Print Page | Close Window

FOX News

Printed From: Commercials I Hate!
Category: Commercials You Hate!
Forum Name: Television Related Rants
Forum Description: That awful stuff between the bad commercials.
URL: http://www.commercialsihate.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=1476
Printed Date: 28 Mar 2024 at 6:13pm
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.04 - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: FOX News
Posted By: Luanne89
Subject: FOX News
Date Posted: 16 Jul 2008 at 10:51pm
I'm so sick of this network and their right-wing "news."  It's nothing more than propaganda. I was stunned when that newswoman made a joke about assassinating Obama on youtube.   Of course, it certainly wasn't the first time they've said something inappropriate, and it sure won't be the last.  I'm no "super-liberal" or anything, but FOX news is ridiculous.

P.S. Bill O'Reilly should burn in hell

Edit:  I am aware that some liberal TV news stations/papers/other forms of media use their power to twist the truth.  I do not mean to make them appear as "perfect" or blameless.    I have nothing against conservatives or people who like FOX News.





Replies:
Posted By: Yutolia
Date Posted: 16 Jul 2008 at 11:20pm
*Subs for Bunny and starts building the bleachers.

Anyone want to run the snack cart?Wink

-------------
"Xbox Live is an online homophobia club for pre-teen Tourette’s sufferers." - Brockway, Cracked.com


Posted By: BrianO
Date Posted: 16 Jul 2008 at 11:24pm
Damn Fox News! It inserted a microchip in the brains of everyone who doesn't like it, and now it FORCES people to watch, whether they want to or not!
Or at least, that's what Keith Olberman told me.


Posted By: ForumAdmin
Date Posted: 17 Jul 2008 at 12:10am
Fox news spells Osama Bin Laden with a U: "Usama Bin Laden".

Think about that.

If every major American news organization uses "Osama", and you use "Usama", what are you saying?
You're saying "We are right, and everyone else is wrong."

And that may be true. The FBI spells it "Usama".

So if Fox reports anything else contradictory to other news outlets, all the other guys must be wrong.
That's what the "Usama" says to me, whenever I see it on Fox. It comes off as arrogant to me.


Posted By: 8 Track Single
Date Posted: 17 Jul 2008 at 12:17am
Post removed at user's request.


Posted By: PaWolf
Date Posted: 17 Jul 2008 at 12:45am

Fox New is IDIOT news...but they'll post about ANYTHING to get your attention - if there was anyone to use as an example for 'Yellow Journalism', FOX IS THE BEST EXAMPLE.

But I sure find some verifiably stupid news there...and some first rate, verifiable archeology news...so they are not totally useless...


-------------
X               <sig.nature>
"What we do for ourselves dies with us, What we do for others is and remains immortal." - Albert Pike


Posted By: TWCFan
Date Posted: 17 Jul 2008 at 1:25am
I am surprised there hasn't been a Fox News rant already.

P.S. Rupert Murdoch should burn in hell. (sorry Luanne)


Posted By: Thor
Date Posted: 17 Jul 2008 at 1:41am
Originally posted by TWCFan TWCFan wrote:

I am surprised there hasn't been a Fox News rant already.

P.S. Rupert Murdoch should burn in hell. (sorry Luanne)
 
There was yesterday.  Wild Starchild and I think it's a good cable news station.  It's in the Tony Snow thread.
 
 


Posted By: Thor
Date Posted: 17 Jul 2008 at 1:43am
Originally posted by PaWolf PaWolf wrote:

Fox New is IDIOT news...but they'll post about ANYTHING to get your attention - if there was anyone to use as an example for 'Yellow Journalism', FOX IS THE BEST EXAMPLE.

But I sure find some verifiably stupid news there...and some first rate, verifiable archeology news...so they are not totally useless...
 
Archaeology news??  Are you talkin' the same FOX news we're talkin' about, Pa?  That is, FOX Cable News i.e., FCN?
 
 
 


Posted By: 8 Track Single
Date Posted: 17 Jul 2008 at 2:01am
Post removed at user's request.


Posted By: TomAnderson
Date Posted: 17 Jul 2008 at 2:21am
While there are plenty of elements of Fox I don't care for (Sean, stop repeating the same thing over and over again, Greta, go get a real show) you have got to be kidding me that Fox is nothing but propaganda.  I know of few shows like the ones on Fox who give so much air time to folks on the "other side of the aisle".

No offense, but this country has been STEEPED in left leaning journalism for the past 30 YEARS at least.  I could see it reading TIME magazine for high school reports. The LA Times, the New York Times, oh, they're not propaganda?  How many Abu Grahib stories did NYT run?

Has the Fox news channel belittled the troops?  Has it done a Dan Rather, and when there is no dirt on the President, then MAKE THE SH!T UP?  Does Fox have POS people on the sub-level of Olbermann who simply make unwarranted, nutty hit jobs on anyone with a -R after their name?

Your singling out of Fox news as somehow "Propaganda" in this swirling morass of cr@ppy liberal media would be hilarious, if it weren't just a little bit sad.


Posted By: Thor
Date Posted: 17 Jul 2008 at 2:31am
Well said, Tom.
 
Furthermore, what gets me is that people on the left see none of that.  Chris Matthews of MSNBC (who I don't think is so bad as long as you know where he's coming from i.e., the left) feigns impartiality---and people fall for it, yet recently said this about Obama:
 
"The feeling most people get when they hear a Barack Obama speech, I mean, I get, I felt this thrill go up my leg. I mean, I don't have that too often."
 
I have no problem with a news commentator presenting himself as liberal or as conservative.  At least I know where they're coming from.  But when they're clearly biased, yet pretend to be objective---well, all I can say is it's a tactic that works with the less discerning.
 


Posted By: Jimbo
Date Posted: 17 Jul 2008 at 2:55am
Originally posted by TomAnderson TomAnderson wrote:

Your singling out of Fox news as somehow "Propaganda" in this swirling morass of cr@ppy liberal media would be hilarious, if it weren't just a little bit sad.
 
What is sad is that the fairy tale of the so-called "liberal media" is still in existence.
 
Anything that right wingers don't like or agree with is labeled "liberal".
 
Don't report lies about how supposedly "great" things are going in Iraq?
 
Well, you're just a bunch of liberal liars.
 
And that whole thing about how during Bush's first 1½ terms in office the so-called "liberal media" treated him with kid gloves until they could no longer get away with it.
 
The truth is that the mainstream media is a CORPORATE media, neither liberal nor conservative but profit driven & content controlled by owners most of whom are conservative.
 
Other networks may have individual on screen personalities who lean to the left, but FOX News as a network, goes out of it's way to lean to the right.
 


-------------
...the ads take aim and lay their claim to the heart and the soul of the spender
Jackson Browne - The Pretender

C'mon, man!
Joe Biden - 46th President of the United States


Posted By: TomAnderson
Date Posted: 17 Jul 2008 at 2:57am
Originally posted by NathanAlexander NathanAlexander wrote:

Fox news spells Osama Bin Laden with a U: "Usama Bin Laden".

Think about that.

If every major American news organization uses "Osama", and you use "Usama", what are you saying?
You're saying "We are right, and everyone else is wrong."

And that may be true. The FBI spells it "Usama".

So if Fox reports anything else contradictory to other news outlets, all the other guys must be wrong.
That's what the "Usama" says to me, whenever I see it on Fox. It comes off as arrogant to me.

'
The translation from Arabic can go either way depending on how it's done, there are some character matchup issues of O and U between Arabic and English.

Take a look at the FBI file here:

http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/topten/fugitives/laden.htm - http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/topten/fugitives/laden.htm

There is no arrogance here, unless you want to accuse Time Magazine of this.  They were one of the few organizations that spelled Romania "Rumania", during the big Romanian news stories of 1989 when deposed Romanian president Nicolae Ceausescu and his wife were overthrown and executed.

http://www.orbilat.com/Languages/Rumanian/Rumanian_vs_Romanian.html - http://www.orbilat.com/Languages/Rumanian/Rumanian_vs_Romanian.html


Posted By: TomAnderson
Date Posted: 17 Jul 2008 at 3:07am
Originally posted by Jimbo Jimbo wrote:

Originally posted by TomAnderson TomAnderson wrote:

Your singling out of Fox news as somehow "Propaganda" in this swirling morass of cr@ppy liberal media would be hilarious, if it weren't just a little bit sad.
 
What is sad is that the fairy tale of the so-called "liberal media" is still in existence.
 
Anything that right wingers don't like or agree with is labeled "liberal".
 
Don't report lies about how supposedly "great" things are going in Iraq?
 
Well, you're just a bunch of liberal liars.
 
And that whole thing about how during Bush's first 1½ terms in office the so-called "liberal media" treated him with kid gloves until they could no longer get away with it.
 
The truth is that the mainstream media is a CORPORATE media, neither liberal nor conservative but profit driven & content controlled by owners most of whom are conservative.
 
Other networks may have individual on screen personalities who lean to the left, but FOX News as a network, goes out of it's way to lean to the right.
 


Jimbo, please disprove anything I said about the NY Times, or other examples.  Go for it with some real examples of how NYT has ANY balance in it at all.  Give me an example of FNC making up things a la Rather.  Let's see it.  Please show me how on Fox news magazines, liberal viewpoints get no exposure, and it's just the right just gets it and that is all.  Tell me all about how right of center Juan Williams, Al Sharpton, Lanny Davis, all contributors and oft-times guests to the programs, are in their viewpoints, and how they are silenced.

Then when  you are telling me about that, please let me know the proportion of right vs. left op eds in most of the nation's newspapers.

If you can't admit that the majority of mainstream media is left leaning, you're either ignorant, blind, disinterested, or a liar....no offense of course.


Posted By: CatWoman
Date Posted: 17 Jul 2008 at 4:09am
Originally posted by yutolia yutolia wrote:

*Subs for Bunny and starts building the bleachers.

Anyone want to run the snack cart?Wink
 
I'll run the snack cart.....LOL      **starts warming up chips and cheese for nachos**


-------------



Posted By: Jimbo
Date Posted: 17 Jul 2008 at 4:22am
Originally posted by TomAnderson TomAnderson wrote:

Originally posted by Jimbo Jimbo wrote:

Originally posted by TomAnderson TomAnderson wrote:

Your singling out of Fox news as somehow "Propaganda" in this swirling morass of cr@ppy liberal media would be hilarious, if it weren't just a little bit sad.
 
What is sad is that the fairy tale of the so-called "liberal media" is still in existence.
 
Anything that right wingers don't like or agree with is labeled "liberal".
 
Don't report lies about how supposedly "great" things are going in Iraq?
 
Well, you're just a bunch of liberal liars.
 
And that whole thing about how during Bush's first 1½ terms in office the so-called "liberal media" treated him with kid gloves until they could no longer get away with it.
 
The truth is that the mainstream media is a CORPORATE media, neither liberal nor conservative but profit driven & content controlled by owners most of whom are conservative.
 
Other networks may have individual on screen personalities who lean to the left, but FOX News as a network, goes out of it's way to lean to the right.


Jimbo, please disprove anything I said about the NY Times, or other examples.  Go for it with some real examples of how NYT has ANY balance in it at all.  Give me an example of FNC making up things a la Rather.  Let's see it.  Please show me how on Fox news magazines, liberal viewpoints get no exposure, and it's just the right just gets it and that is all.  Tell me all about how right of center Juan Williams, Al Sharpton, Lanny Davis, all contributors and oft-times guests to the programs, are in their viewpoints, and how they are silenced.

Then when  you are telling me about that, please let me know the proportion of right vs. left op eds in most of the nation's newspapers.

If you can't admit that the majority of mainstream media is left leaning, you're either ignorant, blind, disinterested, or a liar....no offense of course.
 
Well regarding your last sentence & your immediate resorting to name calling, that's a pretty typical right wing reponse.
 
You think FOX News is the only network that airs opposing views? Just because they allow commentary from the left doesn't make them "fair & balanced" as a network. And if allowing commentary from the left is proof of a lack of bias, then how come the same credit isn't given to the rest of the media who does the exact same thing with commentary from the right & has been doing so since before the FOX Network even existed?
 
What I was talking about was the media in general. The entire mainstream media in general that constantly gets derided as liberal just because they don't engage in the kind of blood thirsty, far right, Limbaughesque ranting that conservatives need to hear in order to validate their obnoxious views.
 
You bring up individuals who engage in commentary from a biased viewpoint, but how about all the conservatives who do the same thing & are published in mainstream newspapers & are seen on other network panel shows? People like George Will, Charles Krauthammer, William F. Buckley, Pat Buchanan, Bill Kristol, etc. etc. etc.
 
We could play the "my list is longer than your list" here for days but it still wouldn't change the fact that the term "liberal media" is & never was anything more than a rallying cry for the right so they could tell themselves they were the oppressed underdogs rather than the rabid attack dogs that they always have been & still are.
 
And I wouldn't recommend continuing with the nasty name calling if you want to stick around here.
 
This is one forum where that crap isn't tolerated.
 
Oh & BTW, in case you've never heard of him there is a conservative columnist named David Brooks who appears regularly on The News Hour with Jim Lehrer opposite Mark Shields & also writes a regular column for the NYT. And they also run a regular column by a guy named Bill Kristol. Maybe you've heard of him. He's on FOX News every Sunday morning nodding his head in agreement with Britt Hume.
 
So much for your screed about the New York Times et al.
 
 


-------------
...the ads take aim and lay their claim to the heart and the soul of the spender
Jackson Browne - The Pretender

C'mon, man!
Joe Biden - 46th President of the United States


Posted By: TomAnderson
Date Posted: 17 Jul 2008 at 5:34am
First of all Jimbo, unless you're the owner of the site, to heck with you and your threats of "not being around here".  As long as we're busy with labels, which you started, how funny it is when someone has a strong opposing opinion, you want to try to move him out of forum.  How brave of you, behind your screen.  There's the tolerant left for ya!

Maybe you should get a thicker skin.  I said if you couldn't see the obvious, you're ignorant, et c.  If the shoe fits, so be it.  My goodness, you would have thought I called you an a-hole.

Interestingly, this thread started out with someone saying Bill O'Reilly should burn in hell.  Not a commercial character that we make fun of here, but a real person.  How funny you don't say a word about that.  But God forbid someone call your lack or acknowledgment of the obvious ignorant.  I am so sorry if I offended your delicate sensibilities.  Do you cry when they put ketchup instead of mustard on your hot dog?

The first name calling here was by you, labeling me as a "right winger", and don't feed me the BS that the label wasn't meant as derogatory.  In fact, you labeled me that while complaining about labeling liberals!  Hilarious.

Oh and for the tiny bit of actual DATA you attempted to supply, which is laughable, I am glad you were able to find actually one conservative columnist at that paper.  Gee, bet you might be able to dig up a conservative  professor at your local university if you really tried too.


Posted By: timdubya
Date Posted: 17 Jul 2008 at 5:38am
As for Osama/Usama, Time also spells Ayatollah Ayatullah.


Posted By: TomAnderson
Date Posted: 17 Jul 2008 at 5:41am
Originally posted by timdubya timdubya wrote:

As for Osama/Usama, Time also spells Ayatollah Ayatullah.


Hmmm, didn't catch that one yet.  I think the editors pretty much decide what direction to go, and then stick with it.  It is odd to be looking at different media and within moment see different spellings.

I am trying to think...if memory serves me, there is a city somewhere that different organizations spell differently.  Can't remember right now, it will probably come to me in the middle of doing reports or something....Unhappy


Posted By: Thor
Date Posted: 17 Jul 2008 at 4:10pm

The Pew Research Center has done extensive studies on bias in the media.  They found that an inordinate number of journalists consider themselves liberal as opposed to conservative.  Furthermore, the liberal writers had trouble identifying their own writings as liberal, though they were able to point to conservative writers.  In other words, liberal writers consider liberal bias to be unbiased.  Also, liberals are more likely to call themselves moderates, based on their opinions on topical issues, as compared to the general public's opinions on those subjects.  In other words, self-described "moderate" journalists are probably liberal.  This supports what I've said here before---that liberal journalists don't even realize that they're liberal.  Or just won't admit it.  But that makes sense.  If everyone around you wears bowties, you see nothing unusual about it.

 
http://people-press.org/report/?pageid=829 - http://people-press.org/report/?pageid=829
 

Excerpt:  About a third of national journalists (34%) and somewhat fewer local journalists (23%) describe themselves as liberals; that compares with 19% of the public in a May survey conducted by the Pew Research Center. Moreover, there is a relatively small number of conservatives at national and local news organizations. Just 7% of national news people and 12% of local journalists describe themselves as conservatives, compared with a third of all Americans.

In this regard, Internet journalists are similar ideologically to local journalists: 57% describe themselves as moderates, while 27% say they are liberals and 13% conservatives. Local TV and radio journalists include the lowest percentage of liberals of any of the journalist groups surveyed (15%). Even among local TV and radio journalists, however, just 13% describe themselves as conservatives.

 
Pew Research also found the media to be biased towards Barack Obama, as opposed to Hillary Clinton.  As if that wasn't obvious.
 


Posted By: ForumAdmin
Date Posted: 17 Jul 2008 at 5:00pm

Right, E.D. Various ways it "had been characterized in the media".
Meaning, someone said it before you did, and nobody noticed.


Posted By: Yutolia
Date Posted: 17 Jul 2008 at 5:13pm
Originally posted by MrsHill MrsHill wrote:

Originally posted by yutolia yutolia wrote:

*Subs for Bunny and starts building the bleachers.

Anyone want to run the snack cart?Wink
 
I'll run the snack cart.....LOL      **starts warming up chips and cheese for nachos**


I knew I could count on you, Hilly! LOL


-------------
"Xbox Live is an online homophobia club for pre-teen Tourette’s sufferers." - Brockway, Cracked.com


Posted By: CatWoman
Date Posted: 17 Jul 2008 at 5:26pm

Oh, it's nothing!  My pleasure!



-------------



Posted By: BrianO
Date Posted: 17 Jul 2008 at 7:09pm
'I'm Keith Olberman, on the not-biased MSNBC. In today's top story, President George W. Poopypants said today that all Republicans smell like poop. MSNBC has now confirmed that they do.'


Posted By: Ryan Ferneau
Date Posted: 18 Jul 2008 at 3:07am
Originally posted by Thor Thor wrote:

They found that an inordinate number of journalists consider themselves liberal as opposed to conservative.  Furthermore, the liberal writers had trouble identifying their own writings as liberal, though they were able to point to conservative writers.

The writers maybe, but what about the editors, publishers, producers, etc. who have to approve their work?

Originally posted by TomAnderson TomAnderson wrote:

I know of few shows like the ones on Fox who give so much air time to folks on the "other side of the aisle".

Well what if I don't want "both sides"?  What if I just want THE TRUTH?  Is anyone looking hard for that these days?


Posted By: Thor
Date Posted: 18 Jul 2008 at 3:23am
Originally posted by Ryan Ferneau Ryan Ferneau wrote:

Originally posted by Thor Thor wrote:

They found that an inordinate number of journalists consider themselves liberal as opposed to conservative.  Furthermore, the liberal writers had trouble identifying their own writings as liberal, though they were able to point to conservative writers.

The writers maybe, but what about the editors, publishers, producers, etc. who have to approve their work?


 
Easy enough.  If the publishers et al continually disapproved of a journalist's work based on bias, that journalist would be out of a job, as would his bias.  I think most of those people have a similar background and a similar perspective on things---and there's no way that's not going to be reflected on the pages of their newspaper.  And it's not just the perspective they impart on a particular story, it's which stories they choose to impart.  And both are based on who buys their paper.  So, when you open up a newspaper, you're not getting "the truth" so much as you're getting that which the readership wants to hear.
 
 
 
 


Posted By: Jimbo
Date Posted: 18 Jul 2008 at 3:51am

Originally posted by TomAnderson TomAnderson wrote:

If you can't admit that the majority of mainstream media is left leaning, you're either ignorant, blind, disinterested, or a liar....no offense of course.

This was your response to a post where I referred to "right wingers" as a group. Real 'equitable" response there. I never directly called you a right winger & if you'll notice the "s" on the end, it's obvious I was referring to the right as a group.
 
First of all Jimbo, unless you're the owner of the site, to heck with you and your threats of "not being around here".  As long as we're busy with labels, which you started, how funny it is when someone has a strong opposing opinion, you want to try to move him out of forum.  How brave of you, behind your screen.  There's the tolerant left for ya!
 
I was just giving you some friendly advice. If you want to twist it around & call it a threat to make yourself appear the victim, you go right ahead. That's a typical underhanded tactic of the right & I'm used to it.

Maybe you should get a thicker skin.  I said if you couldn't see the obvious, you're ignorant, et c.  If the shoe fits, so be it.  My goodness, you would have thought I called you an a-hole.

What is so much better about calling someone a blind, ignorant liar than calling them an a-hole? A direct personal insult is a diirect personal insult. And YOU are the one who engaged in it. MY reference was to the right in general, which you just happen to (obviously) be a part of.
 
Interestingly, this thread started out with someone saying Bill O'Reilly should burn in hell.  Not a commercial character that we make fun of here, but a real person.  How funny you don't say a word about that.  But God forbid someone call your lack or acknowledgment of the obvious ignorant.  I am so sorry if I offended your delicate sensibilities.  Do you cry when they put ketchup instead of mustard on your hot dog?
 
If I choose not to comment on what someone said about Bill O'Reilly, it's none of your business & it has nothing to do with you diving down into the gutter & engaging in personal insults.
 
The first name calling here was by you, labeling me as a "right winger", and don't feed me the BS that the label wasn't meant as derogatory.  In fact, you labeled me that while complaining about labeling liberals!  Hilarious.   
 
Talk about getting a thicker skin.... what I find truly funny is that you have just acknowledged that being called a right winger is an insult, even though in your case it's true. I agree that it is an insult to one's level of intelligence & overall decency to BE a right winger but being referred to as one when you obviously are  is just a statement of fact.
 
But once again as explained before, I was referring to the right in general & your attmept to equate my reference to "right wingers" (plural if you'll notice) with you calling me an ignorant, liar is just typical weak-ass rightie bullsh*t. You must be Thor's next door neighbor or someone he recruited to join up here to back him up because you sound just like him &  the level of your argument is just as weak & desperate.
 
..


-------------
...the ads take aim and lay their claim to the heart and the soul of the spender
Jackson Browne - The Pretender

C'mon, man!
Joe Biden - 46th President of the United States


Posted By: Jimbo
Date Posted: 18 Jul 2008 at 4:01am
Originally posted by Thor Thor wrote:

Originally posted by Ryan Ferneau Ryan Ferneau wrote:

Originally posted by Thor Thor wrote:

They found that an inordinate number of journalists consider themselves liberal as opposed to conservative.  Furthermore, the liberal writers had trouble identifying their own writings as liberal, though they were able to point to conservative writers.

The writers maybe, but what about the editors, publishers, producers, etc. who have to approve their work?
 
Easy enough.  If the publishers et al continually disapproved of a journalist's work based on bias, that journalist would be out of a job, as would his bias.  I think most of those people have a similar background and a similar perspective on things---and there's no way that's not going to be reflected on the pages of their newspaper.  And it's not just the perspective they impart on a particular story, it's which stories they choose to impart.  And both are based on who buys their paper.  So, when you open up a newspaper, you're not getting "the truth" so much as you're getting that which the readership wants to hear.
 
BULL-loney.
 
If the majority of journalists in the nation's media are liberals it is for one obvious reason.... journalism isn't a field one goes into to line one's pockets with lots of money.
 
Liberals tend to be idealists who want to get out of college & make a difference no matter if the pay is low.
 
Conservatives want to get out of college & start looking for some corporate finance job & end up going to work for companies like Enron, then spend their careers trying to see how many people they can screw.
 
That is also why the majority of media outlet owners are conservatives who hire other conservatives to work in management & set the news coverage agenda.
 
One of the reasons why Bush got away with so much for so long while the so-called "liberal media" turned a blind eye.
 
Like I said before.... the notion of a "liberal media" is & always has been a right wing myth conjured up to make them feel like victims & give them a rallying cry.
 
 
 


-------------
...the ads take aim and lay their claim to the heart and the soul of the spender
Jackson Browne - The Pretender

C'mon, man!
Joe Biden - 46th President of the United States


Posted By: Jimbo
Date Posted: 18 Jul 2008 at 4:20am
Originally posted by TomAnderson TomAnderson wrote:

Oh and for the tiny bit of actual DATA you attempted to supply, which is laughable, I am glad you were able to find actually one conservative columnist at that paper.  Gee, bet you might be able to dig up a conservative  professor at your local university if you really tried too.
 
You asked for "any example of how the NYT has any balance at all" & I gave you TWO.
 
What more do you want?????
 
Do you think I'm going to waste the rest of my life responding to your silly nonsense???? Wacko
 
The NYT employs at least TWO conservative columnists at their paper, & that's not to mention any nationally syndicated conservative columnists who might regularly get printed.
 
Sorry if that's not good enough for you.
 
Cry about it to Rush Lame-bo next time you call in.
 
 
 
 


-------------
...the ads take aim and lay their claim to the heart and the soul of the spender
Jackson Browne - The Pretender

C'mon, man!
Joe Biden - 46th President of the United States


Posted By: Thor
Date Posted: 18 Jul 2008 at 5:08am
Here's an article written by the NY Times "public editor", Daniel Okrent.  "The public editor works outside of the reporting and editing structure of The Times and receives and answers questions or comments from readers and the public, principally about articles published in the paper."  The article is entitled "Is the NY Times a Liberal Newspaper?"
It starts out "OF course it is."
 
Here's an excerpt:
On a topic that has produced one of the defining debates of our time, Times editors have failed to provide the three-dimensional perspective balanced journalism requires. This has not occurred because of management fiat, but because getting outside one's own value system takes a great deal of self-questioning. Six years ago, the ownership of this sophisticated New York institution decided to make it a truly national paper. Today, only 50 percent of The Times's readership resides in metropolitan New York, but the paper's heart, mind and habits remain embedded here. You can take the paper out of the city, but without an effort to take the city and all its attendant provocations, experiments and attitudes out of the paper, readers with a different worldview will find The Times an alien beast.
 
 
 
Here's another:
But if you're examining the paper's coverage of these subjects from a perspective that is neither urban nor Northeastern nor culturally seen-it-all; if you are among the groups The Times treats as strange objects to be examined on a laboratory slide (devout Catholics, gun owners, Orthodox Jews, Texans); if your value system wouldn't wear well on a composite New York Times journalist, then a walk through this paper can make you feel you're traveling in a strange and forbidding world.

Start with the editorial page, so thoroughly saturated in liberal theology that when it occasionally strays from that point of view the shocked yelps from the left overwhelm even the ceaseless rumble of disapproval from the right.

 
And another:
But opinion pages are opinion pages, and ''balanced opinion page'' is an oxymoron. So let's move elsewhere. In the Sunday magazine, the culture-wars applause-o-meter chronically points left. On the Arts & Leisure front page every week, columnist Frank Rich slices up President Bush, Mel Gibson, John Ashcroft and other paladins of the right in prose as uncompromising as Paul Krugman's or Maureen Dowd's. The culture pages often feature forms of art, dance or theater that may pass for normal (or at least tolerable) in New York but might be pretty shocking in other places.
 
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9d01e7d8173df936a15754c0a9629c8b63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1 - http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9d01e7d8173df936a15754c0a9629c8b63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1
 
 


Posted By: TomAnderson
Date Posted: 18 Jul 2008 at 6:31am
Blah blah blah blah Jimbo.  You went into the label deal first, spin it any way you want.  You started with the veiled threats of being thrown off the board.  Clearly, you don't like being called on your BS, and you cry foul that you are being insulted.  And THAT is a LIBERAL tactic if I ever saw one.

I have cited several examples, Thor for God's sakes has shown you whole reports from outside sources.  No good for you.  And what nonsense do we get.....right wing this...Enron... liberals are idealists...it's all Bush's fault---paragraph after paragraph of it, and you call my "screeds" nonsense.  That's a good one.  Same old tired dumbazz rhetoric from the pieholes of your useless leadership. 

I'll take a wild guess...you believe that Bush lied about WMD,  9/11 was an inside job, Cheney and his oil cronies control all the markets, the election was stolen, and Al Gore is positively right about everything he says about global warming.  Am I right?  Thought so.

Go on, stay up late tonight in your sweaty jammies and type your inane replies.  No one cares, and you just continue to show your lack of depth.  But keep trying, the occasional laugh makes it  almost worth reading your dreck.



Posted By: JimA
Date Posted: 18 Jul 2008 at 9:06am
Originally posted by TomAnderson TomAnderson wrote:

I'll take a wild guess...you believe that Bush lied about WMD, 
 
Is there any doubt?
 


 


Posted By: Jimbo
Date Posted: 18 Jul 2008 at 11:50am
Originally posted by Thor Thor wrote:

Here's an article written by the NY Times "public editor", Daniel Okrent.  "The public editor works outside of the reporting and editing structure of The Times and receives and answers questions or comments from readers and the public, principally about articles published in the paper."  The article is entitled "Is the NY Times a Liberal Newspaper?"
It starts out "OF course it is."
 
Here's an excerpt:
On a topic that has produced one of the defining debates of our time, Times editors have failed to provide the three-dimensional perspective balanced journalism requires. This has not occurred because of management fiat, but because getting outside one's own value system takes a great deal of self-questioning. Six years ago, the ownership of this sophisticated New York institution decided to make it a truly national paper. Today, only 50 percent of The Times's readership resides in metropolitan New York, but the paper's heart, mind and habits remain embedded here. You can take the paper out of the city, but without an effort to take the city and all its attendant provocations, experiments and attitudes out of the paper, readers with a different worldview will find The Times an alien beast.
 
 
 
Here's another:
But if you're examining the paper's coverage of these subjects from a perspective that is neither urban nor Northeastern nor culturally seen-it-all; if you are among the groups The Times treats as strange objects to be examined on a laboratory slide (devout Catholics, gun owners, Orthodox Jews, Texans); if your value system wouldn't wear well on a composite New York Times journalist, then a walk through this paper can make you feel you're traveling in a strange and forbidding world.

Start with the editorial page, so thoroughly saturated in liberal theology that when it occasionally strays from that point of view the shocked yelps from the left overwhelm even the ceaseless rumble of disapproval from the right.

 
And another:
But opinion pages are opinion pages, and ''balanced opinion page'' is an oxymoron. So let's move elsewhere. In the Sunday magazine, the culture-wars applause-o-meter chronically points left. On the Arts & Leisure front page every week, columnist Frank Rich slices up President Bush, Mel Gibson, John Ashcroft and other paladins of the right in prose as uncompromising as Paul Krugman's or Maureen Dowd's. The culture pages often feature forms of art, dance or theater that may pass for normal (or at least tolerable) in New York but might be pretty shocking in other places.
 
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9d01e7d8173df936a15754c0a9629c8b63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1 - http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9d01e7d8173df936a15754c0a9629c8b63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1
 
 
 
Who ever denied the NYT was a liberal newspsper???? I was talking about the media as a whole & you single out one newspaper that we all know tends to be liberal in it's approach as so-called evidence or even proof that the myth of a liberal media bias is true. Also, regarding my original point about the media as a whole, I note that you left out a telling quote from the article you referenced....
 
Quote The San Francisco Chronicle runs an uninflected article about Congressional testimony from a Stanford scholar making the case that gay marriage in the Netherlands has had a deleterious effect on heterosexual marriage. The Boston Globe explores the potential impact of same-sex marriage on tax revenues, and the paucity of reliable research on child-rearing in gay families.
 
So in other words, these other so-called "liberally biased" newspapers are shown to have run articles counter to the standard liberal argument. Hence my point about the media in general being neither liberal or conservative.
 
And what about The Wall Street Journal, Washington Times, New York Post, Manchester (NH) Union-Leader, and Daily Oklahoman? These are rated as the top five "conservative" newspapers in the country by Insight Magazine itself a self-described conservative publication.
 
Why no mention of them, Thor? And here's another question... do any of these "conservative" papers employ an independant public editor as does the NYT that can write an honest assessment of his employers work without fear of reprisal?
 
Anyway, if you'll go back to my original post on the matter, you'll see that I made the statement that the media was neither liberal nor conservative. Here's an interesting article on that very subject that I'm sure you & your new friend will trash because it doesn't fit into your little pigeon hole & refutes the idea that conservatives are poor little victims beset upon by a big mean liberally biased media that just won't give them a fair shake.
 
http://www2.ups.edu/faculty/haltom/virtualjournal/vroman.htm - http://www2.ups.edu/faculty/haltom/virtualjournal/vroman.htm
 


-------------
...the ads take aim and lay their claim to the heart and the soul of the spender
Jackson Browne - The Pretender

C'mon, man!
Joe Biden - 46th President of the United States


Posted By: Jimbo
Date Posted: 18 Jul 2008 at 12:18pm
Originally posted by TomAnderson TomAnderson wrote:

Blah blah blah blah Jimbo. 
 
I'll bet that's what it says on your GED, isn't it?
 
You went into the label deal first, spin it any way you want.  You started with the veiled threats of being thrown off the board.  Clearly, you don't like being called on your BS, and you cry foul that you are being insulted.  And THAT is a LIBERAL tactic if I ever saw one.
 
Well, you just go ahead & keep your deathgrip on that pathetic defense of your behavior because it's obviously all you've got. I've tussled with enough people like you to know that as absurd as something is, you'll never let it go. You called me unprovoked nasty names because that's all you've got. As far as I'm concerned the matter is closed.

I have cited several examples, Thor for God's sakes has shown you whole reports from outside sources.  No good for you.  And what nonsense do we get.....right wing this...Enron... liberals are idealists...it's all Bush's fault---paragraph after paragraph of it, and you call my "screeds" nonsense.  That's a good one.  Same old tired dumbazz rhetoric from the pieholes of your useless leadership. 
 
Several examples of what? You haven't cited anything. And you certainly haven't backed up any claim you've made, so in reality you're just fartin' in the breeze.

I'll take a wild guess...you believe that Bush lied about WMD,  9/11 was an inside job, Cheney and his oil cronies control all the markets, the election was stolen, and Al Gore is positively right about everything he says about global warming.  Am I right?  Thought so.
 
Yep. Nope. Nope (but they likely control the US refineries who are not running at full capacity thus tightening the supply of gas & keeping the price higher than it needs to be). Yep (2000), and Pretty Much.

Go on, stay up late tonight in your sweaty jammies and type your inane replies.  No one cares, and you just continue to show your lack of depth.  But keep trying, the occasional laugh makes it almost worth reading your dreck.
 
Until you actually prove yourself worthy of an in depth reply by posting something that actually makes a semi cogent point about something, which as of yet you have not, I won't be spending much time on my replies to you if you're lucky enough to merit a reply from me period.

 
..


-------------
...the ads take aim and lay their claim to the heart and the soul of the spender
Jackson Browne - The Pretender

C'mon, man!
Joe Biden - 46th President of the United States


Posted By: Jimbo
Date Posted: 18 Jul 2008 at 12:57pm
Originally posted by JimA JimA wrote:

Originally posted by TomAnderson TomAnderson wrote:

I'll take a wild guess...you believe that Bush lied about WMD, 
 
Is there any doubt?
 
Only in the minds of those to whom the truth is too painful to accept.
 
 


-------------
...the ads take aim and lay their claim to the heart and the soul of the spender
Jackson Browne - The Pretender

C'mon, man!
Joe Biden - 46th President of the United States


Posted By: CatWoman
Date Posted: 18 Jul 2008 at 1:09pm

HOT DOGS, PEANUTS, PRETZELS, NACHOS, CANDY BARS, COOOOCA-COLA!!!!  GET YOUR SNACKS HERE!!!



-------------



Posted By: BrianO
Date Posted: 18 Jul 2008 at 3:43pm

"Hi, I'm Jimbo. Underneath my coherent sentence structure is my basic desire that America should only have one political party. Hint: Not the GOP."



Posted By: Jimbo
Date Posted: 18 Jul 2008 at 5:46pm

Originally posted by BrianO BrianO wrote:

"Hi, I'm Jimbo. Underneath my coherent sentence structure is my basic desire that America should only have one political party. Hint: Not the GOP."

That's not true.
 
I just wish the GOP wasn't as joined at the hip with corporate interests at the expense of just about everything else.
 
The GOP has to be dragged kicking & screaming into any kind of environmental concerns & they'd love to cut poor people off at the knees so that their well-heeled corporate contributors could make even more astronomical sums of money than they already do.
 
And BTW.... it's the GOP who wishes & even attempted during the 90's to make themselves the only political party in America.
 
I just wish the GOP were a little more humane in their policies towards anyone that isn't a large corporation.
 
But thank-you for the "coherent sentence structure" compliment all the same. Smile
 
 


-------------
...the ads take aim and lay their claim to the heart and the soul of the spender
Jackson Browne - The Pretender

C'mon, man!
Joe Biden - 46th President of the United States


Posted By: Luanne89
Date Posted: 18 Jul 2008 at 11:40pm
Originally posted by yutolia yutolia wrote:

Originally posted by MrsHill MrsHill wrote:

Originally posted by yutolia yutolia wrote:

*Subs for Bunny and starts building the bleachers.

Anyone want to run the snack cart?Wink
 
I'll run the snack cart.....LOL      **starts warming up chips and cheese for nachos**


I knew I could count on you, Hilly! LOL


and who will sell tickets?


Posted By: Luanne89
Date Posted: 18 Jul 2008 at 11:44pm
Originally posted by MrsHill MrsHill wrote:

HOT DOGS, PEANUTS, PRETZELS, NACHOS, CANDY BARS, COOOOCA-COLA!!!!  GET YOUR SNACKS HERE!!!




lol :)


Posted By: jeroboam
Date Posted: 25 Jul 2008 at 7:53pm
How is it that others who attempt to enter the fray that is so eloquently mastered Jimbo and Thor, can't do so with even a semblance of tact and intelligence?

In all their heated moments, I have yet to really seem them resort to blatant attacks and personal name calling.
Seems this Tom Anderson on the other hand, hasn't learned this just yet.


Posted By: Ad nauseous
Date Posted: 25 Jul 2008 at 8:33pm
Any network that makes up sh*t without any legitimate proof isn't a reliable source.

Who was the network who started with the nonsense about the "terrorist fist jab" I'll give you one hint.

Who's the network who first claimed Obama was a muslim?

Who's the network that misspelled the word education?

Who's the network who has made false claims about other news outlets WITHOUT any FACTS to back it up?

What network has made racist claims about Barack Obama WITH NO FACTS TO BACK IT UP.

What was the network that claimed that North Korean  subs were silently located off the east coast?

and that's just a few

Look I ain't one of those stupid conspiracy theorists, I can't stand those type of people! Don't try to lump us with nutcases who are afraid to go outside because they fear "da big shadowy gov'mint is going to wead der toughts", I don't appreciate being painted with a broad brush pal.

Look, I've seen some moments the Fox News had excelled at news stories which surprised me, some stuff that others may haven't covered as much, however when those things are clumped together with made up crap they continually come up with it really  HURTS THEIR IMAGE.

CNN isn't perfect either recently I've witnessed Lou Snobbs starting to have idiotic rants about Al Gore, and Barack Obama and calling for offshore drilling.

and about that CBS thing you're forgetting that they had a LIVE INTERVIEW with a REAL PERSON admitting pulling strings to get Bush into the Air National Guard.

and Chris Mathews is hardly fair and balanced.











  

-------------
One good thing about TV-you could always turn it off


Posted By: Wild Starchild
Date Posted: 26 Jul 2008 at 7:26am
Let me jump in here if I may???
 
I just want to ask some questions,and I'd appreciate it if you guys would answer. These questions ARE NOT meant "smartassedly" (my word LOL) however just to get us all on the same page. OK??
 
1. Do any of you think the rape, murder, or exploitation of kids is a good thing?
 
2. What do you think "society" should do to those people found guilty of such crimes against children.
 
3. How do you feel about immigrants from other countries coming into our country, UNLAWFULLY, taking our jobs, using our free healthcare, committing crimes, and never paying taxes or refuse to learn English. If they want to live here, why not register and go through the proper channels?
 
4. Abortion? It's a very touchy subject, and one of, if not THE most hotly argued issues between the right and left. BUT what if their were an alternative. I'd like your views on these points. Now first, let's take the rape issue off the table temporarily, well come back to it shortly. What if folks stopped being irresponsible and used protection?? I know that is asking a lot, but can you imaging, all of the great minds and personalities we have lost from this planet because they never were given a chance to live? I know, a fetus isn't a person right??..........I mean that's what they say. But if that "fetus" had not been aborted, barring   medical complications, it would have been a person. So that lets the wind out of that sail. If we used protection and  were responsible, we could DRAMATICALLY cut down on the huge numbers of abortions, even by tens of thousands. A woman has the right to choose! She should choose to either say NO, or to use protection and make the guy use it too!! If responsibility were pushed instead of the "easy out" of abortion, then we would NOT need it. Ok, for those who did not act responsibly or for those who were raped, why not use the "Morning after Pill"? Look, conservatives, I am conservative too, but I see the need of a compromise. I hate abortion, but you guys are not going to overturn Roe vs. Wade so why not move on to a better use of that effort in trying to drastically cut down on the number of abortions if we can't stop it all together. Ladies, no one should tell you what to do with your bodies, but I would ask that you be responsible, and you guys too!! But if mistakes are made and we all know they can be, why not use the "morning after" pill to kill the sperm. A males sperm can live inside the female body I have heard up to a week. Well kill the sperm before it reaches the egg, instead of waiting around to kill a fertilized egg. I think we have been WAY to staunch on this issue. The right stands firm, while the left digs in and NO GROUND IS GAINED!! Compromise damnit!! each side give a little and then have a f**king coke and a smile!!!
 
I'd be interested in hearing your varying views before I go on. This will be relevant to the thread, I promise.


-------------
AW DAMN!!!! Wild Shot the friggin TV again!!!


Posted By: PaWolf
Date Posted: 26 Jul 2008 at 1:09pm
Originally posted by Wild Starchild Wild Starchild wrote:

Let me jump in here if I may???
 
I just want to ask some questions,and I'd appreciate it if you guys would answer. These questions ARE NOT meant "smartassedly" (my word LOL) however just to get us all on the same page. OK??
 
1. Do any of you think the rape, murder, or exploitation of kids is a good thing?
 
Obviously NOT.
 
2. What do you think "society" should do to those people found guilty of such crimes against children.
 
Punishable by DEATH, nothing less.
 
3. How do you feel about immigrants from other countries coming into our country, UNLAWFULLY, taking our jobs, using our free healthcare, committing crimes, and never paying taxes or refuse to learn English. If they want to live here, why not register and go through the proper channels?
 
We really need to tighten our controls about our resources; if they want to come here, maybe they could show us how much they want to stay by taking the place of our kids in Iraq and Afganistan before taking a job.
 
4. Abortion? It's a very touchy subject, and one of, if not THE most hotly argued issues between the right and left. BUT what if their were an alternative. I'd like your views on these points. Now first, let's take the rape issue off the table temporarily, well come back to it shortly. What if folks stopped being irresponsible and used protection?? I know that is asking a lot, but can you imaging, all of the great minds and personalities we have lost from this planet because they never were given a chance to live? I know, a fetus isn't a person right??..........I mean that's what they say. But if that "fetus" had not been aborted, barring   medical complications, it would have been a person. So that lets the wind out of that sail. If we used protection and  were responsible, we could DRAMATICALLY cut down on the huge numbers of abortions, even by tens of thousands. A woman has the right to choose! She should choose to either say NO, or to use protection and make the guy use it too!! If responsibility were pushed instead of the "easy out" of abortion, then we would NOT need it. Ok, for those who did not act responsibly or for those who were raped, why not use the "Morning after Pill"? Look, conservatives, I am conservative too, but I see the need of a compromise. I hate abortion, but you guys are not going to overturn Roe vs. Wade so why not move on to a better use of that effort in trying to drastically cut down on the number of abortions if we can't stop it all together. Ladies, no one should tell you what to do with your bodies, but I would ask that you be responsible, and you guys too!! But if mistakes are made and we all know they can be, why not use the "morning after" pill to kill the sperm. A males sperm can live inside the female body I have heard up to a week. Well kill the sperm before it reaches the egg, instead of waiting around to kill a fertilized egg. I think we have been WAY to staunch on this issue. The right stands firm, while the left digs in and NO GROUND IS GAINED!! Compromise damnit!! each side give a little and then have a f**king coke and a smile!!!
 
(Frien'Pup's gonna get me for this, I'm certain) I think the 'Zero-Population' initiative has its place whenever I stroll through 'Da Hood', 'Ya'll's Trailer Park', the Barrio, or the 'Indi-RaceWay'...having children is a God-given pivilage; a gift - being a 'Food Stamp Baby' and ending up on Welfare IS NOT - and it's killing us. The recipients just are not 'getting the message'; hormones tend to rule. So, take the kids, spay the bitches, neuter the idiots. I feel NO MERCY for them. We do it to dogs - what's the difference? 
Drastic times call for drastic measures - and we're already there. 
 
I'd be interested in hearing your varying views before I go on. This will be relevant to the thread, I promise.
Answers above.
I CAN'T WAIT to see how you bring this around to being 'relevant' to FOX NEWS, WS - but, hey - go for it!Wink 
You did ask questions to which most answers will 'lean to the right', anyway...so, if THAT is where you are going...hmmmmm.


-------------
X               <sig.nature>
"What we do for ourselves dies with us, What we do for others is and remains immortal." - Albert Pike


Posted By: LOL1955
Date Posted: 26 Jul 2008 at 1:53pm
1.  Not no, but HELL no.
 
2.  Life in prison with severe restrictions (no internet) and no parole.
 
3.  I am softer on illegal immigrants because we are all immigrants to one degree or another.  I prefer that, once they arrive, they take the steps to become an actual citizen, but I would never deny health care to anyone in need, regardless of their paperwork status.
 
4.  If it's possible for a person to be pro-life and pro-choice at the same time, you're lookin at her.   For me, each human life is a sacred gift, and each human being once he/she is old enough to discern right from wrong then has to choose which path to walk.  I believe that I can only choose for myself.


-------------
Love endures all.


Posted By: CatWoman
Date Posted: 26 Jul 2008 at 2:20pm
1) No.
 
2) Life in prison - General population.  No Protective Custody - do time like every other criminal.
 
3) See what LOL said. 
 
4) I wish males and females would think of the consequences of having sex - pregnancy AND disease.  Self respect and control are the things parents should be teaching their children.  Arm your children with knowledge.  Poor judgement will still happen, and birth control may not be 100% effective.  I am pro-choice.  I believe it's up to each capable individual to make their own decision, be it pharmaceutical or surgical abortion, adoption, or keeping the baby.  Different people will have different definitions of the word capable.  I won't argue about my definition of the word.


-------------



Posted By: Wild Starchild
Date Posted: 26 Jul 2008 at 5:02pm
I'll wait till a few more of you guys have a chance to opine, but  already I see that all you gus even from varying veiwpoints have sensible solutions and beliefe on the ISSUES!! Haven't heard any nutball ideas from the right or the left. Please if any goober, troublemakers invade this thread, ignore them and let's stay on topic. I have a different way of looking at things and I want to see if you guys agree?

-------------
AW DAMN!!!! Wild Shot the friggin TV again!!!


Posted By: britastar
Date Posted: 26 Jul 2008 at 5:46pm
"(Frien'Pup's gonna get me for this, I'm certain) I think the 'Zero-Population' initiative has its place whenever I stroll through 'Da Hood', 'Ya'll's Trailer Park', the Barrio, or the 'Indi-RaceWay'...having children is a God-given pivilage; a gift - being a 'Food Stamp Baby' and ending up on Welfare IS NOT - and it's killing us. The recipients just are not 'getting the message'; hormones tend to rule. So, take the kids, spay the bitches, neuter the idiots. I feel NO MERCY for them. We do it to dogs - what's the difference? 
Drastic times call for drastic measures - and we're already there. " 
 
Wow..that solution sounds...hmm...well, let's see here....oddly familiar.  Comparing humans to animals........Napoleon? No.  Hmmm...what other infamous world leader had some of those same ideas???? Hmm....*scratching head*........trying to think here........anyone?  Germany?  Something about Germany. 
 
 


-------------
ilikestupidadssoshutup-MrsHill   



Posted By: CatWoman
Date Posted: 26 Jul 2008 at 5:48pm

I agree with Brit. 



-------------



Posted By: britastar
Date Posted: 26 Jul 2008 at 5:51pm
Basically Pa, your saying "Hitler had the right idea". 
Forgive me if I'm wrong, but it sure sounds like it. 
 

"They do it to dogs"...?  C'mon.
 
 
 


-------------
ilikestupidadssoshutup-MrsHill   



Posted By: PaWolf
Date Posted: 26 Jul 2008 at 5:53pm

'Adolf' Wolf at your service...Nooooooo, not QUITE.Wink

ZPG ('Zero Population Growth') fell 'out of fashion' well over ten (10) years ago - the original idea was pretty much a hyperactive response to a badly projected forthcoming 'disaster' (overpopulation and the resultant demise of mankind)...but, alas, it is once again being looked into...and, in places like Buffalo, well - I'm not so certain it is a bad idea, in some modified/evolved/re-thought form. East Buffalo is a pretty well-trashed and heavily populated area (AND GROWING). Social Services in this area can take up to 1 1/2 years to react to the needs of folks that were often addressed in 90 days or less, just a few years ago; there are TOO MANY folks "in need" - and so very many are young. And now we have (officially, as of yesterday, according to a few Health departments) an official AIDS epidemic in our region (especially bad in East and South Buffalo), to boot...you wouldn't believe so very many of the billboards around town, these days...the public simply doesn't seem to be getting the message...all in all, something has to happen - something must be done.
 
I think us wolves need 'Body Condoms'....the general public is getting scary.
 
  


-------------
X               <sig.nature>
"What we do for ourselves dies with us, What we do for others is and remains immortal." - Albert Pike


Posted By: britastar
Date Posted: 26 Jul 2008 at 5:55pm
Smile

-------------
ilikestupidadssoshutup-MrsHill   



Posted By: CatWoman
Date Posted: 26 Jul 2008 at 8:34pm
Originally posted by Luanne89 Luanne89 wrote:

Originally posted by yutolia yutolia wrote:

Originally posted by MrsHill MrsHill wrote:

Originally posted by yutolia yutolia wrote:

*Subs for Bunny and starts building the bleachers.

Anyone want to run the snack cart?Wink
 
I'll run the snack cart.....LOL      **starts warming up chips and cheese for nachos**


I knew I could count on you, Hilly! LOL


and who will sell tickets?
 
If you want the job, it's yours, Luanne!Hug


-------------



Posted By: Wild Starchild
Date Posted: 26 Jul 2008 at 9:10pm
I think what Pa was refering to is the spreading around of the "seed" with no intentions of tending to the gardens. You see a lot of young men and women, go unmentored and unparented, and they wind up in gangs, prison, or dead, so their lives which could have been worth so much are wasted. I know it's stereotypical to think of young black men in this way, but I am NOT making any references to color or ethnicity, because it happens in all of them. I think Pa means that he lives in a rough area or sees it or has seen it's results, and it makes him angry and sick to see the chaos that unprotected sex causes. If people gave a damn about more than getting instant gratification, then we would not have the problem. I know it's not PC to refer to people like animals, but you have to admit, some folks do act like them. It's a spirited debate, and sometimes spirits are transcribed into peoples words. LOL GOD knows, I have done that!!! LOL 
 
Pa, If I missed the point, then please forgive me for speaking for you.


-------------
AW DAMN!!!! Wild Shot the friggin TV again!!!


Posted By: Thor
Date Posted: 26 Jul 2008 at 9:27pm
1. No.
 
2.  The death penalty for child killers and all murders (if eligible).  Severe sentences for the others.  There are certain cases when death would be appropriate for sex criminals, but they're the extreme cases.  However, the death penalty here would be opening up a bucket of worms.
 
3.  Ideally, remove all illegal immigrants from this country.  Give them no medical or school services.  No anchor babies, either.  Sorry, their babies are not our concern.
 
And no sanctuary cities either.  San Francisco is one.  There's been a case going on recently, in which a father and his two sons were shot while driving.  Had to do with one not yielding to another at an intersection.  the killer was a young illegal alien with a long rap sheet.  San Francisco, in its obsessive love of criminals and other members of the underclass, has refused to deport this person, or to even report him to customs officials.  Now, a mother is left with most of her family gone.  Much of the crime in California is perpetrated by illegal aliens.  Just about all are Hispanic.  I know that's not supposed to be said, but let's face it, violence is Central America's chief export.
 
4.  I think abortion is a worthy debate.  I can see things from both sides.  I am against cloaking it as a woman's issue, though.  I think the killing of the unborn is much bigger than just a person's "choice".
 
 


Posted By: Wild Starchild
Date Posted: 26 Jul 2008 at 9:27pm
Hey since we are on the subject, what do you guys feel about pedophiles and other sex offenders that get out of jail and molest and kill people, should they be allowed to keep their manhoods?? Just curious because I have heard some states are thinking of chemically castrating them.
 
My personal beliefs are, you  do that to a kid and you give up your right to breathe!! I can't stand it when these wastes of guts and skin get out of jail and do it again. Poor little Jessica Lundsford was kidnapped from her bedroom, held and raped for days by John Couey before he wrapped her in garbage bags and burried her alive in a shallow grave in his back yard. This guy should have NEVER been on the streets. This is just one of many HORRRIBLE things done to kids by these perverts. I say when someone possesses the ability to do that, they shouldn't be among us. And furthermore, I don't want to feed these assholes while they rot in jail!! Anyone who does that to a kid or anyone for that matter does not deserve to breathe the same air we do!!


-------------
AW DAMN!!!! Wild Shot the friggin TV again!!!


Posted By: CatWoman
Date Posted: 26 Jul 2008 at 9:41pm
There are 2 pervs by me - a guy down the road who likes boys, and the son of my wonderful across the street neighbors who likes underage girls.  The guy who likes little boys got 6 FRICKIN' MONTHS IN COUNTY JAIL.  The one that got busted with a 14 year old girl (he was in his 20's at the time) got sentenced 1 TO 3 YEARS STATE PRISON.
 
In my little fantasy world, they would still be in prison, in general population, so they know what victimization feels like.  For life.  If they killed a child, give them the death penalty.
 
I wouldn't be in favor of chemical castration - only surgical.  Along with the life sentence in a cell with Big Fat Bubba.


-------------



Posted By: CatWoman
Date Posted: 26 Jul 2008 at 9:43pm
Originally posted by Wild Starchild Wild Starchild wrote:

I think what Pa was refering to is the spreading around of the "seed" with no intentions of tending to the gardens. You see a lot of young men and women, go unmentored and unparented, and they wind up in gangs, prison, or dead, so their lives which could have been worth so much are wasted. I know it's stereotypical to think of young black men in this way, but I am NOT making any references to color or ethnicity, because it happens in all of them. I think Pa means that he lives in a rough area or sees it or has seen it's results, and it makes him angry and sick to see the chaos that unprotected sex causes. If people gave a damn about more than getting instant gratification, then we would not have the problem. I know it's not PC to refer to people like animals, but you have to admit, some folks do act like them. It's a spirited debate, and sometimes spirits are transcribed into peoples words. LOL GOD knows, I have done that!!! LOL 
 
Pa, If I missed the point, then please forgive me for speaking for you.
 
Wild, Pa's very good at getting his point across.  His post was ugly, plain and simple.


-------------



Posted By: PaWolf
Date Posted: 26 Jul 2008 at 10:13pm
Originally posted by Wild Starchild Wild Starchild wrote:

I think what Pa was refering to is the spreading around of the "seed" with no intentions of tending to the gardens. You see a lot of young men and women, go unmentored and unparented, and they wind up in gangs, prison, or dead, so their lives which could have been worth so much are wasted...I think Pa means that he lives in a rough area or sees it or has seen it's results, and it makes him angry and sick to see the chaos that unprotected sex causes. If people gave a damn about more than getting instant gratification, then we would not have the problem...
Pa, If I missed the point, then please forgive me for speaking for you.
Appreciate the 'back-up', WS. You basically 'hit the nail on the head' - if nobody has told you, I'll say it - you are very good at that.
 
If one chooses not to give a pair of innocent eyes a chance - if one cannot commit one's life, don't make a child pay...and pay...and pay.
 
Simply put, 'Nobody Wins'.
 
But, personally, I'm getting a tad bitter, I guiess - I'm CERTAINLY not the first to say this - heck, these words were burned into my head when we were young. They went in one ear and out my d*ck - thus, five happily grown and independant chilluns. Probably because I;
 
1.) Have always loved my wife and children - I've been VERY lucky!
2.) Have always been scared of and respected my wife.
3.) Have always been scared of and respected my parents, sister, and brother.
4.) Have always been scared of and respected her parents, sisters, and brother. 
5.) Have always been amazed of the light in a child's eyes!!! I'll do anything to keep it strong...
6.) And more than anything, understood a simple word: responsibility
 
Words just don't seem to sink in to so very many, anymore. So much seems so lost - and as generation pass, those that lose no longer understand what they could have had - what they could have been - they become more 'animalistic'; almost a 'lower-life form'...and, for what?
 
Now, in regard to "where we live" - we live perfectly well; secluded, quiet, on an island with The Falls in our back yard...but the neighboring areas are quite rough (doesn't scare us a bit) and the community is NOT on the 'upswing', unfortunately. Good for us - it costs money to get on the island and the locals fiercely defend the island; we are not under the control of either of the large local governments around us - thus, Local government is very good; close-by government is 'nothing to write home about' (I'm being kind).
 
Child abusers? C'mon now. As long as they have HANDS/FEET/TEETH/MOUTH...well, then not enough was done.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 


-------------
X               <sig.nature>
"What we do for ourselves dies with us, What we do for others is and remains immortal." - Albert Pike


Posted By: Thor
Date Posted: 26 Jul 2008 at 11:03pm
Originally posted by Wild Starchild Wild Starchild wrote:

Hey since we are on the subject, what do you guys feel about pedophiles and other sex offenders that get out of jail and molest and kill people, should they be allowed to keep their manhoods?? Just curious because I have heard some states are thinking of chemically castrating them.
 
My personal beliefs are, you  do that to a kid and you give up your right to breathe!! I can't stand it when these wastes of guts and skin get out of jail and do it again. Poor little Jessica Lundsford was kidnapped from her bedroom, held and raped for days by John Couey before he wrapped her in garbage bags and burried her alive in a shallow grave in his back yard. This guy should have NEVER been on the streets. This is just one of many HORRRIBLE things done to kids by these perverts. I say when someone possesses the ability to do that, they shouldn't be among us. And furthermore, I don't want to feed these assholes while they rot in jail!! Anyone who does that to a kid or anyone for that matter does not deserve to breathe the same air we do!!
 
This guy just needs to be taken out behind the prison and shot in the head.
 
 


Posted By: Thor
Date Posted: 26 Jul 2008 at 11:09pm
Originally posted by MrsHill MrsHill wrote:

Originally posted by Wild Starchild Wild Starchild wrote:

I think what Pa was refering to is the spreading around of the "seed" with no intentions of tending to the gardens. You see a lot of young men and women, go unmentored and unparented, and they wind up in gangs, prison, or dead, so their lives which could have been worth so much are wasted. I know it's stereotypical to think of young black men in this way, but I am NOT making any references to color or ethnicity, because it happens in all of them. I think Pa means that he lives in a rough area or sees it or has seen it's results, and it makes him angry and sick to see the chaos that unprotected sex causes. If people gave a damn about more than getting instant gratification, then we would not have the problem. I know it's not PC to refer to people like animals, but you have to admit, some folks do act like them. It's a spirited debate, and sometimes spirits are transcribed into peoples words. LOL GOD knows, I have done that!!! LOL 
 
Pa, If I missed the point, then please forgive me for speaking for you.
 
 
Wild, Pa's very good at getting his point across.  His post was ugly, plain and simple.
 
I see where Pa's coming from.  If you look at it from the standpoint of the adults involved, it is kind of severe.  But if you look at it from the standpoint of the potential kids, it's not so severe.
 
The people that Pa talks about don't love their children, anyway.  Oh, maybe they do in their hearts and in some emotional way somehow, but when it comes right down to it, they couldn't care less about these kids. otherwise they wouldn't purposely set them up for failure.  These sorts have babies for some sense of fulfillment.  Very selfish motivation, when that's all they have.  I contend that most of these parents DO NOT love their children.
 


Posted By: Wild Starchild
Date Posted: 26 Jul 2008 at 11:13pm

Yeah, But only if Mark Lundsford gets to pull the trigger!! That scumbag Couey took everything that man had in the whole damned world from him. I get choked up and tears roll down my face everytime I see him on TV. I saw him on Miami Ink a while back getting a Justice Scale tat on his stomach. He told Jessie's story and revealed some things I didn't know about the case!! Damn near killed me!!!

I know some folks might hold it against me for feeling that way, but dammit, when I see stuff like that it just chaps my ass!!! We can not as a society allow these things to continue. What I am refering to is not child sex abuse, cause you're gonna always have that happen. There is really NO way to completely stop it, BUT when someone is convicted of it, then they are gone!!! No more repeat offenders!!!


-------------
AW DAMN!!!! Wild Shot the friggin TV again!!!


Posted By: PaWolf
Date Posted: 26 Jul 2008 at 11:34pm
Originally posted by Thor Thor wrote:

Originally posted by Wild Starchild Wild Starchild wrote:

Hey since we are on the subject, what do you guys feel about pedophiles and other sex offenders that get out of jail and molest and kill people, should they be allowed to keep their manhoods?? Just curious because I have heard some states are thinking of chemically castrating them.
 
My personal beliefs are, you  do that to a kid and you give up your right to breathe!! I can't stand it when these wastes of guts and skin get out of jail and do it again. Poor little Jessica Lundsford was kidnapped from her bedroom, held and raped for days by John Couey before he wrapped her in garbage bags and burried her alive in a shallow grave in his back yard. This guy should have NEVER been on the streets. This is just one of many HORRRIBLE things done to kids by these perverts. I say when someone possesses the ability to do that, they shouldn't be among us. And furthermore, I don't want to feed these assholes while they rot in jail!! Anyone who does that to a kid or anyone for that matter does not deserve to breathe the same air we do!!
 
This guy just needs to be taken out behind the prison and shot in the head.
 
Your comment IMMEDIATELY made me thing of Andrei Chikatilo...sent shivvers up my spine....


-------------
X               <sig.nature>
"What we do for ourselves dies with us, What we do for others is and remains immortal." - Albert Pike


Posted By: LOL1955
Date Posted: 27 Jul 2008 at 12:25am
I'm not sure if I'm about to pour balm...or gasoline...on this discussion.  My entire world view is predicated on the idea that every human being is precisely that:  A fellow human being, possessed of a soul and beloved of God when they start life out.  We are nominally animals in the biologic sense; human nature is, after all, from our position in the natural order.  However, to borrow one of my favorite lines from a movie (African Queen):  "Human nature, Mr. Ornott, is what we are put on earth to rise above."

-------------
Love endures all.


Posted By: PaWolf
Date Posted: 27 Jul 2008 at 12:44am
The problem is when the task of 'rising above' becomes very much easier because of how very low what one has as a challenge, has sunk...that is nothing short of a problem. 

-------------
X               <sig.nature>
"What we do for ourselves dies with us, What we do for others is and remains immortal." - Albert Pike


Posted By: Thor
Date Posted: 27 Jul 2008 at 1:48am
 
 
There's a program out there that offers drug-addicted mothers money to voluntarily get some sort of long term sterilization.  I think it's a good idea, and should be offered to males, as well. 
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Prevention - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Prevention
 
 
 
 


Posted By: CatWoman
Date Posted: 27 Jul 2008 at 2:07am
From the wiki article:
 
A flyer:
"DON'T Let a Pregnancy get in the way of your crack habit."
 
In her first interview Barbara Harris also compared pregnant women to dogs that need to be neutered.
 
One of my friends adopted a crack-addicted baby.  She's a nurse; the baby was her patient.  The baby had physical disabilities, not mental.
 
I can understand the anger my friend felt toward the birth mother.  I don't believe she ever compared the mother to a dog that needed to be neutered.  We humans make our own problems - drug addiction, alcoholism - and there's help for those problems.


-------------



Posted By: LOL1955
Date Posted: 27 Jul 2008 at 4:33am
Just some quick thoughts here (I have GOT to get some work done):
 
1.  There are no new sins.
 
2.  There seems to be a tendency for these speculations to fall out along racial or class lines.  I submit that the WASP suburban housewife who is knocking back a half dozen martinis or cosmos a day is doing as much damage to her child (Fetal Alcohol Syndrome, anyone?) as the inner-city crack addict.  But, I don't see anyone clamoring to neuter the well-to-do white woman.  One thing to remember about poverty:  When Christ came to live among us, He CHOSE to arrive as a helpless infant of a poor family. 
 
3.  I submit that most parents love their children and that love has little to nothing to do with their bank balance. 
 
Now, I gotta scram.


-------------
Love endures all.


Posted By: CatWoman
Date Posted: 27 Jul 2008 at 4:39am
Said with class, as always, LOL....Heart

-------------



Posted By: Thor
Date Posted: 27 Jul 2008 at 6:30am
Originally posted by LOL1955 LOL1955 wrote:

 
 
 
3.  I submit that most parents love their children and that love has little to nothing to do with their bank balance. 
 
 
 
I don't think it has to do with a bank balance, either.  But one's emotional feelings for the kid aren't enough either.  Stability's just as important, maybe even more so.  I see a lot of young single parents who don't provide that.  They have a kid, and then they go out on dates.
 
 


Posted By: Wild Starchild
Date Posted: 27 Jul 2008 at 8:57am
Hey LOL, I submit to the court, that if everyone were like you, the world would be a decent place. I am sure they would share their food, shelter,love and dignity with one another. They would treat each other with respect and look out for each other just like Christ would have them to do. You my dear lady, are the epitome of a true Christian, flawed like every human is but willing to live your life with humility and sacrifice. I applaud you for standing up for your beliefs in a forum where you can almost expect to be challenged for proclaiming to be a Christian. It takes strength and courage to do that, even when you know some will call you a fool for subscribing to the notion that there is a God and that He loves everyone and longs to be in their lives. The problem is, NOT everyone will allow Him to be. NOT everyone will lower themselves to a point where they  allow God to be their guide. I do think very highly of you for loving your fellow man regardless of what they have done. You seem to respect life and I find that refreshing.
 
I wish I were able to be as forgiving as you, but when I think of a John Couey type, and about what he did to little Jessie Lundsford, my blood boils. I might be able to consider forgiving him if he asked for it, but he never did. His failure to own up to what he did, rips out the compassionate part of my heart and tramples on my mercy dispenser. I can not seem to focus on forgiving him or caring about his rights when I think of how he stole Jessie's. all I can think of is that poor little innocent 9 year old girl taken from her bed at gunpoint in the middle of the night. she was told by Couey that if she made a sound he would kill her family. He took her to his crumby trailer, bound and gagged her while he repeatedly raped her for several days while he drank beer and smoked crack. He wrapped her in garbage bags like a piece of trash and buried her in a shallow grave. The coroner's report said that she was still alive when he buried her. All I can think of is the indescribable horror, the utter terror that little sweet girl endured as she gasped for breath just wanting to see her Daddy! But she would never see him again as her light faded and her life expired. Her happiness and innocence were robbed from her to fulfill a monster's cheap perverted lust! Then after all that, when Couey was arrested and charged, he never said he was sorry to my knowledge. Hell, I might have found some mere uncling of forgiveness for his if he'd have pleaded guilty and asked for mercy. He showed no contrition, and tried to get out of the charges.
 
My last point is, according to the Bible, a person can only get into Heaven if he asks God for forgiveness. Works do not get you into Heaven, but works CAN get you into Hell! The Bible says a tree is known by the fruit it bears. Couey's fruit was rotten to the core. He was unconcerned with Jessica's right to have a life. I wonder sometimes if people like this have to be in a position where they themselves are facing death to actually evaluate their actions. So I further wonder if putting them into that extreme circumstance is the most humane thing to do to them. Couey lacked the inability to restrain himself from hurting a innocent little 9 year old girl. He had already lived his life and he has to live with the choices he made. Why did Jessie have to die before her life really got a chance to begin. In situations like this, I am reminded of another thing Jesus said. He said if anyone harms a child it would be better for them to have a millstone tied to their neck and cast into the sea. That was HIS words, not mine. I think God is a loving Gos yes, but He is also a just God and He expects us to protect the innocent. No one knows the heart of anyone, but it is easy to see what someone has in their hearts when they do something like this. I am sorry, and maybe I am wrong, but I have no sympathy for someone who rapes a child and murders them in such a brutal manner as Couey did to Jessie. I agree that humans should be treated as humans, but monsters need to be dealt with to protect the innocent.


-------------
AW DAMN!!!! Wild Shot the friggin TV again!!!


Posted By: CatWoman
Date Posted: 27 Jul 2008 at 11:42am
Fox News, Wild?

-------------



Posted By: Jimbo
Date Posted: 27 Jul 2008 at 1:32pm
Originally posted by Wild Starchild Wild Starchild wrote:

3. How do you feel about immigrants from other countries coming into our country, UNLAWFULLY, taking our jobs, using our free healthcare, committing crimes, and never paying taxes or refuse to learn English. If they want to live here, why not register and go through the proper channels?
 
I will address this one particular part of your post because the answers to the first two are obvious & with regards to abortion, I don't feel like getting into that subject again.
 
With regards to the above statement, let me start out by saying you've posed the question on several false or at least shakey premises.
 
You say they "take our jobs", but I believe it has been well established over & over again that they mainly take the jobs that Americans WON'T DO. What is it that's so hard to understand about that???? How many American citizens of any ethnic origin have you ever met who were looking for employment as fruit or vegetable pickers? How many American citizens do know of who are lining up to be domestic servants? Yard men? Sure, there are Americans who have lawn care businesses, but there are obviously not enough of them to fill the demand. Same with construction workers. There are construction projects BEGGING for laborers & skilled trades people that can't fill all the open positions & if it weren't for using illegal labor, many of them wouldn't get built. Illegal immigrants are not taking away the jobs most Americans are willing to do.
 
With regards to "using our free healthcare", the extent to which the majority of these people use our "free healthcare" is for relatively minor ailments & conditions. You don't see them filling up the nation's cancer & cardio wards or getting organ transplants, etc. You conservatives claim to be the party of God & Jesus, so where's your Christian attitude towards your fellow humans, eh?
 
Your inference that they are committing crimes seems to imply that all or a majority of them are out wreaking havoc in society, when that is simply not the case. Obviously a portion of any group will commit some crimes, but American citizens commit many times more crimes than illegal immigrants. Maybe we should be looking to illegal immigrants to try to get the crime rate amongst our own citizenry down to their relatively low level.
 
Re: "not paying taxes"... that's not true. The majority of illegal immigrants have taxes deducted from their pay just like everyone else.
 
And finally learning the language. If an average American was suddenly living in Mexico, they wouldn't readily be speaking Spanish either. Most of us would try hard if we were there alone, but if we were there with a group of many other Americans like most illegal immigrants are here with several other people from their home country, and we had a close knit group around us all of whom we could speak English with, I guarantee you most of us wouldn't be learning Spanish any time soon.
 
 
 
 


-------------
...the ads take aim and lay their claim to the heart and the soul of the spender
Jackson Browne - The Pretender

C'mon, man!
Joe Biden - 46th President of the United States


Posted By: Jimbo
Date Posted: 27 Jul 2008 at 1:43pm
Originally posted by Wild Starchild Wild Starchild wrote:

My personal beliefs are, you  do that to a kid and you give up your right to breathe!! I can't stand it when these wastes of guts and skin get out of jail and do it again. ........ I say when someone possesses the ability to do that, they shouldn't be among us. And furthermore, I don't want to feed these assholes while they rot in jail!! Anyone who does that to a kid or anyone for that matter does not deserve to breathe the same air we do!!
 
And this from a guy who quotes the Bible.
 
My feeling is that you have a very limited & narrow understanding of the faith you claim to believe in.
 
I'm guessing the food remark was based on you not wanting your tax dollars to pay for it. I'll just remind you that the vast majority of the tax money spent to house prisoners goes to paying the salaries & benefits of the jail employees, not feeding the inmates or building the prisons etc.
 
So in reality, criminals are creating jobs. Something I'd think you'd be behind since prison jobs can't be held by illegal immigrants, therefore providing more jobs for Americans. 
 
If someone commits a heinous crime & it's proven beyond a reasonable doubt they did it, then lock them up. If our sick society continues to spawn sick minds & we have to keep building more prisons to house them, then so be it. When we change, the situation will change.
 


-------------
...the ads take aim and lay their claim to the heart and the soul of the spender
Jackson Browne - The Pretender

C'mon, man!
Joe Biden - 46th President of the United States


Posted By: Jimbo
Date Posted: 27 Jul 2008 at 2:15pm
Originally posted by Thor Thor wrote:

  I don't think it has to do with a bank balance, either.  But one's emotional feelings for the kid aren't enough either.  Stability's just as important, maybe even more so. 
 
I agree that financial & emotional stability are necessary before having kids. Unfortunately, those who are emotionally unstable are the very ones who are likely to not possess the rational judgement needed to understand that. People who are immature or have other emotional issues don't think in terms of the future, but rather immediate gratification of whatever their needs are at any given moment. So it's not surprising that we have so many young, single mothers. Young people have become more emotionally immature over the years as life & society have gotten more & more complicated & difficult to deal with.
 
Originally posted by Thor Thor wrote:

 I see a lot of young single parents who don't provide that.  They have a kid, and then they go out on dates.
 
There is a perfect example of that happening right now here in Central Florida. A 23 y/o mother's 3 y/o daughter went missing several weeks ago & she only reported it to the police a couple of weeks ago. The child was missing for like 3 weeks before her mother (the child's grandmother) called the police. The mother was known to be a big partier too.
 
I don't know if this case is making national headlines yet, though I suspect it has & Nancy Grace & Gloria Allred should be getting involved soon.
 
http://www.wftv.com/news/16989107/detail.html - http://www.wftv.com/news/16989107/detail.html
 
On a side note: The first time I saw the young mother on TV I knew I'd seen her before. Later, they did a profile on her & it turns out that in 2003 she graduated from a high school I subbed at then. I frequently worked at that school from her sophmore year thru her senior year, so I know I've met her & been in the classroom with her before.
 
Surprisingly, that happens fairly often. A couple of years ago, a kid I was familiar with from another school made local headlines when he intentionally hit & killed a police officer who was trying to flag him down as he was speeding in his car.
 
 
 
 
 
http://www.wftv.com/news/16989107/detail.html -  


-------------
...the ads take aim and lay their claim to the heart and the soul of the spender
Jackson Browne - The Pretender

C'mon, man!
Joe Biden - 46th President of the United States


Posted By: Thor
Date Posted: 27 Jul 2008 at 3:03pm
Yeah, Jimbo, that case has been pretty big on cable news for the last week or so.  What gets me is that the mother looks so normal, unlike some of these other mothers in the past who've killed their kids, who always look a bit odd---Yates and Smith come to mind.  I guess looks don't mean much.
 
 


Posted By: Jimbo
Date Posted: 27 Jul 2008 at 3:08pm
My guess is that as you so often hear happening nowadays, she may have left the child in the car which got extremely hot inside & then returned, found her dead then panicked & disposed of the body.
 
Around here we are always hearing news stories about people getting arrested for leaving their child in the car while they're in the store or in a bar drinking, etc.
 
That's my guess as to what happened.
 
 


-------------
...the ads take aim and lay their claim to the heart and the soul of the spender
Jackson Browne - The Pretender

C'mon, man!
Joe Biden - 46th President of the United States


Posted By: Thor
Date Posted: 27 Jul 2008 at 3:12pm
Originally posted by Jimbo Jimbo wrote:

Originally posted by Thor Thor wrote:

  I don't think it has to do with a bank balance, either.  But one's emotional feelings for the kid aren't enough either.  Stability's just as important, maybe even more so. 
 
I agree that financial & emotional stability are necessary before having kids. Unfortunately, those who are emotionally unstable are the very ones who are likely to not possess the rational judgement needed to understand that. People who are immature or have other emotional issues don't think in terms of the future, but rather immediate gratification of whatever their needs are at any given moment. So it's not surprising that we have so many young, single mothers. Young people have become more emotionally immature over the years as life & society have gotten more & more complicated & difficult to deal with.
 
 
 
And that helps start a cycle in which it practically becomes tradition for the kids to do the same, and their kids, and so on.  I've known 33 y/o grandmothers, and 50 y/o great-grandmothers.
 
I also imagine that, for many families, a cohesive family unit (mother/wife, father/husband, children) would seem like an aberration at this point.  These people are probably so used to no husband/father around (maybe a string of boyfriends, instead) that an actual cohesive family unit probably seems like just another alternative, albeit one they're not familiar with and, therefore, not very apt to replicate.
 
On a side note:  When I said "stability", I didn't just mean emotional stability.  I also meant a stable life.  You've sewn your oats, you're married to someone you know as well as can be, you've got a long-term place to live, some sort of financial stability, you're not moving around constantly, you're not working 15 hours/day, etc.
 
Of course, any of those things can change, but it seems to me (an unmarried guy w no kids so take it for what it's worth), that you should at least have that stuff in place before you inflict some sort of chaotic life on another human being.
 


Posted By: Jimbo
Date Posted: 27 Jul 2008 at 3:25pm
That, & there's also the fact that the kinds of guys many of these women & girls tend to gravitate towards wouldn't be worth a sh*t as fathers even if they were around, likely causing more problems than they'd solve with their presence.
 
Although, there are a lot of instances where a woman might have a child out of wedlock but still do a good job raising it because she's more educated & has a good job like a nurse or some other professional position with access to daycare & the ability to spend time with the child in the evenings & on weekends, etc.
 
 


-------------
...the ads take aim and lay their claim to the heart and the soul of the spender
Jackson Browne - The Pretender

C'mon, man!
Joe Biden - 46th President of the United States


Posted By: Thor
Date Posted: 27 Jul 2008 at 3:29pm
Yeah, there are degrees.  But still, I think the Leave It to Beaver lifestyle is optimal.  Maybe some women would feel oppressed by such a lifestyle, but that's not really important.
 
 


Posted By: LOL1955
Date Posted: 27 Jul 2008 at 7:34pm
Originally posted by Thor Thor wrote:

Yeah, there are degrees.  But still, I think the Leave It to Beaver lifestyle is optimal.  Maybe some women would feel oppressed by such a lifestyle, but that's not really important.
 
 
 
Well, I see I had no reason to worry about MY throwing gasoline on the argument! 
 
Sorry, Thor, I know you too well to believe for one minute that last comment was serious.  I am, however, in the midst of a computer crisis and will have to formulate my next a bit before posting.
 
LOLLOLLOLLOL


-------------
Love endures all.


Posted By: Thor
Date Posted: 27 Jul 2008 at 9:58pm
I do believe that.  I'm not saying that all women should live that lifestyle, but if she has kids, her personal sense of fulfillment is no longer important.  If raising kids is oppressive, so be it.  She probably shouldn't have had those kids.
 
By the same token, if a man has a family to feed, it's no longer of utmost importance that his career be satisfying.  What matters at that point, is that he can support his family, as well as be around for them.  Like the Cleavers.
 
These roles can be reversed, too.
 
Sometimes, there are mitigating circumstances.  And things can't always be ideal.  But at the end of the day, the Leave it to Beaver life seems the best---at least for the kids, if not for the parents.
 


Posted By: PaWolf
Date Posted: 27 Jul 2008 at 11:41pm
Originally posted by Jimbo Jimbo wrote:

...You say they "take our jobs", but I believe it has been well established over & over again that they mainly take the jobs that Americans WON'T DO. What is it that's so hard to understand about that???? How many American citizens of any ethnic origin have you ever met who were looking for employment as fruit or vegetable pickers? How many American citizens do know of who are lining up to be domestic servants? Yard men? Sure, there are Americans who have lawn care businesses, but there are obviously not enough of them to fill the demand. Same with construction workers. There are construction projects BEGGING for laborers & skilled trades people that can't fill all the open positions & if it weren't for using illegal labor, many of them wouldn't get built. Illegal immigrants are not taking away the jobs most Americans are willing to do....
BASICALLY true.
However, over the past ten (10) years, I've seen MANY white-collar jobs head 'across the pond'; many organizations will readily move any number of 'back-office' operations groups to large 'business farms' in places like India. We have plenty of people that would readily do that work - and are now 'sitting on the bench'. It certainly isn't all 'lettuce pickers'...it is an awful lot of Information Technology, Call-Center/Customer Service, things like that...
 
 


-------------
X               <sig.nature>
"What we do for ourselves dies with us, What we do for others is and remains immortal." - Albert Pike


Posted By: Wild Starchild
Date Posted: 28 Jul 2008 at 8:43am
Originally posted by Jimbo Jimbo wrote:

Originally posted by Wild Starchild Wild Starchild wrote:

3. How do you feel about immigrants from other countries coming into our country, UNLAWFULLY, taking our jobs, using our free healthcare, committing crimes, and never paying taxes or refuse to learn English. If they want to live here, why not register and go through the proper channels?
 
I will address this one particular part of your post because the answers to the first two are obvious & with regards to abortion, I don't feel like getting into that subject again.
 
With regards to the above statement, let me start out by saying you've posed the question on several false or at least shakey premises.
 
I posed the question based on the arguments I hear in the media almost everyday. My intention was to put issues hotly debated into direct "sunlight" so we could see many varying viewpoints. I think from the responses so far, I accomplished my goal. On this board, we have a diverse community from moderate to extreme, but I have yet to see any viewpoint too far beyond the realm of compromise. I tend to think our society listens far too much to our party leader's talking points, and those points become the standards of the arguments. We have seen these issues debated and screamed about time and time again, but VERY SELDOM do we ever see real change, or do we find solutions. I want solutions, not more fighting.
 
You say they "take our jobs", but I believe it has been well established over & over again that they mainly take the jobs that Americans WON'T DO. What is it that's so hard to understand about that???? How many American citizens of any ethnic origin have you ever met who were looking for employment as fruit or vegetable pickers? How many American citizens do know of who are lining up to be domestic servants? Yard men? Sure, there are Americans who have lawn care businesses, but there are obviously not enough of them to fill the demand. Same with construction workers. There are construction projects BEGGING for laborers & skilled trades people that can't fill all the open positions & if it weren't for using illegal labor, many of them wouldn't get built. Illegal immigrants are not taking away the jobs most Americans are willing to do.
 
Jimbo if you lived where I do in Tennessee, you might see things a little differently. I live in a small town and there are not a lot of opportunities here. We have a large farming community and illegals HAVE become a big problem here. farmers struggling to make it these days due to fuel costs and bad weather are forced to hire illegals who will do the work for a third of what American laborers are paid. It's not fair for a legal American with a family to feed here, to have to lose a job to an illegal, when they will end up sending MOST of what they earn to Mexico. Look man, I don't know where you live, but it is effecting a lot of folks here where I live. Last time I heard, (and it could have changed since then) Tennessee was ranked third in the states having the largest numbers of illegals. Our state is bleeding from it. I know this because I live here, and I see it with my own eyes. I hear the arguments that illegals don't cause that big of a problem, but we see it differently, and those arguments, to us, don't hold water.
 
 
With regards to "using our free healthcare", the extent to which the majority of these people use our "free healthcare" is for relatively minor ailments & conditions. You don't see them filling up the nation's cancer & cardio wards or getting organ transplants, etc. You conservatives claim to be the party of God & Jesus, so where's your Christian attitude towards your fellow humans, eh?
 
Good point about the Christian attitude. The Bible does tell us to help our fellow man. I am all for that. I don't think anyone should be denied medical attention, but the fact is, the damned system is broken, and NO ONE seems to have a solution. Why doesn't Mexico help their own citizens? Because they know they can come here and get free healthcare. I would not have  problem with it if these folks paid in to the system like everyone else does. SOME pay taxes, but it pales in comparison to those who do not based on the reports I have seen. Again, I live in Tennessee, and here we have TENNCARE. It is free to the poor and disadvantaged, or it's SUPPOSED to be. There are a huge number of folks who benefit from it and rightly deserve it. Folks who once worked and have been disabled, and those who have fallen on hard times and are struggling to regain control. But the bible also says, that if a man doesn't work, he should not eat! That's the Bible, not me!! I live about a mile from the "low rent" or "NO rent" district and there are so many there who can work, but don't, and they receive TENNCARE, food stamps, free or reduced housing and other benefits.  These folks, some of who I know are sponges, in that they go to the doctor free of charge, and get pain medications and sell them for high dollar! They will also shop their food stamp cards around to the highest bidder. These folks get money to buy their beer and cigarettes and drugs. If you are wondering what the benefits to using someones food stamp card is, it is because using the card is tax free. If you buy $200 or $300 worth of groceries, that can add up. Not to mention that now, I have heard in some states they are considering giving illegals earned income credits, whether they have paid a dime in taxes or not.
But getting back to the healthcare Jimbo, no healthcare is free. Someone has to pay for it! If these people ( illegal or otherwise) work and they pay their taxes into the system like my wife and I do, then you'll hear no argument from me. I don't want to see anyone die or be sick because they were denied medical attention. But my wife and I pay over $500 every month for health insurance, and it barely covers anything. The co-pays, and deductibles on doctors visits and medicine are outrageously expensive, and going to the emergency room is barely even covered. The sad part is, that this plan is the one offered to us through my wife's job at a reduced rate!!!! So if we tried to find a better plan, it would cost us ten times as much. Are you trying to tell me that you think it is fair for us to just keep shelling out money hand over fist to feed the same beast that is eating us alive?? It's not fair that I have to take food out of my kids mouths to pay for someone who does not work and has no intention of working except to sell the FREE drugs they get from the government?? The drugs that I paided for??? Hell I can't even afford to go to the doctor right now, and my back has been killing me for about three weeks. There is no amount of reasoning you can show me that makes me feel like that is fair!!
 
Your inference that they are committing crimes seems to imply that all or a majority of them are out wreaking havoc in society, when that is simply not the case. Obviously a portion of any group will commit some crimes, but American citizens commit many times more crimes than illegal immigrants. Maybe we should be looking to illegal immigrants to try to get the crime rate among our own citizenry down to their relatively low level.
 
Again here, I posed the question to this forum as I have heard it argued in the media. I do not think the majority of illegals are criminals nor are they wreaking havoc. I asked the question to hear the varying viewpoints. If it sounded as though I were trying to imply what you stated, then please do not take it as such. That was not my intention. Still your point about what American citizens do here is irrelevant, because we were talking about illegals. The numbers of Americans committing crimes has NOTHING to do with the fact that if illegals were not here, then the crimes that they commit would not have happened. Everyone with any sense knows you can't stop crime from happening, but we damn sure need to fix the parts we can. This argument you bring up, to me, sounds similar to what my kids say when I catch them doing something dumb. They'll say, "So and so did it too!!" As if I am going to say, "Ok son, since so and so did it, it makes it ok!'  You can't justify bad behavior but pointing to other bad behavior. If you have an aquarium filled with expensive tropical fish, and you throw in one that is aggressive and he starts killing your other fish, then you take him out. You know it would not have happened if you had not put him in there. To me, here it's the same thing.
 
Re: "not paying taxes"... that's not true. The majority of illegal immigrants have taxes deducted from their pay just like everyone else.
 
I strongly disagree!! I will agree that some do, but the majority of illegals try to stay well under the radar so they can make as much money as they can. There are a lot of shady American business owners that use illegals to get a lot of work done for practically nothing, and not paying taxes on them helps to line their pockets as well. It's a type of slave labor, and I see the Americans participating in this are just as guilty, if not worse. I don't even see how they can accurately calculate and quote these statistics when so many illegals are undocumented. We simply do not know who is in this country, and that's a bit unnerving to me.
 
And finally learning the language. If an average American was suddenly living in Mexico, they wouldn't readily be speaking Spanish either. Most of us would try hard if we were there alone, but if we were there with a group of many other Americans like most illegal immigrants are here with several other people from their home country, and we had a close knit group around us all of whom we could speak English with, I guarantee you most of us wouldn't be learning Spanish any time soon.
 
I see your point, but I am talking primarily about those who utterly REFUSE to learn English. You are right, if that were the scenario, I would speak English with my American counterparts, but I would try my damnedest to learn the native lanugae. Not only is it a disruption to us, but it's also restricting them from a great number of things this nation would have to offer.
 
 
On a side note, if they want to come here to have a shot at a better life, why not just do it legally?? Can someone answer that question for me? I am genuinely stumped by this simple question.
 
 
 
 
 
 


-------------
AW DAMN!!!! Wild Shot the friggin TV again!!!


Posted By: Wild Starchild
Date Posted: 28 Jul 2008 at 10:10am
Originally posted by Jimbo Jimbo wrote:

Originally posted by Wild Starchild Wild Starchild wrote:

My personal beliefs are, you  do that to a kid and you give up your right to breathe!! I can't stand it when these wastes of guts and skin get out of jail and do it again. ........ I say when someone possesses the ability to do that, they shouldn't be among us. And furthermore, I don't want to feed these assholes while they rot in jail!! Anyone who does that to a kid or anyone for that matter does not deserve to breathe the same air we do!!
 
And this from a guy who quotes the Bible.
 
First of all, I rarely bring up spiritual things in this forum unless the conversations have headed that way. I was responding to LOL's comments about Jesus, and I said to her that if everyone in this world were like her then it would truly be a better place. I am not like her. I have trouble forgiving unrepentant child molesters, rapists and vicious murderers like Couey. I said I admired LOL for being strong enough in her faith to be able to do that. She IS the epitome of a true Christian. I wish I could be like that, but I fail at it miserably. I know what the Bible says, but I have a lot of trouble carrying out some of the things it says. Maybe in time I'll gain the temperance I need to fulfill those requirements, but if I were to say I felt that way NOW, then I would be a hypocrite. So at least I am telling you the truth as to how I feel, and that's all I can do is be honest.
 
My feeling is that you have a very limited & narrow understanding of the faith you claim to believe in.
 
Jimbo, you can feel any way you like about me and I won't lose a seconds sleep over it. It is your prerogative to do so, so have at it friend. However, there are many, many instances in the Bible you can check out for yourself where God hates those who senselessly murder and rape the innocent. The old testament is full of times when God smote people for their heinous actions. In Genesis, Chapter 6 regarding the flood of Noah, He said that He was grieved that He ever made man, and that He saw mans heart was ALWAYS evil CONTINUOUSLY!!! According to the Bible He wiped out the whole Earth , save Noah's family, because they were vile. There are more instances where this happened than I can remember or post here without sounding like a Sunday morning sermon slinger. The new testament was a new hope that mankind could be saved from themselves, but the trick is, they had to ask for forgiveness. Now, in regards to my narrow mindedness of my faith, I don't recall Couey ever asking for forgiveness. I don't really know what is in the man's heart, that's between him and God. But I do know I have never heard him say he was the least bit sorry for what he's done! Instead he gets a lawyer and pleads NOT GUILTY!!!??? I MEAN come on??? Where is the outrage??? He totally robbed an innocent little girl of ever having a chance to grow up. This case, and I am sorry to keep beating the living hell out of a dead horse, but it shook me to my very innermost being. What he did was repugnant!! And the Bible says emphatically, that Jesus said from his own lips, "If any man harms a little child and causes them to stumble, it would be better if a giant millstone were tied around their neck and cast into the sea!!" I'd say that was a pretty narrow viewpoint myself, regarding these extreme circumstances!! I don't know, maybe you are right, and I am totally wrong, and if I am I'll have to face God one day about my comments. But if Couey were to show the slightest bit of contrition for his actions, I might rethink my position, but until then, I hope they fry his ass crispy!!!
 
I'm guessing the food remark was based on you not wanting your tax dollars to pay for it. I'll just remind you that the vast majority of the tax money spent to house prisoners goes to paying the salaries & benefits of the jail employees, not feeding the inmates or building the prisons etc.
 
Has nothing to do with my tax dollars, I just think it is a waste of air to have this dirt bag breathe another second. He can never get out, and even if he did, he'd do it again, so what purpose does he serve??? Like I said, strap his ass in an electric chair or stick a needle in his arm and he might actually feel a little remorse then, and he might even cry out to God for mercy right before they throw the switch!! Then it doesn't matter cause God will forgive him right before he checks out. That might just be the only chance he gets at redemption, but then again, I don't know his heart, but I do see the fruit, and it's rotten as hell!!
 
 
So in reality, criminals are creating jobs. Something I'd think you'd be behind since prison jobs can't be held by illegal immigrants, therefore providing more jobs for Americans. 
 
This comment Jimbo I felt was little over the top about the illegals thing. First you completely missed my point! I want people to have jobs. I want people to be happy. I want to be able to live in a society where violent offenders are removed from the sandbox! Secondly, you got on this shpeel about prisons and workers and jobs and stuff, just to take a jab at me. I could return fire, but I'll refrain from doing so, because I hope you'll see by my responses that even though our viewpoints are a million miles away from each other, I didn't throw any underhanded remarks your way. Maybe I misread your intentions because that is very easy to do in type absent the tone and expression of verbal communication. If so I apologize. Even though I strongly disagree with some of the things you have said, I would fight to the finish to defend your right as an American to say them!!
 
If someone commits a heinous crime & it's proven beyond a reasonable doubt they did it, then lock them up. If our sick society continues to spawn sick minds & we have to keep building more prisons to house them, then so be it. When we change, the situation will change.
 
Could not agree more, but I still think that when someone does something this extreme, they forfeit their right to live. Either that, or give them hard labor so intense they would pray for death.
 
 
You know the thing that bothers me so much about this whole (Mexican) illegal thing is that Mexico does not even try to take care of it's own. They have some of the MOST beautiful coastlines on both shores in the whole world. They bring in MILLIONS if not BILLIONS in tourist revenues each year, yet in the central parts of the country, it's like a third world country. These people are starving to death, and being murdered by drug cartels to the point that it is absolutely ridiculous. I truly do sympathize with their struggles. I DO NOT blame the folks for wanting to get the Hell out of that place. I just wish that if they are gonna come here, they would do it, LEGALLY and respect our laws and way of life!! If they would do that, I don't think half of those opposed to it would mind. What is the big frickin deal about doing that. Don't we have guest worker permits here now or is that still a pending thing?


-------------
AW DAMN!!!! Wild Shot the friggin TV again!!!


Posted By: Wild Starchild
Date Posted: 28 Jul 2008 at 10:31am
Originally posted by Jimbo Jimbo wrote:

Originally posted by Thor Thor wrote:

  I don't think it has to do with a bank balance, either.  But one's emotional feelings for the kid aren't enough either.  Stability's just as important, maybe even more so. 
 
I agree that financial & emotional stability are necessary before having kids. Unfortunately, those who are emotionally unstable are the very ones who are likely to not possess the rational judgement needed to understand that. People who are immature or have other emotional issues don't think in terms of the future, but rather immediate gratification of whatever their needs are at any given moment. So it's not surprising that we have so many young, single mothers. Young people have become more emotionally immature over the years as life & society have gotten more & more complicated & difficult to deal with.
 
Originally posted by Thor Thor wrote:

 I see a lot of young single parents who don't provide that.  They have a kid, and then they go out on dates.
 
There is a perfect example of that happening right now here in Central Florida. A 23 y/o mother's 3 y/o daughter went missing several weeks ago & she only reported it to the police a couple of weeks ago. The child was missing for like 3 weeks before her mother (the child's grandmother) called the police. The mother was known to be a big partier too.
 
I don't know if this case is making national headlines yet, though I suspect it has & Nancy Grace & Gloria Allred should be getting involved soon.
 
http://www.wftv.com/news/16989107/detail.html - http://www.wftv.com/news/16989107/detail.html
 
On a side note: The first time I saw the young mother on TV I knew I'd seen her before. Later, they did a profile on her & it turns out that in 2003 she graduated from a high school I subbed at then. I frequently worked at that school from her sophmore year thru her senior year, so I know I've met her & been in the classroom with her before.
 
Surprisingly, that happens fairly often. A couple of years ago, a kid I was familiar with from another school made local headlines when he intentionally hit & killed a police officer who was trying to flag him down as he was speeding in his car.
http://www.wftv.com/news/16989107/detail.html -  
 
I agree wholeheartedly!!! It seems young people these day put more thought into which cellphone they are going to stick in their ear than who they have stuck in themselves!! And the kids suffer for it. They are raised with more problems than they should ever have had thrusted upon then. Put a kid in that kind of pressure and it breeds fear, resentment and anger!!! Damn, I just sounded like Yoda didn't I??? LOL


-------------
AW DAMN!!!! Wild Shot the friggin TV again!!!


Posted By: Jimbo
Date Posted: 28 Jul 2008 at 2:56pm
Originally posted by PaWolf PaWolf wrote:

Originally posted by Jimbo Jimbo wrote:

...You say they "take our jobs", but I believe it has been well established over & over again that they mainly take the jobs that Americans WON'T DO. What is it that's so hard to understand about that???? How many American citizens of any ethnic origin have you ever met who were looking for employment as fruit or vegetable pickers? How many American citizens do know of who are lining up to be domestic servants? Yard men? Sure, there are Americans who have lawn care businesses, but there are obviously not enough of them to fill the demand. Same with construction workers. There are construction projects BEGGING for laborers & skilled trades people that can't fill all the open positions & if it weren't for using illegal labor, many of them wouldn't get built. Illegal immigrants are not taking away the jobs most Americans are willing to do....
 
BASICALLY true.
However, over the past ten (10) years, I've seen MANY white-collar jobs head 'across the pond'; many organizations will readily move any number of 'back-office' operations groups to large 'business farms' in places like India. We have plenty of people that would readily do that work - and are now 'sitting on the bench'. It certainly isn't all 'lettuce pickers'...it is an awful lot of Information Technology, Call-Center/Customer Service, things like that...
 
I think what you're referring to comes under the heading of "outsourcing", Pa. And that is being done by greedy American CEO's to their American employees & illegal immigration has no bearing on that particular problem.
 


-------------
...the ads take aim and lay their claim to the heart and the soul of the spender
Jackson Browne - The Pretender

C'mon, man!
Joe Biden - 46th President of the United States


Posted By: Jimbo
Date Posted: 28 Jul 2008 at 3:37pm
 
Originally posted by Wild Starchild Wild Starchild wrote:

I posed the question based on the arguments I hear in the media almost everyday. My intention was to put issues hotly debated into direct "sunlight" so we could see many varying viewpoints. I think from the responses so far, I accomplished my goal. On this board, we have a diverse community from moderate to extreme, but I have yet to see any viewpoint too far beyond the realm of compromise. I tend to think our society listens far too much to our party leader's talking points, and those points become the standards of the arguments. We have seen these issues debated and screamed about time and time again, but VERY SELDOM do we ever see real change, or do we find solutions. I want solutions, not more fighting. 
 
Well that's fine, but all I did was respond to your question.
 
Originally posted by Wild Starchild Wild Starchild wrote:

Jimbo if you lived where I do in Tennessee, you might see things a little differently. I live in a small town and there are not a lot of opportunities here. We have a large farming community and illegals HAVE become a big problem here. farmers struggling to make it these days due to fuel costs and bad weather are forced to hire illegals who will do the work for a third of what American laborers are paid. It's not fair for a legal American with a family to feed here, to have to lose a job to an illegal, when they will end up sending MOST of what they earn to Mexico. Look man, I don't know where you live, but it is effecting a lot of folks here where I live. Last time I heard, (and it could have changed since then) Tennessee was ranked third in the states having the largest numbers of illegals. Our state is bleeding from it. I know this because I live here, and I see it with my own eyes. I hear the arguments that illegals don't cause that big of a problem, but we see it differently, and those arguments, to us, don't hold water. 
 
All I can say is.... move to where there are more opportunities. Or make your own opportunities. Start a home business. I hear that whole self-reliance thing out of conservatives all the time. If a farmer can't afford to pay the higher wages Americans demand to harvest his crops, not hiring illegals isn't going to get you those jobs at the rate you want to earn, so you're screwed anyway. Then the crops rot on the vine & never make it to the grocery store making the prices higher for everyone else. Everyone loses.
 
Originally posted by Wild Starchild Wild Starchild wrote:

Good point about the Christian attitude. The Bible does tell us to help our fellow man. I am all for that. I don't think anyone should be denied medical attention, but the fact is, the damned system is broken, and NO ONE seems to have a solution. Why doesn't Mexico help their own citizens? Because they know they can come here and get free healthcare.
 
You don't actually believe that do you? You don't think the Mexican govt. officials are sitting in meetings saying.... "Joo know, we dong haff to haff a healt care sees-tem here in May-hico because we cang joss let our peeples sneak across de borrrder eentoo Amedica ang jooz der sees-tem for freeee!!!" Seriously..... I think it has a lot more to do with the fact that Mexico is an economically under developed country lacking the revenue base to support their own system. In other words, it's a mostly poor country.
 
Originally posted by Wild Starchild Wild Starchild wrote:

I would not have  problem with it if these folks paid in to the system like everyone else does. SOME pay taxes, but it pales in comparison to those who do not based on the reports I have seen. Again, I live in Tennessee, and here we have TENNCARE. It is free to the poor and disadvantaged, or it's SUPPOSED to be. There are a huge number of folks who benefit from it and rightly deserve it. Folks who once worked and have been disabled, and those who have fallen on hard times and are struggling to regain control. But the bible also says, that if a man doesn't work, he should not eat! That's the Bible, not me!!
 
The writings of the Old Testament have nothing to do with Christianity. Remember, it's the teachings of Christ in the New Testament that are supposed to guide your thinking.  
 
Originally posted by Wild Starchild Wild Starchild wrote:

I live about a mile from the "low rent" or "NO rent" district and there are so many there who can work, but don't, and they receive TENNCARE, food stamps, free or reduced housing and other benefits.  These folks, some of who I know are sponges,
 
I thought you said there weren't enough job opportunities to go around. First you complain that they take jobs, then you complain that they won't work. WTF????
 
Originally posted by Wild Starchild Wild Starchild wrote:

in that they go to the doctor free of charge, and get pain medications and sell them for high dollar! They will also shop their food stamp cards around to the highest bidder. These folks get money to buy their beer and cigarettes and drugs. If you are wondering what the benefits to using someones food stamp card is, it is because using the card is tax free. If you buy $200 or $300 worth of groceries, that can add up. Not to mention that now, I have heard in some states they are considering giving illegals earned income credits, whether they have paid a dime in taxes or not.
 
I'm guessing you're talking mainly about the activities of our own "American" poor. And that is a different subject & a different debate.
 
Originally posted by Wild Starchild Wild Starchild wrote:

But getting back to the healthcare Jimbo, no healthcare is free. Someone has to pay for it! If these people ( illegal or otherwise) work and they pay their taxes into the system like my wife and I do, then you'll hear no argument from me. I don't want to see anyone die or be sick because they were denied medical attention. But my wife and I pay over $500 every month for health insurance, and it barely covers anything. The co-pays, and deductibles on doctors visits and medicine are outrageously expensive, and going to the emergency room is barely even covered. The sad part is, that this plan is the one offered to us through my wife's job at a reduced rate!!!! So if we tried to find a better plan, it would cost us ten times as much. Are you trying to tell me that you think it is fair for us to just keep shelling out money hand over fist to feed the same beast that is eating us alive?? It's not fair that I have to take food out of my kids mouths to pay for someone who does not work and has no intention of working except to sell the FREE drugs they get from the government?? The drugs that I paided for??? Hell I can't even afford to go to the doctor right now, and my back has been killing me for about three weeks. There is no amount of reasoning you can show me that makes me feel like that is fair!!
 
From what I understand, you are paying those outrageous sums for PRIVATE HEALTH INSURANCE.  Paying taxes has no bearing on your insurance premiums. If I were you I'd have a problem with the greedy insurance companies & healthcare providers. Illegal immigrants aren't raising the cost of private health insurance premiums to a degree that would make any noticable difference to you.
 
Originally posted by Wild Starchild Wild Starchild wrote:

Again here, I posed the question to this forum as I have heard it argued in the media. I do not think the majority of illegals are criminals nor are they wreaking havoc. I asked the question to hear the varying viewpoints. If it sounded as though I were trying to imply what you stated, then please do not take it as such. That was not my intention. Still your point about what American citizens do here is irrelevant, because we were talking about illegals. The numbers of Americans committing crimes has NOTHING to do with the fact that if illegals were not here, then the crimes that they commit would not have happened. Everyone with any sense knows you can't stop crime from happening, but we damn sure need to fix the parts we can. This argument you bring up, to me, sounds similar to what my kids say when I catch them doing something dumb. They'll say, "So and so did it too!!" As if I am going to say, "Ok son, since so and so did it, it makes it ok!'  You can't justify bad behavior but pointing to other bad behavior. If you have an aquarium filled with expensive tropical fish, and you throw in one that is aggressive and he starts killing your other fish, then you take him out. You know it would not have happened if you had not put him in there. To me, here it's the same thing.
 
You're still implying that illegal immigrants are the "bad fish" that need to be removed so that the "good fish" won't be affected anymore. What I was getting at was that the amount of crime they are responsible for is very small in comparison to what our own citizens engage in, so even if we spent the billions upon billions of dollars it would cost the taxpayer to round up every illegal, deport them & build a giant fortified wall along the Rio Grande, it would only result in a small net reduction in crime. In other words, extremely low cost-benefit ratio. All it would accomplish would be to satisfy the xenophobia of a certain segment of society.
 
Originally posted by Wild Starchild Wild Starchild wrote:

I strongly disagree!! I will agree that some do, but the majority of illegals try to stay well under the radar so they can make as much money as they can. There are a lot of shady American business owners that use illegals to get a lot of work done for practically nothing, and not paying taxes on them helps to line their pockets as well. It's a type of slave labor, and I see the Americans participating in this are just as guilty, if not worse. I don't even see how they can accurately calculate and quote these statistics when so many illegals are undocumented. We simply do not know who is in this country, and that's a bit unnerving to me.
 
My understanding is that the majority of illegals get paid by check with taxes deducted just like you & me.
 
Originally posted by Wild Starchild Wild Starchild wrote:

I see your point, but I am talking primarily about those who utterly REFUSE to learn English. You are right, if that were the scenario, I would speak English with my American counterparts, but I would try my damnedest to learn the native lanugae. Not only is it a disruption to us, but it's also restricting them from a great number of things this nation would have to offer.
 
Well, that may be annoying, but it's a free country & people can speak any language they wish. If a person finds they can get by comfortably without speaking English, it's none of your or my business.
 
Originally posted by Wild Starchild Wild Starchild wrote:

On a side note, if they want to come here to have a shot at a better life, why not just do it legally?? Can someone answer that question for me? I am genuinely stumped by this simple question.
 
I'm stumped by the fact that you're stumped by such a simple question with such a simple answer. And that answer is that to do it legally takes years & years. Obviously a person who wants to work & earn money to feed their family wants to do so now, not 5 or 10 years from now. Anyone that has kids & a family ought to be able to understand that the desire to provide for them overrides the immigration laws & concerns of some other country. The main focus & aim of these people is to earn  money to feed & clothe themselves & the people they love. I honestly don't see why it is so hard for some people to at least understand & empathize with that.
 
 
 
 
 


-------------
...the ads take aim and lay their claim to the heart and the soul of the spender
Jackson Browne - The Pretender

C'mon, man!
Joe Biden - 46th President of the United States


Posted By: CatWoman
Date Posted: 28 Jul 2008 at 4:22pm
Wow.
 
Luanne started this thread as a complaint about FOX News.  A 'questionaire' was started with the promise of it having something to do with FOX News.  A statement along the lines of 'there's room for compromise!' is made - then the same poster who made that statement turns this into a hard-nosed debate that has nothing to do with FOX News with no compromise on the issues!  WTF???
 
Luanne is one of the nicer new people to join the forum.  If Wild had issues to get off his chest, he could have started another thread on it in a more appropriate sub-forum, thus not sh*tting on Luanne's thread.
 
I apologize, Luanne.  I would have never participated in the little 'questionaire' if I knew it would come to this - and I should have known it would come to this.
 
 


-------------



Posted By: Jimbo
Date Posted: 28 Jul 2008 at 4:25pm
Originally posted by Wild Starchild Wild Starchild wrote:

First of all, I rarely bring up spiritual things in this forum unless the conversations have headed that way.
 
Actually I've seen you bring up the Bible a few times whether the conversation was headed there or not. No big deal, I'm just pointing it out.
 
Originally posted by Wild Starchild Wild Starchild wrote:

I was responding to LOL's comments about Jesus, and I said to her that if everyone in this world were like her then it would truly be a better place. I am not like her. I have trouble forgiving unrepentant child molesters, rapists and vicious murderers like Couey. I said I admired LOL for being strong enough in her faith to be able to do that. She IS the epitome of a true Christian. I wish I could be like that, but I fail at it miserably. I know what the Bible says, but I have a lot of trouble carrying out some of the things it says. Maybe in time I'll gain the temperance I need to fulfill those requirements, but if I were to say I felt that way NOW, then I would be a hypocrite. So at least I am telling you the truth as to how I feel, and that's all I can do is be honest.
 
Well maybe those who can't bring themselves to think in a Christ like manner ought not to bring him into discussions until they are able to.
 
Originally posted by Wild Starchild Wild Starchild wrote:

Jimbo, you can feel any way you like about me and I won't lose a seconds sleep over it.
 
That's cool. I want you to get your sleep.
 
Originally posted by Wild Starchild Wild Starchild wrote:

It is your prerogative to do so, so have at it friend. However, there are many, many instances in the Bible you can check out for yourself where God hates those who senselessly murder and rape the innocent. The old testament is full of times when God smote people for their heinous actions. In Genesis, Chapter 6 regarding the flood of Noah, He said that He was grieved that He ever made man, and that He saw mans heart was ALWAYS evil CONTINUOUSLY!!! According to the Bible He wiped out the whole Earth , save Noah's family, because they were vile. There are more instances where this happened than I can remember or post here without sounding like a Sunday morning sermon slinger. The new testament was a new hope that mankind could be saved from themselves, but the trick is, they had to ask for forgiveness.
 
And as I mentioned earlier, the Old Testament is irrelevant. Except for maybe telling stories to illustrate or draw a comparison to some other situation. But to hold people to the standards of the Old Testament goes against the New Testament which is what the teachings of Jesus & the Christian faith are based on.
 
Originally posted by Wild Starchild Wild Starchild wrote:

Now, in regards to my narrow mindedness of my faith, I don't recall Couey ever asking for forgiveness. I don't really know what is in the man's heart, that's between him and God. But I do know I have never heard him say he was the least bit sorry for what he's done! Instead he gets a lawyer and pleads NOT GUILTY!!!??? I MEAN come on??? Where is the outrage???
 
The outrage is not all inside you & nobody else. You are not the only one who cares or felt the horror for what that little girl endured. The rest of us are not just cold hearted blocks of stone. My question has always been, why was her father out chasing skirt & sleeping with his girlfriend & not at home protecting his child? Why did he let her sleep alone in a bedroom with the window open & not care enough to buy some of those inexpensive  security clips that you can get at any hardware store that would've prevented someone from opening her window far enough to crawl inside? Where's the outrage over that? That guy has become a media whore sticking his nose into every similar case that comes along as if he's now some kind of expert. The a-hole left his daughter in the care of an elderly woman while he was out having sex. And nobody seems to care about that.
 
Originally posted by Wild Starchild Wild Starchild wrote:

He totally robbed an innocent little girl of ever having a chance to grow up.
 
Gee whiz. That happens everyday in this country. Happens mostly to minority kids that you never hear about. Where's the outrage over that? Is it reserved only for cute little white girls?
 
Originally posted by Wild Starchild Wild Starchild wrote:

This case, and I am sorry to keep beating the living hell out of a dead horse, but it shook me to my very innermost being. What he did was repugnant!! And the Bible says emphatically, that Jesus said from his own lips, "If any man harms a little child and causes them to stumble, it would be better if a giant millstone were tied around their neck and cast into the sea!!" I'd say that was a pretty narrow viewpoint myself, regarding these extreme circumstances!!
 
I'm pretty sure he was referring to what would befall that person in the afterlife or on judgement day. If we trusted God as much as we like to claim we do as a society, then we'd also trust Him to mete out punishment after we die rather than take on His job & decide for Him who lives & dies & breaking the "Thou Shalt Not Kill" commandment.
 
Originally posted by Wild Starchild Wild Starchild wrote:

I don't know, maybe you are right, and I am totally wrong, and if I am I'll have to face God one day about my comments. But if Couey were to show the slightest bit of contrition for his actions, I might rethink my position, but until then, I hope they fry his ass crispy!!!
 
See above.
 
Originally posted by Wild Starchild Wild Starchild wrote:

Has nothing to do with my tax dollars, I just think it is a waste of air to have this dirt bag breathe another second. He can never get out, and even if he did, he'd do it again, so what purpose does he serve??? Like I said, strap his ass in an electric chair or stick a needle in his arm and he might actually feel a little remorse then, and he might even cry out to God for mercy right before they throw the switch!! Then it doesn't matter cause God will forgive him right before he checks out. That might just be the only chance he gets at redemption, but then again, I don't know his heart, but I do see the fruit, and it's rotten as hell!!
 
I don't see where it's our place to make those determinations. Locking him away protects society. I thought "In God We Trust" was supposed to mean we trust Him for EVERYTHING, not just that with which we are comfortable trusting Him for.
 
Originally posted by Wild Starchild Wild Starchild wrote:

This comment Jimbo I felt was little over the top about the illegals thing. First you completely missed my point! I want people to have jobs. I want people to be happy. I want to be able to live in a society where violent offenders are removed from the sandbox! Secondly, you got on this shpeel about prisons and workers and jobs and stuff, just to take a jab at me. I could return fire, but I'll refrain from doing so, because I hope you'll see by my responses that even though our viewpoints are a million miles away from each other, I didn't throw any underhanded remarks your way. Maybe I misread your intentions because that is very easy to do in type absent the tone and expression of verbal communication. If so I apologize. Even though I strongly disagree with some of the things you have said, I would fight to the finish to defend your right as an American to say them!!
 
There was nothing underhanded about that remark. It was a legitimate point. Get rid of criminals & you put hundreds of thousands of people out of work from the police, to the courts to the correctional institutions. Not to mention the loss of construction jobs bulding new prisons, business for food suppliers, local housing markets in surrounding communities where prisons are, stores & restaurants who'd lose the business from those prison & justice system employees. All perfectly legitimate claims to make.
 
Originally posted by Wild Starchild Wild Starchild wrote:

Could not agree more, but I still think that when someone does something this extreme, they forfeit their right to live. Either that, or give them hard labor so intense they would pray for death.
 
Then you don't trust God. Simple as that. Because where in the Bible does God give you the right to decide who should live & who should not? And I'm talking the New Testament rules. And BTW.... what would your consequences be for refusing to perform the intensive labor? Whippings? Beatings? Torture? Starvation? WWJD, WS?
 
Originally posted by Wild Starchild Wild Starchild wrote:

 You know the thing that bothers me so much about this whole (Mexican) illegal thing is that Mexico does not even try to take care of it's own. They have some of the MOST beautiful coastlines on both shores in the whole world. They bring in MILLIONS if not BILLIONS in tourist revenues each year, yet in the central parts of the country, it's like a third world country. These people are starving to death, and being murdered by drug cartels to the point that it is absolutely ridiculous. I truly do sympathize with their struggles. I DO NOT blame the folks for wanting to get the Hell out of that place. I just wish that if they are gonna come here, they would do it, LEGALLY and respect our laws and way of life!! If they would do that, I don't think half of those opposed to it would mind. What is the big frickin deal about doing that. Don't we have guest worker permits here now or is that still a pending thing?
 
As I said, going thru legal channels takes time they obviously feel they don't have. If you were desperate to provide for your family with the likely consequences of failure being death, would you sit there saying "Noooo, I must follow the rules & die waiting for the bureaucracy."
 


-------------
...the ads take aim and lay their claim to the heart and the soul of the spender
Jackson Browne - The Pretender

C'mon, man!
Joe Biden - 46th President of the United States


Posted By: Jimbo
Date Posted: 28 Jul 2008 at 4:29pm
Originally posted by MrsHill MrsHill wrote:

Wow.
 
Luanne started this thread as a complaint about FOX News.  A 'questionaire' was started with the promise of it having something to do with FOX News.  A statement along the lines of 'there's room for compromise!' is made - then the same poster who made that statement turns this into a hard-nosed debate that has nothing to do with FOX News with no compromise on the issues!  WTF???
 
Luanne is one of the nicer new people to join the forum.  If Wild had issues to get off his chest, he could have started another thread on it in a more appropriate sub-forum, thus not sh*tting on Luanne's thread.
 
I apologize, Luanne.  I would have never participated in the little 'questionaire' if I knew it would come to this - and I should have known it would come to this.
 
When has ANY thread ever remained on topic throughout it's entire life?
 
No thread I've ever started that garnered more than a few replies has ever stayed on the original topic.
 
And not just here at CIH either.
 
I think meandering off the subject is just a natural progression in these kinds of conversations.
 
 
 


-------------
...the ads take aim and lay their claim to the heart and the soul of the spender
Jackson Browne - The Pretender

C'mon, man!
Joe Biden - 46th President of the United States


Posted By: CatWoman
Date Posted: 28 Jul 2008 at 4:38pm
I'm calling Wild out on a lie - "oh, my questions WILL have something to do with blah -blah-blah.....
 
Yeah, I've been here a while too - everything goes off topic, and it's fun.  Wild had no intention on relating anything to the topic - he was gearing up for a righty debate.
 
Carry on - that's what I had to get off my chest.LOL


-------------



Posted By: Jimbo
Date Posted: 28 Jul 2008 at 4:41pm
Yeah, he staked out his territory & circled the wagons!!! LOL
 
 
 


-------------
...the ads take aim and lay their claim to the heart and the soul of the spender
Jackson Browne - The Pretender

C'mon, man!
Joe Biden - 46th President of the United States


Posted By: Thor
Date Posted: 28 Jul 2008 at 5:22pm
Originally posted by MrsHill MrsHill wrote:

I'm calling Wild out on a lie - "oh, my questions WILL have something to do with blah -blah-blah.....
 
Yeah, I've been here a while too - everything goes off topic, and it's fun.  Wild had no intention on relating anything to the topic - he was gearing up for a righty debate.
 
Carry on - that's what I had to get off my chest.LOL
 
I think I know where Wild Starchild is going with this.  If I'm right, all of this debate is relevant to his point.
 
 


Posted By: CatWoman
Date Posted: 28 Jul 2008 at 5:28pm
Couey, The Bible, Mexicans, TENNCARE, public aid, jobs, ARRRRGH!!! 

-------------



Posted By: Wild Starchild
Date Posted: 28 Jul 2008 at 5:37pm
GOOD GREIF HILLY!! I was gonna finish it but it went somewhere else there with Jimbo. Dang I never meant for you to get your knickers in a knot!!! I was actually gonna do it last night but I damn near fell asleep at my computer. So stop over reacting, back off the friggin insults there, cause I never lied about anything. I was waiting for folks to have a chance to respond to the questions, that's all. I don't sit at my computer all the time, I do have a life. LOL damn, I thought we were friends here Hilly. I never meant to disrespect Luanne. Goodness!!
 
OK, since you asked nicely!! LOL   The questions had to do with issues that I have heard in the media, be it Fox, CNN, print and others. My point is, I see these folks on the news constantly beating each other to death and never solving a damned thing. The Senators, congressmen and pundants yak yak yak, and they never solve sh*t!!! If you are going to single out FOX, then to be fair you have to examine the rest of them too. The difference is, you don't hear 14, 873 publications, blogs and news outlets running down any of them like you do Fox. A few take hits, but FOX is the one that folks pick on the most. It seems to be hip these days to just bash FOX and I doubt very seriously that many of the ones who bash, actually watch it. I know FOX has flaws like every media outlet does, but there are just a lot of things totally made up. I hear things all the time from blogs and newspapers, that are totally false. what you get with FOX is spirited debate, BUT you will hear BOTH sides, just like we saw both sides with the questions I posted. No one really got offended at the questions, and I didn't see anyone get offended at the answers either. But sometimes you do get pundants and contributors on there that say off the wall things. They aren't cencsored or edited, so they say pretty much what ever they want to, and that is what I have seen mostly in the news.
 
One of FOX's slogans is, "We report, you decide!" I see both sides on FOX. Other than a few of the right wingers like Cavuto and Hannity, I just don't get the arguments. Hannity is like a pitbull with a bone when he gets on somethig. I'm like Jesus Sean, get over it already!!!
 
And, "Bill O'Reilly should burn in hell!!???" Based on what?? Someone please tell me the arguement?
 
The questions I asked were relevant because I hear the exact same veiws you guys have stated here. I just think that maybe if folks weren't so quick to bash, then they'd understand.


-------------
AW DAMN!!!! Wild Shot the friggin TV again!!!


Posted By: CatWoman
Date Posted: 28 Jul 2008 at 5:41pm
There, was that so hard??

-------------



Posted By: Thor
Date Posted: 28 Jul 2008 at 6:02pm
I pretty much thought that that was going to be Wild Starchild's point.  FOX is the only news station that regularly presents issues such as the ones discussed here, and does so in debate form.  I know that upsets the FOX-haters.  Maybe not so much the debate itself, but the fact that there may actually be a debate on such issues, the fact that there may be another point of view, the fact that there may even be a serious issue that's not being discussed on the other channels and media.
 
Michael Savage has been getting a lot of flak lately on some comments he made on autism.  Many people are totally misrepresenting what he said, based on the news outlets report of what he said.  Even FOX got this one wrong.  Well, I heard that broadcast and know what he said.  The particulars about this controversy are for another discussion.  My point here, is that here's someone bringing up a particular subject, and people are livid.  They want him removed from the airwaves for saying what he had said (which really should have generated little or no controversy).  But people saw an opportunity to belittle this person they hate, and so they say whatever they want woithout knowing the facts, in order to justify their belief that this conservative must be destroyed, silenced, removed from the airwaves. 
 
This is what has led me to the belief that the left just does not care to question the status quo, at least when that question comes from one of their hated targets, such as Michael Savage and Bill O'Reilly.  It's so much easier to hate the messenger.  Keith Olbermann's a great example of someone who believes that the way to settle an argument is to belittle the one holding the opposing view---without even bothering to debate that person.
 
 
 


Posted By: Jimbo
Date Posted: 28 Jul 2008 at 6:08pm
Originally posted by Wild Starchild Wild Starchild wrote:

My point is, I see these folks on the news constantly beating each other to death and never solving a damned thing. The Senators, congressmen and pundants yak yak yak, and they never solve sh*t!!!
 
I think people tend to expect social change to come too fast. It's unrealistic to think you can just change the direction of a society as big as ours or solve complex problems overnight especially when so many people are interested only in themselves & you have corporate profit interests competing against personal interests with the corporations having large sums of money to buy influence that normal people can't.
 
Originally posted by Wild Starchild Wild Starchild wrote:

If you are going to single out FOX, then to be fair you have to examine the rest of them too. The difference is, you don't hear 14, 873 publications, blogs and news outlets running down any of them like you do Fox. A few take hits, but FOX is the one that folks pick on the most. It seems to be hip these days to just bash FOX and I doubt very seriously that many of the ones who bash, actually watch it.
 
I disagree. Conservatives beat the hell out of CNN ("Clinton News Network') constantly. Same with MSNBC. It just depends upon who you're listening to at the time. And who constantly howls about the so-called "liberal media"? The same people who love Fox, even though the other networks have conservative commentators too.
 
Originally posted by Wild Starchild Wild Starchild wrote:

I know FOX has flaws like every media outlet does, but there are just a lot of things totally made up. I hear things all the time from blogs and newspapers, that are totally false. what you get with FOX is spirited debate, BUT you will hear BOTH sides, just like we saw both sides with the questions I posted. No one really got offended at the questions, and I didn't see anyone get offended at the answers either. But sometimes you do get pundants and contributors on there that say off the wall things. They aren't cencsored or edited, so they say pretty much what ever they want to, and that is what I have seen mostly in the news.
 
If you don't see the overall conservative slant in Fox's editorial content then you aren't looking too hard.
 
Originally posted by Wild Starchild Wild Starchild wrote:

 One of FOX's slogans is, "We report, you decide!" I see both sides on FOX. Other than a few of the right wingers like Cavuto and Hannity, I just don't get the arguments. Hannity is like a pitbull with a bone when he gets on somethig. I'm like Jesus Sean, get over it already!!!
 
The representives of the left who are employed by Fox like Alan Colmes & Juan Williams are meek, mild & in the shadows of their conservative counterparts like Sean Hannity & Brit Hume. Hannity walks all over Colmes who seems like he's afraid to express too liberal of a POV, & Hume snears in contempt & talks down to Juan W. everytime he expresses an opposing view on Fox News Sunday.
 
Originally posted by Wild Starchild Wild Starchild wrote:

And, "Bill O'Reilly should burn in hell!!???" Based on what?? Someone please tell me the arguement?
 
That's not an "argument" WS, that was just someone letting off steam & using a bit of hyperbole to express her contempt for the guy. Lighten up. I'm sure there are people you've said similar things about.
 
Originally posted by Wild Starchild Wild Starchild wrote:

The questions I asked were relevant because I hear the exact same veiws you guys have stated here. I just think that maybe if folks weren't so quick to bash, then they'd understand.
 
I have no problem with the questions you asked & I took great pains & invested quite a bit of time answering them. Dammit.
 
What I think is that a.) you're not giving us enough credit w/regards to understanding what we're "bashing" here & b.) you're assuming that once you "explain it to us", we'll change our opinions of Fox News, which we will not.


-------------
...the ads take aim and lay their claim to the heart and the soul of the spender
Jackson Browne - The Pretender

C'mon, man!
Joe Biden - 46th President of the United States



Print Page | Close Window

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.04 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2015 Web Wiz Ltd. - http://www.webwiz.co.uk