![]() |
Quote:
|
Quote:
And yes the major newspapers are run by liberals, use 2 be (Years Ago) the Editors were Conservative no longer. |
Quote:
They all say the exact same catchphrases and code words that they hear on the radio. You can deny it, but we both know the truth. A very large percentage of this country is brainwashed by talk radio, CNN, Fox, etc. Rush alone claims 20 million drones listen to him everyday. That's a lot of people who prefer right wing propaganda to facts. Arguing with talk radio listeners is nearly pointless, so I mostly just point them out when I see them. I think I see one! :) |
Quote:
|
By the way, here are some numbers on which candidate most U.S. newspapers endorsed in the 2000 election:
http://www.tipponline.com/articles/00/E&p112.htm At the same time, the survey revealed that the nation's newspapers have endorsed Bush over Gore by a better than 2-1 margin. The Editor & Publisher/TIPP poll also asked who the editors and publishers plan to vote for themselves next week. In another surprise, those willing to reveal their vote named Bush by a 2-1 margin. Publishers will vote for Bush at a 3-1 ratio, with editors favoring the Texas Governor by a narrow margin. |
We knew about Pearl Habor before it happened. It was our excuse to get into the war. We had to get into the war but back then we didnt attack until attacked apon. As crazy as Saddam is he is not Hitler and the Nazi's , he will also never raise to that level he has a suckful army unlike Hitler had.Also Hitler had the support of the German people for the most part, people dont like to talk about that. Saddams people are there only because he wont let them out lol. Also he was doing all this evil shit 12 yrs ago and W's father kept him in power.
Read the book At Dawn We Slept: The Untold Story of Pearl Harbor Considered the most complete work on the subject. |
NO!
Notice most people agree. |
yea, gfy is a great barometer for anything. Half the people on the board hate america. The other half are diehard liberals that think conservatives will end porn even though there was more obsenity busts in the clinton years.
|
Quote:
Here is an article from some right wing site that might wake you up: http://www.moralityinmedia.org/index...lintonporn.htm During the first six years of the Clinton administration, federal obscenity law enforcement declined by over eighty percent. In fiscal year 1997, there were only six prosecutions in which the lead charge was a violation of federal obscenity laws. In fiscal year 1998, the number was eight. During the Reagan and Bush administrations,the Justice Department successfully prosecuted child pornographers and large-scale purveyors of obscenity; and, in the process of effectively enforcing the obscenity laws, collected millions of dollars in fines and forfeitures to offset the costs of enforcement. |
can you answer any question without completely spinning ?
|
Quote:
During the first six years of the Clinton administration, federal obscenity law enforcement declined by over eighty percent. :) |
No, I think he's just ignoring it.
:1orglaugh |
and that is spin. The issue at hand is obsenity under gwb vs clinton.
I don't even think obsenity busts are a bad thing. But the calling card from many pornographers for months ahead of the election is how internet porn would be in hot water under bush. That has not been the case. Far from it. And the obsenity and censorship has been in europe and canada. |
This is like a fucking good looking chick.
IT MUST BE DONE! |
44% for war
56% against Anyone else? |
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:06 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©2000-, AI Media Network Inc123