Bush And Terrorism

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mont974x4

No, we won't put up with BS and lies...which is why readership is down for liberal newspapers and most MSM are seeing ratings drop. lol

---

Please mont, let's be honest here for a second. Despite my nationality, it's just how I communicate best. The media lies. it's not that it used to lie and doesn't now, or even that it lies more now than before. It's that people believe it. That's the problem.

I'd like to believe that the american people were starting to develop their own backbone and might be able to sort truth from lies on their own, because it's apparent that there's too much money to be made off confusion for anyone else to do it for us... But so far... I've been disappointed.

O'Reilly's show is the No-spin zone... he can't spin things, it would go against the name...

now swallow.

Actually I believe there has been a steady decline in honest media since the 60's.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mont974x4

Actually

Sorry, I think Moore is wacko with a severe leftist agenda and more money than sense...bt that is just my personal opinion.

---

M. Moore is a money grubbing bitch that plays off the weak minds of the easily influenced. :twocents:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mont974x4

Actually I believe there has been a steady decline in honest media since the 60's.

---

I'm not saying that the media is all that but explain how such things as Watergate, Whitewater, Billies B.J., Reagons psychics, etc.. could have been reported by a corrupt media. The first reason to influence the media in that manner is to protect the President and the rest of the leaders in a given country. How often do you hear of a Chinese journalist being critical of one of their leaders without being jailed?

All people in power are working to their own agendas the big picture will remain the same until something major league happens like civil uprisings.
Then you will see what a democratic dictator looks like.

While I agree the media can and should report on such things they need to remain as objective as possible. This has rarely been the case in recent years. At a minimum they need to treat all news fiarly. FOr example, we had weeks of front page stories on Abu Graib while at the same time people that had been abducted were being beheaded and that received far less coverage. While I do not condone the actions at Abu Graib they were villified far more than necessary and the real torture done by the enemy was almost whitewashed. Another example is the Cheney hunting accident. While the story was, and should have been, covered it was blown way out of proportion. The press was ticked that they weren't told soon enough while the necessary medical help was provided immediatley. hmm How long did Kennedy wait to even get help after drowning that poor woman in the river?

The American people are waking up to this bias and are talking with their money. That's why readership and circulation is down for liberal newspapers and people are changing the channel and looking for new sources of information.

This is hilarious today! The U.S. system is corrupt, our news is corrupt....but yet 10's of thousands are rioting in the streets of Paris with cars burning and tear gas a flowin'!

The last election in the U.S. one of the candidates wanted to be more like France!:thumbsup:

Gee which candidate was that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Psycho4Bud

We'll have a brand new asshole for ya all to bitch about come "08" and you can call that one the anti-christ by "09".:thumbsup:

---

Yeah proberly unless it's someone who is going to turn america around for the better and isn't as stupid and dishonest just like bush and his adminstration.:thumbsup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Miss Green

Yeah proberly unless it's someone who is going to turn america around for the better and isn't as stupid and dishonest just like bush and his adminstration.:thumbsup:

---

Show me an honest politician and I'll show ya a kangaroo that can fly!

We have so many bad choices to choose from and ya just hope that the one you voted against was the right decision. That's pretty much what the political vote has turned to, you don't vote for the one you "like" as much as you vote against the one you don't like. As for myself, I just couldn't see J. Kerry doing us ANY good at all. Good ol' rich boy from Mass. with absolutely no plan at all and a history of bailing on his fellow troops wasn't a good pick for the Dem. party during war time.