Liberal Media My Ass...

noel · Post by **noel** » April 26, 2007, 12:39 pm

http://politics.slashdot.org/article.pl ... 9&from=rss

If the media is so goddamn liberal, why is this story... A resolution to IMPEACH OUR VICE-PRESIDENT buried on all of the big news sites.

It's fucking appalling that it's getting no media attention no matter which side you support.

Boogahz · Post by **Boogahz** » April 26, 2007, 12:40 pm

I saw it on both Fox News and CNN a couple days ago in our cafeteria, but I have not seen it on their websites.

noel · Post by **noel** » April 26, 2007, 1:02 pm

I too have heard it mentioned, but I think this should be a much bigger story than it currently is. Am I wrong?

Boogahz · Post by **Boogahz** » April 26, 2007, 1:17 pm

noel wrote:I too have heard it mentioned, but I think this should be a much bigger story than it currently is. Am I wrong?

I never heard enough about how he was going to justify bringing it up to really say whether it deserved more media"play" than it got. At the time I was hearing about it, he was still "expected" to present the request.

Xatrei · Post by **Xatrei** » April 26, 2007, 1:24 pm

I think that it's getting so little coverage because it's nothing more than a meaningless gesture. He can't even scrape up a co-sponsor, so it has no chance of even being discussed, so it's just not terribly newsworthy IMO.

noel · Post by **noel** » April 26, 2007, 1:29 pm

Xatrei wrote:I think that it's getting so little coverage because it's nothing more than a meaningless gesture. He can't even scrape up a co-sponsor, so it has no chance of even being discussed, so it's just not terribly newsworthy IMO.

I'll buy that, but ask the following question which is meant to be an indictment of the media not you...

Is it more or less newsworthy than Anna-Nicole Smith?

Boogahz · Post by **Boogahz** » April 26, 2007, 1:32 pm

noel wrote:Is it more or less newsworthy than Anna-Nicole Smith?

I think you're asking the wrong people here...I really doubt any of us would think the Anna-Nicole Smith stories deserved 1/100th of the airtime they received.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » April 26, 2007, 1:40 pm

It's a waste of time to try and impeach Bush. He's a lame duck president. By the time it was all settled, we'd be holding new elections anyway.

miir · Post by **miir** » April 26, 2007, 2:12 pm

Winnow wrote:It's a waste of time to try and impeach Bush. He's a lame duck president. By the time it was all settled, we'd be holding new elections anyway.

Bush is the vice president?

Boogahz · Post by **Boogahz** » April 26, 2007, 2:16 pm

miir wrote:
Winnow wrote:It's a waste of time to try and impeach Bush. He's a lame duck president. By the time it was all settled, we'd be holding new elections anyway.
Bush is the vice president?

Kylere · Post by **Kylere** » April 26, 2007, 2:23 pm

LOL

Maybe because trying to impeach him less than 6 months before the election is just a BS political ploy, it would have been news two years ago.

Xatrei · Post by **Xatrei** » April 26, 2007, 3:09 pm

Refresh my memory, please. What national elections are being held in 6 months?

It's a lame political ploy regardless, though.

Edit to add: Excuse the sloppy edit on my first post. It should read "He can't even scrape up a co-sponsor. It has no chance of even being discussed, so it's just not terribly newsworthy IMO." I didn't intend to tie having a co-sponsor with it not going anywhere within the House, as the text may have implied.

Spang · Post by **Spang** » April 26, 2007, 3:15 pm

noel wrote:I'll buy that, but ask the following question which is meant to be an indictment of the media not you...

Is it more or less newsworthy than Anna-Nicole Smith?

Whether we like it or not, Anna-Nicole Smith type stories sell. It's all about the benjamins.

Gzette · Post by **Gzette** » April 26, 2007, 3:27 pm

a little off topic, but i love how the "liberal media" appears as this big monolithic force guided my some like illuminati or freemasons or zombie Joe Kennedy or something, while on the other hand you never even hear the term "conservative media" despite the fact that there are a billion conservative talk radio shows, and fox news. while for the "liberal media" you just have people speculating.

\oh yeah and Air America!

Xatrei · Post by **Xatrei** » April 26, 2007, 3:29 pm

It's George Soros that's manipulating the "Liberal Media" behind the scenes. Just ask Bill O'Reilly, he'll tell you. He even has a chart!

Morgrym · Post by **Morgrym** » April 26, 2007, 3:40 pm

The liberal media did not post it because it would be the end of the democratic ticket. Condy would be selected as VP and would then be able to run as an encumbant. That would squash Hillary no matter how well she practices her good ole boy lingo. Obama would loose his steam with the vote of a differant color due to the double whammy that Rice would bring to the table. Not that it matters anyway, Rudy is next in office.

Arborealus · Post by **Arborealus** » April 26, 2007, 3:48 pm

Xatrei wrote:It's George Soros that's manipulating the "Liberal Media" behind the scenes. Just ask Bill O'Reilly, he'll tell you. He even has a chart!

Yes well in a sense it is Soros...

Ok I'll break this story here first...It is me controlling very nearly all media outlets worldwide...I'm sorry...I was on a roll...I won't do it again...

Post by **Sylvus** » April 26, 2007, 3:52 pm

Thank you, Bruce.

Arborealus · Post by **Arborealus** » April 26, 2007, 3:58 pm

Sylvus wrote:Thank you, Bruce.

It worked for him and for me!...

Xatrei · Post by **Xatrei** » April 26, 2007, 4:01 pm

Arborealus wrote:Yes well in a sense it is Soros...

In the sense that he (perhaps more accurately his money) is involved in many liberal causes / issues. But to hear O'Reilly spin things (in his spin-free zone no less!), Soros is the mastermind quietly overseeing the machinations of all things "far left" (a.k.a. left of Bill-O).

Arborealus · Post by **Arborealus** » April 26, 2007, 4:06 pm

Xatrei wrote:
Arborealus wrote:Yes well in a sense it is Soros...
In the sense that he (perhaps more accurately his money) is involved in many liberal causes / issues. But to hear O'Reilly spin things (in his spin-free zone no less!), Soros is the mastermind quietly overseeing the machinations of all things "far left" (a.k.a. left of Bill-O).

No Bill just doesn't know about my control of Soros...

...He's just a proxy for me...

Xatrei · Post by **Xatrei** » April 26, 2007, 4:12 pm

Good have him fund my new non-profit. I only need 2 or 3 million. I hope to provide low-cost or gratis IT support / project management / consulting for progressive oriented non-profits. Yeah, that's it. IT support. That's the ticket! PM me for the info on where to send the check.

Kylere · Post by **Kylere** » April 26, 2007, 4:29 pm

Xatrei wrote:Refresh my memory, please. What national elections are being held in 6 months?

It's a lame political ploy regardless, though.

Okay you got me, but no one should blame me for wanting this farce over sooner to the point that I had been wishful thinking for an early election.

Drinsic Darkwood · Post by **Drinsic Darkwood** » April 26, 2007, 6:08 pm

Kylere wrote:Okay you got me, but no one should blame me for wanting this farce over sooner to the point that I had been wishful thinking for an early election.

Yeah, that or you're just too fucking stupid to know what year we're in.

Sueven · Post by **Sueven** » April 26, 2007, 7:12 pm

Honestly, I think that the under-reporting of this story is, if anything, more of a demonstration than a refutation of liberal media bias. A resolution to impeach Cheney is retarded for a variety of reasons which we can get into if anyone disagrees with me. I think the best possible outcome for liberals would be for this motion to die a quick, merciful death with as little light shined on it as possible. The more people know about the motion, the more the greater liberal community will be associated with it.

Midnyte_Ragebringer · Post by **Midnyte_Ragebringer** » April 26, 2007, 9:10 pm

Sueven wrote:Honestly, I think that the under-reporting of this story is, if anything, more of a demonstration than a refutation of liberal media bias. A resolution to impeach Cheney is retarded for a variety of reasons which we can get into if anyone disagrees with me. I think the best possible outcome for liberals would be for this motion to die a quick, merciful death with as little light shined on it as possible. The more people know about the motion, the more the greater liberal community will be associated with it.

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » April 26, 2007, 9:44 pm

Just shoot him in the face with a shotgun. Apparently that is not illegal, so no charges will be filed.

Kylere · Post by **Kylere** » April 27, 2007, 3:59 pm

Drinsic Darkwood wrote:
Kylere wrote:Okay you got me, but no one should blame me for wanting this farce over sooner to the point that I had been wishful thinking for an early election.
Yeah, that or you're just too fucking stupid to know what year we're in.

No, your big head was blocking the fucking calendar.

Drinsic Darkwood · Post by **Drinsic Darkwood** » April 27, 2007, 4:17 pm

My big... head... was...?

Dude, wow.

Post by **Sylvus** » April 27, 2007, 4:23 pm

Don't act like your big head wasn't blocking the calendar, Anglo. It's all part of your lack of self esteem and need to repress others.

Dregor Thule · Post by **Dregor Thule** » April 27, 2007, 5:25 pm

Drinsic Darkwood wrote:My big... head... was...?

Dude, wow.

Lets admit it, your head does look pretty large, even if it's not to scale. And those curly golden locks aren't helping your case. Making your eye look really big does help tho, as it seems to bring your eye:head ratio more into a normal value.

Xyun · Post by **Xyun** » April 28, 2007, 3:46 am

Kucinich is a wacktard. During the debate when he was asked why he wants to impeach cheney he pulled out a pocket constitution and went on a long diatribe. What a dope. Why would you waste time on impeaching a lame-duck vice-president?

After the debate he had an interview sitting next to his wife. She was so fucking hot i think i creamed myself twice in that 3 minutes. She was sorta pale with fire red hair. It was obvious to me that this woman has a vice-grip on this man's testicles and it is only a matter of time before she moves on to a bigger and better fish.

Edit:

here's a photo of them. lol.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » April 28, 2007, 4:53 am

Some infoz for you Xyun:

Marriage license provides clues to Kucinich's wife

Created: 8/24/2005 12:38:04 PM

# CLEVELAND (AP) -- Personal details on the new bride of Cleveland Congressman Dennis Kucinich have been closely guarded, but their marriage license provides some clues. Kucinich wedding photos (1 of 9)
The one-time Democratic presidential candidate married 27-year-old Elizabeth Harper on Sunday in a park alongside Cleveland City Hall. It was the third marriage for the twice-divorced Kucinich, who is 58.

The 250 wedding guests included actors Shirley MacLaine and Sean Penn, both friends of Kucinich.

The marriage license says the bride was born in Upminster, England. Her English home is located in a rural area near a tenth-century church about 25 miles east of London.

The bride is a consultant for a monetary-policy think tank in Chicago.

VariaVespasa · Post by **VariaVespasa** » April 28, 2007, 7:38 am

Bah, they only give me cash payoffs. They gave him a woman!