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.
No sense in taking up space to repeat all the unfounded generalizations.
It would be more credible if we saw some facts, please.
You have seen facts. It is pointless to post anymore because you wouldn't believe them. If Glenn Beck said the sky will fall in two minutes, you'll all run for shelter. Why didn't you ask Beck for facts when he lied about the tea party attendance numbers and sited the the University of "I forgot the name of it"? There's a fact for you. Why don't you ask for facts when people say Obama is a Muslim or that old people would die if healthcare reform passed? Why did you not point out the fact that Obama was a US citizen when his birth certificate (and yes I mean the certificate of live birth because that's what it is) was made public? It goes both ways.
Isn't the same true for liberals? Liberals also hold that their views are the only views that have value, and they they, alone, know what's best for everyone. Therefore, there is something to fear from liberals. By all means, watch them, but do so with some understanding. Visit their websites and you will recognize many, if not most, of the current Obamatron talking points. Just consider the source.
Thanks for the chuckles....
Yes to some extent. It's just that there is a much wider divergence of Liberal views. Opinions are allowed to vary in the Democrat Party. As can be seen in Congress, not all Dems agree on how to deal with the issues we face. On the other hand, all Repubs "agree" on preventing a preceived Democrat success on anything.
Most of the teabaggers who are so anti-Obama, anti-reform and anti- anything different from what's between their four walls have never paid attention to politics until President Obama was elected.
So very, very true!
I don't care what, if any, news channel someone watches. I'm also certainly not afraid of Beck/Hannity/Oberman/Palin/Maddow or any other goober you'll find on those channels. The reason is simple: they are entertainment news people. You won't see any of their names on a ballot anytime soon and they have no effect on policy that affects my life. And yes, I include Palin in that group because let's face it: she's great to look at but not a politician; give her a show on Fox News and ratings would soar even more.
The only thing I'm curious about is when Fox News is going to stop with that whole "mainstream media" nonsense. When you claim that over 50% of the people watch your channel, doesn't that make you mainstream?
I have watched Fox News on many occasions and contributed to the "high ratings" but disagree with 99% of what I have seen there. Everyone who watches Fox News does not agree with them. Although I still disagree with most of what O'Reilly has to say, I can tolerate him the most out of those mentioned here. They are all extreme, fear-mongering, liars who feed the ingnorant fringe element who never takes the time to research the issues on their own.
Most of the teabaggers who are so anti-Obama, anti-reform and anti- anything different from what's between their four walls have never paid attention to politics until President Obama was elected. They are the ones afraid, not those of us who criticise Fox News. Those of you who think the left is part of a conspiracy to implement the New World Order, have you ever stopped to think that maybe Fox News and your precious Sarah Palin, Hannity, Beck, Savage and whoever else we can name here would be part of it too? If this were the case, it would be bigger than Fox News.
Clearly, Fox News is good for nothing other than to divert as much of the US population as possible's attention from the issues that truly matter. When something sounds funny to me, I do some research. I don't take Olbermann, Chris Matthew's or Rachel Maddow's word. Yet the Fox News sheep seem to think everything Fox News says is the gospel. That's what makes this so sickening. People are running around calling Obama a Muslim terrorist, an illegal alien, compare him to Hitler, spreading misinformation about health care reform among other lies. The worse part about it is that a major news network feeds into this. That's the issue with Fox News, not fear. They are bullies just like the wing nuts. Some people may be afraid of bullies but I never have and will not start now.
I am definitely one of your leftists and idenftify more with MSNBC (with the exception of Morning Joe) and CNN. I have seen attacks on Keith Olbermann here too. Does this mean that those who acuse him of lying, attempt to discredit him and call him names are afraid too?
There are too many double standards and subjectivity on the right. It's hard to see what they stand for but clear to see that they are against abortion, homosexuals, anyone that's not Christian, poor people (although some of them are poor but in denial about it) and any government program that helps the needy. Everyone is not a White Christian straight male and personally, I cannot side with the mentality that thinks it's wrong not to be. This is why I could never be part of the party of nope.
Fox News is not realistic, objective or credible. If you want unbiased news, watch PBS. You will not get in on cable although IMO, CNN is the most centered of the three mentioned. Defend Fox News all you want but they do tell lies and spread misinformation but the wing nuts follow them like a cult leader. Seek the truth, you won't find it on Fox News.
The problem i see with your post is your use of the word tea bagger. why you have to discredit honest people trying to organize my marginalizing them with such names says that any part of your post can not be legitimate.
While most of the words you right are non combative the attempt to trivialize the opposition by name calling trivializes your post
The problem i see with your post is your use of the word tea bagger. why you have to discredit honest people trying to organize my marginalizing them with such names says that any part of your post can not be legitimate.
While most of the words you right are non combative the attempt to trivialize the opposition by name calling trivializes your post
They started calling themselves tea-baggers. Ask them. Why not ask why people use terms like "Obamabots", call the president "Barry" or "Hussein" and call Keith Olbermann oberbum or whatever else? Why chose one term out of my entire post and address nothing else? Just look through these threads and same question could be asked of those on the right. Just replace the term. Have you asked?
They started calling themselves tea-baggers. Ask them. Why not ask why people use terms like "Obamabots", call the president "Barry" or "Hussein" and call Keith Olbermann oberbum or whatever else? Why chose one term out of my entire post and address nothing else? Just look through these threads and same question could be asked of those on the right. Just replace the term. Have you asked?
I believe anyone who wants to discuss in an fair way will not use those terms. Please show me a site where the tea party people are calling themselves tebaggers.
You do know the name teabagger is sexually very offensive
The problem i see with your post is your use of the word tea bagger. why you have to discredit honest people trying to organize my marginalizing them with such names says that any part of your post can not be legitimate.
While most of the words you right are non combative the attempt to trivialize the opposition by name calling trivializes your post
I agree completely. But when the dem leadership (e.g. Pelosi) use these words and worse to trivialize the opposition, then what can we expect from their followers?
I first heard the term while watching the local news and seeing some older women with tea bags hanging from their hat saying that they were going to keep "teabagging". Obviously they had no issues with the term then. I thought this was about Fox News by the way.
When did Pelosi use the term? I do know that Maxine Waters explained what the term meant on the floor. Please answer my question, why do you overlook all the derogatory terms on the right? Don't ask me to site, it's not hard to find them, especially when a US Senator blatantly disrespects the president by calling him a liar but since we're talking about media here, let's stick to the subject at hand. Do you have an issue when the derogatory terms come from the right or someome on Fox News?
I first heard the term while watching the local news and seeing some older women with tea bags hanging from their hat saying that they were going to keep "teabagging". Obviously they had no issues with the term then. I thought this was about Fox News by the way.
When did Pelosi use the term? I do know that Maxine Waters explained what the term meant on the floor. Please answer my question, why do you overlook all the derogatory terms on the right? Don't ask me to site, it's not hard to find them, especially when a US Senator blatantly disrespects the president by calling him a liar but since we're talking about media here, let's stick to the subject at hand. Do you have an issue when the derogatory terms come from the right or someome on Fox News?
The term teabagger triviliazed the OP post which otherwise was well worded.
You tell me what terms and what context and I will discuss the terms you wish to talk about
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.
