|
| News Groups Blog Forum Chat Video Audio Images Documents Wiki Home |
|
|||||||
| Register | Tags | FAQ n Rules | Mark Forums Read |
| Notices |
| Drug Policy Reform & Narco Politics The war on drugs, drug politics, how drugs influence politics & (inter)national conflicts. |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
|
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
Obama's Newest Burden
In another example of American media bias...
( http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/...3/215106.shtml ) liberal media pundits are working hard to hash out details of what THEY suspect may-have-been an ongoing affair between Republican Presidential Candidate, John McCaine and lobbyist, Vicky Iseman, despite any evidence to support the story, and amid vehement denials from both McCaine and Iseman that any such relationship ever took place. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4RfWuV_aKvo Meanwhile, front-running Democratic Candidate, Barack Obama, has been publicly challenged to defend himself against allegations of illegal drug use while engaging in gay sex. Moreover, both Obama and the Democratic Party have been named in a lawsuit that claims harrassment and intimidation tactics were used against the man who witnessed this because he threatened to make the information public. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sVeFV...%2F179725.html While it remains a "hushed" issue in the news for now, this story about Obama will eventually sprout legs and start running, and the liberal American news media (proving to be as predictable as they are gullible), will continue to hound any front-running republican candidate. It is interesting that these two stories should come out at around the same time. Could it be deliberate? If so, who could possibly benefit from this??? |
|
#3
|
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
Re: Obama's Newest Burden
Quote:
McCaine is a liberal among a party with a conservative base. He's already busy fielding similar allegations that have been MUCH more widely publicized, and which have no tangible foundation. If you're trying to say "The Republican dirty-tricks committee is behind this," then I'll ask you to provide tangible evidence. I'm sick of the mindset that justifies liberal political BULLSHIT on the simple-minded basis that "Republicans are evil/Democrats are good", largely because it comes from people who are too intellectually inept to consider that they might actually be useful idiots (to the DNC) as described by Lenin. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Useful_idiot Republicans have their own idiots, too; many of them in the military, or police. It is upsetting to know that this country's government is dominated by two opposing, but equally destructive, political ideologies. |
|
#4
|
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
Re: Obama's Newest Burden
Quote:
Back on topic, Obama gay and using illegal drugs, thats pretty much ruining his reputation with a huge chunk of america, not saying it to be harsh or anything, but its pretty true that not everyone is accepting to alternative lifestyle choices over there. I know this is probably in bad taste, but I've got to say it. If it is true, and he still won the election, and then he got fat when he was in office, America would have a fat, black, and gay president that uses drugs, thats pretty much all the stigmas people discriminate against rolled into one.
|
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Obama's Newest Burden
Quote:
|
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Obama's Newest Burden
There is and his name is Ron Paul.
|
|
#7
|
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
Re: Obama's Newest Burden
Quote:
Oh man, I wish! Last edited by Woodman; 03-03-2008 at 07:10. |
|
#8
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Obama's Newest Burden
The only discussion I've heard on the topic is "Hey McCain does have some life left in him, he isn't just a walking corpse!" And everyone I associate with pretty much doesn't care at all about these "personal issues" with the person running for candidacy. Everyone cares more about the issues involved.
|
|
#9
|
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
Re: Obama's Newest Burden
Quote:
Quote:
There is little evidence to support the theory that there is a tendency towards liberal bias in the American media. Effective campaigning by interested parties has engendered the popular misconception that news media is somehow inherently liberal. While studies have shown that journalists tend to locate themselves slightly to the left of their audience, content-analysis has been unable to detect significant ideological bias. The informational and institutional biases arising from the increasingly consumerist approach to news media have much more impact than personal views of journalists. Accusations of media bias are helped by the 'hostile media phenomenon', where people with opposing views will both see a piece of media as being biased in favour of the other side. The more strongly one feels about an issue, the most likely one is to see bias in a media treatment of the issue. Having a cynical perspective of the media is associated with increased perception of bias also. I doubt there is any conspiracy behind the two articles. Journalists need an audience, and the same old campaign issues don't sell. Something new and sensational better meets the commercial definition of news, irregardless of how useless it actually is for informed democratic participation. |
|
#10
|
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
Re: Obama's Newest Burden
beentheredonethatagain,
Indeed! The selection is as shitty as I've EVER seen it. Quote:
Bernard Goldberg best explains the entrenched liberal mindset in his book, "Bias",. "Goldberg, who spent his last years at CBS in the doghouse for his 1996 Wall Street Journal piece, says that if these correspondents were to take a lie detector test as to whether they slanted the news leftward, they would deny it and pass with flying colors. Many of them don’t consider that they’re leaning in any political direction. They really think they are simply mainstream. There is no other side of the argument except what you hear from a few right-wing nut cases. In their world, mainstream conservatism doesn’t exist" http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/...3/215106.shtml Ann Coulter makes documented accounts of how the liberals in the media have been PROVEN WRONG on many conservative issues such as middle-class tax cuts to the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) started by Ronald Regan in her book, "Treason". http://www.conservativebookservice.c...prod_cd=c6174p The fact is that tax cuts DO work to stimulate the economy, and Ronald Regan's SDI program was instrumental in causing the collapse of the Soviet Union. Before that, the liberal solution to the cold war was that America should just dismantle all of her weapons to show the rest of the world that "we're nice people." ....and yes, they really are THAT stupid! Reagan's solution was to develop a system that could defend the US from incoming missiles which eventually became known as SDI. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strateg...nse_Initiative I can remember the soviets walked out on the SALT II missile treaty discussions because Regan refused to put SDI on the table as a bartering chip. The liberal media went NUTS! They became fanatic and labeled SDI as "The 'Star Wars' Program", claiming that the space-based system would provoke the Russians into launching the first strike in a nuclear war. Hence, the name "Star Wars". Unlike many younger people today, who can only now read about it, I was there and I clearly remember it. Here is CNN's Bullshit write-up to explain the term; apparently a Mickey-Mouse attempt to cover their ass for the fact that it was THEIR REPORTERS who were instrumental in popularizing the term. "The system he proposed became known as "Star Wars," after the popular movie, because it was meant to destroy missiles from space." [BULLSHIT!] "The Soviets feared the system would increase the risk of the United States launching a first attack because U.S. officials would not fear retaliation" [more BULLSHIT!] http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/cold.war...arwars.speech/ This is just ONE example of the liberal media bullshit that took place at that time, and how they attempt to revise history by putting out more liberal media bullshit, now. I could always invoke the spector of Dan Rather, ...AGAIN, or expound on the history of political correctness, but if you're not convinced by now then you're probably just another dyed-in-the-wool liberal plagued by denial to where no amount of evidence that I or anyone else could provide (no matter how valid or reasonable) will ever be enough to change your opinion. Last edited by Woodman; 24-02-2008 at 22:09. |
|
#11
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Obama's Newest Burden
Quote:
|
|
#12
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Obama's Newest Burden
Quote:
Rememeber Dan Rather? at CBS news making up stories about Pres. George W. Bush's Nat. Guard record, Rather got fired. that is just one example, the press is made up of a majority of lefty. I will add some links later. |
|
#13
|
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
Re: Obama's Newest Burden
Quote:
|
|
#14
|
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
Re: Obama's Newest Burden
Quote:
Scandal or not, I really don't see much difference between Obama and McCaine. If Obama wins the party nomination, I'ld just as soon not vote at all. If Clinton gets it, I'll reluctantly vote for McCaine in the general election, just because the Clintons are so ruthlessly ambitious and thoroughly heartless. |
|
#15
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Obama's Newest Burden
Quote:
"Lefty'' is a silly word. There is no left wing press in the US, unless you count very marginal publications like "The Nation." Fox news is the extreme right, laughable to any one outside the US. The large papers are owned by rich elites and act as propaganda organs for those elites. If you really think that the Kennedy's and Clinton are 'lefties' I would suggest that you are naive. Clinton's policies favoured business and the rich, not the people. As for Bush, the entire world knows him for bare-faced liar (not to mention severely lacking intelligence.). Where are Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, for example? What about the connections between Al-Qeada and Saddam? More lies. If a CBS reporter got sacked for for writing about Bush, it shows how much the US media lacks freedom. |
|
#16
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Obama's Newest Burden
I will be honest , as I always have . The war on drugs has it ups and downs.
I hate drugs abuse. I think drugs have caused a many of good people turn to shit. Including myself, hows that for honesty? Just say no is a bad way to just let the government off the hook , I agree . Ronald Reagan is a hero without him , our country would have stayed in the crisis that Jimmy Carter got us into. Long lines at the gas station, triple digit inflation, intrest rates out a fuckin controll. Correct me if I am wrong. also ask any Russian who lived in the USSR during the cold war and under communism, who rescued them. Reagan defeated the pinkos with firing a shot. Last edited by beentheredonethatagain; 25-02-2008 at 05:38. |
|
#17
|
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
Re: Obama's Newest Burden
Quote:
Quote:
This is a really genuine question, but wasn't Reagan merely a puppet who was basically used as a frontman by individuals with grander plans? Maybe he just came across poorly whenever a camera was placed in front of him, but he often came across as someone of very limited intellect in advanced stages of dementia. He almost made Bush look intelligent. Maybe my view is all down to European media bias and you can set me straight? |
|
#18
|
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
Re: Obama's Newest Burden
Quote:
In GB for example cannabis use his not risen as a consequence of downgrading it from B to C. I've actually seen some reports which say that it has declined. Putting users in jail doesn't solve anything. It's just as meaningful as putting alcoholics in jail. Which everybody agrees would be idiotic. In my eyes there's no difference. Last edited by WrtngCocaineTutorial; 01-03-2008 at 13:30. Reason: bold abuse |
|
#19
|
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
Re: Obama's Newest Burden
I don't believe in the barrack obama gay issue. Anyone can say they had gay sex and drugs and post a video of themselves on youtube. I believe it is false and is a hilary fan angry becuase of her losses against obama.
|
|
#20
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Obama's Newest Burden
Haven't you played that game "telephone" in preschool? Somewhere along the line, someone changed the message from "Milk and cookies in one hour" to "Joey is gay".
Hell, even then the message is "Jason spooned with his dog" by the time it reaches the end. |
|
#22
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Obama's Newest Burden
what? does this mean? can you clairify who is a nut job?
|
|
#23
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Obama's Newest Burden
Quote:
Here's an article explaining what is meant. It's kind of uncanny how well his predictions in his what-if speech came to be... Quote:
|
|
#24
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Obama's Newest Burden
raver hippie, you are too young to remember gas shortages, no gasoline available at the pumps,, can only buy gas on certain days of the week , depending on the number on your car licence. good idea ?
|
|
#25
|
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
Re: Obama's Newest Burden
Quote:
Which, to be fair, they did - all government subsidies favor one group at the expense of another. In the case of alternative energy, however, I'm all for it (despite the fact that the US Constitution gives the Federal gubmint no right to do anything of the kind - it would be no different than 99% of the other things they do that they're not supposed to). We'd come out far ahead from less pollution and fewer horrific wars halfway around the world. Of course, few Greens will support the best option for alternative energy because it sounds like a bomb. Greenpeace and their ilk abandoned science long ago. Bunch of Gaia-worshipping luddites... ![]() beenthere: OPEC started the gas shortage with their embargo, but you can thank Mr. Nixon's price controls for making it far worse than it should have been. He thought he could repeal the laws of supply and demand. He was wrong. Woodman: Nader's not bad on drugs, but he's pretty damn scary on many other issues. ECL |
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
| Sitelinks: | Site Functions: |