Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Location: In an illegal immigrant free part of the country.
2,096 posts, read 1,469,038 times
Reputation: 382
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by ed he
What does that mean? Should the baby if not responsible for the failing of the parent - then be given public assistance, which is a "liberal project?" Or not?
Of course it is a program that our government offers. Any opposition I would have would be for the drug addict, not the innocent child.
Sometimes I have to refer to this when dealing with the ultra left.
“Grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference.”
Of course it is a program that our government offers. Any opposition I would have would be for the drug addict, not the innocent child.
*taps his foot*
I'm still waiting for your to prove those claims you made with your broad stereotypes. I have the feeling I'm going to be waiting a long time.
Sometimes I have to refer to this when dealing with the ultra left.
“Grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference.”
Ultra left? You think what we have in the US is ultra left? If that's the case, you have no idea what ultra left actually is. You're grandstanding.
Ultra left? You think what we have in the US is ultra left? If that's the case, you have no idea what ultra left actually is. You're grandstanding.
Are you posting this just to one up people? Talk about grandstanding….
This is like someone saying, “Donald Trump is rich”, and you come back with, “he isn’t nearly as rich as Bill Gates”. That doesn’t mean Donald Trump isn’t rich, does it? There will always be one better.
The conservatives know they are biased, the liberals haven't figured it out yet but they are just as biased.
Quote:
Or maybe because these days only the rich can actually afford the luxury of carrying a newspaper subscription.
Last I looked, most newspaper subscriptions were less than .25 cents a day (I checked the Atlanta Journal Constitution and at $10 a month that works out less than a quarter a day for one paper a day). The NYTimes was only .70 cents a day. I don't consider that for the rich. And if you read online there are many papers that allow you to do that, just choose your poison. Liz
Left dominated: MSM, newspapers, entertainment industry (including music industry, Hollywood, Disneyland, etc) most literary works, all of academia, Senate/House, Supreme Court, most of the judicial system, most government organizations, ACLU, unions, want more?
Right dominated: a very few very successful talk radio hosts (who happen to be in political and social alignment with the MAJORITY of this nation's populace), and THAT is the thorn in the side for the lefties. I guess they just want to have it ALL.
This is not defining conservatives but defines liberals perfectly. Look at any event where a speaker may have a different opinion and if liberal ranters hear any idea other then their own they shout people down or destroy property, liberal professors give students bad grades if they don't follow in lock step. God the list could go on at just how much liberals are anything but independent thinkers or and how they at every turn try to stop free speech or the freedom to believe what one chooses to believe.
Freakish. All of the above was pumped into your little brain, undocumented, by David Horowitz, and all you do is spit it back out as entered while claiming to be an independent thinker. I'm sure you don't see the irony in that. You meanwhile should perhaps delve into some of the array of literature dealing with the gravitation of both demagogues and dependent thinkers to the philosophical right. You might find it interesting.
Quote:
Originally Posted by citigirl
This whole thread is about LIBERALS trying to tell station owners what they can broadcast and demanding people be forced to listen to their rants. Some of us do not choose to walk in lockstep with liberals and the whine is all the same. We've heard it already.
Lack of understanding of the issue. The Fairness Doctrine (assuming that is what you meant to refer to) did not require anyone to broadcast anything. It said that if station owners chose to broadcast their own opinions on controversial matters of public interest, they had, in light of their privileged position of influence granted as a public trust, an obligation to broadacst as well the opinions of responsible spokespersons for differing views. The thesis here is that the public airwaves, actually owned by all of us, are not a medium the use of which should be bought up by a concentrated and wealthy few and then utilized solely for their own personal propaganda purposes. You apparently feel otherwise.
Location: In an illegal immigrant free part of the country.
2,096 posts, read 1,469,038 times
Reputation: 382
Quote:
Originally Posted by saganista
Freakish. All of the above was pumped into your little brain, undocumented, by David Horowitz, and all you do is spit it back out as entered while claiming to be an independent thinker. I'm sure you don't see the irony in that. You meanwhile should perhaps delve into some of the array of literature dealing with the gravitation of both demagogues and dependent thinkers to the philosophical right. You might find it interesting.
Lack of understanding of the issue. The Fairness Doctrine (assuming that is what you meant to refer to) did not require anyone to broadcast anything. It said that if station owners chose to broadcast their own opinions on controversial matters of public interest, they had, in light of their privileged position of influence granted as a public trust, an obligation to broadacst as well the opinions of responsible spokespersons for differing views. The thesis here is that the public airwaves, actually owned by all of us, are not a medium the use of which should be bought up by a concentrated and wealthy few and then utilized solely for their own personal propaganda purposes. You apparently feel otherwise.
Oh pleeeeze. Save that double talk for someone else.
Originally Posted by saganista
Freakish. All of the above was pumped into your little brain, undocumented, by David Horowitz, and all you do is spit it back out as entered while claiming to be an independent thinker. I'm sure you don't see the irony in that. You meanwhile should perhaps delve into some of the array of literature dealing with the gravitation of both demagogues and dependent thinkers to the philosophical right. You might find it interesting.
Lack of understanding of the issue. The Fairness Doctrine (assuming that is what you meant to refer to) did not require anyone to broadcast anything. It said that if station owners chose to broadcast their own opinions on controversial matters of public interest, they had, in light of their privileged position of influence granted as a public trust, an obligation to broadacst as well the opinions of responsible spokespersons for differing views. The thesis here is that the public airwaves, actually owned by all of us, are not a medium the use of which should be bought up by a concentrated and wealthy few and then utilized solely for their own personal propaganda purposes. You apparently feel otherwise.
Oh pleeeeze. Save that double talk for someone else.
...citigirl responds to reason and reality with... well typical right wing jibberish.... which makes sense, considering the lack of any real depth that she could add to the topic.
If there were any depth, it would have been noted, but nope, we get:
Quote:
Oh pleeeeze. Save that double talk for someone else
That's right, how dare you saganista for responding with such grounded reason!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
