Here's a shocker: A Politician lied

uneverno

uneverno

Active Member
Originally Posted by reefraff
http:///forum/post/3041400
There is a major difference between between being lazy and not wasting your time.
Fair enough - there is a choice to be made.
The trouble I have is in determining the difference between the two anymore. I generally find that all "reporting" is crap. It's sloppy and incomplete - ever watch the news on a subject you're well acquainted with? What a steaming pile of errors and omissions, IME. My conclusion has to be that what I don't know about is reported on no more thoroughly, so it's entirely up to me to figure it out.
That's why I watch both MSNBC and FOX. They both have an agenda, and the truth lies somewhere in between what each of them reports. Sorta. They're both still the lapdogs of their corporate masters, MSNBC being a wholly owned subsidiary of Viacom, and FOX being owned by Rupert Murdoch and the Saudi caliphate, (additional alphabet channels correspondingly corrupt.)
Wolfie is no more a journalist than O'Really? is. They're both good at reading the teleprompter. That's all.
If you can point me to an actually objective source (and I'm not being in the least facetious), I'm all ears.
 
oscardeuce

oscardeuce

Active Member
Originally Posted by uneverno
http:///forum/post/3044496
Fair enough - there is a choice to be made.
The trouble I have is in determining the difference between the two anymore. I generally find that all "reporting" is crap. It's sloppy and incomplete - ever watch the news on a subject you're well acquainted with? What a steaming pile of errors and omissions, IME. My conclusion has to be that what I don't know about is reported on no more thoroughly, so it's entirely up to me to figure it out.
That's why I watch both MSNBC and FOX. They both have an agenda, and the truth lies somewhere in between what each of them reports. Sorta. They're both still the lapdogs of their corporate masters, MSNBC being a wholly owned subsidiary of Viacom, and FOX being owned by Rupert Murdoch and the Saudi caliphate, (additional alphabet channels correspondingly corrupt.)
Wolfie is no more a journalist than O'Really? is. They're both good at reading the teleprompter. That's all.
If you can point me to an actually objective source (and I'm not being in the least facetious), I'm all ears.

It seems Wolf advertises himself as a journalist while O'Reilly does not.
From the CNN web site
"The Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer is the command center for breaking news, politics and extraordinary reports from around the world"
From Fox
"THE #1 CABLE NEWS TALK SHOW FEATURING BILL O'REILLY"
One is "news" and the other "talk".
There is a difference.
 
stdreb27

stdreb27

Active Member
Originally Posted by oscardeuce
http:///forum/post/3045534
It seems Wolf advertises himself as a journalist while O'Reilly does not.
From the CNN web site
"The Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer is the command center for breaking news, politics and extraordinary reports from around the world"
From Fox
"THE #1 CABLE NEWS TALK SHOW FEATURING BILL O'REILLY"
One is "news" and the other "talk".
There is a difference.
That is the key difference, fox does not claim neutrality with their talk show hosts. Oreilly, and hannity. They clearly say they are saying their opinion.
The other networks cnn msnbc and whatever, have friggen democrat campainers or democrat beaurocrats (hello George Robert Stephanopoulos) as a neutral "news" man.
 
uneverno

uneverno

Active Member
Fair enough, however there is only a subtle difference between declaration and lack of admission.
Fox continually touts itself as Americas #1 cable NEWS network, yet all their prime time shows are infotainment.
O'Really repeatedly touts his as America's #1 cable NEWS show and brow beats us with what lack of credentials he has in order to appear more credible.
Fox also doesn't announce that a significant share of their ownership is Saudi.
Regardless of our respective political bents, we are discussing this intelligently.
Do you think most Americans are able to put that fine a point on it?
 
stdreb27

stdreb27

Active Member
Originally Posted by uneverno
http:///forum/post/3045623
Fair enough, however there is only a subtle difference between declaration and lack of admission.
Fox continually touts itself as Americas #1 cable NEWS network, yet all their prime time shows are infotainment.
O'Really repeatedly touts his as America's #1 cable NEWS show and brow beats us with what lack of credentials he has in order to appear more credible.
Fox also doesn't announce that a significant share of their ownership is Saudi.
Regardless of our respective political bents, we are discussing this intelligently.
Do you think most Americans are able to put that fine a point on it?
I think you're incorporating different lines. Just because they get counted as news by the ratings system, being that fox news is a cable news channel, and Oreilly is a show on the cable news network. Doesn't mean when they say news Oreilly is saying that he is not incorporating his opinion into what he is presenting. It is quite the opposite. The whole thrust of the show is the news through the eyes of Bill O'reilly. And that is made abundantly clear.
Plus if you've ever watched him, he is hardly a conservative. He beats to his own drum.
And the same is done with Hannity. They even call one of his shows Hannity's America. I dunno how you could get more clear that that.
If American's aren't smart enough to figure it out then tough.
 
uneverno

uneverno

Active Member
I watch the Fox shows on a regular basis - I am a follower of Sun Tzu.
I'm not mixing metaphores at all. It's quite clear to me that what's passed off as News is propaganda. (And that goes for MSNBC, AB/NB C, CBS, Clear Channel, whoever.) Some fuzz the lines better than others, but make no mistake, ALL of them fuzz the lines.
For as free as we fantasize the American media to be, the choices in media outlets we have are limited to the journalistic equivalent of Pravda and Isvestia. Not as much in terms of party line so much as content. It's a very subtle distinction. The party line that's being upheld is the corporate party's, which the news Corporations are all wholly owned subsidiaries of.
None of the outlets is truly independent. They are all beholden to their masters, which is evident in what gets reported. Sure, the slant/spin of a given story may vary slightly from network to network (O'Really says yourahrah when Blitzed says boo, or vice versa), but what's reported on is essentially the same.
That those distinctions are lost on most Americans goes a long way toward explaining the state of the Nation, to me.
 
stdreb27

stdreb27

Active Member
Originally Posted by uneverno
http:///forum/post/3045658
I watch the Fox shows on a regular basis - I am a follower of Sun Tzu.

I'm not mixing metaphores at all. It's quite clear to me that what's passed off as News is propaganda. (And that goes for MSNBC, AB/NB C, CBS, Clear Channel, whoever.) Some fuzz the lines better than others, but make no mistake, ALL of them fuzz the lines.
For as free as we fantasize the American media to be, the choices in media outlets we have are limited to the journalistic equivalent of Pravda and Isvestia. Not as much in terms of party line so much as content. It's a very subtle distinction. The party line that's being upheld is the corporate party's, which the news Corporations are all wholly owned subsidiaries of.
None of the outlets is truly independent. They are all beholden to their masters, which is evident in what gets reported. Sure, the slant/spin of a given story may vary slightly from network to network (O'Really says yourahrah when Blitzed says boo, or vice versa), but what's reported on is essentially the same.
That those distinctions are lost on most Americans goes a long way toward explaining the state of the Nation, to me.
Sure it is impossible to not put a slant on things. And yellow journalism is nothing new. But in all honestly, I find fox's actual news far closer to the center than anything else out there.
 
oscardeuce

oscardeuce

Active Member
Originally Posted by stdreb27
http:///forum/post/3045638
If American's aren't smart enough to figure it out then tough.
True, but there is no test to take before you vote. May think that what they see on NBS, CBS is the Gospel according to Dan. If Dan says "Bush bad" then Bush is bad, and they vote accordingly.
If you are voting for someone because you actually agree with their position, then OK, but for the "sheep" out there followng the herd that is the major media, that weakens our country.
They also blindly follow the liars like Mrs Pelosi just becasue if the letter behind her name are just as gullible and really don't deserve their vote.
For Mrs Pelosi to blame the CIA is the lowest. Either she lied, or she slept through the hearings. Both are equally bad when it comes to the defense of our nation, the first responsibility laid out in the Constitution
 
uneverno

uneverno

Active Member
Originally Posted by oscardeuce
http:///forum/post/3045776
True, but there is no test to take before you vote.
Would that there were a test - (if even just in English comprehension.)
CA has a vote tomorrow which will make or break our seriously troubled State economy. Per the "news" voter interest is extremely low.
I have to wonder if that's 'cuz the news said so, or if it's because they've completely ignored reporting on the ballot measures themselves. In doing so we the people have been left to decide based on commercials, or actually reading the texts of the measures. Hmmm. Who will win - sound bite or reading, sound bite, reading?
Here is an example of where I appreciate so called "right wing radio" for more than comic relief. They have actually addressed the issues. Purely from their perspective mind you, but broached the subject nonetheless. That's more than I can say for the rest of the media.
For Mrs Pelosi to blame the CIA is the lowest. Either she lied, or she slept through the hearings. Both are equally bad when it comes to the defense of our nation, the first responsibility laid out in the Constitution
I don't believe that the CIA is above lying themselves, that being their business. In this instance however, I suffer from no delusions that Ms. Pelosi is telling the truth. As such, she is in violation of the Oath of Office she swore to and derelict in her duties as a duly elected representative. Not only that, but she misrepresented her position by lying to we the people in order to secure re-election.
For obviously different reasons, I'm as pissed at her as you are.

Unfortunately, politics is a game of expedience, not of principle.
 
darthtang aw

darthtang aw

Active Member
Lying to or about congress is a federal offense, I doubt the cia is lying about this. Open an investigation either way. In the end, the cia members will either be charged or Pelosi will be exposed.....regardless the investigation MUST be done.
 
uneverno

uneverno

Active Member
Originally Posted by oscardeuce
http:///forum/post/3045864
Why do we the people put up with this?
Yeah well, if she were my representative, I'da voted her out Chicago style.
I'll say it again, give me an honest politician over one I agree with.
Crap. Now we're in agreement. I don't know if I can live with myself anymore.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top