Quote:

---

Originally posted by Jongsstraw:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
Jongsstraw wrote:
Friday, April 10, 2009 09:07
You're just two hopelesss idiots, Sig & Rude. I wouldn't wish that you both get run over by cars this weekend, because that would be a tragedy, especially if the cars were cool.

I just had to save this. The irony is priceless.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

---

You create your own ironies, and then your lapdog bitch cackles at it. What a duet of douchebags you two are. Why don't you just go fuck eachother. You might like it!

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
And Olberman is also described as a news anchor and commentator.

If this is not a problem when practiced by the right-wing, why should it be a problem for anyone else ?



***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

---

Quote:

---

In fact, didn't MSNBC have acknowledge the bias of these two at one point and released a notice that their responsibilities at the network had changed? That's what I recall anyway.

---

Quote:

---

But Palin was given the stink eye because of a video welcome she recorded for a convention of Alaskan separatists. One is definitely worse than the other dontcha think? Even just a little bit? Can I get a little bit of intellectual honesty on that one?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
And Olberman is also described as a news anchor and commentator.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Geezer:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
And Olberman is also described as a news anchor and commentator.

---

Where? Is the source for this as reliable (or not) as gogomag.com?

"Keep the Shiny side up"

---

Quote:

---

From the Wikipedia page on Keith Olbermann:

Keith Theodore Olbermann (born January 27, 1959) is an American news anchor,[3] sportscaster, writer, and political commentator. He hosts Countdown with Keith Olbermann, an hour-long nightly news and commentary program on MSNBC. Starting with the 2007 NFL season, Olbermann also has served as a co-host of NBC's Football Night in America.

---

Quote:

---

Anchor Olbermann counts on commentary to boost MSNBC's ratings
Tuesday, December 12, 2006

Keith Olbermann frequently needles Bill O'Reilly on the air.
Click photo for larger image. MSNBC anchor Keith Olbermann can do sarcasm -- tinged with rage -- very effectively. He does it, in fact, every night on his cable channel's top-rated show, "Countdown," where he systematically eviscerates President George W. Bush, his policies, and assorted members of America's conservative political establishment.

---

Quote:

---

Olbermann addresses the Military Commissions Act in a special comment

SPECIAL COMMENT
By Keith Olbermann
Anchor, 'Countdown'

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
RIP< the difference as I see is was that Palin gave a speech to the separatists as separatists while Bill Ayer's stint as a WU member had ended decades ago, and he was at the time involved in something else.

---------------------------------
It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Wiki?

Keith Theodore Olbermann (born January 27, 1959) is an American news anchor,[3]...

---

Quote:

---

Apparently more than a few people consider Olbermann a commentator AND an anchor. I myself see him as a commentator only.

---

Quote:

---

But I have to ask the question: If a "reporter" or "anchor" gives an "opinion" or "editorial", does that person then lose the right to ever cover the "news" again? Are they at that point ONLY a commentator?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
"KEY FINDINGS:

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Geezer:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
"KEY FINDINGS:

---

From where?

Google, google, google.

Oh, yeah.

"Media Matters for America is a Web-based, not-for-profit, 501(c)(3) progressive research and information center dedicated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media."

http://mediamatters.org/index

Now I understand why you didn't provide a cite for this.





"Keep the Shiny side up"

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Citizen
You can't explain you comments, how I proved YOU right. You can't / won't explain because you're nothing but a pure troll. Thanks for proving ME right.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
Citizensky isn't a pure troll, he's a fucking troll.

Just another obtuse liberal twit, too stupid to know the difference between news reporting and news commentary. Explains a lot about how they form their so-called intelligent opinions. A real sad and pathetic lot.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
You create your own ironies, and then your lapdog bitch cackles at it. What a duet of douchebags you two are. Why don't you just go fuck eachother. You might like it!

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
Why don't you bite me? And then shove your false pretenses of debate up your smug bum.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by RIPWash:
And you guys have NO idea how nervous I get when I hit the "Post" button. You guys have been decent to me and I appreciate that.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by RIPWash:
I think some of that could be, admittedly, my own ignorance much like Kwicko's questions above. I saw Olbermann and Matthews as news anchors because I rarely, if ever watch them.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Citizen
You can't explain you comments, how I proved YOU right. You can't / won't explain because you're nothing but a pure troll. Thanks for proving ME right.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
Citizensky isn't a pure troll, he's a fucking troll.

Just another obtuse liberal twit, too stupid to know the difference between news reporting and news commentary. Explains a lot about how they form their so-called intelligent opinions. A real sad and pathetic lot.

---

Quote:

---

Obama's links to Ayers and Kahlid Rashidi were barely given a glance.
...
But Palin was given the stink eye because of a video welcome she recorded for a convention of Alaskan separatists. One is definitely worse than the other dontcha think? Even just a little bit? Can I get a little bit of intellectual honesty on that one?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
*NOTE*

Citizen still has not, nor likely ever will, explain how I proved "him" right, when all I did was relay the accurate information.

Folks, the actions of a troll would be to continue to avoid responding in any sincere, coherent or honest manner, and offer irrelevant, and often childish insults instead. Just witness what happens, and judge for yourself.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by citizen:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
*NOTE*

Citizen still has not, nor likely ever will, explain how I proved "him" right, when all I did was relay the accurate information.

Folks, the actions of a troll would be to continue to avoid responding in any sincere, coherent or honest manner, and offer irrelevant, and often childish insults instead. Just witness what happens, and judge for yourself.

---

As proven above folks

Notice how it's come up with no evidence to prove it's case, yet says it's proven

Also, please note that the thread title was changed (something Crapo has already accused me of) right after I posted, in a blatant attempt at framing, but right before he did. I wish that to remain on record.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Citizen still has not, nor likely ever will, explain how I proved "him" right, when all I did was relay the accurate information.

---

Quote:

---

"Beyond the 2000 Election, this conservative media tilt has become a dominant reality in modern U.S. politics. The imbalance also was not an accident. It resulted from a conscious, expensive and well-conceived plan by conservatives to build what amounts to a rapid-response media machine. This machine closely coordinates with Republican leaders and can strongly influence - if not dictate - what is considered news."
...
"I admit it -- the liberal media were never that powerful, and the whole thing was often used as an excuse by conservatives for conservative failures."
William Kristol, as reported by the New Yorker, 5/22/95
...
"In the west, 10 or 20 years, there has been massive research documenting the fact that the media are extraordinarily subordinated to external power. Now, when you have that power, the best technique is to ignore all of that discussion, ignore it totally, and to eliminate it, by the simple device of asserting the opposite. If you assert the opposite, that eliminates mountains of evidence demonstrating that what you are saying is false. That's what power means. And the way we assert the opposite is by just saying that the media are liberal."
Noan Chomsky, in FSTV's documentation The Myth Of The Liberal Media

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:

You're still not answering the question. That evidence alone proves ME right.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:

Quote:

---

In fact, didn't MSNBC have acknowledge the bias of these two at one point and released a notice that their responsibilities at the network had changed? That's what I recall anyway.

---

Did MSNBC *have to* acknowledge the bias of Olbermann and Matthews? I rather doubt it - those two freely acknowledge their biases themselves!

What MSNBC did was restrict them to their own shows, doing COMMENTARY, which is what their shows are - commentary on news stories. Pretty much the exact same format as Rush, O'Reilly, Hannity, etc. They were pulled from some of the convention coverage, which they probably should never have been doing in the first place. They can be there to offer their opinions and editorials, but they almost certainly should not be anchoring the coverage.

Quote:

---

But Palin was given the stink eye because of a video welcome she recorded for a convention of Alaskan separatists. One is definitely worse than the other dontcha think? Even just a little bit? Can I get a little bit of intellectual honesty on that one?

---

Are you really sure you want to get into this? If so, can you be intellectually honest about it, even if it's just a little bit?

1) How much coverage did you actually hear in the "mainstream media" about Palin's "video welcome" for Alaskan separatists?

2) Was she really just welcoming a few separatists, or is she married to one of them? How many times has she addressed that group? What do you know about the group's founder and his views?

3) How much of ANY of that got into mainstream coverage? How many minutes of coverage do you think ABC, CBS, NBC, and Fox gave that story on their nightly newscasts? Compare that to how many minutes of Obama's preacher or his "terrorist pal" you saw. Now compare how many pages of Time magazine coverage you saw on those stories, and how many newspaper column-inches were devoted to each.

Honesty isn't always pretty.

Oh, and the reason you've been treated in a civil manner here? Easy - you've BEHAVED in a civil manner. It really is just that simple.

Mike

Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day...
Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
You've missed the point, again. Intentionally, I suspect, so as to drag this thread on so you can submit it to Haken and whine " they're trolls! " .

At issue is Rick Sanchez's claim that another news channel, FOX, is to be held responsible for the shootings of 3 police officers. Sanchez makes this on air claim , in pure editorial fashion, w/ out a SINGLE BIT OF PROOF, what so ever, and then goes on to name names , like former CNN commentator Glenn Beck as part of some vast Right Wing propaganda machine, and there's no POSSIBLE way the disturbed 22 yr old man could have formed his views any other way, OR THAT THOSE VIEWS HAD ANY THING TO DO W/ THE MURDERING OF 3 COPS!

Avoid, evade, deflect away. That's ALL you're doing, but you STILL haven't explained how a NEWS REPORTER ON CNN basically libeling others is in ANY way what so ever proof that the MSM here in the USA leans ' RIGHT '. It actually shows the OPPOSITE of what you said.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
you're the one not giving evidence, again, as I predicted.

Just answer the question.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
you're the one not giving evidence, again, as I predicted.

which statements aren't factual ? List them. Explain to us all which ones, and why

Just answer the question.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by citizen:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
you're the one not giving evidence, again, as I predicted.

Just answer the question.

---

I provided evidence, you haven't. As anyone scanning this thread can see. Lying now will just make you look like a delusional idiot.

So go ahead, if you really want to prove me right more than you have already.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
You've given nothing w/ respect to the specific issue. All you've done is tried to CYA w/ regard ot the broader question of whether or not the MSM leans left ( it undeniably does ) or right here in the US. But that's not at issue here. You refuse to address the issue because you don't want to admit to things you wish weren't true.

It's really that simple.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
If there needed to be any more proof of the bias of the MSM, then this would be it. Yet you focused on a throw away remark, something which is as undeniable as the rising and falling as the tide, ignored the entire POINT of the thread, just so you could avoid agreeing with me. That's how I see this. If you wanted to start your own thread on the tired old argument of whether the MSM here in the U.S. leans left or right, start your own thread.

---

Quote:

---

It at best proves one thing about one guy

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:

Quote:

---

It at best proves one thing about one guy

---

And that ONE guy is the one you keep dodging away from talking about. Amazing!



There's nothing else left for me to do but just laugh at you!

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
I'll pay 500$ to your favourite charity if you show me where you discussed what Rick Sanchez did , how it was wrong ( or right ) and where I lied per this topic.

Go for it, dude.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Wow. How utterly selfish and petty are you, that you won't even admit you're wrong. Even with 500 $ possibly on the line.

Oh, wait....that's not on the line, as we both know you NEVER discussed anything about the subject of this thread.

Oh well. Thanks for proving my point, once again.

* Want to start your own thread on another topic ? Maybe about the bias of the MSM ? Go for it, if you've got the guts.

---

Quote:

---

I'll pay 500$ to your favourite charity if you show me where you discussed what Rick Sanchez did , how it was wrong ( or right ) and where I lied per this topic.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:

Sorry pal, you didn't live up to the rules of the challenge. I asked you to prove that you HAD already discussed ( past tense ) the thread topic. Doing it ex post facto doesn't count. So sorry.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Not a lie in the least. Just your inability to -

Follow along in a thread

Read the rules of a challenge enough to know what you're agreeing to in the first place.

---