this country into the ground, starting with Reagan.
Examples please.
Bush taking the presidency should be the only example you need. If you need others, just browse the Media Matters archives.
They also have liberals, and plenty of them.
Funny, I looked up the word "plenty" in the dictionary and it did not have a picture of Alan Colmes.
Sure Fox has a bias, and it's a bias to the right, but they aren't NEARLY as far to the right as their competition is biased to the left.
I suppose you could see it that way, if you were a fascist. All the other corporate networks failed to report the fact that Gore would have won Florida in a statewide recount, cheered the Iraq war, had two war supporters for every dove yet give right wing assholes like Glenn Beck their own shows, and have to be drug kicking and screaming into reporting on Republican scandals like the U.S. Attorney purge.
The entire mainstream media has a proven, conservative bias. Deal with it.
It's not that simple.
Yes, it is.
News Corp's agenda is to make money.
And to advance right wing politics.
Fox News gives people what they want to see as news, which seems to be republican talking points and talking heads yelling at each other. If liberally biased news got decent ratings, Fox News would be democratic lap dogs.
Fox News has never had anything but right wing talking heads. There are 24 hours in a day - if they wanted to get a left wing asshole to match their right wing assholes, they could get Hugo Chavez to do a show via satellite and see if it would make more money. They have never tried.
Your excuse is bullshit. But of course, you knew that already.
Japan wasn't a colony, so what exactly is your point?
Tell me, what did the USA do to the Islamic world that was as bad as what the USA did to Japan during World War II?
Propped up Saddam when he fought Iran, bombed "economic targets" in Iraq, Abu Garib, Haditha, disbanded their military, and created instability leading to a civil war and the deaths of more than 600,000 Iraqis. As a percentage of population, that's about the same as 7 million Americans dying for someone else's arrogance and incompetence.
Has the Islamic world ever been firebombed, or nuked, or completely surrounded and starved?
Yes, no, yes and yes. Any more stupid questions you'd like answered?
Gore 2000 is a different man than Gore 2007 regardless of what he'd like to say
Aside from the body fat percentage, (hopefully) the only difference would be that he wouldn't listen to idiotic Dem campaign consultants. Just how many presidential elections do Dems have to lose before they learn that the "don't dignify that attack with a response" approach to right wing attacks is a recipe for failure? It worked so well in the 1988 and 2000 elections that Kerry's team did it again in 2004. Any Dem consultant that proposes this today needs to be taken out back, pistol whipped, fired, and then pistol whipped again.
But a few years ago he became little more than a lapdog for the RNC.
More than a few years ago:
Haiti.
Somalia.
Though his quote on his influence WRT the internet was poorly worded
No it wasn't. It was a perfectly reasonable thing to say, given the facts. But media and the RNC ignored the facts, ignored the context of his answer, deliberately misquoted him, and made a BFD about it. As opposed to, oh say...Bush taking credit for passing health care legislation when he was governor of Texas that he actually vetoed, or Cheney claiming that he had never laid eyes on John Edwards before their debate, when they had actually met three separate times.
Pro-gun: check. Anti-abortion: check. Pro-tax-cut: check. Paranoid, fatalistic world view: check.
You forgot one: massive hypocrisy. Also check. Thompson gave a speech passionately calling for a pardon of Scooter Libby while also passionately calling for the rule of law in the same speech. Or how he claims to be a social conservative while parading around with his trophy wife that is younger than the daughter he had with his old wife, whom he divorced. Oh, and not to mention the right wings hatred of Hollywood, yet they line up to go down on actors who give them the time of day (Reagan). It's no wonder the IOKIYAR wing of the party likes him.
stay and do what needs doing to do it right (McCain's choice)
"Doing it right" at this point would require at least 500,000 troops, and thats just for the city of Baghdad. And until he manages to either build a huge international coalition, like the first President Bush, or start up a draft, he's not "doing it right", he's for the status quo. And the status quo is a big meat grinder for our troops.
Besides, McCain is all for pulling the troops out when things aren't going well...if there's a Democrat in office.
Thats not at all a comparison, and you know it.
Okay, here's one: during military actions, the U.S. military routinely hits military and economic targets. What do you think the Pentagon and the World Trade Center are? By our own rules, the only people to have died from terrorism on 911 were those in the airplanes. How would you like it if Iran's military grabbed some of our soldiers while they were off duty and out of uniform, invented a term like "unlawful combatant", and kept them prisoners without a hearing or any rights? How about foreign governments waterboarding our citizens?
I've gotta say that's really just flamebait. People who think this should try getting their information from more than one media source at once-- or from non-media sources.
.45 and shotgun during a robbery because he doesn't want them to get stolen. It is just mindbogglingly stupid reasoning. We had weapons inspectors on the ground and while they were kicked out we still had satellite photos. If Saddam had tried moving his weapons, we would have known about it.
Pot calling kettle...
Talk to some of the guys who've been over there. The Iraqis knew we were coming. They had plenty of time to remove their weapons.
This is one of the right wing's lamest arguments, somewhere between "cut and run" and the "he didn't want to scare the children" excuse for Bush reading My Pet Goat instead of getting on the phone with NORAD. Saddam hiding his WMD's in the face of an invasion is like a gun nut hiding his
I'm sorry, but you Bush bashers had me for a time, but there's simply too much greed in the world to believe CNN is really interested in reporting the truth.
"Bush bashing"? Any American who is not appalled by this presidents actions either doesn't follow the news - at all - or doesn't deserve their citizenship. And CNN, are you kidding me? The network that has to have two ultra conservative voices for every moderate while giving right wing bigots like Glenn Beck their own shows? The network that carried water for the president all throughout the Iraq invasion? The network that has started calling those opposed to the war "the antiwar crowd"?
PNAC or Project for the New American Century, proposed originally to Clinton a new way forward for the USA, including; huge expansion of military forces, preemptive intervention to peoples & countries hostile to it and preserving an international order in the interests of the USA.
What does any of that have to do with Clinton.
As indicated by a couple of the replies to your post, one problem seems to be willful ignorance.
The real problem is the willful ignorance of the mainstream media. They were so obsessed with finding "fibs" and "exaggurations" with Al Gore in 2000 that they completely ignored it when Bush took credit for passing health care legislation in Texas that he actually, um, vetoed as governor.
But the press still seems to take Cheney seriously, even though he has much credibility as Baghdad Bob, after still insisting that Iraq was involved with 911 long after the nuttiest wingnuts dropped that line, and claimed in a 2004 debate that he had never seen John Edwards before, even thought they met on three separate occasions.
I don't recall hearing *any* politician, regardless of the country they are in, but especially the Congressional ones, apologize, or otherwise admit they were wrong regarding these WMDs.
John Edwards did, a year and a half ago.
It was not just our President who was convinced, but Congress was as well
Yes, Congress was convinced, convinced by the intelligence fed to them by the administration.
and one from Mr. "I invented the Interwebs"
Any more bullshit talking points you'd like to rattle off here? How about Love Story or Love Canal? Pelosi One? Plame was not covert? As long as you're making shit up, go hog wild.
and I quote here
Why stop with two? Why not give out the whole list of quotes from Clinton administration officials saying Saddam was a bad guy that wanted WMD? It's a few pages long. The problem with the list, is that there are no quotes saying that Saddam was such an imminent threat that we had to take him out now, no time for diplomacy or weapons inspectors.
Just to nit a pick, Bungie's titles were dual Windows & Mac release starting with the first Myth game, IIRC. But it did definitely debut at a Macworld Expo...I remember showing a PC gamer a clip of the game footage, and he said "there's no way that's rendered in real time." Then of course, Bungie sold out to Microsoft, Halo was delayed and transformed into a console title, and by the time it came out the graphics were average at best instead of amazing.
The other thing that pissed me off about the sellout was how they ripped multiplayer out of Oni before releasing the game. Fuckers....
"never as successful in the marketplace as Apple had hoped" (from your link) does not equal "market failure." The Newton didn't fail. It was spun off into a wholly owned, proftiable subsidiary. The Newton was killed, by Steve Jobs, when he came back to the company. The fact that the Newton was Scully's baby might have something to do with that.
That's how much gas is a gallon in my town, and that's a lot less than in other parts of the country. Environmentalism saves you money right now, and will save you a lot more money down the road if we avert the worst of the damage now.
Yeah? Then explain why, out of dozens of manufacturers, not a single one has managed to dent Apple's marketshare. And please, before you make any retarded comparisons to the Windows monopoly, keep in mind that there are large swaths of applications that only run on Windows. There is nothing to prevent you from buying a Rio or a Zune for less money and filling it up with the exact same music for equal or lesser prices.
There is nothing preventing anyone from listening to the exact same music for similar prices on equally priced or cheaper players. It's not "hype" that keeps the iPod on top, it's the fact that no company has made a product that competitive.
If we were actually fighting a War of Conquest, as people seem to insist that we are,
Straw man. What people.
Here we are, almost 90 years later, and they still haven't gotten rid of it.
Probably because it's the fairest tax yet to be invented.
He missed the whole "Han shot first" thing. Of course that was from like 1998, so maybe that one's obsolete now... I dunno.
Some of the books have their moments. I'm reading the "Legacy of the Force" series right now, and one part has some assassins trying to kill Han, Leia, and some politicians at a summit. Han shoots some with his blaster, and Leia gets some with her lightsabre. When they're checking on the rest of the party, someone asks Leia if Han is okay.
Leia says, "Oh. Han's fine. He shot first."
Try watching anime....I've never seen video as bad as some of the voice dubbing on some imported anime.