WHITE HOUSE excludes FOX News (press censorship)
SFTVratings
tried to change the rules and exclude FOX. The other 4 remaining
networks responded by saying, "Either we are all included, or none
will participate." The White House backed down.
More details here, from 0:20 to 1:10
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GmAsIswHueo
This video also makes comment about President Richard Nixon who tried
to shut-out/censor the Washington Times for unraveling the Watergate
scandal. Mkes you wonder what the president was trying to hide?
clouddreamer
> All 5 networks are part of the Presidential press pool, but Obama
> tried to change the rules and exclude FOX. The other 4 remaining
> networks responded by saying, "Either we are all included, or none
> will participate." The White House backed down.
Fox signaled their exclusion by refusing to broadcast one of his new
conferences.
>
> This video also makes comment about President Richard Nixon who tried
> to shut-out/censor the Washington Times for unraveling the Watergate
> scandal. Mkes you wonder what the president was trying to hide?
>
Oh fer god's sake.
..
FDR
Makes you wonder what Cheney was hiding when he gave an exclsuive
interview with Fox but no other major news outlet.
I see it's ok for Cheney, just not Obama.
Hal E
>
> I see it's ok for Cheney, just not Obama.
A one-on-one interview is different than the press pool.
All Presidents have given exclusive interviews; I can't think of any
(Bush included)
who shut a legitimate news service out of the press pool. And yes,
whether we like it or not, Fox News is
a legitimate news service.
Mark Lindamood
> All 5 networks are part of the Presidential press pool, but Obama
> tried to change the rules and exclude FOX. The other 4 remaining
> networks responded by saying, "Either we are all included, or none
> will participate." The White House backed down.
>
>
> This video also makes comment about President Richard Nixon who tried
> to shut-out/censor the Washington Times for unraveling the Watergate
> scandal. Mkes you wonder what the president was trying to hide?
I'm hopeful that this means the President's "divide-and-conquer"
tactics aren't going to work anymore, at least not on the press. Of
course this incident just could mean that the administration is going
to have to become sneakier about how it uses the press.
FDR
Oh what legitimate news service did Jeff Gannon work for?
Taylor
> All 5 networks are part of the Presidential press pool, but Obama
> tried to change the rules and exclude FOX. The other 4 remaining
> networks responded by saying, "Either we are all included, or none
> will participate." The White House backed down.
>
>
> This video also makes comment about President Richard Nixon who tried
> to shut-out/censor the Washington Times for unraveling the Watergate
> scandal. Mkes you wonder what the president was trying to hide?
*coughs* http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YRx5ethd8JU *coughs*
Mark Lindamood
What is a selectively-edited, anonymously-assembled YouTube
compilation supposed to prove? At least Fox's journalists and
commentators publicly stand behind their own words.
SFTV_troy
> SFTVratings wrote:
>
>
> > This video also makes comment about President Richard Nixon who tried
> > to shut-out/censor the Washington Times for unraveling the Watergate
> > scandal. Mkes you wonder what the president was trying to hide?
>
> Makes you wonder what Cheney was hiding when he gave an exclsuive
> interview with Fox...I see it's ok for Cheney, just not Obama.
Cheney's not a government official. He's a private citizen and can
interview anybody he feels like interviewing with (or not). But Obama
on the other hand IS on the taxpayer payroll. Different rules apply
for people sucking money from the American proletariat's wallets.
SFTV_troy
>
> *coughs*http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YRx5ethd8JU*coughs*
MSNBC and CNN also have opinion shows (Rachel Maddow, communist at
large, ring a bell)? In fact the Glenn Beck show was originally not
on FOX - it was on CNN.
It's extremely hypocritical to say FOX can't have opinion shows, but
the other cable new channels can.
FDR
Actually O'Reilly hasn't. He is directly quoted then denies he sais it.
Michael Coburn
I agree whole heartedly! So where is the compilation from the other
side. What you would find in a heads up comparison video from the
rightards is that on MSNBC the OPINIONS appear on the OPINION programs
and not on the NEWS programs. And in the rest of the NEWS outlet firms,
the opinion pieces are even MORE isolated from the NEWS segments.
--
"Those are my opinions and you can't have em" -- Bart Simpson
Michael Coburn
Fox is _NOT_ a legitimate news service and never has been.
Nickname unavailable
> All 5 networks are part of the Presidential press pool, but Obama
> tried to change the rules and exclude FOX. The other 4 remaining
> networks responded by saying, "Either we are all included, or none
> will participate." The White House backed down.
>
>
> This video also makes comment about President Richard Nixon who tried
> to shut-out/censor the Washington Times for unraveling the Watergate
> scandal. Mkes you wonder what the president was trying to hide?
as they should. if the conservative press had been muzzeled in
germany from 1930-1933, maybe there would have been no hitler.
Jax
> All 5 networks are part of the Presidential press pool, but Obama
> tried to change the rules and exclude FOX. The other 4 remaining
> networks responded by saying, "Either we are all included, or none
> will participate." The White House backed down.
>
>
> This video also makes comment about President Richard Nixon who tried
> to shut-out/censor the Washington Times for unraveling the Watergate
> scandal. Mkes you wonder what the president was trying to hide?
Stop lying.
FDR
What is Dick afraid of if he could only speak on Fox?
clouddreamer
He was afraid of a real question.
..
Clave
news:A-CdnR6lkZ7gBH7X...@giganews.com...
Indeed -- Maddow's had a standing invitation for him to appear on her show
for a long time.
Jim
Volfie999
> tried to change the rules and exclude FOX. The other 4 remaining
> networks responded by saying, "Either we are all included, or none
> will participate." The White House backed down.
>
>
> This video also makes comment about President Richard Nixon who tried
> to shut-out/censor the Washington Times for unraveling the Watergate
> scandal. Mkes you wonder what the president was trying to hide?
That would be shocking if true!
Fortunately, it's not. The sooner you recognize your kool-aid mixers
for what they are, the sooner we can move forward as a nation.
Also, just FYI, but if you're going to make things up, at least check
what can be easily checked: it was the Washington *Post* that did all
the stories on Watergate, not the Washington Times. And the Wash.
Times didn't even start publishing until 1982, just a few years after
Watergate.
Not Sure
Sure it is. And it's monstrously successful, despite the howling and
crying from the dipshit left who can't stand that one media outlet out
of the hundreds in this country doesn't slobknob the Messiah 24/7.
Continue sobbing :)
>
> --
> "Those are my opinions and you can't have em" -- Bart Simpson- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Not Sure
You mean like Obama is, of Fox? LOL, next time, try not arguing our
point for us so successfully, dipshit.
>
> ..- Hide quoted text -
Sanders Kaufman
news:7d3e77f2-3263-4540...@o36g2000vbl.googlegroups.com...
> All Presidents have given exclusive interviews; I can't think of any
> (Bush included)
> who shut a legitimate news service out of the press pool. And yes,
> whether we like it or not, Fox News is a legitimate news service.
No - they are not a news service; they're just a PR firm.
News services have ethical obligations to report all sides of an issue.
This publicity firm only presents the Republican position.
Not Sure
> On Sat, 24 Oct 2009 16:56:11 -0700, SFTV_troy wrote:
> > On Oct 24, 6:21 pm, Taylor <lukebenw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> *coughs*http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YRx5ethd8JU*coughs*
>
> > MSNBC and CNN also have opinion shows (Rachel Maddow, communist at
> > large, ring a bell)? In fact the Glenn Beck show was originally not on
> > FOX - it was on CNN.
>
> > It's extremely hypocritical to say FOX can't have opinion shows, but the
> > other cable new channels can.
>
> I agree whole heartedly! So where is the compilation from the other
> side. What you would find in a heads up comparison video from the
> rightards is that on MSNBC the OPINIONS appear on the OPINION programs
> and not on the NEWS programs.
No they don't. But continue capitalizing random words because you
can't stand how The Anointed OneTM screwed the pooch on this one :)
Sanders Kaufman
news:aefaf667-5e6f-4b12...@y10g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> I'm hopeful that this means the President's "divide-and-conquer"
> tactics aren't going to work anymore, at least not on the press.
Throwing Fox out of the newsroom was not divisive.
It eliminated a divisive factor.
This reminds me of when you Republican pieces of shit used to say that the
absence of nukes in Iraq was proof that Iraq had nukes.
Sanders Kaufman
news:cc898c23-9ef8-4418...@o21g2000vbl.googlegroups.com...
> Sure it is. And it's monstrously successful, despite the howling and
> crying from the dipshit left who can't stand that one media outlet out
> of the hundreds in this country doesn't slobknob the Messiah 24/7.
> Continue sobbing :)
It's really creepy to see anti-Obama creeps referring to the President as if
he were some metaphysical creature.
Religious people are already sick, twisted individuals.
They get a lot worse when garbage like you tries to play into their demonic
fears - to get them to fight your fight for you.
You just see them as a weapon to point at the American people.
Why do you hate America so much that you would encourage religious nuts to
harm this country?
Do you really think that hating America will make your own life any better -
or have you given up on that goal already?
Sanders Kaufman
> What is a selectively-edited, anonymously-assembled YouTube
> compilation supposed to prove? At least Fox's journalists and
> commentators publicly stand behind their own words.
You mean like when Glenn Beck called the president a racist, apologized for
calling the president a racist, and then called him a racist again?
Yeah - Republicans are really men of honor, aren't they?
Mark Lindamood
> "Mark Lindamood" <jazzyjackki...@gmail.com> wrote in message
Iraq? Try to stay on the subject, won't you?
You seem to misunderstand what "divide and conquer" means. If the rest
of the press fails to back up Fox, then they will have let the
President dictate to them what "legitimate" news is. Which will that
the rest of the press won't hold the Obama administration to account
for anything it does after Fox has become "delegitimatized".
trotsky
To the balloon boy family they are.
trotsky
Excellent turdsmanship.
Beam Me Up Scotty
Sanders Kaufman
> You seem to misunderstand what "divide and conquer" means. If the rest
> of the press fails to back up Fox, then they will have let the
> President dictate to them what "legitimate" news is.
What is it about you Republicans that you think somebody can "dictate what
legitimate news is"?
Regardless of what you may have heard at church or a white power rally,
nobody can "dictate what legitimate news is".
Sanders Kaufman
message news:4ae480e7$0$29568$ec3e...@unlimited.usenetmonster.com...
> I'm guessing that family is an MSNBC family.
You're wrong about that.
They were hoping to get publicity for a reality show they were pitching....
to Fox.
The idea was that they were an ordinary, conservative family - not very
wealthy, but having a lot of fun.
One of the reasons their first-pitch was shot down was because, as Fox told
them, nobody knew who they were.
That's why the family pulled this publicity stunt - to get their own show...
on Fox.
Jax
Stop lying.
Jax
Stop lying.
Stop covering the ass of those who do lie.
Stop being a fucking terrorist.
Mark Lindamood
> "Mark Lindamood" <jazzyjackki...@gmail.com> wrote in message
Tell the Obama administration. They are the ones who can't seem to
tolerate anything other than a fawning press.
Jax
> On Oct 24, 5:11 pm, Michael Coburn <mik...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Sat, 24 Oct 2009 16:56:11 -0700, SFTV_troy wrote:
> > > On Oct 24, 6:21 pm, Taylor <lukebenw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >> *coughs*http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YRx5ethd8JU*coughs*
>
> > > MSNBC and CNN also have opinion shows (Rachel Maddow, communist at
> > > large, ring a bell)? In fact the Glenn Beck show was originally not on
> > > FOX - it was on CNN.
>
> > > It's extremely hypocritical to say FOX can't have opinion shows, but the
> > > other cable new channels can.
>
> > I agree whole heartedly! So where is the compilation from the other
> > side. What you would find in a heads up comparison video from the
> > rightards is that on MSNBC the OPINIONS appear on the OPINION programs
> > and not on the NEWS programs.
>
> No they don't. But continue capitalizing random words because you
> can't stand how The Anointed OneTM screwed the pooch on this one :)
>
>>
Stop. Fucking. Lying.
Sanders Kaufman
> Tell the Obama administration. They are the ones who can't seem to
> tolerate anything other than a fawning press.
Well, sure it "seems" that way... to you.
But that's just because of your own sick, twisted mind - and has nothing to
do with what Obama does or does not do.
There's nothing anyone can do about your funhouse mirror perspective on
life.
Mark Lindamood
> "Mark Lindamood" <jazzyjackki...@gmail.com> wrote in message
If that were true you'd make your point by providing examples of
stories from other networks which have upset the Obama administration.
Instead of, y'know, continually trying to bait me with personal
attacks.
Until you can respond to me as though you were an adult, I have
nothing else to say to you.
Ed Stasiak
>
> It's really creepy to see anti-Obama creeps referring to the
> President as if he were some metaphysical creature.
And when the Left referred to Bush as "Chimpy McHitler"?
Sanders Kaufman
> On Oct 25, 11:46 am, "Sanders Kaufman" <bu...@kaufman.net> wrote:
> Until you can respond to me as though you were an adult, I have
> nothing else to say to you.
If you want to be treated like an adult, you won't get it by defending the
Republican party.
Sanders Kaufman
news:42375099-0917-44eb...@o13g2000vbl.googlegroups.com...
Well, that's just good fun - because nobody worships chimps.
But when you team up with religious extremists and try to convince them that
the President of the United States is a mystical demon - they take that shit
SERIOUSLY!
It's a character issue - and the fact that you would launch these people as
a weapon against Americans shows that you have a real slime-ball character.
Thanatos
"Sanders Kaufman" <bu...@kaufman.net> wrote:
> "Ed Stasiak" <esta...@att.net> wrote in message
> news:42375099-0917-44eb...@o13g2000vbl.googlegroups.com...
> >> Sanders Kaufman
> >>
> >> It's really creepy to see anti-Obama creeps referring to the
> >> President as if he were some metaphysical creature.
> >
> > And when the Left referred to Bush as "Chimpy McHitler"?
>
> Well, that's just good fun
Of course. It's always "different" when the Left is caught doing the
very things of which they complain.
Just like the hysterical meltdown the Left had this summer when people
showed up at those town hall meetings with posters comparing Obama to
Hitler. They were so indignant about how this "crosses a line" and no
matter what you think of Obama, you should respect the office of the
president.
I guess the last eight years just slipped their mind-- you know, the
near-decade full of anti-war protesters that showed up wherever Bush
went with posters and puppets of Bush compared to Hitler, Bush *as*
Hitler, Bush wearing a Nazi uniform, etc.
And the few times this was pointed out to them, the response was always
"well, that's different". It's the Liberal Double Standard in full
flower.
SFTV_troy
> SFTV_troy wrote:
>
>
>
>
> > Cheney's not a government official. He's a private citizen and can
> > interview anybody he feels like interviewing with (or not). But Obama
> > on the other hand IS on the taxpayer payroll. Different rules apply
> > for people sucking money from the American proletariat's wallet
>
> What is Dick afraid of if he could only speak on Fox?
No idea. Maybe you should email him or his staff and ask. Frankly
don't care, because we threw both him and Dispshit out of office, so
let's focus on the PRESENT not the past. Cheney/Bush no longer have
power to make my life shitty. Obama and his lackeys do.
trotsky
> In article <wp2Fm.48726$Lw1....@newsfe03.iad>,
> "Sanders Kaufman" <bu...@kaufman.net> wrote:
>
>> "Ed Stasiak" <esta...@att.net> wrote in message
>> news:42375099-0917-44eb...@o13g2000vbl.googlegroups.com...
>>>> Sanders Kaufman
>>>>
>>>> It's really creepy to see anti-Obama creeps referring to the
>>>> President as if he were some metaphysical creature.
>>> And when the Left referred to Bush as "Chimpy McHitler"?
>> Well, that's just good fun
>
> Of course. It's always "different" when the Left is caught doing the
> very things of which they complain.
>
> Just like the hysterical meltdown the Left had this summer when people
> showed up at those town hall meetings with posters comparing Obama to
> Hitler.
Can you describe the similarities that Obama has to Hitler?
Didn't think so.
trotsky
Is he one of those whopping 20% that still claims to be a Repug?
FDR
Well if somebody is going to accuser the present President to be hiding
something by not going on Fox, I'd like to know their answer to why
Cheney chose only one network and not the many others. One could say he
was and is hiding something then.
trotsky
I think what Obama is trying to hide is his contempt for Roger Ailes and
his band of lying assholes.
Sanders Kaufman
news:1E4Fm.107645$la3.98120@attbi_s22...
>> If you want to be treated like an adult, you won't get it by defending
>> the Republican party.
>
> Is he one of those whopping 20% that still claims to be a Repug?
No, like most Republican supporters, he's ashamed to actually ADMIT to it.
Sanders Kaufman
news:atropos-0B4EED...@news-wc.giganews.com...
> And the few times this was pointed out to them, the response was always
> "well, that's different". It's the Liberal Double Standard in full
> flower.
Actually, that never happened.
There is no guy named "the left" and you never had any such conversation
with said imaginary character.
What you're doing here is called "anthromorphization".
It's when somoene (usually not older than a toddler) assigns human
characteristics to things - like a coffee table or "the left".
It's a trait that most humans shed in early childhood - but which
Republicans like you NEVER seemed to have gotten over.
In it's most severe form, the individual who is doing the anthromorphizing
takes it so far that they actually start imagining conversations with the
object - like when a child talks to their dolls, and relays the
conversations to mom and dad later on.
That's what you've done here. You're quoting a statement that was not made,
and attributing it to a person that does not exist - and the crazy part is
that you don't even see how bat-shit crazy that is!
Fox News does it, too.
They often make up such conversations, quoting "the left" as saying things
that were never said by anyone... except the perhaps the newscaster himself.
That's one of the things I like about MSNBC over Fox.
At least when MSNBC quotes someone - It's an actual person.
Thanatos
"Sanders Kaufman" <bu...@kaufman.net> wrote:
> "Thanatos" <atr...@mac.com> wrote in message
> news:atropos-0B4EED...@news-wc.giganews.com...
>
> > And the few times this was pointed out to them, the response was always
> > "well, that's different". It's the Liberal Double Standard in full
> > flower.
>
> Actually, that never happened. There is no guy named "the left"
> and you never had any such conversation with said imaginary character.
I never said *I* had this conversation with anyone, genius. Pay closer
attention to what you read. I was commenting on the few times it was
pointed out to leftist political commentators on various news shows and
what their typical response consisted of.
> What you're doing here is called "anthromorphization".
> It's when somoene (usually not older than a toddler) assigns human
> characteristics to things - like a coffee table or "the left".
I did no such thing, lackbrain, which makes what you just did above a
classic example of a strawman argument.
> It's a trait that most humans shed in early childhood - but which
> Republicans like you NEVER seemed to have gotten over.
And there you are assuming I'm a Republican just because I criticized
the Left.
Apparently you're not free from error yourself.
Sanders Kaufman
> In article <svnFm.76171$lR3....@newsfe25.iad>,
>> Actually, that never happened. There is no guy named "the left"
>> and you never had any such conversation with said imaginary character.
>
> I never said *I* had this conversation with anyone, genius. Pay closer
So - you think that the conversation you made up with the imaginary person
happened to someone else?
>> It's a trait that most humans shed in early childhood - but which
>> Republicans like you NEVER seemed to have gotten over.
>
> And there you are assuming I'm a Republican just because I criticized
> the Left.
Don't blame me - YOU picked your side.
I know you hate to think of yourself as standing FOR anything.
But as long as you keep repeating Republican propaganda, you'll continue to
be a Republican - whether you like to think of yourself as one, or not.
FDR
> In article <svnFm.76171$lR3....@newsfe25.iad>,
> "Sanders Kaufman" <bu...@kaufman.net> wrote:
>
>> "Thanatos" <atr...@mac.com> wrote in message
>> news:atropos-0B4EED...@news-wc.giganews.com...
>>
>>> And the few times this was pointed out to them, the response was always
>>> "well, that's different". It's the Liberal Double Standard in full
>>> flower.
>> Actually, that never happened. There is no guy named "the left"
>> and you never had any such conversation with said imaginary character.
>
> I never said *I* had this conversation with anyone, genius.
How can you quote something that you never had a conversation with then?
Pay closer
> attention to what you read. I was commenting on the few times it was
> pointed out to leftist political commentators on various news shows and
> what their typical response consisted of.
Maybe next you can quote the conversation you never had with Kris Kringle.
>
>> What you're doing here is called "anthromorphization".
>> It's when somoene (usually not older than a toddler) assigns human
>> characteristics to things - like a coffee table or "the left".
>
> I did no such thing, lackbrain, which makes what you just did above a
> classic example of a strawman argument.
Lackbrain? Gosh Gomer, that there is one might hurtful insult.
>
>> It's a trait that most humans shed in early childhood - but which
>> Republicans like you NEVER seemed to have gotten over.
>
> And there you are assuming I'm a Republican just because I criticized
> the Left.
>
> Apparently you're not free from error yourself.
At least he's not making up imaginary quotes.
Thanatos
"Sanders Kaufman" <bu...@kaufman.net> wrote:
> "Thanatos" <atr...@mac.com> wrote in message
> news:atropos-207DAA...@news-wc.giganews.com...
> > In article <svnFm.76171$lR3....@newsfe25.iad>,
>
> >> Actually, that never happened. There is no guy named "the left"
> >> and you never had any such conversation with said imaginary character.
> >
> > I never said *I* had this conversation with anyone, genius. Pay closer
>
> So - you think that the conversation you made up with the imaginary person
> happened to someone else?
Since when is Donna Brazile an imaginary person? I'm sure she'd be
surprised to find that out.
> >> It's a trait that most humans shed in early childhood - but which
> >> Republicans like you NEVER seemed to have gotten over.
> >
> > And there you are assuming I'm a Republican just because I criticized
> > the Left.
>
> Don't blame me - YOU picked your side.
> I know you hate to think of yourself as standing FOR anything.
> But as long as you keep repeating Republican propaganda, you'll continue to
> be a Republican - whether you like to think of yourself as one, or not.
This is the best you can do? Really?
Sanders Kaufman
> "Sanders Kaufman" <bu...@kaufman.net> wrote:
>> So - you think that the conversation you made up with the imaginary
>> person
>> happened to someone else?
>
> Since when is Donna Brazile an imaginary person? I'm sure she'd be
> surprised to find that out.
Oh, I see - when you said the conversation occurred between you and "the
Left" - you were simply referring to one person.
No, of course not - when you said that conversation happened, you were
lying - and now you're just continuing the insincerity.
Bad character and unrepentant dishonesty... such is the nature of the
character of the President's detractors - the Republicans.
Sanders Kaufman
news:e9idnTW4VKMVtnvX...@giganews.com...
> Thanatos wrote:
>> "Sanders Kaufman" <bu...@kaufman.net> wrote:
>> And there you are assuming I'm a Republican just because I criticized the
>> Left.
>>
>> Apparently you're not free from error yourself.
>
> At least he's not making up imaginary quotes.
And more importantly, I am not trying to pretend I'm something I'm not.
It doesn't matter that this creep SAYS he's not a Republican.
He still repeats their slogans, adopts their values, and votes for their
candidates.
That's more than many *registered* Republicans do.
--
"Yet, Brutus says he was ambitious,
And Brutus is an honorable man,
So are they all - all honorable men". - Shakespeare
Ed Stasiak
> > Thanatos
> > > Ed Stasiak
> > >
> > > And when the Left referred to Bush as "Chimpy McHitler"?
>
> people as a weapon against Americans shows that you have
> a real slime-ball character.
I would "launch" people? Where is this coming from?
> > It's the Liberal Double Standard in full flower.
>
> Actually, that never happened.
"Well, that's just good fun"
-- Sanders Kaufman --
> What you're doing here is called "anthromorphization".
Kinda like when the Left speaks of "gun crime"?
> That's one of the things I like about MSNBC over Fox.
> At least when MSNBC quotes someone - It's an actual
> person.
You know what they say; "A picture tells a thousand words";
Thanatos
"Sanders Kaufman" <bu...@kaufman.net> wrote:
> "Thanatos" <atr...@mac.com> wrote in message
> news:atropos-75EBBC...@news-wc.giganews.com...
> > "Sanders Kaufman" <bu...@kaufman.net> wrote:
>
> >> So - you think that the conversation you made up with the imaginary
> >> person
> >> happened to someone else?
> >
> > Since when is Donna Brazile an imaginary person? I'm sure she'd be
> > surprised to find that out.
>
> Oh, I see - when you said the conversation occurred between you and "the
> Left" - you were simply referring to one person.
I never said the conversation occurred between me and anyone, dumbass. I
said the conversation occurred. I never indicated that I was a
participant, but of course you know that and this little game is the
best response you have because you *know* that the double-standard I
described is alive and well and there's really no defending it. Hence
the puerile attempt at misdirection.
Thanatos
"Sanders Kaufman" <bu...@kaufman.net> wrote:
> It's a shitty thing to do, a shitty way to behave, a shitty strategy to use,
> and shows the shitty character of you anti-government types.
>
As opposed to the shitty things you do, the shitty ways you behave, and
the shitty strategies you use that show the shitty character of you
pro-nanny state types.
Thanatos
"Sanders Kaufman" <bu...@kaufman.net> wrote:
> "FDR" <FDR@fkfkdkfd> wrote in message
> news:e9idnTW4VKMVtnvX...@giganews.com...
> > Thanatos wrote:
> >> "Sanders Kaufman" <bu...@kaufman.net> wrote:
>
> >> And there you are assuming I'm a Republican just because
> >> I criticized the Left.
> >>
> >> Apparently you're not free from error yourself.
> >
> > At least he's not making up imaginary quotes.
>
> And more importantly, I am not trying to pretend I'm something I'm not.
> It doesn't matter that this creep SAYS he's not a Republican.
> He still repeats their slogans, adopts their values, and votes for their
> candidates.
LOL! You have no idea for whom I voted. Of course that doesn't matter.
You're going to decide for me who I voted for-- actual facts be damned--
so you can call me names and use lots of profanity because that makes
you feel superior and empowered.
Well, have at it, child. The adults here will just chuckle and move on.
Sanders Kaufman
> "Sanders Kaufman" <bu...@kaufman.net> wrote:
>> Oh, I see - when you said the conversation occurred between you and "the
>> Left" - you were simply referring to one person.
>
> I never said the conversation occurred between me and anyone, dumbass. I
So - that conversation that you described never happened at all, eh?
That's how these conversations with you anti-government types usually go.
You gripe about something you say happens.
Then, whatever-it-was turns out to not have happened at all.
So, you say something else that's kind of like the first thing is really
what happens.
Then, whatever-that-was turns out to not have happened at all, either.
Lather... rinse... repeat.
The only thing that remains constant with you anti-government types is that
you see yourselves as victims.
Sanders Kaufman
> As opposed to the shitty things you do, the shitty ways you behave, and
> the shitty strategies you use that show the shitty character of you
> pro-nanny state types.
My but your hatred for our government sure is strong.
Thanatos
"Sanders Kaufman" <bu...@kaufman.net> wrote:
LOL! Because I quoted your own words back to you. Behold the irony...
Thanatos
"Sanders Kaufman" <bu...@kaufman.net> wrote:
> "Thanatos" <atr...@mac.com> wrote in message
> news:atropos-DB5FBD...@news.giganews.com...
> > "Sanders Kaufman" <bu...@kaufman.net> wrote:
>
> >> Oh, I see - when you said the conversation occurred between you and "the
> >> Left" - you were simply referring to one person.
> >
> > I never said the conversation occurred between me and anyone, dumbass. I
>
> So - that conversation that you described never happened at all, eh?
May I momma dog face in the banana patch?
SFTVratings
>
>
>
> >>> And when the Left referred to Bush as "Chimpy McHitler"?
>
> >> Well, that's just good fun
>
> > Of course. It's always "different" when the Left is caught...
> > Just like the hysterical meltdown the Left had this summer when people
> > showed up at those town hall meetings comparing Obama to Hitler.
>
> Can you describe the similarities that Obama has to Hitler?
> Didn't think so.
Economic facism - Control of privately-owned companies by government.
The so-called "third way" that is not capitalism, not communism, but
halfway between. (Although I think Obama considers himself more a
Maoist.)
Your turn. Can you describe why the Left called Bush - Chimpy
McHitler?
SFTVratings
> "Thanatos" <atro...@mac.com> wrote in message
>
> news:atropos-0B4EED...@news-wc.giganews.com...
>
> > And the few times this was pointed out to them, the response was always
> > "well, that's different". It's the Liberal Double Standard in full
> > flower.
>
> Actually, that never happened.
> There is no guy named "the left" and you never had any such conversation
> with said imaginary character.
> What you're doing here is called "anthromorphization".
> It's when somoene (usually not older than a toddler) assigns human
> characteristics to things - like a coffee table or "the left".
Okay. And how are you any different? You said: "It's really creepy
to see anti-Obama creeps referring to the President as if he were some
metaphysical creature." You too are guilty of lumping everyone into a
single label (creeps) which is prejudice and stereotyping.
Me for example.
I'm nothing like what you describe. I'm not anti-Obama. I like the
man, I just hate his (and Clinton's and Gore's) pro-socialist/
communist views. I want less government control, not more. Basically
I want to be left alone.
SFTVratings
>
>
>
>
> That's how these conversations with you anti-government types usually go.
> You gripe about something you say happens.
> Then, whatever-it-was turns out to not have happened at all.
Vice-versa when we specifically QUOTE somebody like Anita Dunn saying
her favorite philosopher is Chairman Mao, you pro-government tyranny
supporters claim that never happened too.
You guys are no different.
trotsky
> In article <9AqFm.11358$86....@newsfe15.iad>,
> "Sanders Kaufman" <bu...@kaufman.net> wrote:
>
>> "Thanatos" <atr...@mac.com> wrote in message
>> news:atropos-75EBBC...@news-wc.giganews.com...
>>> "Sanders Kaufman" <bu...@kaufman.net> wrote:
>>>> So - you think that the conversation you made up with the imaginary
>>>> person
>>>> happened to someone else?
>>> Since when is Donna Brazile an imaginary person? I'm sure she'd be
>>> surprised to find that out.
>> Oh, I see - when you said the conversation occurred between you and "the
>> Left" - you were simply referring to one person.
>
> I never said the conversation occurred between me and anyone, dumbass.
Way to take the high road there, Thanny. If you need someone to trade
insults with, I'm available.
Oh, that's right, we have the last ten times to consider.
trotsky
> In article <9GqFm.15350$OY2....@newsfe22.iad>,
> "Sanders Kaufman" <bu...@kaufman.net> wrote:
>
>> "FDR" <FDR@fkfkdkfd> wrote in message
>> news:e9idnTW4VKMVtnvX...@giganews.com...
>>> Thanatos wrote:
>>>> "Sanders Kaufman" <bu...@kaufman.net> wrote:
>>>> And there you are assuming I'm a Republican just because
>>>> I criticized the Left.
>>>>
>>>> Apparently you're not free from error yourself.
>>> At least he's not making up imaginary quotes.
>> And more importantly, I am not trying to pretend I'm something I'm not.
>> It doesn't matter that this creep SAYS he's not a Republican.
>> He still repeats their slogans, adopts their values, and votes for their
>> candidates.
>
> LOL! You have no idea for whom I voted.
...said the anonyshit.
trotsky
> On Oct 25, 5:43 pm, trotsky <gmsi...@email.com> wrote:
>> Thanatos wrote:
>>> "Sanders Kaufman" <bu...@kaufman.net> wrote:
>>>> "Ed Stasiak" <estas...@att.net> wrote in message
>
>>
>>
>>>>> And when the Left referred to Bush as "Chimpy McHitler"?
>>>> Well, that's just good fun
>>> Of course. It's always "different" when the Left is caught...
>>> Just like the hysterical meltdown the Left had this summer when people
>>> showed up at those town hall meetings comparing Obama to Hitler.
>> Can you describe the similarities that Obama has to Hitler?
>> Didn't think so.
>
>
> Economic facism -
"Facism" would be spending too much time on face book, then? I don't
think they had that when Hitler was around. Granted, they did make
books out of people's faces, but that's not the same thing.
Control of privately-owned companies by government.
Which companies did Hitler do this to?
> The so-called "third way" that is not capitalism, not communism, but
> halfway between. (Although I think Obama considers himself more a
> Maoist.)
>
> Your turn. Can you describe why the Left called Bush - Chimpy
> McHitler?
Because he looks like a Chimp:
and he made references to being a dictator:
http://www.seattlepi.com/national/32902_bush27.shtml
Personally, I preferred when a guy on Usenet referred to him as Chimpy
McFlightsuit, of course referring to that unbelievably embarrassing
photo op with the "Mission Accomplished" banner.
Any other questions?
FDR
Then you better not vote Republican either since they like to have their
say on how you live, love and die.
FDR
> In article <9GqFm.15350$OY2....@newsfe22.iad>,
> "Sanders Kaufman" <bu...@kaufman.net> wrote:
>
>> "FDR" <FDR@fkfkdkfd> wrote in message
>> news:e9idnTW4VKMVtnvX...@giganews.com...
>>> Thanatos wrote:
>>>> "Sanders Kaufman" <bu...@kaufman.net> wrote:
>>>> And there you are assuming I'm a Republican just because
>>>> I criticized the Left.
>>>>
>>>> Apparently you're not free from error yourself.
>>> At least he's not making up imaginary quotes.
>> And more importantly, I am not trying to pretend I'm something I'm not.
>> It doesn't matter that this creep SAYS he's not a Republican.
>> He still repeats their slogans, adopts their values, and votes for their
>> candidates.
>
> LOL! You have no idea for whom I voted. Of course that doesn't matter.
Knowing you, you sat home on election day. It's just better to bitch
about shit than vote.
Ed Stasiak
> > Ed Stasiak
> >> Sanders Kaufman
> >>
> >> It's a character issue - and the fact that you would launch these
> >> people as a weapon against Americans shows that you have
> >> a real slime-ball character.
>
> > I would "launch" people? Where is this coming from?
>
> the victim. If you had followed the thread, you would have
> seen that the post was in reply to to Thanatos, not you.
I'd suggest it's you who needs to to follow the thread
closer, as it was from your reply to my post of Oct. 25th.
> _y'alls_ practice of stirring up the religious freaks
> to fight _your_ fight
> against the US government for _you_
> _you've_ been stepping up that rhetoric
> as if _you_ liked what _you_ saw
So then who exactly are you talking about here, me
specifically or the Right in general?
Because while on the one hand, you seem to have
a problem being included in with those on the Left,
you don't have a problem lumping others in with
those on the Right.
What's good for the goose, is good for the gander.
And if it was acceptable for the Left to portray Bush
as Hitler, you shouldn't have any problem with the
Right painting Obama as a Leftist messiah.
It's an issue of free speech after all, which the Left has
always at least claimed to be staunch defenders of.
trotsky
What kind of American is ashamed to admit who he voted for?
FDR
Those 60 million that voted for McCain I guess.
FDR
Interesting that the religious right would break one of the 10 Commandments:
"I am the Lord thy God, ... Thou shalt have no other gods before me."
It's only the right referring to Obama as Messiah.
clouddreamer
> All 5 networks are part of the Presidential press pool, but Obama
> tried to change the rules and exclude FOX. The other 4 remaining
> networks responded by saying, "Either we are all included, or none
> will participate." The White House backed down.
>
Funny that you'd cry censorship for something so silly....after Bush
relegated Helen Thomas to the back row for asking a pointed question on
Iraq. He never asked her another question.
How that for cowardice?
BTW, the Dean of the WH Press Corps is back where she belongs...in the
front row.
..
--
We must change the way we live
Or the climate will do it for us.
Ed Stasiak
> > Ed Stasiak
> >
> > And if it was acceptable for the Left to portray Bush
> > as Hitler, you shouldn't have any problem with the
> > Right painting Obama as a Leftist messiah.
>
> Interesting that the religious right would break one of
> the 10 Commandments:
Interesting, though not surprising, that your grasp of
the English language isn't quite up to snuff.
Poetic Justice
It was started in a Lefty news paper on the left coast as I recall. The
right uses it as a joke. Joking about how gullible the Liberals are.
Dano
>
> It was started in a Lefty news paper on the left coast as I recall.
> The right uses it as a joke. Joking about how gullible the Liberals
> are.
>
The righties that find it amusing only demonstrate how vapid and
unimaginative they are. Which merely reflects their political
ineffectualness.
FDR
Well that's very specific. lol
Poetic Justice
At least it's not in the wrong direction and you can do the google
search to get the names.
David Johnston
No, he can't. There's no way he could sort through all of the right
wing blogs acclaiming Obama as the messiah to find such a newpaper
item if it even existed.
FDR
If the right thinks it's a joke here's something to look at:
God told me to strike at al Qaida and I struck them, and then he
instructed me to strike at Saddam, which I did, and now I am determined
to solve the problem in the Middle East. If you help me I will act, and
if not, the elections will come and I will have to focus on them.
-- George W Bush
"I believe that God wants me to be president." -- George W Bush
"I feel like God wants me to run for President. I can't explain it, but
I sense my country is going to need me. Something is going to happen...
I know it won't be easy on me or my family, but God wants me to do it."
-- George W Bush
I am driven with a mission from God. God would tell me, 'George go and
fight these terrorists in Afghanistan'. And I did. And then God would
tell me 'George, go and end the tyranny in Iraq'. And I did. And now,
again, I feel God's words coming to me, 'Go get the Palestinians their
state and get the Israelis their security, and get peace in the Middle
East'. And, by God, I'm gonna do it."
-- George W Bush
So I wonder if it would be ok to call Bush the Messiah as well. Sounds
like he speaks to God all the time and does his will.
Sanders Kaufman
news:911be5c4-d2f0-4ef8...@37g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
> Vice-versa when we specifically QUOTE somebody like Anita Dunn saying
> her favorite philosopher is Chairman Mao, you pro-government tyranny
> supporters claim that never happened too.
>
> You guys are no different.
Wow - you really, really hate the US government, don't you?
Sanders Kaufman
news:o%DFm.103727$5n1.57870@attbi_s21...
> What kind of American is ashamed to admit who he voted for?
The answer to that is easy - it's the ones who voted Republican who are
ashamed to say so.
Sanders Kaufman
news:e7GFm.33706$eJ4...@newsfe07.iad...
> It was started in a Lefty news paper on the left coast as I recall. The
> right uses it as a joke. Joking about how gullible the Liberals are.
Yeah - the ironic thing is that, instead of embarrassing the left, it just
highlights the religious extremism on the right.
Calling Obama "the Messiah" is the non-beliver right-wingers' way of trying
to light a fire under the religious right.
The Republicans saw the events of 9/11 and said to themselves, "We need to
get our religious nuts to do that kind of stuff, too!"
This is just one of the Republicans' ways of getting religious extermists to
launch terrorist attacks against Americans.
Sanders Kaufman
news:hc7c41$b45$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
> The righties that find it amusing only demonstrate how vapid and
> unimaginative they are. Which merely reflects their political
> ineffectualness.
I used to think so, too.
I used to think such things were just "vapid and unimaginative".
Then, I watched a couple of ultra-conservative right-wing religious
extremists fly some jets into some buildings.
Now I see the right-wingers embracing of religious extremists as support for
terrorism.
Sanders Kaufman
> Okay. And how are you any different? You said: "It's really creepy
> to see anti-Obama creeps referring to the President as if he were some
> metaphysical creature." You too are guilty of lumping everyone into a
> single label (creeps) which is prejudice and stereotyping.
Where you go wrong here is in misinterpreting "anti-Obama creeps" to mean
"everyone".
I didn't, as you claim, refer to "everyone" when I said "anti-Obama creeps".
I'm smart enough to know that not everyone is an anti-Obama creep.
In fact - I'm grateful to all the Republicans and Libertarians who voted for
him!
Thanatos
"Sanders Kaufman" <bu...@kaufman.net> wrote:
> "Thanatos" <atr...@mac.com> wrote in message
> news:atropos-CA4048...@news.giganews.com...
> > In article <j4uFm.68154$Ku5....@newsfe04.iad>,
>
> >> > As opposed to the shitty things you do, the shitty ways
> >> > you behave, and the shitty strategies you use that show
> >> > the shitty character of you pro-nanny state types.
> >>
> >> My but your hatred for our government sure is strong.
> >
> > LOL! Because I quoted your own words back to you. Behold the irony...
>
> No - that just demonstrates that you admire my communication
> style and seek to emulate it.
Whatever gets you through the night, chief.
> Your hatred for the government is obvious because you refer
> to it in the most negative of terms.
Well, one of our most revered patriots once said, "I love my country but
hate my government." To understand the sentiment of the modern liberal,
just reverse that quotation.
Thanatos
FDR <FDR@fkfkdkfd> wrote:
No, I actually worked. Something with which I'm sure you're wholly
unfamiliar.