Conservatives love torture like a fat kid loves cake

Xyun · Post by **Xyun** » January 14, 2009, 9:57 am

cross posted from my blog

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LolY4THlw6M

Is it just me, or have these people gone off the edge? Sure there are many fictional sagas that bring up true deep moral questions, but that doesn't change the fact that they are fiction. Newsflash, Jack Bauer is NOT A REAL PERSON!

What's worst is that these same people then turn around and attack other fictional tales -

Conservatives attack animated penguin movie as global-warming propaganda

Cultural conservatives, led by CNN's Glenn Beck, Fox News' Neil Cavuto, and syndicated talk-show host Michael Medved, have all criticized Happy Feet, the new Warner Bros. animated movie about Mumble, the tap-dancing penguin, because they say the movie is laced with liberal overtones and tries to "indoctrinate" children.

Even if we are to accept that both "24" and "Happy Feet" are forms of propaganda for real causes, they are still FICTION! In the real world, real people research the themes of these fictional works. There is scientific evidence regarding global warming and regarding torture that any of these idiots can look to. Flaunting Jack Bauer or attacking a cartoon exhibits just how deeply susceptible the right wing is to propaganda, and just how ignorant they are of science and reality.

Fash · Post by **Fash** » January 14, 2009, 10:47 am

Neither side is more susceptible than the other. You only see the other side because you've already swallowed plenty of propaganda, hook, line, and sinker.

The science behind global warming is weak and weakening, and kids don't ignore issues just because it's fiction... the don't really know what that is, and the brain doesn't care. They're issues none the less.

Xyun · Post by **Xyun** » January 14, 2009, 11:07 am

Show me one example of non-conservative mainstream media that uses FICTION to justify their cause. Just one. I'm not talking about an actual work of fiction, but a professional news organization that points to a work of fiction.

Nick · Post by **Nick** » January 14, 2009, 11:38 am

Neither side is more susceptible than the other

utter nonsense.

Ashur · Post by **Ashur** » January 14, 2009, 11:38 am

Not that I care and would happily let my daughter watch Happy Feet, but propaganda aimed at children is a little more suspect I would think.

P.S. My wife bought March of the Penguins because she thought it was going to be a happy story and she loves penguins. So I'm watching it with her and when the leopard seal eats a penguin she stands up and shouts "Let him go you asshole!" at the TV and then had to leave the room when the carrion birds were picking off the baby penguins. I think SHE would like Happy Feet.

Xyun · Post by **Xyun** » January 14, 2009, 12:08 pm

I don't disagree that fiction is laced and sometimes saturated with a ton of propaganda. My problem is that supposedly professional pundits would point to a fictional drama and use it as evidence to support their political cause or ideology. No self respecting news man on the left goes on TV and says "Hey look Star Trek doesn't have money, it's a giant communistic society, so that's proof that communism works."

Both sides peddle fictional propaganda, but only the right peddles fiction as non-fiction on national fucking "news" programs. But please, prove me wrong.

Boogahz · Post by **Boogahz** » January 14, 2009, 12:13 pm

Xyun wrote:Both sides peddle fictional propaganda, but only the right peddles fiction as non-fiction on national fucking "news" programs. But please, prove me wrong.

wait, which of the people you listed in the original post are actually on the news programs? As far I as can remember, they have their own "talk" shows. That is not the same as presenting the news. That is a forum for them to present their own opinions.

Xyun · Post by **Xyun** » January 14, 2009, 12:20 pm

Again, if you are able to find any national program on TV from anyone that is unbiased or clearly biased towards the left that uses FICTION to try to prove a political point, I'd love to see it. Last time I checked the FOX NEWS emblem was stamped right on the TV as they spouted this nonsense.

Boogahz · Post by **Boogahz** » January 14, 2009, 12:42 pm

Xyun wrote:Again, if you are able to find any national program on TV from anyone that is unbiased or clearly biased towards the left that uses FICTION to try to prove a political point, I'd love to see it. Last time I checked the FOX NEWS emblem was stamped right on the TV as they spouted this nonsense.

I think that you're missing the point of those shows. Each network has them. They are designed around the host. The host gets their time to spout off whatever nonsense opinion they have. Do you watch Nancy Grace to find out what the latest news is? I would hope not, and that is not the reason anyone should be watching these people either. It is like quoting an editorial opinion piece from a paper as being pure fact in that paper's eyes.

Xyun · Post by **Xyun** » January 14, 2009, 1:02 pm

Boogahz wrote:
Xyun wrote:Again, if you are able to find any national program on TV from anyone that is unbiased or clearly biased towards the left that uses FICTION to try to prove a political point, I'd love to see it. Last time I checked the FOX NEWS emblem was stamped right on the TV as they spouted this nonsense.
I think that you're missing the point of those shows. Each network has them. They are designed around the host. The host gets their time to spout off whatever nonsense opinion they have. Do you watch Nancy Grace to find out what the latest news is? I would hope not, and that is not the reason anyone should be watching these people either. It is like quoting an editorial opinion piece from a paper as being pure fact in that paper's eyes.

No I think you are missing my point. EVEN AS OPINION show me anyone else that uses FICTION to support their political opinion. Anyone else at all that is not a conservative. I don't disagree that it is conservative opinion, my point is THE USE OF FICTION to support an argument.

Kilmoll the Sexy · Post by **Kilmoll the Sexy** » January 14, 2009, 1:15 pm

I am certain that if any conservative actually wanted to torture themselves into watching the liberal "news" that it would not be impossible to do. There are PLENTY of retarded liberal news sites and saying they would never use fiction is absolutely absurd.

Ashur · Post by **Ashur** » January 14, 2009, 1:23 pm

I should note, I love 24, but realize it's fiction.

... although the hot redhead FBI chick turning to evil Jack methods was kind of sexy. STILL FICTION!

cadalano · Post by **cadalano** » January 14, 2009, 1:36 pm

I am certain that if any conservative actually wanted to torture themselves into watching the liberal "news" that it would not be impossible to do.

so find an example from an unbiased source. although i assume the problem here would be that there is no mainstream media that is not leftist, sans fox. that would be an easy out

There are PLENTY of retarded liberal news sites and saying they would never use fiction is absolutely absurd.

he emphasized that it be from a mainstream organization

Gzette · Post by **Gzette** » January 14, 2009, 3:58 pm

Jack Bauer could restore peace in the Mideast with a car battery and a bucket of water.

Kilmoll the Sexy · Post by **Kilmoll the Sexy** » January 14, 2009, 5:31 pm

cadalano wrote:
I am certain that if any conservative actually wanted to torture themselves into watching the liberal "news" that it would not be impossible to do.
so find an example from an unbiased source. although i assume the problem here would be that there is no mainstream media that is not leftist, sans fox. that would be an easy out

There are PLENTY of retarded liberal news sites and saying they would never use fiction is absolutely absurd.
he emphasized that it be from a mainstream organization

Are you shitting me? Most of you would consider The Daily Show as mainstream unbiased news. Outside of Fox, pretty much EVERY news media is liberal. If you think I am going to scour shit looking for this you are nuts. The only reason this sticks out is because it is the ONLY conservative leaning news outlet that has any credibility whatsoever.

http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/Me ... -6664.aspx

miir · Post by **miir** » January 14, 2009, 5:33 pm

Most of you would consider The Daily Show as mainstream unbiased news.

Most of us consider the Daily Show as comedy...

Kilmoll the Sexy · Post by **Kilmoll the Sexy** » January 14, 2009, 5:35 pm

By the way, if you think I can't find some liberal rag dropping a comparison to fiction, I am willing to place a wager of $1000 US dollars on it. I would love to just google up "CSI" and see how many hits I can find on it relating to mainstream news.

miir · Post by **miir** » January 14, 2009, 5:49 pm

I would love to just google up "CSI" and see how many hits I can find on it relating to mainstream news.

China’s CSI 300 index rose 4.2 percent, the most in six weeks, on speculation the central bank will cut interest rates for the sixth time since September. Bahrain All Share index advanced 0.8 percent, while Russia’s Micex Index gained 0.5 percent.

CSI President Jerry Beck says the proposal is for a building designed for teaching wind, solar and geothermal energy classes. He estimates the project could cost between $4 million and $7 million.

Robert Patterson, President of CSI Americas remarked: "In 2009 and 2010 we see the US developing into a major market for both of our regular and e-Module solar products.

Kilmoll the Sexy · Post by **Kilmoll the Sexy** » January 14, 2009, 5:51 pm

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld ... 8551.story

But the attached corporate headquarters feel more New Age than Rambo

"If a bad guy comes in, everyone always wishes there were the John Wayne hero in the classroom to respond," he says. "But that's really hard to pull off."

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/sun ... 7839.story

the North Carolina-based private security company has been known for its swaggering image and "Dirty Harry" demeanor.

The look was designed to inspire dread, but it was carried to such cartoonish extremes that the man resembled Yosemite Sam more than the Terminator.

Xyun · Post by **Xyun** » January 14, 2009, 6:13 pm

Kilmoll, the point is not that they just made a reference to some work of fiction. The point is that they USED a work of fiction to argue in favor of a certain political ideology. For example, if the example you are using said "Dirty Harry murders people, so murder is ok" then it would qualify. You will never be able to find a mainstream liberal or unbiased source that JUSTIFIES its political opinion using a FICTIONAL plot line. This act is reserved only for the mainstream conservative media. Since reality denies them, their only recourse to support their insanity is fiction. This is not the first time I've seen it either. This happened back in July when "The Dark Knight" was released and some buffoon wrote an Op-Ed in the Wall Street Journal claiming that "Batman had to break the law in order to preserve the law" or some nonsense. The WSJ has since taken the article down but luckily for us Midnyte posted the entire thing here as a triumph!!

http://www.veeshanvault.org/forums/view ... 13&t=23057

I responded to it here

http://www.progressivejunction.com/2008 ... eroes.html

Just another example of how the MAINSTREAM conservative media uses fiction to justify clearly illegal acts. Funny after reading that thread the same thing was asked. An example of anyone but conservatives doing this, and again, no examples were found or given.

miir · Post by **miir** » January 14, 2009, 6:22 pm

I understand your point, Xyun.
It certainly doesn't happen often but it's a very curious trait of conservative media.

Kilmoll the Sexy · Post by **Kilmoll the Sexy** » January 15, 2009, 10:18 am

You do realize that the WSJ is rated as THE most liberal newspaper?

Xyun · Post by **Xyun** » January 15, 2009, 11:26 am

Kilmoll the Sexy wrote:You do realize that the WSJ is rated as THE most liberal newspaper?

1st of all WSJ is a conservative paper. 2nd, the article was written by a conservative, if it would have appeared in the NYT I would have still pointed it out since it was written by a conservative.

Boogahz · Post by **Boogahz** » January 15, 2009, 12:19 pm

Xyun wrote:Just another example of how the MAINSTREAM conservative media uses fiction to justify clearly illegal acts. Funny after reading that thread the same thing was asked. An example of anyone but conservatives doing this, and again, no examples were found or given.

Um, you do realize that you're going off on an OP-ED piece, right? Go back to my original post about the talking heads you were originally going off about to see why people aren't bothering to even look up what you're asking for. You're asking for people to prove that a liberal doesn't do something, when everything you're even posting about was OPINION articles. Where they are posted is irrelevant for anyone but you. If the papers were to deny these people the right to have their opinions heard, the outlets might have run into freedom of speech issues with more talking heads going off about how they censor information.

Xyun wrote:1st of all WSJ is a conservative paper. 2nd, the article was written by a conservative, if it would have appeared in the NYT I would have still pointed it out since it was written by a conservative.

That's funny, what I just read on the first link of a search on liberal media bias shows otherwise. The editorials were shown to have a conservative slant, but not the news...which is what you are talking about being nutty.

Besides, most "news" outlets don't even report on actual events anymore. They're more focused on what celebrity overdosed last week, or who is banging who.

Gzette · Post by **Gzette** » January 15, 2009, 1:49 pm

Newspapers who endorsed McCain:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newspaper_ ... ohn_McCain

Obama had 3 times as many newspaper endorsements. So there is a likely liberal bias.

Notable McCain papers:

The Dallas Morning News
New York Post
Boston Herald
San Antonio Express-News
The Arizona Republic

The Dallas Morning News appears to be the only top-tier newspaper in that regard. And it is barely top tier, if at all.

Notable Obama papers:

Los Angeles Times
NY Times
The Washington Post
Houston Chronicle
Chicago Tribune
Denver Post
San Francisco Chronicle
Philadelphia Enquirer
Chicago Sun-Times
Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Seattle Times
Miami Herald
The Oregonian
Star Tribune
Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel

Where does it come from? I think it lends itself to the educational background of reporters and editors. Communications majors are going to be more liberal than - say - business students or engineers. And the overwhelming numbers that conservatives in the media face backs them into a corner, and - regrettably - makes them say stupid, often untrue, sometimes inflammatory statements.

Xyun · Post by **Xyun** » January 15, 2009, 2:26 pm

Boogahz wrote:
Xyun wrote:Just another example of how the MAINSTREAM conservative media uses fiction to justify clearly illegal acts. Funny after reading that thread the same thing was asked. An example of anyone but conservatives doing this, and again, no examples were found or given.
Um, you do realize that you're going off on an OP-ED piece, right? Go back to my original post about the talking heads you were originally going off about to see why people aren't bothering to even look up what you're asking for. You're asking for people to prove that a liberal doesn't do something, when everything you're even posting about was OPINION articles. Where they are posted is irrelevant for anyone but you. If the papers were to deny these people the right to have their opinions heard, the outlets might have run into freedom of speech issues with more talking heads going off about how they censor information.

Xyun wrote:1st of all WSJ is a conservative paper. 2nd, the article was written by a conservative, if it would have appeared in the NYT I would have still pointed it out since it was written by a conservative.
That's funny, what I just read on the first link of a search on liberal media bias shows otherwise. The editorials were shown to have a conservative slant, but not the news...which is what you are talking about being nutty.

Besides, most "news" outlets don't even report on actual events anymore. They're more focused on what celebrity overdosed last week, or who is banging who.

Boog, you are not understanding my argument at all. I've tried to explain it several times to you, but you simply are overlooking my argument for tangential shit that has nothing to do with what I'm trying to say. I'm talking about MAINSTREAM CONSERVATIVE OPINION.

MAINSTREAM CONSERVATIVES USE FICTION TO SUPPORT ARGUMENTS.

I've shown several examples of this happening in mainstream media. I'm NOT talking about the news man. Why can you not accept that I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT THE NEWS THEY ARE REPORTING.

I'm talking about the practice of USING FICTION to support an opinion. Even on this site, you will be hard pressed to find anyone that uses fiction to prove a point. I don't know how else I can convey what I'm trying to say using the English language. The only reason I bring up the source (Fox News or WSJ) is to show that it is mainstream and not some extremity. The source of the depravity only matters because it is in the mainstream. But I'm still only talking about (once again) -

MAINSTREAM CONSERVATIVES USE FICTION TO SUPPORT ARGUMENTS.

Xyun · Post by **Xyun** » January 15, 2009, 2:45 pm

Ok, I'm gonna try a different angle to better explain what I'm trying to say.

Say I were to come on this site and argue:

We as a society should immediately cease the development of technology.

We should do this because in the movie "The Matrix" computers eventually get so powerful that they rise up and overtake the human race. Therefore, it is imperative that we immediately stop all technological advancements.

If I did this, I would be laughed off the stage. It would be an unbelievably fucking ridiculous notion that I'm using the movie "The Matrix" as a reason, or as evidence for my argument.

Nonetheless, people are doing this on national TV and they are not being laughed off the stage. They are even being defended, by people in this very thread. Although I am overtly against the use of torture, I understand some arguments can be made for it. But an argument that uses fiction is completely illegitimate. It is laughable. Nonsensical. Ignorant. Stupid. Fucking moronic. Yet, these people get a platform of national TV and print media to make this argument about their opinion. It is a practice only used by conservatives that have access to such a platform.

I hope that explains it better.

Boogahz · Post by **Boogahz** » January 15, 2009, 4:59 pm

Xyun wrote:Ok, I'm gonna try a different angle to better explain what I'm trying to say.

Say I were to come on this site and argue:

We as a society should immediately cease the development of technology.

We should do this because in the movie "The Matrix" computers eventually get so powerful that they rise up and overtake the human race. Therefore, it is imperative that we immediately stop all technological advancements.

If I did this, I would be laughed off the stage. It would be an unbelievably fucking ridiculous notion that I'm using the movie "The Matrix" as a reason, or as evidence for my argument.

Nonetheless, people are doing this on national TV and they are not being laughed off the stage. They are even being defended, by people in this very thread. Although I am overtly against the use of torture, I understand some arguments can be made for it. But an argument that uses fiction is completely illegitimate. It is laughable. Nonsensical. Ignorant. Stupid. Fucking moronic. Yet, these people get a platform of national TV and print media to make this argument about their opinion. It is a practice only used by conservatives that have access to such a platform.

I hope that explains it better.

You would be laughed off of the stage because you were being ridiculous, not because you were conservative/liberal. If you wanted to argue that the 3-4 people mentioned in the original post, which happen to be conservative talk show hosts, were idiots because of the opinion they shared, that would be one thing. You were talking about "a professional news organization that points to a work of fiction." They were not part of any one organization, nor were they presenters of the news from those organizations.

I would agree that they are idiotic to blame a kid's movie for global propaganda, and this is an example of how your "labels" can be incorrect.

Xyun · Post by **Xyun** » January 15, 2009, 5:21 pm

Fox News and the WSJ (both of which happened to be owned by Rupert Murdock) give a platform to these idiots to spout their nonsense nationally. If you don't think that those people are presenters of news to a national audience then I guess that we just have to agree to disagree. The people in that clip, save Rush Limbaugh, are presenting news AND commentary on TV on a daily basis, and they leave it up to the audience to decipher which is which. I really don't care one way or the other about it, except that they used a work of fiction as support for a political argument/opinion.

My point is you will never ever see this happen on an unbiased or liberal news network. The standards are higher.

Soreali · Post by **Soreali** » January 15, 2009, 5:28 pm

Ashur wrote:Not that I care and would happily let my daughter watch Happy Feet, but propaganda aimed at children is a little more suspect I would think.

P.S. My wife bought March of the Penguins because she thought it was going to be a happy story and she loves penguins. So I'm watching it with her and when the leopard seal eats a penguin she stands up and shouts "Let him go you asshole!" at the TV and then had to leave the room when the carrion birds were picking off the baby penguins. I think SHE would like Happy Feet.

If you haven't yet, go out and get Surf's Up.. she'll love you for it.. cute penguin movie..

my girlfriend is also obsessed with penguins so I know just about every penguin move there is...

Boogahz · Post by **Boogahz** » January 15, 2009, 6:06 pm

Xyun wrote:Fox News and the WSJ (both of which happened to be owned by Rupert Murdock) give a platform to these idiots to spout their nonsense nationally. If you don't think that those people are presenters of news to a national audience then I guess that we just have to agree to disagree. The people in that clip, save Rush Limbaugh, are presenting news AND commentary on TV on a daily basis, and they leave it up to the audience to decipher which is which. I really don't care one way or the other about it, except that they used a work of fiction as support for a political argument/opinion.

My point is you will never ever see this happen on an unbiased or liberal news network. The standards are higher.

One of the three people are with Faux News.

What would you consider Dailykos?

What would you consider the New York Times?

Zaelath · Post by **Zaelath** » January 15, 2009, 6:49 pm

Boogahz wrote:
Xyun wrote:Fox News and the WSJ (both of which happened to be owned by Rupert Murdock) give a platform to these idiots to spout their nonsense nationally. If you don't think that those people are presenters of news to a national audience then I guess that we just have to agree to disagree. The people in that clip, save Rush Limbaugh, are presenting news AND commentary on TV on a daily basis, and they leave it up to the audience to decipher which is which. I really don't care one way or the other about it, except that they used a work of fiction as support for a political argument/opinion.

My point is you will never ever see this happen on an unbiased or liberal news network. The standards are higher.
One of the three people are with Faux News.

What would you consider Dailykos?

What would you consider the New York Times?

Hrmm, both those pieces seem to be commentary on commentary; i.e. they comment on the fact that batman finds torture and violating right to privacy OK. I only read the Times piece in detail, but at no point does he ascribe anything to anyone real outside the people that made the movie.

The Fox and Friends idiots however, don't discuss the moral abiguity of anything, and they certainly don't talk about the producers of 24. They claim that most Americans would support Jack Bauer. The others really do talk about him like he's a real person; that could be taken out of context, but I honestly think a significant percentage of those with the right to vote confuse TV with reality. 2% would be significant, I think it's already been shown to be a lot higher.

I'm going to go ahead and say these pieces aren't comparable at all, and you can go ahead and keep channelling Midnyte.

Kilmoll the Sexy · Post by **Kilmoll the Sexy** » January 15, 2009, 8:29 pm

Xyun wrote:
The standards are higher.

No...they are absolutely not. Liberal media passes their opinion as facts and do not even attempt to educate themselves. While I simply cannot even bring myself to watch Fox news EVER, I am finding it harder and harder to read or watch the news from these incredibly slanted liberal sites either. Fox knows it is an absurdly right wing outlet and does nothing to disguise it. The liberal mainstream sites (like most serious lefty liberals) bring their opinions and misnomers as factual items time and time again with no regard for truthful journalism.

Spang · Post by **Spang** » January 15, 2009, 8:33 pm

Kilmoll the Sexy wrote:No...they are absolutely not. Liberal media passes their opinion as facts and do not even attempt to educate themselves. While I simply cannot even bring myself to watch Fox news EVER, I am finding it harder and harder to read or watch the news from these incredibly slanted liberal sites either. Fox knows it is an absurdly right wing outlet and does nothing to disguise it. The liberal mainstream sites (like most serious lefty liberals) bring their opinions and misnomers as factual items time and time again with no regard for truthful journalism.

Any proof?

Zaelath · Post by **Zaelath** » January 15, 2009, 8:42 pm

Spang wrote:
Kilmoll the Sexy wrote:No...they are absolutely not. Liberal media passes their opinion as facts and do not even attempt to educate themselves. While I simply cannot even bring myself to watch Fox news EVER, I am finding it harder and harder to read or watch the news from these incredibly slanted liberal sites either. Fox knows it is an absurdly right wing outlet and does nothing to disguise it. The liberal mainstream sites (like most serious lefty liberals) bring their opinions and misnomers as factual items time and time again with no regard for truthful journalism.
Any proof?

If Kilmoll was "Liberal Media" this would constitute self referential proof

Xyun · Post by **Xyun** » January 15, 2009, 10:07 pm

Boogahz wrote:
Xyun wrote:Fox News and the WSJ (both of which happened to be owned by Rupert Murdock) give a platform to these idiots to spout their nonsense nationally. If you don't think that those people are presenters of news to a national audience then I guess that we just have to agree to disagree. The people in that clip, save Rush Limbaugh, are presenting news AND commentary on TV on a daily basis, and they leave it up to the audience to decipher which is which. I really don't care one way or the other about it, except that they used a work of fiction as support for a political argument/opinion.

My point is you will never ever see this happen on an unbiased or liberal news network. The standards are higher.
One of the three people are with Faux News.

What would you consider Dailykos?

What would you consider the New York Times?

You are right. Those are definitely comparable and you have proved me wrong. The left uses fictional movies to push their agenda onto the public in the same manner as the right. Those examples are proof of how those liberal sites are pushing a liberal agenda using fictional plot lines. You've proved me wrong, so there's no reason to continue this discussion.

Zaelath · Post by **Zaelath** » January 15, 2009, 11:12 pm

I think someone got bored of the discussion...

Nick · Post by **Nick** » January 15, 2009, 11:32 pm

You do realize that the WSJ is rated as THE most liberal newspaper?

This is fucking hilarious.

Kaldaur · Post by **Kaldaur** » January 15, 2009, 11:36 pm

I'm pretty sure that was a typo. I'm sure he meant another New York paper, the Times. There is no way that anyone can believe the WSJ is liberal. At all.

Boogahz · Post by **Boogahz** » January 16, 2009, 12:02 am

I made the mistake of stopping on Fox instead of BBC while swapping channels on XM once when Fox & Friends was on in the car. I thought my ears were going to shut themselves outside the car windows.

Kilmoll the Sexy · Post by **Kilmoll the Sexy** » January 16, 2009, 12:19 am

Kaldaur wrote:I'm pretty sure that was a typo. I'm sure he meant another New York paper, the Times. There is no way that anyone can believe the WSJ is liberal. At all.

A study by UCLA on liberal media bias showed the WSJ to be the most liberal print news outlet. If you have issues with it, click on the link I provided (and Boog also put it there for you turds to ignore) and take it up with their researchers.

Kilmoll the Sexy · Post by **Kilmoll the Sexy** » January 16, 2009, 12:23 am

In other news....just tonight...

http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/01/15/new.yo ... pstoryview

"There is a heroic pilot," said Gov. David Paterson. "We have had a miracle on 34th Street, I believe we now have a miracle on the Hudson."

Enjoy!

it reminds me of something else as well....how many mainstream outlets have posted Santa Claus tracking on their sites or broadcasts? I am fairly sure that count is well more than one

Boogahz · Post by **Boogahz** » January 16, 2009, 12:32 am

Kilmoll the Sexy wrote:In other news....just tonight...

http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/01/15/new.yo ... pstoryview

"There is a heroic pilot," said Gov. David Paterson. "We have had a miracle on 34th Street, I believe we now have a miracle on the Hudson."
Enjoy!

it reminds me of something else as well....how many mainstream outlets have posted Santa Claus tracking on their sites or broadcasts? I am fairly sure that count is well more than one

That doesn't count either, since Glenn Beck (from the Original Post) is on CNN.

Zaelath · Post by **Zaelath** » January 16, 2009, 12:38 am

Kilmoll the Sexy wrote:In other news....just tonight...

http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/01/15/new.yo ... pstoryview

"There is a heroic pilot," said Gov. David Paterson. "We have had a miracle on 34th Street, I believe we now have a miracle on the Hudson."
Enjoy!

it reminds me of something else as well....how many mainstream outlets have posted Santa Claus tracking on their sites or broadcasts? I am fairly sure that count is well more than one

The fact that it's a quote from a politician and religious on top of that, just goes to prove.... fuck it, you're dumber than a box of rocks.

Xyun · Post by **Xyun** » January 16, 2009, 1:57 am

Boogahz wrote:
Kilmoll the Sexy wrote:In other news....just tonight...

http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/01/15/new.yo ... pstoryview

"There is a heroic pilot," said Gov. David Paterson. "We have had a miracle on 34th Street, I believe we now have a miracle on the Hudson."
Enjoy!

it reminds me of something else as well....how many mainstream outlets have posted Santa Claus tracking on their sites or broadcasts? I am fairly sure that count is well more than one
That doesn't count either, since Glenn Beck (from the Original Post) is on CNN.

Glenn Beck no longer works for CNN, he now works for FOX. Who would've thought....

Drolgin Steingrinder · January 16, 2009, 3:34 am

miir wrote:
Most of you would consider The Daily Show as mainstream unbiased news.
Most of us consider the Daily Show as comedy...

The Daily Show is comedy. The onion - now that's news.

Ashur · Post by **Ashur** » January 16, 2009, 4:39 am

Zaelath wrote:I think someone got bored of the discussion...

I know I did!

Boogahz · Post by **Boogahz** » January 16, 2009, 11:09 am

Xyun wrote:
Conservatives attack animated penguin movie as global-warming propaganda

Cultural conservatives, led by CNN's Glenn Beck, Fox News' Neil Cavuto, and syndicated talk-show host Michael Medved, have all criticized Happy Feet, the new Warner Bros. animated movie about Mumble, the tap-dancing penguin, because they say the movie is laced with liberal overtones and tries to "indoctrinate" children.

Xyun wrote:
Boogahz wrote:That doesn't count either, since Glenn Beck (from the Original Post) is on CNN.
Glenn Beck no longer works for CNN, he now works for FOX. Who would've thought....

The point is in bold. I wouldn't know what station he is on, since I do not watch Faux news. I think it is amusing that you take me as some far right-wing nutjob for disagreeing with your label that all right and left wing commentators/news providors/media outlets are the same as every other nutjob that is on their side of the "political aisle." The fact that you seem to say that all conservatives are wackos for these three people's OPINION just shows how stupid it is to label any group. It would be like saying someone with a socialist idea is automatically a commie!

Spang · Post by **Spang** » January 16, 2009, 11:26 am

I get all my news from The Daily Show with John Stewart and the internet.

Xyun · Post by **Xyun** » January 16, 2009, 11:34 am

Boogahz wrote:
Xyun wrote:
Conservatives attack animated penguin movie as global-warming propaganda

Cultural conservatives, led by CNN's Glenn Beck, Fox News' Neil Cavuto, and syndicated talk-show host Michael Medved, have all criticized Happy Feet, the new Warner Bros. animated movie about Mumble, the tap-dancing penguin, because they say the movie is laced with liberal overtones and tries to "indoctrinate" children.

Xyun wrote:
Boogahz wrote:That doesn't count either, since Glenn Beck (from the Original Post) is on CNN.
Glenn Beck no longer works for CNN, he now works for FOX. Who would've thought....
The point is in bold. I wouldn't know what station he is on, since I do not watch Faux news. I think it is amusing that you take me as some far right-wing nutjob for disagreeing with your label that all right and left wing commentators/news providors/media outlets are the same as every other nutjob that is on their side of the "political aisle." The fact that you seem to say that all conservatives are wackos for these three people's OPINION just shows how stupid it is to label any group. It would be like saying someone with a socialist idea is automatically a commie!

For what it's worth I don't consider you a right wing nut job at all. In fact I don't even consider you right wing, since the nut jobs have pretty clearly commandeered the right wing. I was only trying to point that out.