Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: OzmO on May 08, 2014, 07:28:01 AM
-
http://www.publicintegrity.org/2014/05/08/14732/gop-civil-war-rages-senate-primary-battles (http://www.publicintegrity.org/2014/05/08/14732/gop-civil-war-rages-senate-primary-battles)
GOP civil war rages in Senate primary battles
Hard-line conservatives have become Democrats’ unwitting allies in the battle to control Congress.
Conservative groups have together spent nearly $3 attacking Republican candidates for every $1 spent slamming Democrats, according to a Center for Public Integrity analysis of federal independent expenditure disclosures.
In all, from Jan. 1 through Tuesday, identifiably conservative political action committees, super PACs and nonprofit groups have spent about $10 million advocating for the defeat of Republican congressional candidates in advertisements and other communications.
Identifiably liberal groups, meanwhile, have spent next to nothing attacking their own, instead spending millions of dollars either bashing Republican hopefuls or gushing about fellow Democrats through television, radio and Internet ads.
Such a dichotomy illustrates the persistent family feud between mainstream Republicans and their tea party-affiliated cousins, many of whom have forced GOP incumbents into bitter — and expensive — primary fights because they believe they’re not conservative enough.
-
Good make these old guard GOP'ers accountable for their votes
-
Good make these old guard GOP'ers accountable for their votes
Yeah, but does it help further the party's goals of unseating the dems or does it just make true conservatives feel good?
-
Repubs can't start winning until they decide this RINO vs Tea Party civil war. Nobody will admit it's happening. Nobody will admit it's hurting voter turnout. They cling to the twice-disproven claim that "Repubs are going to show up and vote for whoever is on the ticket".
It's ignorant, outdated thinking. And it's why they keep losing elections.
-
http://www.publicintegrity.org/2014/05/08/14732/gop-civil-war-rages-senate-primary-battles (http://www.publicintegrity.org/2014/05/08/14732/gop-civil-war-rages-senate-primary-battles)
GOP civil war rages in Senate primary battles
Hard-line conservatives have become Democrats’ unwitting allies in the battle to control Congress.
Conservative groups have together spent nearly $3 attacking Republican candidates for every $1 spent slamming Democrats, according to a Center for Public Integrity analysis of federal independent expenditure disclosures.
In all, from Jan. 1 through Tuesday, identifiably conservative political action committees, super PACs and nonprofit groups have spent about $10 million advocating for the defeat of Republican congressional candidates in advertisements and other communications.
Identifiably liberal groups, meanwhile, have spent next to nothing attacking their own, instead spending millions of dollars either bashing Republican hopefuls or gushing about fellow Democrats through television, radio and Internet ads.
Such a dichotomy illustrates the persistent family feud between mainstream Republicans and their tea party-affiliated cousins, many of whom have forced GOP incumbents into bitter — and expensive — primary fights because they believe they’re not conservative enough.
Are tea party members "hard-line" conservatives?
-
Are tea party members "hard-line" conservatives?
Funny how you NEVER, EVER see the left described as 'hard-line liberals'. Not ever. The entire wording the media uses is different for the right.
-
Funny how you NEVER, EVER see the left described as 'hard-line liberals'. Not ever. The entire wording the media uses is different for the right.
the difference is that far-left liberals and moderate liberals do settle on things, and they do show up and vote for whoever wins.
Repubs? not so much.
-
Funny how you NEVER, EVER see the left described as 'hard-line liberals'. Not ever. The entire wording the media uses is different for the right.
Yep. It is deliberate IMO. It's really about an attempt to influence public opinion.
-
Yep. It is deliberate IMO. It's really about an attempt to influence public opinion.
'
it's a shame people are so easily duped. THeyr'e barely watching liberal news, yet somehow liberal news is able to dupe a nice % of the majority of americans (supposedly conservative) into voting dem. baffling.
-
'
it's a shame people are so easily duped. THeyr'e barely watching liberal news, yet somehow liberal news is able to dupe a nice % of the majority of americans (supposedly conservative) into voting dem. baffling.
I know right? Is that why you voted for Obama twice while repeatedly claiming to be a Republican/Libertarian/Republican/Libertarian?
-
Yep. It is deliberate IMO. It's really about an attempt to influence public opinion.
Exactly. We constantly see the following, in the mainstream media, to describe the Right, but NEVER the Left. The double standard is sickening:
'Hard line conservatives'
'Hard-right politician'
'Radicals'
'Radical elements in the republican party'
'Extremists'
'Extremist elements in the republican party'
'Controvertial right wing politician'
When is the last time you saw the exact same terms used to descibe the other side of the aisle?
'Hard line liberals'
'Hard left politician'
'Radicals'
'Radical elements in the democratic party'
'Extremists'
'Extremist elements in the democratic party'
'Controvertial left wing politician'
The double standards are staggering, and it is done on purpose
-
Exactly. We constantly see the following, in the mainstream media, to describe the Right, but NEVER the Left. The double standard is sickening:
'Hard line conservatives'
'Hard-right politician'
'Radicals'
'Radical elements in the republican party'
'Extremists'
'Extremist elements in the republican party'
'Controvertial right wing politician'
When is the last time you saw the exact same terms used to descibe the other side of the aisle?
'Hard line liberals'
'Hard left politician'
'Radicals'
'Radical elements in the democratic party'
'Extremists'
'Extremist elements in the democratic party'
'Controvertial left wing politician'
The double standards are staggering, and it is done on purpose
Great point. You are absolutely correct. I'm going to post this in the liberal media bias thread.
-
I thought:
Radical = Extreme Liberal
Liberal = Extreme democrat
So hard line conservative is like Liberal or Radical
I think its fair to say both liberals and "hard line conservatives or neo-cons get demonized pretty well.
-
Exactly. We constantly see the following, in the mainstream media, to describe the Right, but NEVER the Left. The double standard is sickening:
'Hard line conservatives'
'Hard-right politician'
'Radicals'
'Radical elements in the republican party'
'Extremists'
'Extremist elements in the republican party'
'Controvertial right wing politician'
When is the last time you saw the exact same terms used to descibe the other side of the aisle?
'Hard line liberals'
'Hard left politician'
'Radicals'
'Radical elements in the democratic party'
'Extremists'
'Extremist elements in the democratic party'
'Controvertial left wing politician'
The double standards are staggering, and it is done on purpose
it's not a double standard if there are no "radical or extremists" on the left
the best you can do is Bernie Sanders
Remember how right wingers are always saying just because we're all created equal doesn't mean we're all equal
It's the exact same argument
Your side owns the radical and extremist labels
-
I thought:
Radical = Extreme Liberal
Liberal = Extreme democrat
So hard line conservative is like Liberal or Radical
I think its fair to say both liberals and "hard line conservatives or neo-cons get demonized pretty well.
By the MSM? Nah.
-
By the MSM? Nah.
By FOX? yeah
-
it's not a double standard if there are no "radical or extremists" on the left
the best you can do is Bernie Sanders
Remember how right wingers are always saying just because we're all created equal doesn't mean we're all equal
It's the exact same argument
Your side owns the radical and extremist labels
There are extremist elements on BOTH sides. However, most of the republicans constantly labeled as 'extremist' , such as ted cruz, are not extremist at all. The truth is, there are more leftist politicians pushing for things that are legitimately extremist when compared to the united states' history and ideological traditions than there are on the right, and they hold much higher positions.The thing is is that they NEVER get get called such by the media. For them, being far-left IS THE NORMAL and therefore anything to the right of far-left is to them, extremist.
For example:
Hard-line liberal politicians such as obama, holder, feinstein, etc...want to 'fundamentally change' the country and do things like socialize the entire health care system, use the office of the department of justice to pursue racial agendas, and if possible, completely ban american firearm ownership.
THESE are radical agendas, pushed by true extremists. But to the media, this is just 'normal'.
Yet ted cruz pushes comparatively mundane agendas such as fiscal responsibility, maintaining the rule of law and seeking to ensure the executive branch stays within the bounds of the united states constitution, and protecting national sovereignty. These are not radical or extreme positions. Yet it is HE who the media slaughters as 'a crazy radical extremist'.
Incredible, ridiculous double standard.
-
By FOX? yeah
Fox all by itself is a drop in the bucket compared to the entire rest of the (leftist) MSM combined. I dont know why people keep comparing the two as if they were 'equal' ::)
-
By FOX? yeah
By Fox opinion shows, yes. Not their hard news shows. And definitely not by the MSM (print, TV, internet).
-
Fox all by itself is a drop in the bucket compared to the entire rest of the (leftist) MSM combined. I dont know why people keep comparing the two as if they were 'equal' ::)
I thought we just had a thread that FOX had higher ratings than CNN, MSN, and all the other liberal news outlets combined?
FOX NEWS 2013 RATINGS MORE THAN MSNBC, CNN, HLN COMBINED
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2013/12/16/Fox-News-competition
-
Fox all by itself is a drop in the bucket compared to the entire rest of the (leftist) MSM combined. I dont know why people keep comparing the two as if they were 'equal' ::)
Fox is the number 1 rated news network is it not?
If so that puts the "entire rest of the (leftist) MSM combined." into perspective
-
By Fox opinion shows, yes. Not their hard news shows. And definitely not by the MSM (print, TV, internet).
So you are saying that FOX doesn't demonize liberals on their "hard news" but MSM does with Conservatives?
Perhaps you can give some samples
-
Fox is the number 1 rated news network is it not?
If so that puts the "entire rest of the (leftist) MSM combined." into perspective
FOX has more viewers than all the lib cable networks combined. Brietbart brags about it.
It's hard to claim you're not the "mainstream" media... when you are the MAJORITY of cable news. It's like Floyd Mayweather calling himself "Underdog!"
-
There are extremist elements on BOTH sides. However, most of the republicans constantly labeled as 'extremist' , such as ted cruz, are not extremist at all. The truth is, there are more leftist politicians pushing for things that are legitimately extremist when compared to the united states' history and ideological traditions than there are on the right, and they hold much higher positions.The thing is is that they NEVER get get called such by the media. For them, being far-left IS THE NORMAL and therefore anything to the right of far-left is to them, extremist.
For example:
Hard-line liberal politicians such as obama, holder, feinstein, etc...want to 'fundamentally change' the country and do things like socialize the entire health care system, use the office of the department of justice to pursue racial agendas, and if possible, completely ban american firearm ownership.
THESE are radical agendas, pushed by true extremists. But to the media, this is just 'normal'.
Yet ted cruz pushes comparatively mundane agendas such as fiscal responsibility, maintaining the rule of law and seeking to ensure the executive branch stays within the bounds of the united states constitution, and protecting national sovereignty. These are not radical or extreme positions. Yet it is HE who the media slaughters as 'a crazy radical extremist'.
Incredible, ridiculous double standard.
so you think that Obama, Holder and Feinstein are extremists and Ted Cruz is relatively mundane?
Do I understand you correctly?
-
John Matrix has replaced 240 as the best political board poster. 8)
-
Yeah, but does it help further the party's goals of unseating the dems or does it just make true conservatives feel good?
I could care less what the "parties" goals are, hell I'll vote democrat if the candidate is doing what is in America's best interest.
-
I could care less what the "parties" goals are, hell I'll vote democrat if the candidate is doing what is in America's best interest.
I am with ya there. Problem is, a fragmented GOP can mean dem dominance.
-
So you are saying that FOX doesn't demonize liberals on their "hard news" but MSM does with Conservatives?
Perhaps you can give some samples
Yes. See the post above by John Matrix.
-
I could care less what the "parties" goals are, hell I'll vote democrat if the candidate is doing what is in America's best interest.
Yep. Me too.
-
So you are saying that FOX doesn't demonize liberals on their "hard news" but MSM does with Conservatives?
Perhaps you can give some samples
pretty funny how conservative see the world
also funny how they brag about the overwhelming ratings of Faux News as compared to MSNBC, et al yet when it comes time to complaining about their perception of unfair treatment by the media suddenly Faux is a mere drop in the bucket
-
pretty funny how conservative see the world
also funny how they brag about the overwhelming ratings of Faux News as compared to MSNBC, et al yet when it comes time to complaining about their perception of unfair treatment by the media suddenly Faux is a mere drop in the bucket
LOL - says the msnbc fan girl. The reason there is never any battles within the RAT party is b/c its fully communist now
-
Yes. See the post above by John Matrix.
You claim MSM hard news demonizes Conservatives and Fox's doesn't do it to Libs.
Don't see it.
I think most want a candidate who can get things done right regardless of party.
Not too many saw it in Romney, hence a turd so they voted for OB.
-
LOL - says the msnbc fan girl. The reason there is never any battles within the RAT party is b/c its fully communist now
there is nothing in my statement that expresses support for MSNBC
I also told you that since you're too stupid to read you should stop replying to my posts
notice how you ran away from this thread
Clinton signed Gramm Leech bill that deregulated the derivatives market remember?
Of course you do - but wont admit it
dude - just stop responding to my posts because you clearly don't even read them
I've never said it was all Bush's fault (though of course everything that's happened since then is all Obama's fault)
The asset bubble in real estate was created by de-regulation of commodity and banking which both parties were complicit in doing
The idiotic premise of this thread seems to be that Obama should have pressed the magical re-set button when he got into office rather than the actual reality of slowing recovering from an economic shit storm (and getting absolutely no cooperation from Repubs in doing so)
This topic has been covered ad nauseam on this board over the last six years
-
You claim MSM hard news demonizes Conservatives and Fox's doesn't do it to Libs.
Don't see it.
I think most want a candidate who can get things done right regardless of party.
Not too many saw it in Romney, hence a turd so they voted for OB.
I said the Fox hard news doesn't. The opinion shows do. But there really is no denying what the MSM does, as Matrix laid out. I see that all the time. Subtle, but pervasive and effective.
Most of the voters want a candidate from their party elected. It's the independents and crossovers who decide presidential elections.
-
I said the Fox hard news doesn't. The opinion shows do. But there really is no denying what the MSM does, as Matrix laid out. I see that all the time. Subtle, but pervasive and effective.
Most of the voters want a candidate from their party elected. It's the independents and crossovers who decide presidential elections.
such as?
-
such as?
Exactly. We constantly see the following, in the mainstream media, to describe the Right, but NEVER the Left. The double standard is sickening:
'Hard line conservatives'
'Hard-right politician'
'Radicals'
'Radical elements in the republican party'
'Extremists'
'Extremist elements in the republican party'
'Controvertial right wing politician'
When is the last time you saw the exact same terms used to descibe the other side of the aisle?
'Hard line liberals'
'Hard left politician'
'Radicals'
'Radical elements in the democratic party'
'Extremists'
'Extremist elements in the democratic party'
'Controvertial left wing politician'
The double standards are staggering, and it is done on purpose
-
Also numerous stories here: http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=401076.0
-
Also numerous stories here: http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=401076.0
"Such as" meaning show some.
Not list someone else's opinion, or a bunch of posts.
show some hard news with "But there really is no denying what the MSM does, as Matrix laid out. I see that all the time. Subtle, but pervasive and effective."
-
"Such as" meaning show some.
Not list someone else's opinion, or a bunch of posts.
show some hard news with "But there really is no denying what the MSM does, as Matrix laid out. I see that all the time. Subtle, but pervasive and effective."
Go search any of the mainstream news outlets and find one single example of an article, any article, describing any democrat candidate using the terms i layed out above, or anything close to it. You know, the usual terms they use to describe republicans.
You wont be able to find one.
-
so you think that Obama, Holder and Feinstein are extremists and Ted Cruz is relatively mundane?
Do I understand you correctly?
Absolutely
-
Go search any of the mainstream news outlets and find one single example of an article, any article, describing any democrat candidate using the terms i layed out above, or anything close to it. You know, the usual terms they use to describe republicans.
You wont be able to find one.
first you have to have a Dem acting like an "extremist" or a "radical"
that's the problem
You've got Bernie Sanders and that's about it
I know you believe Holder, Obama and Feinstein and are examples but just because you see it that way does not make it how the majority of the country sees it
-
"Such as" meaning show some.
Not list someone else's opinion, or a bunch of posts.
show some hard news with "But there really is no denying what the MSM does, as Matrix laid out. I see that all the time. Subtle, but pervasive and effective."
You're asking me to go find examples of thing I have seen and heard? Uh, not unless you're going to get your checkbook and pay me. :)
But seriously, I agree with his post. I don't need to restate what he said. And I posted numerous stories in the Liberal Media Bias thread. I don't need to repeat those either. That's part of the reason I created the thread.
-
I thought we just had a thread that FOX had higher ratings than CNN, MSN, and all the other liberal news outlets combined?
FOX NEWS 2013 RATINGS MORE THAN MSNBC, CNN, HLN COMBINED
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2013/12/16/Fox-News-competition
Ok now add NBC, CBS, and ABC, Yahoo, Reuters, AP, etc....and see if Fox still 'outweighs' the entire rest of the mainstream media outlets all by itself ::)
-
first you have to have a Dem acting like an "extremist" or a "radical"
that's the problem
You've got Bernie Sanders and that's about it
I know you believe Holder, Obama and Feinstein and are examples but just because you see it that way does not make it how the majority of the country sees it
Between the two, who wants to 'fundamentally transform' the united states?
Obama/holder/feinstein, or ted cruz?
-
first you have to have a Dem acting like an "extremist" or a "radical"
that's the problem
You've got Bernie Sanders and that's about it
I know you believe Holder, Obama and Feinstein and are examples but just because you see it that way does not make it how the majority of the country sees it
LMFAO
-
Ok now add NBC, CBS, and ABC, Yahoo, Reuters, AP, etc....and see if Fox still 'outweighs' the entire rest of the mainstream media outlets all by itself ::)
oh, if you want to include web + print, I guess we'd have to move Drudge into the mix. They're #1 in their division too.
and print? Weekly standard, NRO, Takis, CSM, etc.
-
Between the two, who wants to 'fundamentally transform' the united states?
Obama/holder/feinstein, or ted cruz?
you are on fire lately!
-
you are on fire lately!
:D
im still waiting for one of the Lefties to explain how cruz is a 'crazy radical extremist'...guess the wait continues
-
:D
im still waiting for one of the Lefties to explain how cruz is a 'crazy radical extremist'...guess the wait continues
which getbigger said that?
-
You're asking me to go find examples of thing I have seen and heard? Uh, not unless you're going to get your checkbook and pay me. :)
But seriously, I agree with his post. I don't need to restate what he said. And I posted numerous stories in the Liberal Media Bias thread. I don't need to repeat those either. That's part of the reason I created the thread.
I am just asking for some examples. If you can't provide any, it suggests your claim is opinion not fact.
-
Go search any of the mainstream news outlets and find one single example of an article, any article, describing any democrat candidate using the terms i layed out above, or anything close to it. You know, the usual terms they use to describe republicans.
You wont be able to find one.
The thing is, i don't think your assessment of terms are valid.
Who calls Liberals: 'Hard line liberals' or 'Hard left politician'? I never heard those terms used.
But, I agree you might have a point so i did 4 searches on cnn.com
Hard Line conservatives
http://edition.cnn.com/search/?query=%27Hard%20line%20conservatives%27&intl=true&sortBy=relevance (http://edition.cnn.com/search/?query=%27Hard%20line%20conservatives%27&intl=true&sortBy=relevance)
Hard right politician
http://edition.cnn.com/search/?query=Hard%20right%20politician&intl=true&sortBy=relevance (http://edition.cnn.com/search/?query=Hard%20right%20politician&intl=true&sortBy=relevance)
Radical elements in the republican party
http://edition.cnn.com/search/?query=Radical%20elements%20in%20the%20republican%20party&intl=true&sortBy=relevance (http://edition.cnn.com/search/?query=Radical%20elements%20in%20the%20republican%20party&intl=true&sortBy=relevance)
All above 0 hits
radical left
http://edition.cnn.com/search/?query=radical%20left&intl=true&sortBy=relevance (http://edition.cnn.com/search/?query=radical%20left&intl=true&sortBy=relevance)
Several hits on "Radical Left"
-
I am just asking for some examples. If you can't provide any, it suggests your claim is opinion not fact.
Everything stated in this thread is opinion. My opinion is based on my observation, reading, watching, etc.
If you disagree, that's fine, but I'm not going to try and prove my opinion to be true. I agree with what Matrix said. I posted numerous articles in the thread I linked (and recently bumped).
The fact there is a liberal bias in the MSM isn't news.
-
Everything stated in this thread is opinion. My opinion is based on my observation, reading, watching, etc.
If you disagree, that's fine, but I'm not going to try and prove my opinion to be true. I agree with what Matrix said. I posted numerous articles in the thread I linked (and recently bumped).
The fact there is a liberal bias in the MSM isn't news.
If you can't or won't prove it, what ever. Guess you see what you want to see.
-
If you can't or won't prove it, what ever. Guess you see what you want to see.
Why do I need to prove my opinion? Besides, I provided plenty of examples.
If you are refusing to look at the numerous articles I posted, then you're the one who is actually seeing what you want to see.
-
I did MSNBC:
I hate that site. lol
Hard line conservatives
http://www.msnbc.com/search/Hard%20Line%20conservatives (http://www.msnbc.com/search/Hard%20Line%20conservatives)
1 hit
Hard right politician
http://www.msnbc.com/search/Hard%20right%20poltician (http://www.msnbc.com/search/Hard%20right%20poltician)
0 hits
Radical elements in the republican party
http://www.msnbc.com/search/radical%20elements%20in%20the%20republican%20party (http://www.msnbc.com/search/radical%20elements%20in%20the%20republican%20party)
0 hits
Radical left
http://www.msnbc.com/search/radical%20left (http://www.msnbc.com/search/radical%20left)
2 hits, 1 talking about radical left and right. The other talking about how both sides of the isle critisizing Ted Cruz’s “radical” rhetoric
I guess we just see what we want to see huh?
I could try all your terms, but i don't feel like it. lol
-
Why do I need to prove my opinion? Besides, I provided plenty of examples.
If you are refusing to look at the numerous articles I posted, then you're the one who is actually seeing what you want to see.
You don't have to do anything. I simply asked you to provide some examples of " MSM Hard news" doing what you said. Now, according to you: "its your "opinion" and you don't have to prove it, show it, need to get paid for it, blah blah blah."
Sorry not going to skim through 211 pages. Don't get paid enough. :D I would think that if you are so sure on your opinion it wouldn't be so hard to post some examples. After all that's your "thread"
But I did skim a few pages, and most if not all the articles were from "News Busters" a cite dedicated to exposing liberal news bias. lol So you directed me to articles form an OPINION site. lol
Can you show some HARD NEWS from MSM or not?
-
:D
im still waiting for one of the Lefties to explain how cruz is a 'crazy radical extremist'...guess the wait continues
great point
there is nothing extreme or radical about shutting down the entire government over your own personal temper tantrum
that's really just an example of how "mundane" he is
-
great point
there is nothing extreme or radical about shutting down the entire government over your own personal temper tantrum
that's really just an example of how "mundane" he is
And what exactly is going to happen if .gov "shuts down"? seems to me being full time politician is a relatively new thing.
-
And what exactly is going to happen if .gov "shuts down"? seems to me being full time politician is a relatively new thing.
I'm not sure I follow you on this
do you think that shutting down the government means that only the politicians stop "working"
btw - I think anytime the government is shut down that all politicians and their staffs should not only not be paid but they should not be able to recover the back pay
Repubs would never shut down the government again
-
You don't have to do anything. I simply asked you to provide some examples of " MSM Hard news" doing what you said. Now, according to you: "its your "opinion" and you don't have to prove it, show it, need to get paid for it, blah blah blah."
Sorry not going to skim through 211 pages. Don't get paid enough. :D I would think that if you are so sure on your opinion it wouldn't be so hard to post some examples. After all that's your "thread"
But I did skim a few pages, and most if not all the articles were from "News Busters" a cite dedicated to exposing liberal news bias. lol So you directed me to articles form an OPINION site. lol
Can you show some HARD NEWS from MSM or not?
What you're asking for isn't reasonable. I cannot give you quotes from things I've seen on TV. And no, I'm not going to go search for things I've read on the internet. But what I have done is compiled numerous examples of liberal bias by the MSM in one thread.
Yes, most of the articles I posted in the Liberal Media Bias thread are from news busters. I'm glad they made the creation and contributions of that thread so much easier. :) And they're not an opinion site. They actually track facts (things said, not said, reported, not reported, etc.). Are you disputing any of the stories?
-
btw - I think anytime the government is shut down that all politicians and their staffs should not only not be paid but they should not be able to recover the back pay
Repubs would never shut down the government again
With you on that 100%
-
I'm not sure I follow you on this
do you think that shutting down the government means that only the politicians stop "working"
btw - I think anytime the government is shut down that all politicians and their staffs should not only not be paid but they should not be able to recover the back pay
Repubs would never shut down the government again
The point being is the .gov used to convene, then when their business was done go back to their day jobs. Now being a politician is the day job. Shut the government down, what impact is it going to have on the average person?
-
I am just asking for some examples. If you can't provide any, it suggests your claim is opinion not fact.
Or, at least, it suggests that BB is lazy and is sometimes inclined to talk out of his ass. (In a studiedly genial way, though, so there's that. ;D)
-
What you're asking for isn't reasonable. I cannot give you quotes from things I've seen on TV. And no, I'm not going to go search for things I've read on the internet. But what I have done is compiled numerous examples of liberal bias by the MSM in one thread.
Yes, most of the articles I posted in the Liberal Media Bias thread are from news busters. I'm glad they made the creation and contributions of that thread so much easier. :) And they're not an opinion site. They actually track facts (things said, not said, reported, not reported, etc.). Are you disputing any of the stories?
If that's so then it should be reasonably easy, quick and simple for you to do.
Seems like you have an assumed stereotype supported by an bias site dedicated to finding anything they can call media bias.
Kind of like Matrix saying:
Go search any of the mainstream news outlets and find one single example of an article, any article, describing any democrat candidate using the terms i layed out above, or anything close to it. You know, the usual terms they use to describe republicans.
You wont be able to find one.
it took me like 2 minutes.
The thing is, i don't think your assessment of terms are valid.
Who calls Liberals: 'Hard line liberals' or 'Hard left politician'? I never heard those terms used.
But, I agree you might have a point so i did 4 searches on cnn.com
Hard Line conservatives
http://edition.cnn.com/search/?query=%27Hard%20line%20conservatives%27&intl=true&sortBy=relevance (http://edition.cnn.com/search/?query=%27Hard%20line%20conservatives%27&intl=true&sortBy=relevance)
Hard right politician
http://edition.cnn.com/search/?query=Hard%20right%20politician&intl=true&sortBy=relevance (http://edition.cnn.com/search/?query=Hard%20right%20politician&intl=true&sortBy=relevance)
Radical elements in the republican party
http://edition.cnn.com/search/?query=Radical%20elements%20in%20the%20republican%20party&intl=true&sortBy=relevance (http://edition.cnn.com/search/?query=Radical%20elements%20in%20the%20republican%20party&intl=true&sortBy=relevance)
All above 0 hits
radical left
http://edition.cnn.com/search/?query=radical%20left&intl=true&sortBy=relevance (http://edition.cnn.com/search/?query=radical%20left&intl=true&sortBy=relevance)
Several hits on "Radical Left"
I did MSNBC:
I hate that site. lol
Hard line conservatives
http://www.msnbc.com/search/Hard%20Line%20conservatives (http://www.msnbc.com/search/Hard%20Line%20conservatives)
1 hit
Hard right politician
http://www.msnbc.com/search/Hard%20right%20poltician (http://www.msnbc.com/search/Hard%20right%20poltician)
0 hits
Radical elements in the republican party
http://www.msnbc.com/search/radical%20elements%20in%20the%20republican%20party (http://www.msnbc.com/search/radical%20elements%20in%20the%20republican%20party)
0 hits
Radical left
http://www.msnbc.com/search/radical%20left (http://www.msnbc.com/search/radical%20left)
2 hits, 1 talking about radical left and right. The other talking about how both sides of the isle critisizing Ted Cruz’s “radical” rhetoric
I guess we just see what we want to see huh?
I could try all your terms, but i don't feel like it. lol
I actually thought he might be right.
Thing is, Beach i thihnk you are probably right too, but i would like to "see" what you are talking about, because i also suspect Fox news does similar things with the "hard news" but you choose to let them off the hook because of you own bias.
-
great point
there is nothing extreme or radical about shutting down the entire government over your own personal temper tantrum
that's really just an example of how "mundane" he is
The dems shut it down. Or does ted cruz have the power to 'shut down the government' all by himself ::)
-
The dems shut it down. Or does ted cruz have the power to 'shut down the government' all by himself ::)
It's weird how Cruz shuts down the government and a gallery of wing nuts cheer him on and then he pretends that somehow the Dems did it
If you want to pretend that somehow the Dems shutdown the government that's fine
You can fantasize all that you want but don't expect the rest of the world to follow along
-
It's weird how Cruz shuts down the government and a gallery of wing nuts cheer him on and then he pretends that somehow the Dems did it
If you want to pretend that somehow the Dems shutdown the government that's fine
You can fantasize all that you want but don't expect the rest of the world to follow along
And what effect did it have? Taxes were still collected, gubmint checks still went out.............
-
And what effect did it have? Taxes were still collected, gubmint checks still went out.............
ok, so if there was no negative effect then why does Cruz pretend that the Dems did it
Is he trying to give the Dems a victory?
-
It's weird how Cruz shuts down the government and a gallery of wing nuts cheer him on and then he pretends that somehow the Dems did it
If you want to pretend that somehow the Dems shutdown the government that's fine
You can fantasize all that you want but don't expect the rest of the world to follow along
Wow...I didnt realise a single freshman senator had the power to 'shut down' the united states government. Cruz must be one powerful guy :D
-
ok, so if there was no negative effect then why does Cruz pretend that the Dems did it
Is he trying to give the Dems a victory?
There was no negative effect, not sure why such a big deal is made of it. Dem\Rep basically the same with a few issue to get the peon's riled up.
-
Wow...I didnt realise a single freshman senator had the power to 'shut down' the united states government. Cruz must be one powerful guy :D
He didn't do it by himself but he was the driving force behind it and in the end his own party hated him for it
Do you really want to turn this thread me posting all kinds of transcripts on this or do you want to just admit that Cruz owns this one
Shit, other people on this board think it as a good thing so why run away from it, especially when everyone knows exactly what happened
-
Dig up all the transcripts you have and post them all, along with charts and diagrams and a 14 paragraph dissertation and please include quotes and full citations. Get on it right away
-
Dig up all the transcripts you have and post them all, along with charts and diagrams and a 14 paragraph dissertation and please include quotes and full citations. Get on it right away
before I do that let's just make sure I understand your belief
you believe that the Dems and not Ted Cruz are responsible for shutting down the governemnt
Do I have that part correct?
-
The obama administration and the dems were the ones who stonewalled, refused to negotiate anything, and then made the calculated decision to go ahead with the 'shutdown'.
Ted cruz cannot 'shut it down' by himself. Ultimately only the administration has the ability to do that, and it was their decision and only their decision that made it so.
Obama knew full well that he along with his media fanboys would blame the republicans for everything and the public would eat it up, which they mostly did, and they made sure to make it as big of a spectacle as they could, shutting down parks, random public spaces, barricaded open air war memorials, closed off the road with views of mount rushmore, and made sure to put signs on everything saying 'due to the government SHUTDOWN(in all caps of course lmao)'.
It was a big fucking charade
-
The obama administration and the dems were the ones who stonewalled, refused to negotiate anything, and then made the calculated decision to go ahead with the 'shutdown'.
Ted cruz cannot 'shut it down' by himself. Ultimately only the administration has the ability to do that, and it was their decision and only their decision that made it so.
Obama knew full well that he along with his media fanboys would blame the republicans for everything and the public would eat it up, which they mostly did, and they made sure to make it as big of a spectacle as they could, shutting down parks, random public spaces, barricaded open air war memorials, closed off the road with views of mount rushmore, and made sure to put signs on everything saying 'due to the government SHUTDOWN(in all caps of course lmao)'.
It was a big fucking charade
a yes or now would have been fine
I'm just trying to clarify your belief just to make sure it's not crazy
so the Dems are responsible for shutting down the government because Cruz threatened to hold up funding the government unless they "negotiated" on Obamacare
Is that the basic premise as to why the Dems and not Cruz are responsible for shutting down the government
A simple yes or no and then we can move on
-
Who made the all-or-nothing ultimatum?
The dems, or ted cruz?
-
If that's so then it should be reasonably easy, quick and simple for you to do.
Seems like you have an assumed stereotype supported by an bias site dedicated to finding anything they can call media bias.
Kind of like Matrix saying:
it took me like 2 minutes.
I actually thought he might be right.
Thing is, Beach i thihnk you are probably right too, but i would like to "see" what you are talking about, because i also suspect Fox news does similar things with the "hard news" but you choose to let them off the hook because of you own bias.
It's not reasonable, quick, or easy to try and find things I have observed on TV. What is really easy and quick is to post a link to a thread with numerous examples of liberal media bias. Whether you chose to read those stories is up to you.
I will say, generally, that a reasonable, objective person who really pays attention to the MSM will likely see a clear bias in the reporting, headlines, and content.
-
It's not reasonable, quick, or easy to try and find things I have observed on TV. What is really easy and quick is to post a link to a thread with numerous examples of liberal media bias. Whether you chose to read those stories is up to you.
I will say, generally, that a reasonable, objective person who really pays attention to the MSM will likely see a clear bias in the reporting, headlines, and content.
So basically you are saying you have "heard" these things from time to time in the past, but cannot or will not provide anything to substantiate your claim other then a 211 page thread mostly from a opinion site where you again cannot or will not provide any examples from or examples of their "facts". Further more you cited Matrix's list which currently has been shown to be inaccurate, unrealistic, stereotyped, and assumption based.
Got it.
-
So basically you are saying you have "heard" these things from time to time in the past, but cannot or will not provide anything to substantiate your claim other then a 211 page thread mostly from a opinion site where you again cannot or will not provide any examples from or examples of their "facts". Further more you cited Matrix's list which currently has been shown to be inaccurate, unrealistic, stereotyped, and assumption based.
Got it.
No, it's more like I've heard, seen, and read biased reporting by the MSM. I don't need to substantiate what I've seen, which really isn't reasonable, because I'm not about to try and recount quotes or whatever from things I've seen on TV. Regarding things I have read, I provided a link to a thread with numerous examples. Those examples contain facts. You don't want to read them, because there are too many examples and too many facts.
And yes, I agree with Matrix. No, you doing an internet search on a couple cites using a few search terms doesn't make what he (or I) have seen to be inaccurate, unrealistic, etc.
Are you seriously suggesting there is no liberal bias in the MSM?
-
Who made the all-or-nothing ultimatum?
The dems, or ted cruz?
Ted Cruz
Let's review
The Dems fought a legislative battle for the ACA and then fought court battles
The Dems won and then Cruz decided he was going to hold up funding (taking the country hostage) unless the Dems yielded to his ransom demand
The Cruz killed the hostage (shut down the government) and then wants to pretend that the Dems actually killed the hostage
-
No, it's more like I've heard, seen, and read biased reporting by the MSM. I don't need to substantiate what I've seen, which really isn't reasonable, because I'm not about to try and recount quotes or whatever from things I've seen on TV. Regarding things I have read, I provided a link to a thread with numerous examples. Those examples contain facts. You don't want to read them, because there are too many examples and too many facts.
And yes, I agree with Matrix. No, you doing an internet search on a couple cites using a few search terms doesn't make what he (or I) have seen to be inaccurate, unrealistic, etc.
Are you seriously suggesting there is no liberal bias in the MSM?
If those examples contain facts its shouldn't be too hard to show them. Remember, its YOUR thread.
You used Matrix's list to support your claim. It was proved unrealistic for the reason's i listed.
And regardless of anything you have said here these facts still remain:
1. You are unwilling to give examples of this MSM bias on Hard News but willing to absolve Fox news.
2. This is based on your recollection of what you have "heard" be that yesterday, last week, last month, last year, etc.
3. You have a massive thread which YOU started that supposedly contains facts you are unwilling to show to back up your claim
4. Matix's list is bunk.
Not too much more to say on this matter because nothing is really changing.
In conclusion, you are charging MSM for a liberal bias, unwilling to back up your claim and you are giving FOX a free pass.
Great example of being nonobjective and shows bias opinion based on commonly accepted stereotypes fed to you by the conservative spin machine. Oh wait, Conservatives don't spin anything right? they just tell the straight truth. ;)
-
If those examples contain facts its shouldn't be too hard to show them. Remember, its YOUR thread.
You used Matrix's list to support your claim. It was proved unrealistic for the reason's i listed.
And regardless of anything you have said here these facts still remain:
1. You are unwilling to give examples of this MSM bias on Hard News but willing to give absolve Fox news.
2. This is based on your recollection of what you have "heard" be that yesterday, last week, last month, last year, etc.
3. You have a massive thread which YOU started that supposedly contains facts you are unwilling to show to back up your claim
4. Matix's list is bunk.
Not too much more to say on this matter because nothing is really changing.
In conclusion, you are charging MSM for a liberal bias, unwilling to back up your claim and you are giving FOX a free pass.
Great example of being nonobjective and shows bias opinion based on commonly accepted stereotypes fed to you by the conservative spin machine. Oh wait, Conservatives don't spin anything right? they just tell the straight truth.
What exactly is your point? The issue is whether or not there is a liberal bias in the MSM. There is an entire thread on the subject. If you're asking me to go through that thread and pull out the examples for you, then no I'm not willing to do that.
If you are saying that based on your own observation, there is no liberal bias in the MSM, then we'll have to agree to disagree.
If you are saying my own observation is wrong, because I will not spoon feed you stories that are already in a thread that talks about this very subject, then I don't really have anything more to add.
-
What exactly is your point? The issue is whether or not there is a liberal bias in the MSM. There is an entire thread on the subject. If you're asking me to go through that thread and pull out the examples for you, then no I'm not willing to do that.
You said that quite a few times. Which basically means you'll parrot a bias site but will not reach in and pull out some of these "supposed facts."
If you are saying that based on your own observation, there is no liberal bias in the MSM, then we'll have to agree to disagree.
Not saying that at all. Simply asking you to provide some examples.
If you are saying my own observation is wrong, because I will not spoon feed you stories that are already in a thread that talks about this very subject, then I don't really have anything more to add.
Not saying that at all regarding MSM's bias. Simply asking you to provide some examples.
-
You said that quite a few times. Which basically means you'll parrot a bias site but will not reach in and pull out some of these "supposed facts."
Not saying that at all. Simply asking you to provide some examples.
Not saying that at all regarding MSM's bias. Simply asking you to provide some examples.
It's a site that tracks and exposes liberal media bias. If you actually read some of the articles posted in the thread, you would see that. It can be pretty subtle, but also pretty blatant.
-
If those examples contain facts its shouldn't be too hard to show them. Remember, its YOUR thread.
You used Matrix's list to support your claim. It was proved unrealistic for the reason's i listed.
And regardless of anything you have said here these facts still remain:
1. You are unwilling to give examples of this MSM bias on Hard News but willing to absolve Fox news.
2. This is based on your recollection of what you have "heard" be that yesterday, last week, last month, last year, etc.
3. You have a massive thread which YOU started that supposedly contains facts you are unwilling to show to back up your claim
4. Matix's list is bunk.
Not too much more to say on this matter because nothing is really changing.
In conclusion, you are charging MSM for a liberal bias, unwilling to back up your claim and you are giving FOX a free pass.
Great example of being nonobjective and shows bias opinion based on commonly accepted stereotypes fed to you by the conservative spin machine. Oh wait, Conservatives don't spin anything right? they just tell the straight truth. ;)
Dude anyone who regularly reads political articles or sees news on mainstream news outlets knows there is a massive bias. You doing a quick search (the results of which i find rather hard to believe) certainly doesnt 'disprove' anything. I read a variety of sources on a daily basis and see examples every day. The main media honchos are virtually all Dem, the leaders of all the REAL big names in media(other than fox) , like nbc and cbs off the top of my head are big Dem donors, the head of Disney is a big Dem donor/obama fan..Yahoo news sources virtually all of their headlines from liberal news outlets...these are the guys controlling the vast majority of the media seen by average nonpolitical americans every day.
Politico reported a survey a few days ago showing only 7% of journalists identify as republicans. SEVEN PERCENT
-
Ted Cruz
Let's review
The Dems fought a legislative battle for the ACA and then fought court battles
The Dems won and then Cruz decided he was going to hold up funding (taking the country hostage) unless the Dems yielded to his ransom demand
The Cruz killed the hostage (shut down the government) and then wants to pretend that the Dems actually killed the hostage
Lmao...man cruz must be really powerful, he just 'decided' and then personally 'shut down the government' on his own!
You suuuure it obama, reid and the dems had nothing to do with it? ;)
The funniest thing about this whole charade is that the Dems postured and squealed so loud and dug in their feet...then proceeded to do EXACTLY WHAT CRUZ WANTED them to do a few weeks later anyways
-
Lmao...man cruz must be really powerful, he just 'decided' and then personally 'shut down the government' on his own!
You suuuure it obama, reid and the dems had nothing to do with it? ;)
The funniest thing about this whole charade is that the Dems postured and squealed so loud and dug in their feet...then proceeded to do EXACTLY WHAT CRUZ WANTED them to do a few weeks later anyways
him and a handful of other teabaggers but he was the leader
you know this (and it's easily verifiable for anyone who doesn't know it)
The Dems fought and won the battle for the ACA and Cruz basically just threw a childish temper tantrum and all the Dems could do was sit back and wait for the little child to cry himself out.
And then Cruz (and apparently you) want to pretend that it was not his fault
fine by me but don't expect anyone else to join you in fantasy land
-
Dude anyone who regularly reads political articles or sees news on mainstream news outlets knows there is a massive bias.
I am not saying there isn't a Bias in the MSM, including FOX news.
You doing a quick search (the results of which i find rather hard to believe) certainly doesnt 'disprove' anything.
Do you think i made it up?
Did you even click on the links?
Is your OWN PERSONAL BIAS preventing you from clicking on the links, or doing the exact same thing I did?
I did exactly as you said which you have up to now conveniently ignored:
Go search any of the mainstream news outlets and find one single example of an article, any article, describing any democrat candidate using the terms i layed out above, or anything close to it. You know, the usual terms they use to describe republicans.
You wont be able to find one.
I did exactly what you asked.
Are afraid of the TRUTH? Or do you want to stay in your DEMONIZE anything not conservative hate world?
WTF?????
Face FACT: YOUR LIST WAS BUNK.... a product of subtle stereotyping. there was no examples of Candidates being described as such and very few uses of the terms you provided either way.
I read a variety of sources on a daily basis and see examples every day. The main media honchos are virtually all Dem, the leaders of all the REAL big names in media(other than fox) , like nbc and cbs off the top of my head are big Dem donors, the head of Disney is a big Dem donor/obama fan..Yahoo news sources virtually all of their headlines from liberal news outlets...these are the guys controlling the vast majority of the media seen by average nonpolitical americans every day.
Politico reported a survey a few days ago showing only 7% of journalists identify as republicans. SEVEN PERCENT
So can you serve up some examples of "Hard News", not opinion crap, hard news from MSM showing a liberal bias??????????
I believe you. Can you show something?????????????????
FFS, you fucking people don't like your opinions questioned do you?
-
I am not saying there isn't a Bias in the MSM, including FOX news.
Do you think i made it up?
Did you even click on the links?
Is your OWN PERSONAL BIAS preventing you from clicking on the links, or doing the exact same thing I did?
I did exactly as you said which you have up to now conveniently ignored:
I did exactly what you asked.
Are afraid of the TRUTH? Or do you want to stay in your DEMONIZE anything not conservative hate world?
WTF?????
Face FACT: YOUR LIST WAS BUNK.... a product of subtle stereotyping
So can you serve up some examples of "Hard News", not opinion crap, hard news from MSM showing a liberal bias??????????
I believe you. Can you show something?????????????????
FFS, you fucking people don't like your opinions questioned do you?
Brutal meltdown :D
-
Brutal meltdown :D
::)
What ever, typical response from someone who has no where else to go with it.
You are acting just like Blacken here or any other libtard here.