Install the app
How to install the app on iOS

Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.

Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

north korea launch missile

Status
Not open for further replies.
And naturally you have the "inside information" that the rest of seem to lack.

Let me give you some organizations that if you're not already a member of, you'd fit right in:

1) Daily Kos
2) Democratic Underground
3) Move On
4) ACORN


leave aston villa out of this, bill!
 
You Americans and your culture wars.

Left = Sean Penn movies. :lol:

Just to clarify our European position:

Left = cut off the heads of monarchs and put them on pikestaffs to be eaten by crows, then declare yourself a republic.
 
You Americans and your culture wars.

Left = Sean Penn movies. :lol:

Just to clarify our European position:

Left = cut off the heads of monarchs and put them on pikestaffs to be eaten by crows, then declare yourself a republic.

Quite, although the queen has been quite dutiful. Maybe a spell in irons for her, and the pikestaffs for the rest of 'em (double pikestaffs for Charles and Harry). :D
 
I think Neb hit it on the head when talking about what's "left" in Europe vs. what's "left" in the USA. In fact, that might have been a previous discussion thread awhile back if I'm not mistaken.

ABC, NBC, & CBS are most definitely left leaning (USA "left") while FOX is pretty much middle of the road.

However those on the left here in the USA accuse FOX of being on the right because they aren't used to a news organization that doesn't walk on the left side of the aisle in this country.

So to them, "fair and balanced" means "obviously shilling for the right."

But I could give you case after case after case of not only the major news networks, but the news outlets as well (AP especially egregious), New York Times, etc... slanting their news reporting with a left leaning bias. It's pretty much common knowledge here.

come the **** on bill, i can admit that networks like cbs and nbc carry a liberal bias, is it that hard for you to believe that Fox clearly carries a conservative bias
http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=A3BD2524FE99BD4D&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&v=dN823dUu6KA

the only middle of the road network in america is CSPAN for sure, because they don't add their own commentary

it seems the difference between you and I bill, is that I can see the wisdom in conservative thinking. i understand it, and respect it as a legitimate viewpoint, one which people with different values and backgrounds than me are justified in believing, even if i myself don't believe that. i don't make claims that conservatives are out of touch with reality, though given their apparent ignorance of the effects of historical interference in the middle east, thats an easily defensible claim.

you don't need to make claims that we are out of touch with the facts, the facts are not being debated here, they're accepted on both sides, the debate is about interpretation of those facts, which is inherently opinion based. its fine if you believe your viewpoint, but you don't need to insult others for disagreeing
 

FOX news treats Ann Coulter like she makes sense.

As if you needed any proof they're heavily conservative.

Or, has been mentioned, watch Bill O'Reilly.
 
El Rushbo is about as conservative as you can get. Radio is the most conservative except for NPR the most liberal. The major three networks are very liberal and opinionated ABC, NBC & CBS. FOX tries to be fair and balanced and CNN has noted it can gain more viewers by coming more to the middle. Overall, liberalism is rampant on US television. What is so funny is the CNBC commentators diverging from the NBC & MSNBC spin it's outright hilarious.:D The Beltway and Wall street aren't the best of friends right at the moment.
 
come the **** on bill, i can admit that networks like cbs and nbc carry a liberal bias, is it that hard for you to believe that Fox clearly carries a conservative bias
http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=A3BD2524FE99BD4D&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&v=dN823dUu6KA

the only middle of the road network in america is CSPAN for sure, because they don't add their own commentary

it seems the difference between you and I bill, is that I can see the wisdom in conservative thinking. i understand it, and respect it as a legitimate viewpoint, one which people with different values and backgrounds than me are justified in believing, even if i myself don't believe that. i don't make claims that conservatives are out of touch with reality, though given their apparent ignorance of the effects of historical interference in the middle east, thats an easily defensible claim.

you don't need to make claims that we are out of touch with the facts, the facts are not being debated here, they're accepted on both sides, the debate is about interpretation of those facts, which is inherently opinion based. its fine if you believe your viewpoint, but you don't need to insult others for disagreeing

Unfortunately, that's where you and I differ. I rarely respect the view from a liberal viewpoint. Why you ask?

Because when the liberal thought process is applied to real world issues, it fails every time. Liberalism sounds great in theory. But it's a belief system that has no basic in logic and rationalism. It's all based on emotion. I'm confident that you won't respect that opinion as many on here won't but that's ok.

As for interpreting facts, there is no debate about how facts are "interpreted" when it comes to the USA's defense of it's country.

Example:

FACT: We were attacked (unless one thinks that's debatable)

FACT: The Taliban harbors those responsible for those attacks (again, unless one somehow thinks that's a debatable point)

FACT: The USA "legally" used force in defense of it's country by attacking those responsible in Afghanistan (once again, is there any debate on that fact?)

That's where I have a problem with liberals Toffee. They don't want to rely on facts and logic. There's a narrative they have to tell. When the facts don't fit, well then it's the typical liberal modus operandi of moving on to the next debate, never answering the questions posed to them previously. Anyone who wants to "debate" and "interpret" those facts differently really doesn't have a leg to stand on much less two legs.

When someone wants to post on here in essence that "those who died in the WTC attacks had it coming because of US foreign policy" then hell yeah, they're gonna get insulted and a post like that is going to get the ridicule that it deserves.

Sure, it'd be one thing if we dropped a bunch of bombs on a muslim country without provocation and then thumbed our noses at them. But that didn't happen did it? Of course a liberal's line of thinking would have said that before that country retailiated against us or fought back, they'd have to get permission from the rest of the world to do so.

As for FOX. Go back to my original post. They don't fit the liberal narrative and therefore, they MUST be a right wing mouthpiece. I really don't watch FOX too much these days but I can tell you that everytime I watched them during the Presidential campaign, they were even handed with both candidates.

Meaning that they actually had a few things to say about Obama that weren't complementary and actually asked some forthright questions about an Obama presidency...something the liberals might take as "biased" and "right wing." It would have been one thing had FOX done nothing but gush over McCain and hammer Obama but I'm afraid that never happened.
 
FOX news treats Ann Coulter like she makes sense.

As if you needed any proof they're heavily conservative.

Or, has been mentioned, watch Bill O'Reilly.

Translated:

Ann Coulter states facts about liberals and liberal thinking. :D
 

El Rushbo is about as conservative as you can get. Radio is the most conservative except for NPR the most liberal. The major three networks are very liberal and opinionated ABC, NBC & CBS. FOX tries to be fair and balanced and CNN has noted it can gain more viewers by coming more to the middle. Overall, liberalism is rampant on US television. What is so funny is the CNBC commentators diverging from the NBC & MSNBC spin it's outright hilarious.:D The Beltway and Wall street aren't the best of friends right at the moment.

You ever wonder why Air America didn't work?

Answers on a postcard.
 
A considerate enough person to realise that Ann Coulter is an ignorant, xenophobic clown of the highest order.

If not buying into the whole 'eye for an eye, you attacked our civilians so we'll murder thousands of yours, because that makes it better' argument, then yeah call me Liberal. But stop treating it as if it's a derogatory slur.

You know Bill, I don't mind you not being Liberal, or not liking Liberals, but talking out your arse was referring to trying to say that Ann Coulter just goes against 'leftist' viewpoints. When in fact she is a complete fundamentalist nutjob. And FOX news takes her seriously. (hence why you can only describe them as a far-right news agency)

Some Coulter quotes?

On Muslims post 9/11

"We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity. We weren't punctilious about locating and punishing only Hitler and his top officers. We carpet-bombed German cities; we killed civilians. That's war. And this is war."

(and if you were thinking she was being facetious)

"Ozzy Osbourne has his bats, and I have that darn "convert them to Christianity" quote. Some may not like what I said, but I'm still waiting to hear a better suggestion."

And a few more goodens

"Being nice to people is, in fact, one of the incidental tenets of Christianity (as opposed to other religions whose tenets are more along the lines of 'kill everyone who doesn't smell bad and doesn't answer to the name Mohammed')"

"[Canadians] better hope the United States does not roll over one night and crush them. They are lucky we allow them to exist on the same continent. "

"I'm getting a little fed up with hearing about, oh, civilian casualties"; "I think we ought to nuke North Korea right now just to give the rest of the world a warning."

"If only we could get Muslims to boycott all airlines, we could dispense with airport security altogether. "

"I think the government should be spying on all Arabs, engaging in torture as a televised spectator sport, dropping daisy cutters wantonly throughout the Middle East and sending liberals to Guantanamo. "

"The ethic of conservation is the explicit abnegation of man's dominion over the Earth. The lower species are here for our use. God said so: Go forth, be fruitful, multiply, and rape the planet — it's yours. That's our job: drilling, mining and stripping. Sweaters are the anti-Biblical view. Big gas-guzzling cars with phones and CD players and wet bars — that's the Biblical view. "

"I would like evolution to join the roster of other discredited religions, like the Cargo Cult of the South Pacific. Practitioners of Cargo Cult believed that manufactured products were created by ancestral spirits, and if they imitated what they had seen the white man do, they could cause airplanes to appear out of the sky, bringing valuable cargo like radios and TVs. So they constructed “airport towers” out of bamboo and “headphones” out of coconuts and waited for the airplanes to come with the cargo. It may sound silly, but in defense of the Cargo Cult, they did not wait as long for evidence supporting their theory as the Darwinists have waited for evidence supporting theirs. "

"Frankly, I'm not a big fan of the First Amendment. "

"(on George Bush) The man responsible for keeping Americans safe from another terrorist attack on American soil for nearly seven years now will go down in history as one of America's greatest presidents."

"I think our motto should be, post-9-11, 'raghead talks tough, raghead faces consequences.' "

"The presumption of innocence only means you don't go right to jail. "
 
Last edited:
Bush was a lame-duck for the last year of his presidency. Would the UN have even paid that much notice to him if he was still here? Remember, the UN is made up of 26 states, not just America.

Obama has just got a pet elected as general secretary (Rasmussen (the ******)). Let's see how the lot of them deal with things. It's way too early to claim that Obama is the weaker of the two regarding dealing with so-called rogue states.

Bush was a lame duck for the entirety of his presidency!!
 
Unfortunately, that's where you and I differ. I rarely respect the view from a liberal viewpoint. Why you ask?

Because when the liberal thought process is applied to real world issues, it fails every time. Liberalism sounds great in theory. But it's a belief system that has no basic in logic and rationalism. It's all based on emotion. I'm confident that you won't respect that opinion as many on here won't but that's ok.

As for interpreting facts, there is no debate about how facts are "interpreted" when it comes to the USA's defense of it's country.

Example:

FACT: We were attacked (unless one thinks that's debatable)

FACT: The Taliban harbors those responsible for those attacks (again, unless one somehow thinks that's a debatable point)

FACT: The USA "legally" used force in defense of it's country by attacking those responsible in Afghanistan (once again, is there any debate on that fact?)

That's where I have a problem with liberals Toffee. They don't want to rely on facts and logic. There's a narrative they have to tell. When the facts don't fit, well then it's the typical liberal modus operandi of moving on to the next debate, never answering the questions posed to them previously. Anyone who wants to "debate" and "interpret" those facts differently really doesn't have a leg to stand on much less two legs.

When someone wants to post on here in essence that "those who died in the WTC attacks had it coming because of US foreign policy" then hell yeah, they're gonna get insulted and a post like that is going to get the ridicule that it deserves.

Sure, it'd be one thing if we dropped a bunch of bombs on a muslim country without provocation and then thumbed our noses at them. But that didn't happen did it? Of course a liberal's line of thinking would have said that before that country retailiated against us or fought back, they'd have to get permission from the rest of the world to do so.

As for FOX. Go back to my original post. They don't fit the liberal narrative and therefore, they MUST be a right wing mouthpiece. I really don't watch FOX too much these days but I can tell you that everytime I watched them during the Presidential campaign, they were even handed with both candidates.

Meaning that they actually had a few things to say about Obama that weren't complementary and actually asked some forthright questions about an Obama presidency...something the liberals might take as "biased" and "right wing." It would have been one thing had FOX done nothing but gush over McCain and hammer Obama but I'm afraid that never happened.

bill i don't dispute your first two facts, and while i agree with the third statement you listed, that is not a fact. people have different concepts of what justice is, you cannot make the blanket statement that an argument is fact just because you believe. since i agree with you on that though, we shouldn't beat it to death

like i said, its what we do with those facts that is important. my OPINION related to those facts is that the invading Afghanistan was justifiable, but that if an action is so easily justifiable, seeking international approval of said action should be easy as well. while i think an invasion eventually would have been necessary, it is my opinion (speculation is ALWAYS opinion) that had we exhausted the diplomatic process before turning to arms, the afghani people would have been more accepting of our presence.

it is also my opinion that we should have simply sought to retrieve harbored al qaeuda members, not to take over the entire country. while it is my opinion, there is strong cultural evidence to suggest that many people in the middle east will oppose a government guided by american ideals just on principle, out of hatred for western ideas. i feel that most conservatives exhibit a lack of sensitivity to the culture of the middle east.

it is my opinion that the war in Iraq was not a justifiable action (though i believe this 100%, i would never have the arrogance to call it fact the way you do), it was an unprovoked attack which offended the entire international community, it was unilateral action that sets a dangerous precedent. i was against the war from day one, and i still believe it was a miserable failure, the time and resources invested in it, and the lives lost as a result on both sides are absolutely not worth it.

it is an issue of dispute, but i strongly believe that for every civilian you kill, you create atleast one terrorist. all the war in iraq has accomplished is supplying terrorist groups with propaganda with which to breed the next generation of terrorists.

now, since you're so interested in facts, lets talk about some facts:

fact: The United States aided britain in staging a coup to remove Mohammed Mossadegh, democratically elected prime minister of iran. his replacement could not control the populace and his weakness gave rise to the ayatollah.

fact: Sadaam Hussein was once a close allie of the United States, and the United States were instrumental in his ascension to power

fact: The United States contributed hundreds of millions of dollars to the afghan mujahideen when they were fighting the soviets, one of their most prominent leaders was Osama Bin Laden

fact: The United States have given nearly 8 billion dollars to Pakistan in the form of military aid since 9/11


now back to opinions, can you see a pattern here? we allie ourselves with the lesser of two evils, and it comes back to haunt us later on. this is why it is my opinion that US involvement in the middle east should be limited and reserved, that we should stop sending billions of dollars in aid not only to pakistan who are quickly becoming our enemy, but also to the powderkeg israel because they are a developed nation and our actions only antagonize countries that are volatile as is.

you make claims that liberalism is based on emotion, i'm interested to here you point out where my arguments are emotionally fueled, where are they illogical

what i do see as emotional is the sentiment that they got us so we need to get them back, the childish notion that somehow invading other countries will rectify the tragedy of 9/11, even if there is no link whatsoever between them

you can never remove emotions completely from politics, we are all human afterall, but to dismiss the ideals of one side of a debate as all rooted in emotion is just absurd. get off your high horse for christ sake.

and as for fox's bias, did you watch the video? there's a difference between being critical of obama, and mis-quoting and misrepresenting speeches he's made, as well as discussions of that said speech. the mainstream media has been very critical of the bailout plan on all counts, though i'm sure theres no point in even pointing that out to you because all you're going to say is "thats because its fact" or something to that effect. it'd be nice if you could understand that the notions of right and wrong are never factual.

look when i watch nbc and cbs, i don't percieve a liberal bias myself, but i can understand that its because i'm liberal, and therefore its difficult for me to make a fair assessment of bias. is it so hard to believe that you might be in the same boat with faux news?
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Back
Top