Liberal Bias in the media! [Archive]

Swamphunter

06-26-2005, 06:10 PM

BIGBUCKSHOOTER, why do you have to sound so mad and upset and like you are looking for an arguement. Maybe you don't respect Racksie, but a lot of us do, including me. He has been an outstanding member here for almost 5 years, you've been here just 6 months. Guys here have come to know him quite well. You won't win the respect arguement like that. We members here are not the media on this forum and best as I remember no one here has ever said anything about this stuff recently enough to bring about this arguement (and sarcastic sounding I may add). Maybe I missed it though. http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif
I'm sure there are some members here that may agree with you, I am not one of them and neither are those that have responded so far. They are simply wondering what your research consisted of and it looks more like you want to argue than explain your research and findings. I am sure most guys here would be interested in seeing this. Take a few minutes and tell us how you came to determine this, I am curious myself.

buckee

06-26-2005, 06:45 PM

http://www.realtree.com/img/500/2141RTreferees.gif

Steven

06-26-2005, 07:05 PM

I don't want your respect, BBS. I don't need it. I'd rather not have it.

1. Durbin vs. Rove (http://www.mrc.org/cyberalerts/2005/cyb20050624_extra.asp)

2. Clinton vs. Gingrich (http://www.rightgrrl.com/99grrls/February/Lisa_P/hillary.shtml)

3. Media Bias Basics (http://www.mediaresearch.org/biasbasics/welcome.asp)

4. That Liberal Media (http://www.thatliberalmedia.com/archives/003966.html)

Ritzer

06-26-2005, 07:25 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I don't want your respect, BBS. I don't need it. I'd rather not have it

[/ QUOTE ]

good thing we dont all sound like a bunch of kids lol. ah ha ha ah. man this is my favorite part of the forum. im only 15 and its so funny to watch all you guys act like big babies. you argue over the stupidest stuff. lol man o man http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Steven

06-26-2005, 07:41 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't want your respect, BBS. I don't need it. I'd rather not have it

[/ QUOTE ]

good thing we dont all sound like a bunch of kids lol. ah ha ha ah. man this is my favorite part of the forum. im only 15 and its so funny to watch all you guys act like big babies. you argue over the stupidest stuff. lol man o man http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Way to put me in my place, sport. Now I'm going to cry.

Ritzer

06-26-2005, 07:52 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Way to put me in my place, sport. Now I'm going to cry.

[/ QUOTE ]

#1 my name is not sport "racksie".
#2 it was a freakin joke. so before you go cry try and bump your maturity up to the level of about my 10 year old sister.
#3 it was directed at everybody in the forum, i just used your quote as an example, show me where i said racksie you act like a kid. show me exactly where i said that because thats exactly what i thought i didnt. good call on that one. http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif

buckee

06-26-2005, 08:00 PM

I haven't done any research. I just observed for the last 52 years http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

The News Media is interested in one thing....ratings !!. They all want the biggest audience they can get. That's how they make their money and that's also how they make their decissions on how to report the news.. They swing like a pendulum in the ever changing wind, as far as taking sides here or there. It's the masses they want to please. It's good for business.
The very fact that they are like a pendulum in the wind, is what makes them have a liberal bias, because that is the same principle that makes a liberal, a Liberal. Pendulums in the wind, who would rather fall for everything than stand for something. http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/blush.gif

Steven

06-26-2005, 08:09 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Way to put me in my place, sport. Now I'm going to cry.

[/ QUOTE ]

#1 my name is not sport "racksie".
#2 it was a freakin joke. so before you go cry try and bump your maturity up to the level of about my 10 year old sister.
#3 it was directed at everybody in the forum, i just used your quote as an example, show me where i said racksie you act like a kid. show me exactly where i said that because thats exactly what i thought i didnt. good call on that one. http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

#1 I call kids sport when I don't know their name.
#2 My comment was obviously as much a joke as yours. And as poorly constructed as yours.
#3 If the comment wasn't directed at me, don't quote me. It may not have been directly stated, but it was implied. Why comment in the political forum if you have nothing to say? I'm sure there's 20 "which bow" or "which gun" posts to read.

buckee

06-26-2005, 08:20 PM

do I lock this post now or wait 10 minutes, just for the fun of it ?? http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Ritzer

06-26-2005, 08:21 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Why comment in the political forum if you have nothing to say

[/ QUOTE ]

because i can and i dont give what part of the forum it is.i can talk about politics in this post if i want,but i dnt have to. and no it was not implied. if i had implied it then it would have really been directed at you but not directly stated. so now that i put all those questions to shame, got anymore?

oh bye the way, using a quote that someone said does not mean that it was implied or directed at them. i used a quote from george washington in my worl history midterm. does that mean tht i was talking to him? yeah it doesnt.

sorry for hijacking this thread but when hes gonna tske a post that i was kiding around in and make sarcastic remarks, i aint just gonna "let it fly"

Steven

06-26-2005, 08:28 PM

Or we could take 2 posts that we both were in kidding and get a thread locked over it. Don't assume that I'm being serious because I'm not using smilies. Anytime I call someone 'sport' chances are I'm not being serious.

Anyway. How 'bout we get back on topic.. What was the topic again? OH yeah.. Mathews or Hoyt?

fisherguy

06-26-2005, 09:22 PM

[ QUOTE ]
do I lock this post now or wait 10 minutes, just for the fun of it ?? http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[/ QUOTE ]
Buckee do not lock this post! We are still waiting for BBS's response. http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Steven

06-26-2005, 09:36 PM

Don't give yourself too much credit BBS. You have still refused to present any information to support your argument like I have to disprove it.

fisherguy

06-26-2005, 09:45 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Don't give yourself too much credit BBS. You have still refused to present any information to support your argument like I have to disprove it.

[/ QUOTE ] In the entire time he has been here BBS has yet to backup anything he says. And BBS...you are the only one riled up...i get a good laugh every time you do this...make statements, and then do anything in your power to avoid backing them up.

horst

06-26-2005, 10:29 PM

BBS, why is it everytime you post in here you do so with absolutley no facts to back up any of your statements?It seems like we just had this discussion not to long ago.You read a book nobodies heard of and cant or wont print anything from it in here.Why do you waste everyones time like this?

slugshooter

06-26-2005, 10:37 PM

First off, I mentioned this last year during the campaign and got basically the same responses. The media is liberal, the media is evil, even though I can think of more "conservative" shows vs. "liberal" shows on TV and radio. Newspapers tend to be more liberal but I tell ya, the least fair and balanced network is FOX News, the other ones at least try to mix up their shows between liberal, conservative, and no , Hannity and Colmes is not "fair and balanced" when Sean Hannity runs his mouth 99% of the time, all Alan Colmes does is step in when Hannity gets to talking to a guest like a piece of garbage. As far as the topic at hand, hey, here's an example.
[ QUOTE ]

One month after formally kicking off his presidential campaign, Vice President Al Gore paddled down the Connecticut River in New Hampshire on July 22nd, 1999, spreading his green theme of protecting the environment and pausing for a photo op. His message was quickly drowned out, though, when the Washington Times' Bill Sammon reported that local authorities had granted Gore a special favor when they released nearly 4 billion gallons of water from a nearby dam into the drought-stricken river in order to keep the vice president's boat afloat.
The price tag on the spilled water was quickly calculated at $7 million. The implication was clear: In a clumsy abuse of power, Al Gore, a supposed friend of the environment, gladly wasted precious natural resources to stage-manage a political event.

Following the lead of the Washington Times, an unabashedly conservative outlet often hostile to Democrats, the rest of the mainstream press pounced, not only upbraiding Gore for his supposed hypocrisy but also suggesting that the campaign miscue was just the latest example of a foundering presidential run. The New York Times detailed the "mishap," the Washington Post ridiculed Gore's FOUR BILLION GALLONS FOR A PHOTO OP, Newsweek dubbed it the "photo op from ****," and CNN covered the "wave of criticism after floodgates are opened on a New Hampshire river to keep Al Gore afloat."

In retrospect, the most notable thing about the whole story was just how murky the facts were. Nobody from the Gore campaign asked for the water to be released. (Concerned about security, the Secret Service did.) As for the amount of water released, it was 500 million gallons, not 4 billion - a fact that Sammon reported a week later, long after other media ran with the original story. And the local utility company that operates the dam was already dumping millions of gallons of water into the parched Connecticut River every day. The routine release had simply been moved up a couple of hours to accommodate Gore's trip. The $7 million figure turned out to be completely inaccurate, since the water was not wasted. Instead, it passed through hydroelectric turbines and generated power that the utility company sold to other utilities.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you want to see for yourself what the news story percentages were between Gore and Bush in 2000, as well as some other data, then click on this link and scroll down to the graphs showing percentages for Bush and Gore, looks to me like Bush was better off in the media than Gore as far as positive stories to me.
http://www.brookings.edu/dybdocroot/GS/Projects/HessReport/week8.htm

As for the issue, does it really matter, at this point I could care less who got trashed more in the media 4 years ago and 4 years from now I'm not gonna care about last year. All we are doing is beating a dead horse here.

As far as Ritzer and Racksie, how old did you say you were Ritzer, 15?? And you talk to an adult that way, of course, I know for sure you wouldn't do it to his face because as soon as you did, I am pretty sure your daddy would have done slapped the ever loving crap out of you. Learn some respect for your elders or else you are gonna have a real rough time on here.

fisherguy

06-26-2005, 10:58 PM

This is pretty sad...slugshooter has to come in and post some sources to back up your posts BBS. I think you owe him a thank you.

Ritzer

06-26-2005, 11:01 PM

[ QUOTE ]
As far as Ritzer and Racksie, how old did you say you were Ritzer, 15?? And you talk to an adult that way, of course, I know for sure you wouldn't do it to his face because as soon as you did, I am pretty sure your daddy would have done slapped the ever loving crap out of you

[/ QUOTE ]

yes my daddy woulda slapped the crap out of me if i said that to his face. i have said worse to an adults face but we wont get into that. and back to the topic now, we are still waiting for factual proof from bigbuckshooter.
just give your website addresses and names of the boks you used so we can see the cited sources for ourselves.

wtnhunt

06-27-2005, 05:44 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Team Franken? And you expect an unbiased opinion? That's funny.

I really liked the part where you said we should just believe you without any refrences. I don't think you've earned that kind of respect around here.

[/ QUOTE ]

Could not agree more with what Racksie says here. Bigbuck, I dont hardly believe your research you have quoted is based on established facts. Too funny.

I have yet to read a post by Bigbuck that has any validity or factual basis to back up what he says.

LifeNRA

06-27-2005, 08:37 AM

[ QUOTE ]
First off, I mentioned this last year

[/ QUOTE ]

Right here is the problem!!! SOME PEOPLE JUST CANT LET GO!!!

The elections are over now get over it! SHEEEEEESH! But I will agree with the rest here, BBS once again you have no facts to back up your story!

As far as the kid busting on Racksie, I agree with Racksie! If you have nothing to add, then dont. If you dont understand then ask, someone will answer you! But to make a smart comment is just showing your age!

slugshooter

06-27-2005, 10:53 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
First off, I mentioned this last year

[/ QUOTE ]

Right here is the problem!!! SOME PEOPLE JUST CANT LET GO!!!

[/ QUOTE ]

What did you do, read the first sentence and stop. You are good at that though.

Texan_Til_I_Die

06-27-2005, 01:32 PM

Well, to address the original point of this thread - I don't think that there is an overwhelming conservative bias in the media. SOME outlets are definitely conservative, like the talk shows, and some are definitely liberal, like the New York Times (by their own admission (http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000968615) ). What I have a problem with are the outlets that claim to be unbiased, but present the news with a liberal slant. Three out of the four big networks qualify for that "distinction." And - this is important so pay attention - when you look at the total audience of the media, I would think that far more people are being exposed to the "liberal" parts of the media than are being exposed to the "conservative" parts.

Swamphunter

06-27-2005, 01:49 PM

BBS?? BBS....?? Your sources??

silence..... other than the sounds of chirping crickets in the air.

johnf

06-27-2005, 04:09 PM

[ QUOTE ]
it is not a web site it is a book by team Franken!!!! called lyers! O and by the way FISHERGUY I DId do my reseach so dont doubt the facts!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[/ QUOTE ]

It's easy to see that the media has a hard left bias. All you have to do is read the paper, watch tv, listen to the radio or surf the net. I agree 100% with that.

However, if your going to spout of numbers, you shouldn't feel offended that someone wants you to back them up. That's why when I give reference to something biblical that I usually give a book, chapter and verse. You will not gain the respect of those who disagree with you by throwing out stuff without backing it up.

There are a lot of guys on here that I don't agree with spiritually or politically, but I do have a lot of respect for them, and try to point out times when we do agree.

You get respect by giving it. http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif

LifeNRA

06-28-2005, 08:14 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
First off, I mentioned this last year

[/ QUOTE ]

Right here is the problem!!! SOME PEOPLE JUST CANT LET GO!!!

[/ QUOTE ]

What did you do, read the first sentence and stop. You are good at that though.

[/ QUOTE ]

No slug, I read every post! Enough already! You dems just cant let it go! Thats my point! I just used your first sentence as an example of what BBS is doing. You already mentioned this last year and he keeps the fire rolling! But then you do the same thing at times too!

Listen here, I read every post so dont tell me what I am good at!

You dems just keep crying about who got into the White House. It does get sickening after awhile!

Waaaaaaaaaaaaa! He did this and waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa! He did that! Lets move on! Its like beating a dead horse!
http://absolutewrite.com/forums/images/smilies/Emotedeadhorse.gif

I too am waiting for his sources! Come on slug help him out! LOL!

preacherman

06-28-2005, 09:25 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I haven't done any research. I just observed for the last 52 years http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Man, Buckee, you are old! http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/shocked.gif http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/smirk.gif http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif

stevebeilgard

06-28-2005, 10:12 PM

anyone who does not believe that there is a severe liberal bias in our news media, simply hasen't paid attention.

stevebeilgard

06-30-2005, 10:50 PM

think we can shorten bbs to just bs

LifeNRA

07-02-2005, 05:51 PM

Dont you have the book anymore? You had six days since you last posted. Stop messing around and give us the name of the book and the author!
http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

buckee

07-02-2005, 10:34 PM

The Best Democracy Money Can Buy
by Greg Palast

LifeNRA

07-02-2005, 11:31 PM

Oops!!! Sorry! BBS I didnt see that the first time! Thanks Buckee!!!
http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/crazy.gif http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

wtnhunt

07-03-2005, 06:46 AM

[ QUOTE ]
The Best Democracy Money Can Buy
by Greg Palast

[/ QUOTE ]

A quote about bias, by an author who is no doubt biased. Would be interesting to see just how the "research" was conducted to arrive at this conclusion.

oldksnarc

07-03-2005, 11:38 AM

There's bias in the media???? Really?? You're kidding??

fisherguy

07-03-2005, 05:35 PM

I think oldsnark was being sarcastic.

Steven

07-03-2005, 11:08 PM

[ QUOTE ]

1. Durbin vs. Rove (http://www.mrc.org/cyberalerts/2005/cyb20050624_extra.asp)

2. Clinton vs. Gingrich (http://www.rightgrrl.com/99grrls/February/Lisa_P/hillary.shtml)

3. Media Bias Basics (http://www.mediaresearch.org/biasbasics/welcome.asp)

4. That Liberal Media (http://www.thatliberalmedia.com/archives/003966.html)

[/ QUOTE ]

I posted this on 6/26 in this thread.

wtnhunt

07-04-2005, 08:18 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
There's bias in the media???? Really?? You're kidding??

[/ QUOTE ] where are the facts you guys blame me for not giveing facts, you arent giveing facts. i am making a compeling argument. i just want some facts that give me any reason that there is a liberal bias in the media!

[/ QUOTE ]

And you are giving supporting facts for your argument where??? This book you claim as facts is all opinions. Try and tell me an author of such a book does not have an unbiased opinion in writing something such as this. Come on, give me a break buddy.

Quit grasping, the election is over.

horst

07-04-2005, 09:18 AM

BBS, trying to get around the language editing feature isnt gonna get you anywhere but banned, keep it clean ok.

johnf

07-04-2005, 12:02 PM

[ QUOTE ]
every one who thinks the media has a liberal bias. Give me some evidence i dont want to here. "it just is". Give me some real facts!

[/ QUOTE ]

If I were color blind could you prove to me that the sky is blue.

I don't really think it is, it must be green.

Steven

07-04-2005, 01:23 PM

Hey, it looks like BBS is right. Greg Palast isn't biased at all. Not even a little.

Greg Palast (http://www.gregpalast.com/)

Deal with it BBS, EVERYBODY is biased in one way or another. It's human nature.

robk

07-04-2005, 03:33 PM

i see this has turned into nana na naaaaaaaaaa thread and i think the truth shall be heard lol. first off if franken wrote it it is a bias story to start with. franken is well known to turn the tables and does create all kinds of hoopla and lead people to the exact mudslinging you guys are doing now.
thr truth be said just listen to the news and i mean all of the news affiliates then go ask some o the troops about iraq and afghanistan. the story is completely different and it just goes that unless your a solider there and not a new caster as they will always go for the negative due to liberal factions that own the media stations and refuse to show the government right and will always be that way until the end of time.
when a person is mad atthe government the news will print it or bring in on air. if a person tries to rebute the negative it won't last long if shown once then dropped it has always been that way. vietnam was the first war they had on the news and now every news story out of iraq has been unfavorable toward the government i have yet to see a positive spin on our involvement in iraq or afghanistan but it is important and when listening to the news at night the main jest of it all is on iraq.
we are there and for a good reason and i know they say there were no weapons of mass destruction but they foudn all the materials there to build them and what happened with all of that many yrears of refusing to allow the inspectors in and what happened to those weapons of mass destruction they actually had. they haven't talked about the fact that electricitiy has found it;s way into most all of the homes that never hasd it before and the schools they have opened or the fact the money they siezed from saddam's bank accounts and put it directly back intot he economy how many stories did you see on that kind of work being done in iraq. also about the people who will stand in line and i am talking people with college educations and lawyers and doctors and other people of higher education standing in line just to fill sandbags for a measly few dollars to have to feed their family or when an attack would occur they would scatter but as soon as the attack was over the people were back in line and ready for work. sounds to me like we're doing some great good inthe country and i also feel that in a few years it will be solid footing and we can leave there and let htem fend for themselves. hteir government is in place and it is them getting attacked now not so much as the military but we still get hit but not as much and their police and their army that is building is starting to take over some of the work that needs to be done
rob k
just a thinkg or two the media won't really play with

wtnhunt

07-05-2005, 06:01 AM

[ QUOTE ]
you think that i am still mad about the election come on buddy that is in the past who gives a <font color="red"> dang </font> I Still dont understand why you think he is bias you are bias yourself because you think the book is all opinion. Man you sure now how to assume!!

[/ QUOTE ]

You brought this up. Sure I am biased as is anyone. I have my own opinions I have formed over the course of my life based on my own experiences .

Texan_Til_I_Die

07-05-2005, 02:06 PM

[ QUOTE ]
i got my facts from the book The best democracy money can buy. I cant rember who the author is but in the book it said that in the 2000 election that 56% of the time the press wrote negative things about Gore and only 43% of the time did they write negative storys on Bush. Now i got my info from the book and they got it from Columbia univerisy. Now if anyone has any question just post it k

[/ QUOTE ]

I wonder who/what qualifies as "the press" in those statistics? I usually think of it as newspapers, magazines, TV and radio news casts. I have a difficult time believing those outlets would INTENTIONALLY publish more negatives about Gore than about Bush. Of course, there's also the possibilty that there were just more bad things about Gore to start with, so naturally there would be more negative stories... http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Swamphunter

07-05-2005, 09:01 PM

[ QUOTE ]
do I lock this post now or wait 10 minutes, just for the fun of it ?? http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Made it a lot longer than I ever would have though buckee!! http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

wtnhunt

07-06-2005, 05:54 AM

[ QUOTE ]
You also have News orgainizaing like FOX News Washington Times New York times and talk radio all have conservitive bias.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
very funny you guys just have a hard time saying that you are wrong about the press haveing a liberal bias there is no BIAS!!!!!!!!!!!!

[/ QUOTE ]

So which is it Mr great debater http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/crazy.gif http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif

Texan_Til_I_Die

07-06-2005, 09:12 AM

[ QUOTE ]
very funny you guys just have a hard time saying that you are wrong about the press haveing a liberal bias there is no BIAS!!!!!!!!!!!!

[/ QUOTE ]

I really was being serious with my question. If you include all of the Internet bloggers and TALK (not news) radio, there very easily could be more negatives on Gore than on Bush. The difference is that those outlets don't claim to be unbiased, but the so called mainstream media does. And its in that supposedly unbiased mainstream media where you see the stories routinely slanted towards the left. And one other point - sometimes it's what doesn't get reported that gives me heartburn. Much of the good that the conservatives have accomplished never makes the news or it gets buried on page D32 of the New York Times. I have absolutely no problem with anyone, even the press, being liberal or conservative, just admit it when you are!

Texan_Til_I_Die

07-06-2005, 09:24 AM

BTW - If you want an example of liberal bias try this on for size....

July 2005
CNN anchor Carol Costello stated, during an interview with Representative Robin Hayes, that "there is no evidence that Saddam Hussein was connected in any way to al Qaeda." Later that same day, anchor Daryn Kagan said, "according to the record, the 9/11 Commission in its final report found no connection between al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein."

Both of those statements, made by CNN anchors, a supposedly "unbiased" media outlet, are false. (I'll be nice and not call them lies)

In fact, Thomas Kean, chairman of the 9/11 Commission, stated during a press conference that "there was no question in our minds that there was a relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda." Moreover, his Commission's report detailed several "friendly contacts" between Iraq and al Qaeda, and concluded only that there was no proof of Iraqi involvement in al Qaeda terrorist attacks against American interests.

If you would like, I can supply you many more instances of connections between Saddam Hussein's Iraq and al Qaeda...

Texan_Til_I_Die

07-06-2005, 01:52 PM

Well, let me try once more.

Example 1, the handling by the media of sexual misconduct allegations against Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas vs. the sexual misconduct allegations against President Bill Clinton.

Example 2, Newt Gingrich signs a book deal worth $400,000 and the media gets hysterical. Hillary Clinton signs a book deal worth $8,000,000 and the media sees nothing wrong with that.

Example 3, the media ridicules Vice President Dan Quayle for his spelling of "potato" as potatoe. Which, by the way is how the British typically spell it. The media doesn't say a word about Vice President Al Gore not knowing what state Minneapolis is in. He said it was in Missouri.

Need I go on? I can make this the "Neverending Deer Story" of the politics forum.

Steven

07-06-2005, 02:37 PM

Texan, he doesn't seem to care about our proof, all he cares about is 1 sentence from a book written by a liberal. I've posted a few links (one is the same as your Newt/Hillary story)- he doesn't care. I'm just dismissing his post as a red-face temper tantrum and from here on I'm officially ignoring him. He isn't worth my time. He is using the 'Nuh-Uhh' strategy and has probably already run to his mom crying asking 'why don't they believe me?!' I can get a more intelligent conversation out of my 13-year-old nephew.

Texan_Til_I_Die

07-06-2005, 06:23 PM

You're probably right, but hey, I'm always willing to make an effort to correct people's wrong impressions. If I get tired enough of it, I'll probably end up blowing off the thread too... http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

LifeNRA

07-06-2005, 07:50 PM

It seems to be pointless! Some people only have a one track mind! Besides, who cares anymore the elections are over. Some people I guess just haven't gotten over it yet!
http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif

Swamphunter

07-06-2005, 08:41 PM

[ QUOTE ]
It seems to be pointless! Some people only have a one track mind! Besides, who cares anymore the elections are over. Some people I guess just haven't gotten over it yet!
http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Yep, and President Bush is the man!!! For another 4 years!!!! Imagine if Kerry had got elected...who knows what would have happened to the sport we cherish. http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

buckee

07-06-2005, 09:45 PM

fisherguy

07-06-2005, 09:58 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
let me get on another tanget. when we got attacked on 9/11 americans went to there comfort zone. Republicans emedeatley went to there comfort zone attacking Bill Clinton! Well lets see here Republicans attack democarts for blameing america well lets see here isnt Bill Clinton an American???

[/ QUOTE ]
LMBO...you'll have to start another post now..You just changed the subject ...LOL http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[/ QUOTE ]
Buckee...is this a new rule? If so there are going to be a lot more threads in this room from now on. Staying on topic seems to be a challenge in here http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

buckee

07-06-2005, 10:23 PM

No sense of humour eh http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Steven

07-06-2005, 11:36 PM

Wow. I never believed in A.D.D. until reading BBS's posts. Now... maybe, just maybe.

LifeNRA

07-07-2005, 08:25 AM

[ QUOTE ]
let me get on another tanget. when we got attacked on 9/11 americans went to there comfort zone. Republicans emedeatley went to there comfort zone attacking Bill Clinton! Well lets see here Republicans attack democarts for blameing america well lets see here isnt Bill Clinton an American???

[/ QUOTE ]

Republicians and democrats ALWAYS attack each other! But clinton had his chance to take out bin laden during his terms. But he didnt want to listen too Oliver North. But this would have not changed anything, because another loser would have taken his place! Then again, maybe none of this would have happened too!

BTW who went into a comfort zone? Everyone was scared poopless, or in a state of shock when the towers went down! I dont see any comfort zones being used!
http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif once again at your words there BBS.

Texan_Til_I_Die

07-07-2005, 09:22 AM

[ QUOTE ]
let me get on another tanget. when we got attacked on 9/11 americans went to there comfort zone. Republicans emedeatley went to there comfort zone attacking Bill Clinton! Well lets see here Republicans attack democarts for blameing america well lets see here isnt Bill Clinton an American???

[/ QUOTE ]

I guess you could say that about me. On 9/11 I immediately went home, cleaned and loaded all of my guns and prepared myself mentally to go to war and do violence against anyone who attacked me or my neighbors. I was deadly serious then and I'm deadly serious about it today. The liberals, if they ever were serious, surely don't demonstrate that now.

Texan_Til_I_Die

07-07-2005, 11:45 AM

[ QUOTE ]

Bill CLinton built the Military tell me one thing Bush has done to build the military? ALL he has done is use it!

[/ QUOTE ]

From FrontPage Magazine (see their article if you want the original source for the figures)

[ QUOTE ]
Between 1992 and 2000 the Clinton Administration cut national defense forces by more than half-a-million personnel and $50 billion in inflation-adjusted dollars. As the Heritage Foundation reported, by the time President Bush took office the Army alone had lost four active divisions and two Reserve divisions. The number of total active personnel in the Air Force had decreased by nearly 30 percent. In the Navy, the total number of ships had decreased from around 393 ships in the fleet in 1992 to 316 today. Even the Marines had lost 22,000 personnel.

[/ QUOTE ]

That doesn't sound like much of a build up to me.

LifeNRA

07-07-2005, 02:46 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Bill CLinton built the Military tell me one thing Bush has done to build the military? ALL he has done is use it!

[/ QUOTE ]

He did!!!! Please!!!!!!!!! tell me you actually believe that!!!!!!!!!! LMBO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! He didnt do anything other than reduce it! OMG!!!!!!! It hurts!!!!!! Please!!!!!!!!! Dont say anymore!!!!!!! LMBO!!!!!!!!

wtnhunt

07-08-2005, 05:40 AM

You ignore the facts bigbuck. Our US military was dramatically reduced under Clinton. Some numbers are posted above.

horst

07-08-2005, 07:51 AM

This whole post just entered the catagory of being absurd.BBS, it was well documented tht Clinton made huge military cutbacks, I think he even gave a speech or two about it.Your obviously talking about things you know very little about, maybe this isnt a room you should play in http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

LifeNRA

07-08-2005, 08:43 AM

Maybe you need to wake up and smell the coffee! LMBO!!!! Still laughing!!!!!! LMBO!!!!!!!!

leatherneck

07-08-2005, 10:40 AM

I did not want to get into this, but as someone who has served under both Clinton and Bush, I can honestly tell you that Mr.Bush has done more good for the military than slick Willie ever did.
BBS you stated that all Bush has done is use the military. Well sir. in a way you are right. Mr. Bush has used us for what we are here for in the first place. To serve and protect the right for people like you to sit back in the comfort of youR SAFE and FREE home and complain about stuff that you obviously know nothing about. You seem to be an intelligant gentleman, and everyone is intitled their oppinion, but the numbers speak for themselfs.

Texan_Til_I_Die

07-08-2005, 11:36 AM

[ QUOTE ]

That doesn't sound like much of a build up to me.

[/ QUOTE ] Ya just dont want to admit that Clinton Put 100,000 more police on the ground. and had the biggest surplus the world has ever seen! Just ad mit it. You Republicans this is what you guys think it is either your way or your wrong!!!

[/ QUOTE ]
Not sure how we got from the military to the police, but if that's where we're heading fine.

Congress approved TEMPORARY funding, and Clinton signed into law, a bill that added about 70,000 new law enforcement positions. That funding has now expired.

And you did get one thing almost correct - if you don't believe in conservatism, then you are wrong. Republican or Democrat doesn't matter, it's conservative (right) or liberal (wrong) that counts.

LifeNRA

07-08-2005, 06:37 PM

[ QUOTE ]
To serve and protect the right for people like you to sit back in the comfort of youR SAFE and FREE home and complain about stuff that you obviously know nothing about. You seem to be an intelligant gentleman, and everyone is intitled their oppinion, but the numbers speak for themselfs.

[/ QUOTE ]

I for one would love to shake your hand and say, " THANK YOU FOR SERVING!!!" That THANK YOU GOES TO EVERY SERVICEMAN AND WOMAN!!!

johnf

07-09-2005, 12:21 AM

07-09-2005, 09:10 AM

I wonder if this post will be locked by a mod. And of course after we hear his viewpoint AGAIN. http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Texan_Til_I_Die

07-11-2005, 06:27 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
let me get on another tanget. when we got attacked on 9/11 americans went to there comfort zone. Republicans emedeatley went to there comfort zone attacking Bill Clinton! Well lets see here Republicans attack democarts for blameing america well lets see here isnt Bill Clinton an American???

[/ QUOTE ]

Near as I can remember they attacked Afganistan. Was Clinton there too?

[/ QUOTE ]

That's pretty good John, wish I'd said it! http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

OK, one more statistic, just for grins...

The Center for Media and Public Affairs says that 33% of the comments about Bush on the CBS, NBC and ABC evening news were positive so far this year. During his first term it was 29%.

During Bill Clinton’s 2 terms, it was 43 percent positive.

slugshooter

07-11-2005, 06:51 PM

[ QUOTE ]
But he didnt want to listen too Oliver North.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why should Clinton have listened to Oliver North, during the Clinton years Ollie North was an analyst, part of the media, out of the loop so to speak, of military intelligence, since Ollie was so good at lying about the Iran-Contra Scandal, and since he was Reagans NSA during the Soviet-Afghanistan brouhaha, I guess he would know about Bin Ladens capabilities, since he most likely authorized the transfer of weapons and training to our former ally Osama Bin Laden in fighting the Soviets, heck, I am sure he met with Saddam Hussein at some point in time, probably when Rumsfeld was selling weapons to Saddam, or maybe when Saddam was getting the ket to the City of Detroit. Who can keep track anyways?

slugshooter

07-11-2005, 06:57 PM

[ QUOTE ]
You ignore the facts bigbuck. Our US military was dramatically reduced under Clinton. Some numbers are posted above.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, Clinton cut people numbers, I'll admit that, he also cut ship numbers, the stats don't lie, but the positions he cut were non-essential, jobs were consolidated, obsolete ships were dry docked. BUT, most of the advanced weaponry used today in Iraq and Afghanistan were the direct result of funding during the Clinton years, these new armored fighting vehicles-Clinton, new bombs-Clinton, new equipment-Clinton. There is the negative(so to speak) of reducing troop numbers, and the positive of having advanced weaponry to take the place of human soldiers. Me personally, I would rather have unmanned spy drones and laser guided missiles to reduce the possibilty of excessive human casualties, than risking the loss of two or three times the amount we have lost now because every operation must be carried out by troop patrols.