Cerise
Well-Known Member
You don't have to look further than the NYT giving a $75,000 discount to moron.org when they placed their Gen. Betrayus ad to see an agenda.
Things you won't hear in the U.S.
- Thread starter jimpeel
- Start date
You don't have to look further than the NYT giving a $75,000 discount to moron.org when they placed their Gen. Betrayus ad to see an agenda.
jimpeel
Well-Known Member
Great! Now this is a "conspiracy theory thread". I never said "conspiracy" and there doesn't need to be a conspiracy for the MSM to be dominated by liberals. If you want a far reaching conspiracy then go read up on Cecil Rhoads.
If you want something more recent, simply try the "60 Minutes" smear of the president.
Was it a "conspiracy" that Mapes, Rather, Burkett, et al tried to smear and defame the president through the use of forged documents created using a word processing program that didn't even exist at the time of the president's service? YEP! Now THAT'S a conspiracy by the very definition of the word.
There have been numerous studies and reports on the liberal bias of the MSM and their overwhelming tendency to support, vote for, register as, and donate to democrats. No conspiracy. Just fact.
Of course the libs cry that the MSM is really conservative owned and operated and thus is a right wing cabal stinted against the democrats. "Ruuuuuupert Muuuurrrrdock!!!! Say it ain't so! He owns Fox and too many newspapers! Oh, alas and alak! What will we do?"
If you want something more recent, simply try the "60 Minutes" smear of the president.
Was it a "conspiracy" that Mapes, Rather, Burkett, et al tried to smear and defame the president through the use of forged documents created using a word processing program that didn't even exist at the time of the president's service? YEP! Now THAT'S a conspiracy by the very definition of the word.
There have been numerous studies and reports on the liberal bias of the MSM and their overwhelming tendency to support, vote for, register as, and donate to democrats. No conspiracy. Just fact.
Of course the libs cry that the MSM is really conservative owned and operated and thus is a right wing cabal stinted against the democrats. "Ruuuuuupert Muuuurrrrdock!!!! Say it ain't so! He owns Fox and too many newspapers! Oh, alas and alak! What will we do?"
spike
New Member
ZOMG! TINFOIL HAT TIME! :cry:
THe cons are always crying about the "liberal media" but it's bullshit. Just like you claim a lot of crap but I noticed you backed none of it.
ResearchMonkey
Well-Known Member
You don't even remember your own werds. You opened the door with first mention of it in this thread. Itcame from you, in an accusation
spike said:
So far this has been the best defense/statement/point/argument/deflection you've offered, no wonder you use it so often
What is says is: "I cannot address what you said"
* * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Spike my widdle friend,
Communication is a skill, an art, a tool used to share ideas, debate, and express interpersonal thoughts. It's interaction between people and the more skill one has the higher up the intellectual ladder they go.
. . . . now lets see if we can get you on that ladder.
.
spike
New Member
Nope, the bogus conspiracy was mentioned right in the title of the thread and promptly proven false.
I addressed everything that was said immediately. "won't hear in the US"...promptly proven false.
Do you have something specific you'f like addressed besides you're rhetoric? Let me know.
If first we can get you out of the rhetoric swamp and smiley parade we may get somewhere yet. So maybe you have something intelligent to say yet?
Have at it.
ResearchMonkey
Well-Known Member
First off; One mans statement on a thread title ( a catch phrase) does not constitute a conspiracy. especially when the actual topic was "Good News"
Second: Thinking you proved him wrong on his personal observation is simply dumbass.
Third: I'ld like for you to tell me what you belive 'intelligent' means.
ResearchMonkey
Well-Known Member
I'm not wearing anything you've used in a sleepover.
OK, I concede, Spike you've WON top honors by breaking the conspiracy of JimmyP wide-the-fuck-open. :surrender:
Jim, I support your notion that good news is a bit harder to come by than left-leaning, doubt casting news.
Good news there too Jim. The political eating of their own has already begun. Waking-up some of those who report to see things have been skewed for a long time.
. . . Go Team!!!!
OK, I concede, Spike you've WON top honors by breaking the conspiracy of JimmyP wide-the-fuck-open. :surrender:
Jim, I support your notion that good news is a bit harder to come by than left-leaning, doubt casting news.
Good news there too Jim. The political eating of their own has already begun. Waking-up some of those who report to see things have been skewed for a long time.
. . . Go Team!!!!
Cerise
Well-Known Member
Cha-Ching!
jimpeel
Well-Known Member
ZOMG! TINFOIL HAT TIME! :cry:
THe cons are always crying about the "liberal media" but it's bullshit. Just like you claim a lot of crap but I noticed you backed none of it.
Lame. Very lame.
A debate is not furthered by name calling and denigration of the poster. That, however, seems to be the paramount tactic of the liberal base.
Don't agree with the poster? Simply call them a name or question their sanity. Does that bolster the name caller's credibility? Yeah. That does it. In their own eyes; but others, lurkers especially, are watching, shaking their heads, and saying "Tsk, tsk."
jimpeel
Well-Known Member
What you posted were a few sites that mentioned the case in point and then went on to shoot it down with doubts of its longevity, and trustwortiness of the participants. The rest were blogs, foreign sources (my point), and NOT THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA.
I posted examples HERE, and HERE. The point was -- and was more than adequately covered in the thread header -- that the MSM concentrates on the bad news and doesn't give us the good news; or did you miss, gloss over, couldn't see, or just plain ignore this:
Maybe you will see the large type edition; but I doubt it because you are blinded by your hatred.
jimpeel
Well-Known Member
con·spir·a·cy /kənˈspɪrəsi/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[kuhn-spir-uh-see] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun, plural -cies. 1. the act of conspiring.
2. an evil, unlawful, treacherous, or surreptitious plan formulated in secret by two or more persons; plot.
3. a combination of persons for a secret, unlawful, or evil purpose: He joined the conspiracy to overthrow the government.
4. Law. an agreement by two or more persons to commit a crime, fraud, or other wrongful act.
5. any concurrence in action; combination in bringing about a given result.
That would be Burkett, Rather, and Mapes. How many of them are still working at CBS? ZERO. Burkett never did, Rather and Mapes were fired; and don't give us this shit that Rather wasn't fired. He was forced out of CBS because he conspired with Burkett and Mapes to fabricate a false story against an individual they all disliked and wished to destroy.
They attempted to perpetrate a fraud on the American public and got caught. They weren't even smart enough to use a typewriter. Instead they chose to use a word processing program that didn't even exist at the time the purported "document" was supposedly created. In fact, they weren't even smart enough to use THAT program in a way they wouldn't get caught. The settings of the Word document were the DEFAULT Word settings! BWAAAAAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!
It will be interesting to see what comes out of this specious suit that Rather has hoisted against CBS. He WILL be hung on his own petard.
–noun, plural -cies. 1. the act of conspiring.
2. an evil, unlawful, treacherous, or surreptitious plan formulated in secret by two or more persons; plot.
3. a combination of persons for a secret, unlawful, or evil purpose: He joined the conspiracy to overthrow the government.
4. Law. an agreement by two or more persons to commit a crime, fraud, or other wrongful act.
5. any concurrence in action; combination in bringing about a given result.
That would be Burkett, Rather, and Mapes. How many of them are still working at CBS? ZERO. Burkett never did, Rather and Mapes were fired; and don't give us this shit that Rather wasn't fired. He was forced out of CBS because he conspired with Burkett and Mapes to fabricate a false story against an individual they all disliked and wished to destroy.
They attempted to perpetrate a fraud on the American public and got caught. They weren't even smart enough to use a typewriter. Instead they chose to use a word processing program that didn't even exist at the time the purported "document" was supposedly created. In fact, they weren't even smart enough to use THAT program in a way they wouldn't get caught. The settings of the Word document were the DEFAULT Word settings! BWAAAAAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!
It will be interesting to see what comes out of this specious suit that Rather has hoisted against CBS. He WILL be hung on his own petard.