its all party politics. i know most media has some form of bias.
whichever side the highups follow, they bash the other side to gain power. if you think cnn isnt biased, you have problems. you think remembering and reporting about a dead president is bias? cnn covered it for how long? 2 seconds? "reagan dead, back to bashing bush."

you went from conservative idiot to incomprehensible waste of time in less than three posts. Congratulations. But it's really not that much of a step.

I DARE you to read this (if you read) and come back here and say there isn't a conservative slant in the media. http://www.bartcop.com/libmedia.htm

I'm expecting you to come back with something bizarre and completely unrelated to the topic, by the way. This post is really for the other people reading this thread. Both of them.

you're an idiot. you provide someones internet rant as proof that the liberal media bias doesnt exist? you have serious problems. lets get back to kerry changing his mind on issues. didnt he vote for the patriot act that he now attacks? how about no child left behind? did he thow away his friends medals? ribbons? or where they his? does he own a suv? or is it his family. he makes statements that he later has to "clarify" two or three times. these are the facts, but the liberal media wont even touch it.

I own an SUV too, does that make me a bad man?

http://www.starterupsteve.com/images/steve4.gif

nice pic, lol.. http://www.starterupsteve.com - what the fuck is up with that site? are you even a webmaster?

nothing wrong with owning a suv. when he's in detroit, he's proud of owning a suv, on earth day, he doesnt own it, its his family. and yes, im a webmaster.

what's your site?

did you read that article or do I have to post it here and make you look like more of an idiot than you already are?

comment on that article. I'd like to hear what you have to say about it. Debunk it.

its in my profile

I missed that. :(

i agree with the basis of it. they would go out and deny it. im not here promoting fox news or anything like that. what i was originally saying is that all the big media is biased in one way or another. those names listed on there dont represent the entire media. im sure all those things could be said about clinton and liberal networks.

the whole point of the article is that there is no liberal echo chamber. There wouldn't be any attack dogs out to defend Clinton. If the media is biased, it has to be biased one way or the other, it can't be biased both ways. You read the article. Which way is it biased?

I was wondering why this person was saying that CNN has a liberal bias, because to everyone outside the USA, that comment sounds more ridiculous than I can explain. Then I realized why he's saying it.

http://www.starterupsteve.com/images/steve4.gif

He's a fucking kid with his head up his ass who thinks that being a Republican will help make him a cool rich guy. Why are intelligent people wasting breath on this kid?

Covering Clinton's blowjob constantly and then brushing off the huge scandals from Woodwards book in one week, yeah what a 'liberal' bias CNN has. Who owns most of CNN now, Ted Turner? Don't think so. Actually I think it's AOL. Who owns AOL? I'll let you find that out for yourself. :1orglaugh

its biased to the left making the generalization that the media is represented by the conservative right. it appears that was written along time ago. there are more leftwingers on tv now. the only thing they dont dominate is the radio. and there are always attack dogs defending someone or another. they are defending kerry now. if cnn isnt biased, why didnt they bitch at clinton after bombing iraq in 98? he used the same intel and reasoning bush used. now they are out for bush's blood. and yes, it can be biased both ways. fox news is one side, cnn is the other. those two are the most extermine and there are serveral in the middle who dont report new selectively.

he's young, confused. Maybe he can still be helped :thumbsup

im no kid, and thats not my picture. bash away

Clinton didn't waste 800 American lives and untold billions of American dollars invading Iraq. Bush did. Hence the media coverage.

If you had followed any of the links I gave you or actually read and pondered the bartcop article, we wouldn't still be having this conversation about a biased liberal media.

It's no fun to win an argument when you know you're wrong. Quit trying. Being a conservative doesn't make you look tougher. Read and learn and be objective, you'll thank yourself when you're in your 30s.

If that's not your pic and you're not a kid, I'm shocked for two reasons:

a) your argumentative techiques are high school level. If you're not a kid, this is bad.

b) you have a picture of a pimple faced 17 yr old boy on your really, really shitty website. Why?

Clinton preferred to kill civilians.

im done with this. if you think the only bias in the media is the right, then thats fine. im not going to change your mind. i guess i learned something here tonight.

and what did you learn?

how many Iraqi civilians have been killed and/or tortured under Bush? How many under Clinton?

wanna take a guess how those numbers are going to work out?

if you dont like the website, dont visit it. thats your choice. and you're right, its shitty. maybe i should spend some time to redesign it. thanks for letting me know.

I just wanna know why you have that young boy's picture on your website if that's not you.

i learned that people are hard headed and dont want to change their opinions. i fall into that group, i know, but alot of other people here do aswell. these threads are pointless.

because that's "starterup steve"
my name is mike
hi

My mind can be changed, I just have to be convinced by the weight of the evidence. If conservatives were similarly inclined, we wouldn't be having these problems with our government right now.

did you make up starterup steve or is he a real person you know?

The civilians that Bush killed weren't necessarily targets. The civilians that Clinton murdered were. Waco and Ruby Ridge are the two most obvious examples but really, the Clinton administration was notorious for its ability to rid itself of enemies. Look it up.

thats true

i made it to annoy a guy i went to highschool with
thats him in the picture

oh yeah, he killed Vince Foster right? :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

As it happens, I don't agree with the Clinton administration's actions at Waco or Ruby Ridge. I didn't like their lackadaisacal approach to individual privacy issues either, but on the whole he was a great President and far, FAR above Bush league.

and at least Clinton killed his civilians outright, nice and clean. He didn't torture them first.

hahaha. its sad that a fool like yourself with no understanding of our government gets so much play on this board. (I'm sure the idiots actually believe your horse shit and thats too bad)

Can you explain to the class what the attorney general has to do with the military?
:1orglaugh

Sure, he's refusing the release the report that shows Bush signed off on the torture, yet not claiming executive privilege. Which, according to most of the Senators, is contempt of congress. Keep asking questions my friend, I'll gladly help you get a better understanding of what's really going on in the world. I don't mind spending my time helping out an uninformed soul.

Good to know you read that report and now understand and admit the scope of the systematic US torture.

http://www.iht.com/articles/524001.html

http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news...p_world _news

memos rather, not report.

http://www.iht.com/articles/524001.html
"""Appearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Ashhahahahaha was assailed with questions about a cascade of recently disclosed memorandums in which lawyers from his department as well as those from the Defense Department and elsewhere in government provided legal justifications for using torture in interrogating people detained in the campaign against terrorism."""

sleep off the rest of your drunk so that you can comprehend what you read. (or are you sober and this is a typical example of canadian education?):1orglaugh

Theres alot of disturbing things with this regime.. I mean administration...
It *is* contempt of congress to refuse to provide information without citing executive priviledge and not citing a specific exemption. He simply stated that he doesnt think he should have to release the memos because he thinks the pres. is entitled to private advice. Well, thats not the law. He is in contempt based on the information we have so far.
Also, remember the 9/11 commision hearings with miss rice? No one could envision someone flying planes into buildings she said. But she said they were on high alert for hijackings and bombings and such. Well before those planes could be flown anywhere, they were hijacked. Thats a failure on a massive scale.
She also said that the proof of their failure were those planes going into those buildings. No shit. And that the memo stating that bin dickfuck was planning attacks *in* the us was a "historical document". Pullease. These buttheads literally needed planes to fly into buildings to see something was wrong, by their own testimonies.
Also, in woodwards interview with the pres., which I remind you was ENCOURAGED by the pres., he asked if gw had sought advice from G senior. And he said no, he asked a higher father. I assert that A) if what he said is true, and he didnt seek advice from Sr., that it is a sign of massive incompetence. And B) calling this not a religious war while praying for advice from God is massive incompetence and a blatant lie.
Either way, these clowns can kiss my ass because as an American, they do NOT represent me. They can barely argue their way out of a paper lunch sack.

C'mon, you dont need to be partisan on either side to recognize idiocy and horribly failed policy. You dont have to be a genius to know that in the Reagan administration a plan was tabled by Wolfie, rummy, chenny and G sr to "liberate iraq". Reagan and his smarter advisors laughed it out of the room as being "radical". This is part of public record, and was reported on PBS' Frontline shortly after this latest war began. Rarely reported since then, if at all.

I could go on and on because I'm bored.. lets just say that if I was inclined to put a political sign in my lawn, it would read "Anyone but Bush 2004".

What are you points here? Bush and Asskroft are not doing anything wrong? What do you take from this Asskroft hearing, quick, no turning to Rush Limbaugh for help.

You're so delusional it's hard to talk to you.

That you're a liar.

There is no such report or mention of such a report.
you're a liar as you always are (when you're not busy parrotting the liberal line unwittingly)

oh, and here's another little bit of education for you son, if Ashhahahahaha is in contempt of congress, congress would hold him in contempt instead of cry like little girls
*saying* he's in contempt.

your ignorance is stunning.:1orglaugh

your contempt would be a little less idiotic and misplaced if most of the world hadn't actually seen Ashhahahahaha on CNN refusing to release the report. Do I need to find you a video clip?

your 'crying like little girls' remark is especially funny considering you're licking the nutsack of a pack of chicken hawks too scared to go to war who are doing their best to make a war hero look like a coward.

But your big mustache is a real turn-on, I must admit. Does it go well with your cowboy hat, boots and redneck attitude?

Fuck them all..:BangBang:

Samuel

whoa, WHAT'S THIS?!? A conservative in favor of education?

I thought you people hated intellectuals i.e. smart people. You know, you want to teach creationism in schools, ban Huck Finn, all that good stuff.

Aren't you, as a good conservative, supposed to be dead set against ever learning anything about the real world? You need to get back to your conservative roots. Read the Bible and listen to Charlie Daniels tonight, you're slipping.

oh look, diglet to the rescue with every liberal talking point he can think of.
ahahahaha.
poor little diglet still hating the fact that people don't take liberals like himself seriously.

good thing you can rant on the internet to pump yourself up with your rightousness, no?:1orglaugh

hrm some telling points there Ronnie, I just don't know how I'm going to deal with your keen, perceptive rebuttals. hrm, let me think....

http://www.starpulse.com/Music/Villa..._The/thumb.jpg

you're the cowboy, right?

Ehm, you point out that canadian education is bad, however, the average grade 12 test in the US would be considered a grade 8 level test on other countries. In Ohio, a new low has been reached. In order for a grade 12 to pass a test, they have to get at least 40%... on a grade 8 test.

Ronnie shaved off his mustache last year digdug. Have you been a little too liberal with your pot-smoking again?

lol

the gambling industry will cheer assheads departure with champagne! :glugglug

:glugglug :glugglug :glugglug