No, I agree the Olberman/O'Riley comparison. Coulter is very mean-spirited, but closer to Olberman than Beck is. Glenn Beck is in a class all by himself.
Yeah I've never seen a conservative pundit whose conspiracy theories have that kind rare mix of insinuation and sympathetic magic. Its like he watched the National Treasure movies while on LSD and came out of the theater thinking they were real, only with Commie-nazi's behind it all.
Why the right mistrusts the left:
Crazy iranian leader Mahmoud Ahmadinejad gets a professional reception at Columbia University.
Ann Coultier gets threatened and has even been assaulted, more recently a group of the left in canada forced a speech by her to be canceled due to the potential danger.
So, how about the vaulted respect for freedom of speech leftists preach? As long as it is speech they agree with it is fine. If it is not, then it is labeled "hate speech" and then it is ok to surpress.
Why the right mistrusts the left:
Crazy iranian leader Mahmoud Ahmadinejad gets a professional reception at Columbia University.
Ann Coultier gets threatened and has even been assaulted, more recently a group of the left in canada forced a speech by her to be canceled due to the potential danger.
So, how about the vaulted respect for freedom of speech leftists preach? As long as it is speech they agree with it is fine. If it is not, then it is labeled "hate speech" and then it is ok to surpress.
You're trying to argue that there's a double standard regarding the freedom of speech on the left because crazy people made threats to another crazy person? I won't bring up the threats and more-than-threats on Democrats in recent days because I know that the people perpetrating these things do not represent the majority of the people who oppose the health care legislation.
You're trying to argue that there's a double standard regarding the freedom of speech on the left because crazy people made threats to another crazy person? I won't bring up the threats and more-than-threats on Democrats in recent days because I know that the people perpetrating these things do not represent the majority of the people who oppose the health care legislation.Why the right mistrusts the left:
Crazy iranian leader Mahmoud Ahmadinejad gets a professional reception at Columbia University.
Ann Coultier gets threatened and has even been assaulted, more recently a group of the left in canada forced a speech by her to be canceled due to the potential danger.
So, how about the vaulted respect for freedom of speech leftists preach? As long as it is speech they agree with it is fine. If it is not, then it is labeled "hate speech" and then it is ok to surpress.
So your statement is all the people protesting and basically shutting down Coulters speech in canada were "crazy people"?
|
Why bother? The Left is convinced they're the side of reasonable discourse (which is a laugh and a half), and the Right thinks they're holy warriors or something (again, ROFL).
Both sides (Repub and Democrat) are criminals, liars and don't have our interests at heart.
Oh, well, let the left-tards and right-tards fight it out. They'll wake up and realize they've been had soon enough...
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16
|
I'd like to say that the left doesn't do well at the hate radio and TV crazytalk because we don't fall for it as easily. I don't think I'd put money on it though.
I was actually pondering this idea earlier today. At the risk of making sweeping generalizations about large and diverse segments of the population, I think right-wing wackos dominate the radio because rich old people listen to the radio at work. Left wing wackos, on the other hand, probably overwhelmingly dominate the blogosphere because young poor people surf the Internet from their parents' basements. Again, these generalizations are largely inaccurate, but there's probably some truth in there somewhere.
I'd like to say that the left doesn't do well at the hate radio and TV crazytalk because we don't fall for it as easily. I don't think I'd put money on it though.I was actually pondering this idea earlier today. At the risk of making sweeping generalizations about large and diverse segments of the population, I think right-wing wackos dominate the radio because rich old people listen to the radio at work. Left wing wackos, on the other hand, probably overwhelmingly dominate the blogosphere because young poor people surf the Internet from their parents' basements. Again, these generalizations are largely inaccurate, but there's probably some truth in there somewhere.
According to Dolbermann, the reason why left-wing radio does poorly is because during the day when those shows are on Liberals have jobs ...
Yeah, Dolbermann, real clever.
I'd like to say that the left doesn't do well at the hate radio and TV crazytalk because we don't fall for it as easily. I don't think I'd put money on it though.I was actually pondering this idea earlier today. At the risk of making sweeping generalizations about large and diverse segments of the population, I think right-wing wackos dominate the radio because rich old people listen to the radio at work. Left wing wackos, on the other hand, probably overwhelmingly dominate the blogosphere because young poor people surf the Internet from their parents' basements. Again, these generalizations are largely inaccurate, but there's probably some truth in there somewhere.According to Dolbermann, the reason why left-wing radio does poorly is because during the day when those shows are on Liberals have jobs ...
Yeah, Dolbermann, real clever.
I really can't speak for anyone else but left-wing opinion radio doesn't appeal to me because its usually conspiracy theory b$*$*$+@ on top of smarmy self-righteousness without a hint of the reality of modern society. Same with right-wing opinion radio. This is because extremism, at it's heart, is crazy b$&*!*~@. Sadly, it's also LOUD and not always stupid. And even if it is stupid, it knows how to TALK a good game and convince moderates of things through FEAR (terrorism).
It makes me sad.
Fortunately, I have a local news radio station that refuses to carry shows like Democracy Now! and whatnot. They do have commentators now and again, but the shows are great. The progressive-leaning guy in charge has a show on the channel and he invites the local media including conservative-leaning newscasters and newspaper editors to the show which is a free-for-all round-table format. And it's not like the old Crossfire where the left guy was just a patsy. There are really good arguments on that show and I learn a lot.
I'd like to say that the left doesn't do well at the hate radio and TV crazytalk because we don't fall for it as easily. I don't think I'd put money on it though.I was actually pondering this idea earlier today. At the risk of making sweeping generalizations about large and diverse segments of the population, I think right-wing wackos dominate the radio because rich old people listen to the radio at work. Left wing wackos, on the other hand, probably overwhelmingly dominate the blogosphere because young poor people surf the Internet from their parents' basements. Again, these generalizations are largely inaccurate, but there's probably some truth in there somewhere.According to Dolbermann, the reason why left-wing radio does poorly is because during the day when those shows are on Liberals have jobs ...
Yeah, Dolbermann, real clever.
You might want to not refer to him by "Dolbermann" when taking him to task sarcastically for being "clever".
pot, kettle, black, etc.
I'm not trying to defend him in particular, but these silly name changing antics lower any political debate to the level of a fart joke.
On the other hand, maybe that's appropriate these days....
I'd like to say that the left doesn't do well at the hate radio and TV crazytalk because we don't fall for it as easily. I don't think I'd put money on it though.I was actually pondering this idea earlier today. At the risk of making sweeping generalizations about large and diverse segments of the population, I think right-wing wackos dominate the radio because rich old people listen to the radio at work. Left wing wackos, on the other hand, probably overwhelmingly dominate the blogosphere because young poor people surf the Internet from their parents' basements. Again, these generalizations are largely inaccurate, but there's probably some truth in there somewhere.According to Dolbermann, the reason why left-wing radio does poorly is because during the day when those shows are on Liberals have jobs ...
Yeah, Dolbermann, real clever.
You might want to not refer to him by "Dolbermann" when taking him to task sarcastically for being "clever".
pot, kettle, black, etc.
I'm not trying to defend him in particular, but these silly name changing antics lower any political debate to the level of a fart joke.
On the other hand, maybe that's appropriate these days....
It actually comes from a Boondocks comic strip, so I can't take credit.
It was something to the effect of:
"That dolbermann next door kept me up all night with its yapping."
"I didn't know they had a dog."
"He means Keith Olbermann."
When President Obama said "If you like the health insurance play you have, you'll be able to keep it," was he lying, or was he simply uninformed?
Nine months ago, I would have said he misspoke or had been given bad information. Now, I think it's obvious we have a president who lies because he believes the ends justifies the means.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16
|
Fortunately, I have a local news radio station that refuses to carry shows like Democracy Now! and whatnot. They do have commentators now and again, but the shows are great. The progressive-leaning guy in charge has a show on the channel and he invites the local media including conservative-leaning newscasters and newspaper editors to the show which is a free-for-all round-table format. And it's not like the old Crossfire where the left guy was just a patsy. There are really good arguments on that show and I learn a lot.
See, now that's interesting. I think that's a good approach. I find that best way to get at the truth of things is to look as honestly as you can at your own biases, let the other side speak according to theirs, and figure that the real truth is probably somewhere in the middle, and probably involves a lot of facts that neither side brings up.
I get most of my news lately from BBC news on public radio, but even there I have to keep my bulls__t detector finely-tuned.
I think the context of that was that the government isn't force you to pick a specific health care provider or drop your current coverage. It's not socialized medicine.
I'd like to say that the left doesn't do well at the hate radio and TV crazytalk because we don't fall for it as easily. I don't think I'd put money on it though.I was actually pondering this idea earlier today. At the risk of making sweeping generalizations about large and diverse segments of the population, I think right-wing wackos dominate the radio because rich old people listen to the radio at work. Left wing wackos, on the other hand, probably overwhelmingly dominate the blogosphere because young poor people surf the Internet from their parents' basements. Again, these generalizations are largely inaccurate, but there's probably some truth in there somewhere.According to Dolbermann, the reason why left-wing radio does poorly is because during the day when those shows are on Liberals have jobs ...
Yeah, Dolbermann, real clever.
You might want to not refer to him by "Dolbermann" when taking him to task sarcastically for being "clever".
pot, kettle, black, etc.
I'm not trying to defend him in particular, but these silly name changing antics lower any political debate to the level of a fart joke.
On the other hand, maybe that's appropriate these days....
It actually comes from a Boondocks comic strip, so I can't take credit.
It was something to the effect of:
"That dolbermann next door kept me up all night with its yapping."
"I didn't know they had a dog."
"He means Keith Olbermann."
Hm. I did not know that. Still, it's not just you and Boondocks - I see people on the internet referring to "Algore" or "Rushbo" to try to be disparaging. It just seems like a way to be annoying without being too annoying. Like if a political candidate spoke in falsetto for an entire debate, but made excellent points, you'd just want to slap him, even if he wins.
Fortunately, I have a local news radio station that refuses to carry shows like Democracy Now! and whatnot. They do have commentators now and again, but the shows are great. The progressive-leaning guy in charge has a show on the channel and he invites the local media including conservative-leaning newscasters and newspaper editors to the show which is a free-for-all round-table format. And it's not like the old Crossfire where the left guy was just a patsy. There are really good arguments on that show and I learn a lot.See, now that's interesting. I think that's a good approach. I find that best way to get at the truth of things is to look as honestly as you can at your own biases, let the other side speak according to theirs, and figure that the real truth is probably somewhere in the middle, and probably involves a lot of facts that neither side brings up.
I couldn't agree more with this.
Fortunately, I have a local news radio station that refuses to carry shows like Democracy Now! and whatnot. They do have commentators now and again, but the shows are great. The progressive-leaning guy in charge has a show on the channel and he invites the local media including conservative-leaning newscasters and newspaper editors to the show which is a free-for-all round-table format. And it's not like the old Crossfire where the left guy was just a patsy. There are really good arguments on that show and I learn a lot.See, now that's interesting. I think that's a good approach. I find that best way to get at the truth of things is to look as honestly as you can at your own biases, let the other side speak according to theirs, and figure that the real truth is probably somewhere in the middle, and probably involves a lot of facts that neither side brings up.
I get most of my news lately from BBC news on public radio, but even there I have to keep my bulls__t detector finely-tuned.
I like NPR, myself (as well as the BBC), but I think they sometimes go too far in trying to present "both sides". They're great though because they don't treat you as if you're a frickin moron.
They had two insurance guys on the other day to explain what it might mean to people's insurance plans at certain points in the law's implementation (long story short: expect fluctuations up and down).
The same day they had doctors on explaining the hardships we might be facing with a deficit in health care professionals (long story short, get a primary care yesterday and expect subsidies to people to pay for medical school in the near future).
But folks often consider NPR leftist. In the above examples, someone might ask "WTF?? Where's the counterpoint argument yammering about Death Panels???"
Where is it?
It's over in Crazytown where it belongs.
Olbermann is much more like Coulter. Just as bile-filled. Just as ridiculous.
While Olbermann is over-the-top and full of bile, as near as I can tell, he reserves his bile almost exclusively for politicians, and big money corporate types. (Have only seen him on the web, though, don't have MSNBC.)
Coulter, on the other hand, hits out at whole ethnic groups.
I heard her say this on an O'Reilly clip "If all Muslims boycotted airlines, we wouldn't need airport security."
No, there is a special place in h**l reserved for her...
Greg
Agreed. It's not for her BELIEFS though. I doubt she even believes half the stuff her crazy mouth says. She does it to get attention and sell books; she hurts the nation because of it. That's unconscionable.
Agreed. It's not for her BELIEFS though. I doubt she even believes half the stuff her crazy mouth says. She does it to get attention and sell books; she hurts the nation because of it. That's unconscionable.
I agree. My feeling is that she is an brazen opportunist. And in many ways, that makes her speech even that much more intolerable. She panders to the worst parts of society just to make a buck.
Greg
Dude's got, what, six posts? And the sum total of their content can be summarized as "Glenn Beck is my hero, health care sucks, and Erik Mona is a dummy."
Don't feed the trolls.
Trolls...leave with the b*tches.
Dude's got, what, six posts? And the sum total of their content can be summarized as "Glenn Beck is my hero, health care sucks, and Erik Mona is a dummy."
Don't feed the trolls.
You're right of course. However, I never thought we would find the conservative version of Gailbraithe on these boards.
|
|
You're right of course. However, I never thought we would find the conservative version of Gailbraithe on these boards.Dude's got, what, six posts? And the sum total of their content can be summarized as "Glenn Beck is my hero, health care sucks, and Erik Mona is a dummy."
Don't feed the trolls.
Well, you know, everything has it's analogue.
My fellow Americans, when I need to deal with a Super Mutant... which is not unlike a troll... I prefer to use a laser rifle in the 30 kilowatt range and finish him off with Ol' Painless. I remember stomping around rural Kentucky in my youth, though it was a post-nuclear wasteland... Shooting Super Mutants and sipping glowing lemonade. I thought those days would never end.
Thanks for gathering round the fire with me.
Your president: John Henry Eden.
[pulls out automatic rifle and fires the whole clip]
Whoops. Must've had a low constitution. Can you tell I'm not a very nice guy?
Dude's got, what, six posts? And the sum total of their content can be summarized as "Glenn Beck is my hero, health care sucks, and Erik Mona is a dummy."
Don't feed the trolls.
Posts removed...personal attacks will not be tolerated, etc.
|
Here's an alternative suggestion?Dude's got, what, six posts? And the sum total of their content can be summarized as "Glenn Beck is my hero, health care sucks, and Erik Mona is a dummy."
Don't feed the trolls.
I like your style.
I like your style.Here's an alternative suggestion?Dude's got, what, six posts? And the sum total of their content can be summarized as "Glenn Beck is my hero, health care sucks, and Erik Mona is a dummy."
Don't feed the trolls.
That is amazing. I LOVE spaceships... especially fabulous ones!
I saw some story on a guy with brain cancer in canada that had to come to the US to be treated. It got me thinking.
For our non-US friends here, I think the fact that these "radical-rightwingnuts" in the US pointing out minor flaws in your systems, should be seen as a good thing. Instead of blowing these issues off, you should take this as a wake up call that even though the US system needs to be improved, your own systems also have places they need to be improved as well. Cancer patients have a better survival chance in the US, that is a place where your system can start making strides for example. One big issue with cancer is wait time, you need to start treating cancer as soon as it is discovered, because it can spread.
For our non-US friends here, I think the fact that these "radical-rightwingnuts" in the US pointing out minor flaws in your systems, should be seen as a good thing.
While I have not read the whole thread, from front to back, I don't think I have ever heard anyone claim that their non-US system was perfect.
Imperfect != bad.
I saw some story on a guy with brain cancer in canada that had to come to the US to be treated.
Do you have a link? I'd be interested to read this. Was it because of "wait time" or was it because he was seeking a treatment that hadn't been approved in Canada yet? (We have our own oversight bodies here, and just because a drug or treatment has been approved in the US, does not mean that it has been approved here.)
Greg
Commie-nazi's
Wow, don't know how I missed this one. This thread is a "target-rich environment."