Welcome guest, is this your first visit? Create Account now to join.
  • Login:

Welcome to the Online Debate Network.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 38
  1. #1
    Senior Mod

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,289
    Post Thanks / Like

    Dark Knight shooting in Colorado. Liberal attack dogs in 3...2...1...

    From the people that constantly (and hypocritically) scold the right about "civil discourse" and not politicizing things... we get more of the same: potlicizing a tragedy within minutes to implicate the Left's favorite target: the Tea Party.

    Aired on ABC News within minutes of the attack:



    Quote Originally Posted by Brian Ross, ABC News
    At least 12 people were killed and more than 50 people were injured at a shooting in a movie theater in Colorado early Friday morning. During ABC News’ coverage of the shooting on Friday, Stephanopoulos noted that Ross had discovered that the alleged shooter, Jim Holmes, may be linked to the Tea Party.

    “There’s a Jim Holmes of Aurora, Colorado, page on the Colorado Tea Party site as well, talking about him joining the Tea Party last year,” said Ross. “Now, we don’t know if this is the same Jim Holmes. But it’s Jim Holmes of Aurora, Colorado.”

    A personal page on a Colorado Tea Party website shows a user named Jim Holmes highlighted an event with an expert who had discussed “global Islamic terrorism. ” This link between the shooter and the Tea Party that ABC News was referring to.
    Apparently, there are 25 Jim Holmes in that area of Colorado, and there was not a single bit of dilligence done to ensure that this man was not falsely implicated in such a heinous crime... because it was convenient to smear him as a Tea Partier and take another shot at those "gun-toting, right-wing nutjobs."

    Now, the network did issue a sort-of retraction and apology.... but I want to know why the article didn't also announce Brian Ross had been fired for incompetence and unfairly dragging a perfectly respectable and upstanding citizen's name through the mud? If that had been Rush Limbaugh, people would be falling all over themselves demanding he resign, because a simple half-baked apology that had to be dragged out of them in stages in the first place would never have been enough.

    Oh... and they've done the same to Rush Limbaugh, speaking of the devil.. dozens of comments in the liberal blogosphere about Limbaugh's rant about Bane from the movie and its homophone, "Bain" (capital), and how it might have been connected. Nevermind that Limbaugh is obviously not a comic book fan and doesn't know that the character Bane is decades old... someone wanted to try to smear him with the same brush, despite there being not one single shred of proof suggesting that the attack might have been motivated by something Limbaugh said.

    I shouldn't be surprised... I shouldn't even be disappointed. It's pretty standard for the Ministry of Truth these days to use anything... anything at all... to try to demonize conservative citizens who are passionate about their country and passionate in their disagreement with the policies of this failed Presidency. What's sad is that I tried to post this 3 times earlier today and never got the chance. I nailed it the second I heard about this. I knew that the Left was going to do this, because it's a standard play out of their main playbook. Demonize the opposition, and throw as much defamatory crap at them as you can, and maybe some of it will stick and make a basis for an ad hominem attack that will energize the base and further polarize the country.

    I'm *really* not sure why I'm surprised that Piers Morgan and other liberal mouthpieces of the MiniTrue have used this as yet another soapbox for gun control when the facts clearly don't bear out their arguments.... but I guess I just keep holding onto hope that maybe one day reason will sink in.

    I guess the slogan of the Left is *still* "never let a good crisis go to waste."

    At least Romney and Obama showed a little class... but then, Obama has the liberal media as his attack dogs. He can stand back and keep his hands clean while they foam at the mouth to try to falsely pin this on the Tea Party... just like they did with the Virginia Tech shooter and the Tuscon, AZ shooter.

    Alinksy is alive and well in the Democratic party.
    -=[Talthas]=-
    ODN Senior Moderator

    ODN Rules

  2. #2
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Seattle, Washington USA
    Posts
    7,130
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Dark Knight shooting in Colorado. Liberal attack dogs in 3...2...1...

    Once again someone mistakes the medias entertainment bias for a media bias.

    What they like to do is say anything that constitutes picking a fight or sounds like drama. If they can find anything on that name that has any political relevance they will run it. Tea part works as a hot topic, so would Peta, or if he had Islamist ties, or he was a war veteran. Whatever connection they can make to a hot button issue, they will make it. Actually fact checking ****... ya right, not to days TV media, no way.

    The news plays up both right wing and left wing wack jobs when the opportunity presents itself. It just so happens these days most of the killers of note are either right wing types (in which I would include conservative Islamic terrorists) or disgruntled types (like kids who like goth and violent video games). We used to get more left wing killers but there are less and less of them these days. Give it time, radicalism knows no real boundaries.

    This guy could be the next great left wing mass murderer, we don't know yet. Until they have hard facts, don't beleive the ********.

    As to Rush
    Great band!

    wait...

    He said something dumb and he is famous so he got mocked for it. end of story. Not a liberal conspiracy except the left likes to take shots at him because he takes shots at them. Seems fair game to me.

    The actual quote I say looked more like he was joking around to me but I only saw a single paragraph quoted. I though he was sort of mock critiquing it for fun rather than seriously suggesting it was intentional.
    Feed me some debate pellets!

  3. #3
    Senior Mod

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,289
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Dark Knight shooting in Colorado. Liberal attack dogs in 3...2...1...

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigfried View Post
    Once again someone mistakes the medias entertainment bias for a media bias.

    What they like to do is say anything that constitutes picking a fight or sounds like drama. If they can find anything on that name that has any political relevance they will run it. Tea part works as a hot topic, so would Peta, or if he had Islamist ties, or he was a war veteran. Whatever connection they can make to a hot button issue, they will make it. Actually fact checking ****... ya right, not to days TV media, no way.
    It's more than that. This is a pervasive pattern that has demonstrated itself in the last 3 major attacks that have received public attention. It happened with the Virginia Tech shootings, the Tuscon Shootings, and last night's attack. It happens anytime there is any possible way that the situation can be misconstrued to implicate the Tea Party. This is in perfect lockstep with the tactics that the heads of the liberal establishment have been using for years, learned at the feet of the likes of Saul Alinsky and Francis Fox Piven.

    You never see this kind of wild speculation about violent criminals saying that they "may be associated with the Communist Party of America" or "had history with a violent domestic terrorist organization called Weather Underground." In fact, even though this is true about active members of the White House administration, you don't see these sorts of speculation or exposes. The media didn't speculate about Nidal Hasan having Islamic ties until there were witnesses that came out publicly and independent of the media, stating that they clearly heard him screaming, "Allahu akhbar!" This is because they're not interested being equal-opportunity haters or equal-opportunity entertainers. This behavior demonstrates a conscious and sustained effort on the part of the liberal media to defame, disempower, and ostracize the conservative cohort in this country. It happens time and time again, and you can't just explain it away with "entertainment."

    You can call it "entertainment" if you want, but I think that's either naive or intentionally overlooking the statistically proven media bias in all of the major news stations except Fox and maybe the Drudge Report.


    Quote Originally Posted by Sigfried
    The news plays up both right wing and left wing wack jobs when the opportunity presents itself. It just so happens these days most of the killers of note are either right wing types (in which I would include conservative Islamic terrorists) or disgruntled types (like kids who like goth and violent video games). We used to get more left wing killers but there are less and less of them these days. Give it time, radicalism knows no real boundaries.
    This just isn't true. First of all, as I mentioned, there has been no speculation about killers recently being associated with left-wing anything, even when it was true... as in the case of the Tuscon shooting. The mainstream media immediately started speculating, without any proof, that the shooter was inspired by Sarah Palin... when he was actually, if anything, a leftist... a fact which has never really made it into the leftist media despite all the overblown hype about the non-issue of Sarah Palin's "target list" which dominated the political landscape for well over a week.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigfried
    This guy could be the next great left wing mass murderer, we don't know yet. Until they have hard facts, don't beleive the ********.
    If he turns out to be leftist, don't hold your breath for it to be publicized or speculated about to the degree that has been done about possible Tea Party involvement in virtually every high-profile shooting that's occurred since their inception, despite never having a single piece of substantiating evidence and never finding anyone that fit that mold. No... if he's liberal, we won't hear about it.
    -=[Talthas]=-
    ODN Senior Moderator

    ODN Rules

  4. #4
    Banned Indefinitely

    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    SF,CA
    Posts
    2,133
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Dark Knight shooting in Colorado. Liberal attack dogs in 3...2...1...

    Quote Originally Posted by Talthas View Post
    From the people that constantly (and hypocritically) scold the right about "civil discourse" and not politicizing things... we get more of the same: potlicizing a tragedy within minutes to implicate the Left's favorite target: the Tea Party.
    Or the right politicizing a tragedy to implicate the right's favorite target: the Secularists?

    Texas Republican Rep. Louie Gohmert told radio host Ernest Istook, a former Oklahoma congressman, that the Colorado theater shooting could be directly linked to "ongoing attacks on Judeo-Christian beliefs."

    "You know what really gets me, a Christian, is to see the ongoing attacks on Judeo-Christian beliefs, and then some senseless crazy act of a derelict takes place," Gohmert said on Istook Live, according to a report from the Huffington Post.

    Thirteen people were killed in the shooting and more than 35 were injured.

    And while Istook reminded Gohmert that the motives of James Holmes, the 24-year-old man police took into custody following the shooting, were still unknown, Gohmert was insistent.

    "Some of us happen to believe that when our founders talked about guarding our virtue of freedom, that was important," he said on the show, "People say...where was God in all of this? We've threatened high school graduation participations if they use God''s name, they're going to be jailed... I mean that kind of stuff. Where was God? What have we done with God? We don't want him around." http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/...n-christianity

  5. #5
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    2,087
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Dark Knight shooting in Colorado. Liberal attack dogs in 3...2...1...

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigfried View Post

    The actual quote I say looked more like he was joking around to me but I only saw a single paragraph quoted. I though he was sort of mock critiquing it for fun rather than seriously suggesting it was intentional.
    I don't think he was joking - the way he denied it the next day, saying he didn't imply a conspiracy, was probably the nearest to a retraction he could make. He also didn't replay what he had said the previous day which I thought was a little dishonest.

    Either way, I appreciated our favorite fat-wit's acknowledgement of the Left's impressive foresight and immense resources to pull off such a conspiracy. Though I suspect that he was probably paid to do a sort of endorsement of the movie and that was the best he could come up with. In fact, maybe the real conspiracy is both Rush and the entire media-sphere for blowing it up to such a huge two day event.

    That said, I didn't think that going back to the original comic was a valid rebuttal to the conspiracy; they should have gone back to when the movie script was written, December 2008.

    Now, to properly prove that it was indeed a conspiracy, were there any other movies this Summer that would have negatively impacted some of the other potential candidates, should they have made it through instead of Romney. Or would Rush have linked Cain with Bane, as a subliminal rhyme? Or compare Gingrich to the Penguin, from a previous Batman movie? Perry, the Joker? Bachman, the slightly unhinged Harley Quinn from the Arkham City game?

    Surely, a better one for Romney would be Two-Face? Which ties in with Dark Knight, Nolan's previous Batman movie from .... 2008 ... when Romney was also a Presidential Candidate. Maybe there is more to this than first meets the eye!
    Last edited by SharmaK; July 21st, 2012 at 04:19 AM.

  6. #6
    Senior Mod

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,289
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Dark Knight shooting in Colorado. Liberal attack dogs in 3...2...1...

    Quote Originally Posted by Booger View Post
    Or the right politicizing a tragedy to implicate the right's favorite target: the Secularists?
    This is a single instance where I have seen this kind of thing happen. The left has a consistent pattern of doing this, and the rest of the media has helped them in every case except this one to blow such unfounded accusations way out of proportion until it becomes a non-story of its own. Tuscon and the Virginia Tech shootings are both examples of this. In cases where the person in question was actually associated with Leftist beliefs (the Tuscon shooting) or with a pet cause of the left (Fort Hood), this doesn't make the news until the people involved, or the general public at large, are already outraged about the seemingly intentional omission.

    You can throw up a single counterexample of a person speaking in general terms about the left's attack on religion... but that doesn't make a pattern like the Left has demonstrated in repeated incidents, with significant push from the media to force these non-stories into the public eye.

    So... your counterexample is noted... but it still doesn't address my point at all. At best, it's an ad hominem tu quoque.
    -=[Talthas]=-
    ODN Senior Moderator

    ODN Rules

  7. #7
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    6,192
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Dark Knight shooting in Colorado. Liberal attack dogs in 3...2...1...

    1. This is the second time in 2 weeks (?) that MSNBC has been caught deliberately skewing news towards its ideology.
    2. In fact, Microsoft has split from NBC (the MS in NBC), in part because;
    http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/La...-separate-ways
    Microsoft, in particular, had grown frustrated by contract terms requiring it to exclusively feature MSNBC.com content on its own websites. That exasperation was exacerbated by the MSNBC cable channel's strategy to counter
    Fox News Channel
    's appeal to conservative viewers by tailoring its programming for an audience with a liberal viewpoint.
    3. Yes, NBC is dedicated to entertainment over news and that accounts for attempting to make a story more relevant. In this case trying to tie the shooter with the Tea Party. Yet, it is fairly clear that NBC gone beyond mere entertainment. They are a rooting liberal interest.
    4. Just because Fox does or does not do something does not make it ok for NBC. Two wrongs don't make a right.
    5. I think it is fair to say that in this circumstance, the left wing NBC media outlet was the first to attempt to politicize this event. It does not even matter if they offer a weak retraction later. How many people who watch NBC will ever hear this retraction? The damage is done and that is the whole game. The Tea Party will be linked to this event.

    The OP gave a nod to Alinsky. So, I thought it would be helpful to share some Alinsky quotes and quotes from his book, Rules For Radicals. It is a guide for community organizers. Hey, don't we all know someone who held that title??? The left makes an articulate argument about how the Republican party used racism to make inroads into the South in the 70's. It would seem the same sort of connection can be made regarding the Marxists and the Democrats concerning the Northeast and West Coast. Just a thought.

    “Those who are most moral are farthest from the problem.” ―
    Saul D. Alinsky

    "The third rule of ethics of means and ends is that in war the end justifies almost any means...." p.29

    "Ridicule is man's most potent weapon. It is almost impossible to counteract ridicule. Also it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage."

    "Keep the pressure on, with different tactics and actions, and utilize all events of the period for your purpose."

    Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.
    The U.S. is currently enduring a zombie apocalypse. However, in a strange twist, the zombie's are starving.

  8. Likes chadn737 liked this post
  9. #8
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Seattle, Washington USA
    Posts
    7,130
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Dark Knight shooting in Colorado. Liberal attack dogs in 3...2...1...

    Quote Originally Posted by Talthas View Post
    Tuscon and the Virginia Tech shootings are both examples of this. In cases where the person in question was actually associated with Leftist beliefs (the Tuscon shooting) or with a pet cause of the left (Fort Hood), this doesn't make the news until the people involved, or the general public at large, are already outraged about the seemingly intentional omission.
    This kind of post makes me wish we still had the neg rep button.

    Anarchists are now part of the liberal establishment and the left is a big supporter of radical Islam? Sorry but no. Those two do not fit anywhere into the main rank and file of american politics. They are radicals for their respective causes that are not in the american mainstream political spectrum.

    Nor does the weather underground, which is an absurd notion for an example of who the media should be looking to for a possible motivation for the shooting. An organization which has been dead and gone for a good long time. When was the last time you saw a big weather underground rally on the national mall? How relevant do you really think they are?

    GET REAL
    Feed me some debate pellets!

  10. #9
    Senior Mod

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,289
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Dark Knight shooting in Colorado. Liberal attack dogs in 3...2...1...

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigfried View Post
    This kind of post makes me wish we still had the neg rep button.
    This kind of misplaced snark makes me wish you understood the issue better and had your facts straight.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigfried
    Anarchists are now part of the liberal establishment and the left is a big supporter of radical Islam? Sorry but no.
    OWS - which was vociferously supported by multiple people from the major liberal establishment had a huge anarchist component to it. Also, the guy was not simply an anarchist... he had Marxist literature in his house. So, either way you slice it, you're still wrong.

    As to Fort Hood... I never said that they were supporters of radical Islam.... this is a straw man. Their pet political cause - "political correctness" totally precluded any meaningful investigation into Hasan *or* his multiple contacts with known terrorist organizations until it was far too late, because they didn't want to hurt anyone's feelings.

    But just in case you were unclear on the issue... President Obama hosted a man affiliated with a known terrorist organization in the White House just last week, and he demanded the release of the Blind Sheikh as his opening overture for "diplomacy." This guy was invited to a meeting of the Security Council... the sort of meeting that people normally have to have top secret clearance ratings to get access to. Also, they've come out in support of the Muslim Brotherhood in the past, which is also known to be a radical Islamist organization. Also, CAIR - known to be associated with several radical terrorist groups - has significant support from elements within the Left.

    So.. you're wrong again.

    So before you start throwing snark around, get informed about the issues.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigfried
    Nor does the weather underground, which is an absurd notion for an example of who the media should be looking to for a possible motivation for the shooting. An organization which has been dead and gone for a good long time. When was the last time you saw a big weather underground rally on the national mall? How relevant do you really think they are?
    Bill Ayers - one of the prime movers of the Weather Underground movement in its heyday - is a close personal associate of Obama and has been to the white house quite frequently. There is credible scholarly speculation that at least a significant portion, if not the whole, of Obama's autobiography, "Dreams from my Father," was ghost written by Ayers. This is the same Bill Ayers who, along with Bernadine Dohrn and others in the Weather Underground, was responsible for multiple domestic terrorist attacks in the form of bombings. His only comment on the issue is that he doesn't feel they went far enough.

    So... dead? Maybe not alive by the same name... but the OWS guys certainly have some of the same themes and tactics as the SDS and the Weather Underground did. So did ACORN, except without the bombings.

    It all goes back to the same roots.

    My point in mentioning the Weather Underground is that even if it's not a currently active problem, Obama still has close associations and frequent contact with people from that movement, and nobody ever talks about it in the mainstream media. Ever. Why aren't the news stations frothing at the mouth to try to figure out why the President of the United States is hob-nobbing with known domestic terrorists and inviting foreign terrorists into the White House to attend meetings which discuss some of our most closely guarded security secrets?

    The simple answer is that they are complicit and don't want to do anything to make the President look bad or to work against his agenda. The media has failed to do its primary duty to the public when it comes to politics... to hold them accountable.
    Last edited by Talthas; July 23rd, 2012 at 08:03 AM.
    -=[Talthas]=-
    ODN Senior Moderator

    ODN Rules

  11. Likes chadn737, Squatch347 liked this post
  12. #10
    Senior Mod

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,289
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Dark Knight shooting in Colorado. Liberal attack dogs in 3...2...1...

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigfried View Post
    Nor does the weather underground, which is an absurd notion for an example of who the media should be looking to for a possible motivation for the shooting. An organization which has been dead and gone for a good long time. When was the last time you saw a big weather underground rally on the national mall?
    Oh, yeah.. because you asked..

    This is a photo from a March 2012 rally by the SDS (the violent parent group of the Weather Underground). They had a significant presence at OWS in several different cities, and Tom Hayden, the author of the founding document for SDS, said this just last month about the OWS movement, linking its efforts directly to the SDS:

    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Hayden, co-founder of SDS
    "The logic of an occupation, I think, is if you feel voiceless about a burning issue of great, great importance, and the institutions have failed you, the only way to get leverage for your voice is to occupy their space in order to get their attention. This goes way back to occupations of factories in the ’30s. ... Occupy Wall Street is only the latest stage

    SDS high-ups coached OWS organizers in Ann Arbor, MI and elsewhere had strong shows of solidarity from local SDS chapters.

    So...
    Quote Originally Posted by Sigfried
    How relevant do you really think they are?
    Very.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigfried
    GET REAL.
    Wake up.
    -=[Talthas]=-
    ODN Senior Moderator

    ODN Rules

  13. #11
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Seattle, Washington USA
    Posts
    7,130
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Dark Knight shooting in Colorado. Liberal attack dogs in 3...2...1...

    Quote Originally Posted by Talthas View Post
    OWS - which was vociferously supported by multiple people from the major liberal establishment had a huge anarchist component to it. Also, the guy was not simply an anarchist... he had Marxist literature in his house. So, either way you slice it, you're still wrong.
    Anarchists are not liberals Talthas, nor are they progressives. Anarchists don't want universal health care, Anarchists don't want to tax the wealthy, anarchists don't want gun control laws, anarchists don't want social security, Anarchists are as anti government as anti government can be, Anarchists don't want banking regulation, Anarchists don't want environmental regulations, Anrachists don't support Obama, Anarchists don't support any politician. Anarchists love Ayn Rand (though she is no fan of them)

    Anarchists do like to show up to government protests and cause trouble and they do sympathize with any effort that is anti-establishment groups but they are not liberals in the american political context. Leftists, sure, but not in the way anyone in american politics practices it and they are not glorified by the american news media except that they love to cover then when they break windows and fire bomb buildings during protests.

    As to Fort Hood... I never said that they were supporters of radical Islam.... this is a straw man. Their pet political cause - "political correctness" totally precluded any meaningful investigation into Hasan *or* his multiple contacts with known terrorist organizations until it was far too late, because they didn't want to hurt anyone's feelings.
    ******** Talthas. You implied the shooter in that case was supporting a liberal cause. That's what I read. If you want to clarify that's fine but your post implied the shooter was a liberal sympathizer and he is not. He was a radicalized Islamic sympathizer. And if you want to say anarchist are left wing, then radical Islam is right wing. In truth however they are both just extremists.

    But just in case you were unclear on the issue... President Obama hosted a man affiliated with a known terrorist organization in the White House just last week, and he demanded the release of the Blind Sheikh as his opening overture for "diplomacy." This guy was invited to a meeting of the Security Council... the sort of meeting that people normally have to have top secret clearance ratings to get access to. Also, they've come out in support of the Muslim Brotherhood in the past, which is also known to be a radical Islamist organization. Also, CAIR - known to be associated with several radical terrorist groups - has significant support from elements within the Left.
    Nice hijacking of the facts. You would make a great TV news reporter / muck raker. You know what, you deserve NBC, its the way you apparently think about news, so its the kind of news you get. You want to move the pieces around to paint exactly the picture you want to believe or you want others too? Apparently there are lots of media outlets that cater to exactly that interest.

    (For those who don't know the white house hosted a delegation from the new government in Egypt which was democratically elected for the first time in a great many years after decades of military rule under a dictatorship which the people overthrew. It so happens the new government has a lot of islamists in it, go figure since its an islamic nation for the most part. Democracy is like that. So one of these guys represents a political party formed from members of what was/is a terrorist organization according to our government. And indeed they may well be, I don't know. But the point is this guy is an elected member of their parliament and not a criminal in that country or ours. We may not like his politics or his friends but he's part of their new government and we don't make a practice of snubbing a nation's elected officials because we don't like their associates.)

    Of course you make it sound like this is some mysterious friend of Obama's over for tea in the garden so Obama can joke around bout blowing up Christians with them and plan their Islamic takeover of the world together. Way to offer unbalanced reporting there Talthas.

    So.. you're wrong again.
    Wrong about what exactly?

    So before you start throwing snark around, get informed about the issues.
    I'm more informed than you are. I look at the facts, I report the facts, I don't sling ******** and call it the news of the day. I give all the info, not just the info I want people to see or that is convenient for my cause.

    Bill Ayers - one of the prime movers of the Weather Underground movement in its heyday - is a close personal associate of Obama and has been to the white house quite frequently. There is credible scholarly speculation that at least a significant portion, if not the whole, of Obama's autobiography, "Dreams from my Father," was ghost written by Ayers. This is the same Bill Ayers who, along with Bernadine Dohrn and others in the Weather Underground, was responsible for multiple domestic terrorist attacks in the form of bombings. His only comment on the issue is that he doesn't feel they went far enough.
    A. ********. There is no evidence Ayers visited the white house once much less several times. The visitors list includes his name, but it was shown to be a different person according to their social security number. Indeed there are a good many joke names and celebrity double names on those lists.

    B. There is 0 evidence that Ayers wrote dreams of my father. That is just conspiracy ********. And honestly I find it amazing you fall for that kind of crap. Are you a fan of the Illumuinati and the obvious 9-11 conspiracy too, and have we never walked on the moon and the earth is flat as well?

    Name me one single gathering or official act by the Weather underground in the last 40 years. Just one. Show me one political rally where they were organizing. Show me just one memorandum they have released. Show me one shred of evidence they are the least bit relevant in american politics today as an organization rather than some ex members who are respected tenured college professors. Now compare that to the Tea Party which is large organized and active and very relevant to american politics.

    My point in mentioning the Weather Underground is that even if it's not a currently active problem, Obama still has close associations and frequent contact with people from that movement, and nobody ever talks about it in the mainstream media. Ever.
    Yes they do Talthas. But the thing is, they have a brain and they realize that was a long time ago and Ayers is not a crazy mad bomber today, hes a respected professor at a major university who doesn't call for anyone to blow up anything any more. And while Obama had a fundraiser at his house and knows the guy the connection doesn't honestly go much further than that. They looked and realized there wasn't much to see. Its the people that WANT to believe that a liberal black president must be EVIL that won't give it up, just like nubtall leftists insist the Bushes were part of the illuminate NWO and secretly pull the puppet strings on all the worlds governments. Its all a big pile of ******** fantasy.

    Why aren't the news stations frothing at the mouth to try to figure out why the President of the United States is hob-nobbing with known domestic terrorists and inviting foreign terrorists into the White House to attend meetings which discuss some of our most closely guarded security secrets?
    The answers are pretty plain and simply, you just can't accept them. You have to think the weather underground was actually important when they were really just some kids with pipe bombs and an axe to grind against the government that took place during the Vietnam erah when we had a lot of upheaval. You are fighting the echos of a political battle likely older than you are. Its not relevant and they weren't even all that important in their day, just flashy. They specifically tried not to hurt people in their bombings as opposed to todays terrorists who want to rack up maximum body counts like the folks in Oklahoma or the Islamic terrists of 9-11. Different ball game Talthas and decades apart.

    The simple answer is that they are complicit and don't want to do anything to make the President look bad or to work against his agenda. The media has failed to do its primary duty to the public when it comes to politics... to hold them accountable.
    The simple answer is they aren't right wing ideologs.

    ---------- Post added at 09:57 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:53 AM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Talthas View Post
    Oh, yeah.. because you asked..

    This is a photo from a March 2012 rally by the SDS (the violent parent group of the Weather Underground). They had a significant presence at OWS in several different cities, and Tom Hayden, the author of the founding document for SDS, said this just last month about the OWS movement, linking its efforts directly to the SDS:
    FYI The SDS that spawned the weather underground had their last meeting in 1969 when they disalved the organization. In 2010 some students created a new SDS organization. Different people, 40 years later, and while they may fly that flag, they have nothing what so ever to do with the Weather Underground.

    But those facts wouldn't make for as exciting a story so you didn't bother to share them with us, that or you didn't do your homework and just parroted whatever some conspiracy rag reported to you without thinking to challenge the information in the slightest.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Student...cratic_Society
    Feed me some debate pellets!

  14. Likes AuspiciousFist liked this post
  15. #12
    Senior Mod

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,289
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Dark Knight shooting in Colorado. Liberal attack dogs in 3...2...1...

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigfried View Post
    Anarchists are not liberals Talthas, nor are they progressives. Anarchists don't want universal health care, Anarchists don't want to tax the wealthy, anarchists don't want gun control laws, anarchists don't want social security, Anarchists are as anti government as anti government can be, Anarchists don't want banking regulation, Anarchists don't want environmental regulations, Anrachists don't support Obama, Anarchists don't support any politician. Anarchists love Ayn Rand (though she is no fan of them)

    Anarchists do like to show up to government protests and cause trouble and they do sympathize with any effort that is anti-establishment groups but they are not liberals in the american political context. Leftists, sure, but not in the way anyone in american politics practices it and they are not glorified by the american news media except that they love to cover then when they break windows and fire bomb buildings during protests.
    You're doing a fantastic job of setting up a straw man. I never once brought up anarchists... that was you. I was just commenting that even if they *were* relevant to the discussion - and they're not - they still enjoy indirect support from the liberal politicians in America, since anarchists were a significant minority in the OWS protests and have had similar alignments of political goals in the past with liberal groups.

    My actual point was that Laughtner was not "some anarchist" any more than he was "a Tea Partier," or "inspired by Palin," as the liberal media tried to immediately say he was. The guy had Communist literature in his house and was apparently totally off his rocker anyway... if anything, he was probably somewhat lefty, as evidenced by the Communist literature he had laying around. It doesn't really matter that much whether he was or not. The point I'm trying to make is that in this case, like the others I've mentioned, the immediate conclusion drawn by the liberal media was that he must have been associated in some way with the Tea Party, no matter how much distortion or falsehood they had to inject into the issue to make the non-story an issue for the next week. Nobody ever made the same huge story about how the facts had been distorted and how the Tea Party and Sarah Palin had been unfairly maligned once the facts of the situation were revealed... they just carried on as if nothing had happened.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigfried
    ******** Talthas. You implied the shooter in that case was supporting a liberal cause. That's what I read. If you want to clarify that's fine but your post implied the shooter was a liberal sympathizer and he is not. He was a radicalized Islamic sympathizer. (emphasis mine)
    I have bolded the relevant portion of your statement. That's what *you* read... not what I wrote. I don't feel it requires any further addressing.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigfried
    Nice hijacking of the facts. You would make a great TV news reporter / muck raker. You know what, you deserve NBC, its the way you apparently think about news, so its the kind of news you get. You want to move the pieces around to paint exactly the picture you want to believe or you want others too? Apparently there are lots of media outlets that cater to exactly that interest.

    (For those who don't know the white house hosted a delegation from the new government in Egypt which was democratically elected for the first time in a great many years after decades of military rule under a dictatorship which the people overthrew. It so happens the new government has a lot of islamists in it, go figure since its an islamic nation for the most part. Democracy is like that. So one of these guys represents a political party formed from members of what was/is a terrorist organization according to our government. And indeed they may well be, I don't know. But the point is this guy is an elected member of their parliament and not a criminal in that country or ours. We may not like his politics or his friends but he's part of their new government and we don't make a practice of snubbing a nation's elected officials because we don't like their associates.)
    As for the rest of it... I don't have time right now to address the remainder of your post point-by-point right now, but let me just close for now by saying that:

    a) you're distorting my position and making my argument out to say things I never did.
    b) you're personalizing the issue and making an attempt at an indirect ad hominem while refusing to look at objective facts as they are, instead preferring to slant my (admittedly hasty) recounting of them to try to invalidate the entire argument.
    c) you're derailing the argument and the OP entirely by focusing on non-issues as related to the OP.

    My point is that the liberal media has, yet again, jumped to the immediate conclusion that the shooter in question must have been associated with the Tea Party. They have done this in 2 of the last 3 high profile shootings in the past year. The parties responsible have never been punished, the networks have issued, at best, a half-hearted retraction if anything at all, and they still continue to do the same whenever they get the chance. In contrast, the President and all his associates get less vetting from the media than any responsible parent would use to vet their babysitter. Instead, the media has covered over or swept aside a multitude of sins that probably need some pretty extensive investigation.

    In short, the media is complicit in the Obama administration's propaganda campaign and has utterly failed in its duty to report on the politicians we elect to hold them accountable. That's the sum of my points. Anything else you've (mis)construed from my arguments is either a) a straw man, b) irrelevant, or c) a distortion of the facts.
    Last edited by Talthas; July 23rd, 2012 at 01:15 PM.
    -=[Talthas]=-
    ODN Senior Moderator

    ODN Rules

  16. #13
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Seattle, Washington USA
    Posts
    7,130
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Dark Knight shooting in Colorado. Liberal attack dogs in 3...2...1...

    [QUOTE=Talthas;499733]I have bolded the relevant portion of your statement. That's what *you* read... not what I wrote. I don't feel it requires any further addressing.

    You wrote the following
    Tuscon and the Virginia Tech shootings are both examples of this. In cases where the person in question was actually associated with Leftist beliefs (the Tuscon shooting) or with a pet cause of the left (Fort Hood), this doesn't make the news until the people involved, or the general public at large, are already outraged about the seemingly intentional omission.
    To check out if what you said is true I did a little research. The Tuscon guy was primarily an anarchist in his rantings. The Fort Hood guy was a sympathizer for Islamic radical anti-western ideology. That is not an american leftist position or a pet cause of the left. Your attempts to paint them as such are just as damning as the idiots who leap to report the most distant and uncorroborated connections to right politicos.

    You seem happy to distort the facts to fit your narrative but pissed off if anyone else does it to support their narrative.

    How about we just stick to the facts and stop trying to sell our narratives?

    a) you're distorting my position and making my argument out to say things I never did.
    If that is the case you need to re-consider what you write. You know me somewhat well. You know I play both sides of the isle on many issues. Your posts sound like slanted propaganda, not the writing of someone interested in digging into the real facts. Just someone complaining that their political view is not reflected in a given newscast.

    b) you're personalizing the issue and making an attempt at an indirect ad hominem while refusing to look at objective facts as they are, instead preferring to slant my (admittedly hasty) recounting of them to try to invalidate the entire argument.
    I'm trying to keep you honest my friend, that's it. I respect many of the regulars here on ODN and it ticks me off to see smart folks simply buy into propaganda of any kind. Reality is generally more mundane than the media (all of it) likes to make it out to be. Media of all kinds is about exciting your interest and it will always convey what is most dramatic. You have to guard against that, seek out diverse viewpoints and facts, always question them, and measure it against, "if it were me, what would I have been thinking?" Then you can often find a more reasonable viewpoint.

    Lots of groups out there have a political agenda. NBC is likely among them though the bigger the group, the harder it is to have a set line and control the message. But that is also perfectly natural and we as consumers of information have to take responsibility to filter out the ********, not counter it with someone else's ********.

    c) you're derailing the argument and the OP entirely by focusing on non-issues as related to the OP.
    I'm just calling BS on stuff I think is BS. If you don't want it challenged, don't say it.

    You have a damning case that the media was "reporting" connections they had no idea were true or not. That is not journalism, its craptastic infotainment. Its shameful and its irresponsible and its stupid and NBC should hang their heads in shame at pandering that way. Its worth condemning them for and I'll line up to wag my finger at them. But you want to go and make a deal of it being some kind of evil liberal agenda and they are ignoring all these other BS cases of unfounded connections that have been repeatedly debunked themselves and asking "why don't they cover the real TRUTH!" Well its not truth my man, its just more of the same stuff.

    So instead of calling them out, you doubled down with nonsense of your own and I had to call that to the carpet as well. If I didn't respect you I wouldn't be so animated about it.

    My point is that the liberal media has, yet again, jumped to the immediate conclusion that the shooter in question must have been associated with the Tea Party. They have done this in 2 of the last 3 high profile shootings in the past year. The parties responsible have never been punished, the networks have issued, at best, a half-hearted retraction if anything at all, and they still continue to do the same whenever they get the chance. In contrast, the President and all his associates get less vetting from the media than any responsible parent would use to vet their babysitter. Instead, the media has covered over or swept aside a multitude of sins that probably need some pretty extensive investigation.
    Welcome to the universe. The powers that be always have an advantage and everyone has an opinion and is interested in sharing it. There is no shortage of bias Conservative media if you know where to look and clearly you do because you share their stories with us here. Folks on the left feel just like you do and are sure the media is in the pockets of big business and march to the tune of secret elites etc... etc...

    But every time no matter the political alignment you will find the beating heart of entertainment and the masses crying out to be amused and titillated and they are the ones paying the bills for those who shovel them the ****. Its our responsibility to demand better and to do better.

    In short, the media is complicit in the Obama administration's propaganda campaign and has utterly failed in its duty to report on the politicians we elect to hold them accountable. That's the sum of my points. Anything else you've (mis)construed from my arguments is either a) a straw man, b) irrelevant, or c) a distortion of the facts.
    They don't have a duty. They have a bottom line. That bottom line is to please their audience so they will look at the advertisements that pay the bills. They are in the eyeball attracting business not the brainwashing business, that is just a sideline to the main show.
    Feed me some debate pellets!

  17. Likes UNC Reason liked this post
  18. #14
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    2,087
    Post Thanks / Like

    Smile Re: Dark Knight shooting in Colorado. Liberal attack dogs in 3...2...1...

    As much as I feel for the right when whining about how the left paints them with a broad brushstroke, I think in this case, it's just a single journalist, albeit an award winning one, who has a history of getting things wrong. He also mis-quoted Holme's mother in the same article, so it seems that he was just eager and in a rush to scoop everyone. It's hardly indicative of a general conspiracy on the part of the Left.

    To the point in the OP, or rather lack of, it's really only natural for people to point fingers; take a look at some other reactions:

    Blame Lack of Jesus
    The hate group American Family Association who claimed "So these black-robed miscreants said we cannot permit potential mass murderers like James Holmes to read or meditate on God’s prohibition “Thou shall not murder” as a part of their education, " (src) blaming the incident on not having enough religious instruction.

    Edit: Adding Huckabee:
    "We don't have a crime problem, a gun problem or even a violence problem. What we have is a sin problem. And since we've ordered god out of our schools, and communities, the military and public conversations, you know we really shouldn't act so surprised... when all hell breaks loose."


    Blame Teaching of Evolution
    Or Rick Warren's oblique swipe at teaching evolution in schools with his tweet "When students are taught they are no different from animals, they act like it." (src)


    Blame the Gays
    Or the Westboro Baptist Church jumping at another opportunity to blame it on the Gay with their promise to picket a memorial service (src).


    Video Games
    Pat Brown, a criminal profiler claims "And I’m not saying video games make you a killer. But if you’re a psychopath, video games help you get in the mode to do the killing. "

    Blame Batman
    Edit2: Rush is now blaming Batman:
    So Batman in the sixties on TV metastasizes to a sick dystopian, hyper-violent Batman movie in 23 years. Twenty-three years since Batman on TV to the first Batman movie. And the birth of the modern Batman series of films with which the killer in Aurora explicitly identified, by his own admission…

    Blame the Victims (!)
    Edit3: Russel Pearce (former AZ State Senator) in his now deleted Facebook entry:
    He then wondered why none were “[b]rave” enough to stop the atrocity.

    “Where were the men of flight 93???? Someone should have stopped this man,” he wrote. “…All that was needed is one Courages/Brave man prepared mentally or otherwise to stop this it could have been done.” (src)

    Combinations of the above
    Conservapedia makes an interesting claim linking his heavy involvement with his local (liberal evolution-teaching, gay-priest) Presbyterian church:
    The Christian Post reported that the mass murderer James Holmes was heavily involved in his local Presbyterian church.[8]
    In 2012, the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (USA) passed a resolution, by a lopsided vote of 353-150, reaffirming its support of evolution. [9] In October of 2011, the Presbyterian Church USA ordained its first homosexual "minister". [10]
    Did James Holmes attend a evolution and homosexuality promoting/condoning liberal "church" or a Bible Presbyterian church which are fewer in number? Darwinism has a bloodstained legacy and has been linked to a decline in morality.[11][12]


    So in times of great stress and distress people will lash out at their greatest enemies. I guess for the Left, it's the ones that are pro-gun, which seems to be the Tea Party these days. I don't really find it surprising given that a seemingly normal debate about ObamaCare here on ODN had several references to guns, which was certainly shocking. So it's hardly big leap to assume that it's the ones talking about guns the most might be suspected first - the boy who cried wolf and all that. This doesn't justify unsubstantiated accusations but it's no different to not having enough Jesus, too much Evolution or Gays or Video games that some of those on the right blame.

    Interestingly, for the right, it's playing the innocent victim and complaining about falsely getting blamed for everything shooting related (right on cue, Talthas) whilst trying prevent dialog on further gun control. I put on my rubber gloves to check out Breitbart to find that most of the articles were exactly of that type: Schakowsky Politicizes Aurora Theatre Shooting declares one article about her call for more thought around the issue (oh noes - more thinking!), CHER EXPLOITS AURORA MASSACRE TO CHEER OBAMA, RIP ROMNEY shouts another, right next to Warner Todd Huston pointing out flaws in Roger Ebert's piece about gun-control.

    So I think the OP is a pre-emptive strawman to mis-direct the debate to where it should be - gun control. Cue "over my dead body and my eight pistols and semi-automatics" Besides, I thought the Tea Party busy culling the US of Muslims - we on the Left deserve a breather for a while.
    Last edited by SharmaK; July 23rd, 2012 at 06:22 PM.

  19. #15
    Senior Mod

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,289
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Dark Knight shooting in Colorado. Liberal attack dogs in 3...2...1...

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigfried View Post
    To check out if what you said is true I did a little research. The Tuscon guy was primarily an anarchist in his rantings. The Fort Hood guy was a sympathizer for Islamic radical anti-western ideology. That is not an american leftist position or a pet cause of the left.
    Whether or not either anarchy or radical Islam is a position embraced by the spectrum of leftists in this country is sort of outside the scope of this debate, so I'm just going to leave that point alone. It's not really what I'm interested in debating right now. I'm not nearly as interested in what causes fall inside the scope of American liberalism as I am at the gross negligence of the media and the press, who have had, at least until recent years, a self-professed duty to the masses, which they have utterly abandoned while still claiming lip service to it.. and all the privileges that went with that "responsibility." I will address this more in a moment.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigfried
    You seem happy to distort the facts to fit your narrative but pissed off if anyone else does it to support their narrative.
    I don't believe I was distorting facts. I always maintained that my statement was intended to say that the "pet cause" of the Left in this case was not radical Islam, as you have said, but instead was "political correctness," which has been conclusively shown to have been the primary factor that allowed Nidal Hassan to commit his acts of murder without any prior intervention, even though the military had plenty of warning. However, it's only once the public started really looking into the issue that any sort of negative press started getting published about the seeming hesitancy to interfere with anything even remotely smelling like Islamic culture, let alone talking about Hassan's screaming "Allahu akhbar!" during his massacre. No... you never heard the press talking about that, even though that does seem like something that would be particularly newsworthy, considering all the links that were clearly before us once the facts came out that he was known to be linked to known terrorists.

    That *is* fact... nobody wanted to report the whole truth about this because it ran counter to the administration's narrative until the public started getting angry about the silence from the media.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigfried
    Lots of groups out there have a political agenda. NBC is likely among them though the bigger the group, the harder it is to have a set line and control the message. But that is also perfectly natural and we as consumers of information have to take responsibility to filter out the ********, not counter it with someone else's ********.

    You have a damning case that the media was "reporting" connections they had no idea were true or not. That is not journalism, its craptastic infotainment. Its shameful and its irresponsible and its stupid and NBC should hang their heads in shame at pandering that way. Its worth condemning them for and I'll line up to wag my finger at them.
    At least we agree on this.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigfried
    They don't have a duty. They have a bottom line. That bottom line is to please their audience so they will look at the advertisements that pay the bills. They are in the eyeball attracting business not the brainwashing business, that is just a sideline to the main show.
    And this is the heart of my objection to what's going on in the media today. I argue that the media does have a duty... and that they have always had a duty... to report accurately, objectively, and completely. This is the only reason that we allow people with "press passes" special privileges and special access to our leaders, our most important events, and our most beloved people and most sensitive issues. Historically, it's been only this responsibility to present the unvarnished truth about our world that has been the grounds upon which we give the press this unparalleled level of access to the most important parts of our lives. If they don't have a duty to do these things, then why on earth do they have any privileges that any Joe Schmoe off the street doesn't have? Why can't you or I get a press pass, if all that they're going to do is take the facts, distort them as they see fit, and exploit the public's "need for entertainment?" I say that if the press isn't going to do its job to report fairly, accurately, and completely, then they should lose their access to those things in favor of someone who will. We owe it to ourselves to demand better of our media, the media owes us better because of the privileges that we as a society have given them, and the leaders of our country owe it to us to enforce that debt.

    And that is the point I have been trying to make all along. Who is doing the distortion... which side of the aisle is doing it... that's not nearly as important as the fact that it's happening, and nobody's doing anything to stop it. I say that NBC and the other liberal media are the biggest perpetrators, and you apparently agree at least on the NBC front.

    I also say that there's a pretty huge double standard in our society about which news stations are allowed to say what, and who gets called on the carpet about it when they step out of bounds. That needs to stop, too.
    Last edited by Talthas; July 23rd, 2012 at 07:23 PM.
    -=[Talthas]=-
    ODN Senior Moderator

    ODN Rules

  20. #16
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    689
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Dark Knight shooting in Colorado. Liberal attack dogs in 3...2...1...

    It seems that there have been several news outlets of late that have jumped the gun in order to try and sensationalize news. They are just chipping away at any credibility and viewership that they may have had left.

    The libs are just dying to find the "smoking gun", an obnoxious, racist, mass-killing Tea Party sympathizer. Good luck.
    In God We Trust
    Support Our Troops!

  21. #17
    Senior Mod

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,289
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Dark Knight shooting in Colorado. Liberal attack dogs in 3...2...1...

    Quote Originally Posted by SharmaK View Post
    As much as I feel for the right when whining about how the left paints them with a broad brushstroke, I think in this case, it's just a single journalist, albeit an award winning one, who has a history of getting things wrong. He also mis-quoted Holme's mother in the same article, so it seems that he was just eager and in a rush to scoop everyone. It's hardly indicative of a general conspiracy on the part of the Left.
    There is a historical pattern of omission of damning facts about the left on the part of the media in this country, by and large. Otherwise, we would have known a lot sooner about Obama's "Choom Gang," there would have been a general hue and cry about exactly how much money the "most transparent President in history" (/sarcasm) has spent to keep his school transcripts and other relatively innocuous parts of his life hidden from the public eye, while demanding ever-increasing amounts of disclosure from his opponents, and there would have been a lot more vetting of Obama's associates, history and political and philosophical background. Nope... dead silence from the liberal media, who have gone on outright witch hunts about non-issues about almost every major conservative candidate.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sharmak
    Blame Lack of Jesus
    The hate group American Family Association who claimed "So these black-robed miscreants said we cannot permit potential mass murderers like James Holmes to read or meditate on God’s prohibition “Thou shall not murder” as a part of their education, " (src) blaming the incident on not having enough religious instruction.
    Not a politician, not a major news organization. Outside the scope of the debate.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sharmak
    Edit: Adding Huckabee:
    "We don't have a crime problem, a gun problem or even a violence problem. What we have is a sin problem. And since we've ordered god out of our schools, and communities, the military and public conversations, you know we really shouldn't act so surprised... when all hell breaks loose."
    I happen to agree with his opinion, but it's hardly an indictment about a person who runs an opinion show known to espouse conservative views. You don't see me getting up in arms about the latest inane crap to spew forth from Joy Behar's mouth, do you? No... because the View isn't billed as news, either. Irrelevant and outside the scope of the debate.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sharmak
    Blame Teaching of Evolution
    Or Rick Warren's oblique swipe at teaching evolution in schools with his tweet "When students are taught they are no different from animals, they act like it." (src)
    Opinion... which everyone has a right to. Also, last time I checked, Rick Warren isn't a major news outlet. Irrelevant and outside the scope of the debate.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sharmak
    Blame the Gays
    Or the Westboro Baptist Church jumping at another opportunity to blame it on the Gay with their promise to picket a memorial service (src).
    Because we all agree that the Westboro Baptist Church represents anybody but themselves and their own opinions.. right. Certainly not a major news outlet... or really anything to anybody except who they choose to annoy this week. Outside the scope of the debate... and hardly surprising, considering what a bunch of hateful whack-jobs they are.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sharmak
    Video Games
    Pat Brown, a criminal profiler claims "And I’m not saying video games make you a killer. But if you’re a psychopath, video games help you get in the mode to do the killing. "
    Opinion... and seems to be pretty well-grounded in psychological theory, if you ask me. But as far as I know, he's not a major news media outlet or reporter. Irrelevant and outside the scope of the debate.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sharmak
    Blame Batman
    Edit2: Rush is now blaming Batman:
    So Batman in the sixties on TV metastasizes to a sick dystopian, hyper-violent Batman movie in 23 years. Twenty-three years since Batman on TV to the first Batman movie. And the birth of the modern Batman series of films with which the killer in Aurora explicitly identified, by his own admission…

    Blame the Victims (!)
    Edit3: Russel Pearce (former AZ State Senator) in his now deleted Facebook entry:
    He then wondered why none were “[b]rave” enough to stop the atrocity.

    “Where were the men of flight 93???? Someone should have stopped this man,” he wrote. “…All that was needed is one Courages/Brave man prepared mentally or otherwise to stop this it could have been done.” (src)
    All outside the scope of the debate, because none of them is involved in the major media as far as I'm aware. Rush is admittedly a very popular opinion guy, but he's not billing himself as a major news outlet... never has. If I'm wrong, please feel free to point this out with specifics about which news channel they report for, when they did so, and the like.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sharmak
    Interestingly, for the right, it's playing the innocent victim and complaining about falsely getting blamed for everything shooting related (right on cue, Talthas) whilst trying prevent dialog on further gun control.

    So I think the OP is a pre-emptive strawman to mis-direct the debate to where it should be - gun control. Cue "over my dead body and my eight pistols and semi-automatics"
    I have *never* shied away from a healthy debate about gun control when I've had the time to engage in it, and I don't recall ever having lost a debate about it. If you feel up to the challenge, I welcome the chance to re-educate you about why a position that heavily favors the restriction of personal ownership of firearms is totally untenable and flawed on every premise.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sharmak
    Besides, I thought the Tea Party busy culling the US of Muslims - we on the Left deserve a breather for a while.
    I have a reasonable objection to the fact that just about every time someone gets shot in this country, since the inception of the Tea Party, there has been at least some attempt on the part of the mainstream media to try to link the Tea Party to the shooting, even when there was not a single shred of evidence linking them together. It's exactly your kind of snide and totally unjustified smears that has the Tea Party so angry... there's absolutely no basis in fact for your accusations of "culling the US of Muslims." But it's exactly this kind of crap that gets repeated over and over again, as if saying the lie enough times will make it true.

    I remember wiping the floor with you last time you made an unfounded assertion about the Tea Party being racist. If you feel like you've got the stones, you can go again with me for round 2, and I'll re-educate you on that topic, too. Otherwise, leave the uncalled for smears out of it.
    -=[Talthas]=-
    ODN Senior Moderator

    ODN Rules

  22. #18
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    West / East Coast
    Posts
    3,370
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Dark Knight shooting in Colorado. Liberal attack dogs in 3...2...1...

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigfried View Post
    They don't have a duty. They have a bottom line. That bottom line is to please their audience so they will look at the advertisements that pay the bills. They are in the eyeball attracting business not the brainwashing business, that is just a sideline to the main show.
    If that is the accepted norm by the majority of Americans of the media, and you accept that as the accepted norm, then we're in real trouble if there are millions of Sigs out there with that accepted mentality.

    I won't accept this from the news media, hopefully you don't either.

    Good evening ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to XXX News Channel. We're here reporting the news events of the day this evening from around the world with our primary goal of pleasing you, our audience. Thank you for tuning in. We are here to please you in order that you may watch our expensive advertising segments between the news broadcast which is geared to, of course, please you. Folks, we have to keep those lights turned on, the cameras rolling, meet our payroll and pay our bills, so we are here to please you -- first and foremost. As for the facts and the integrity of our national broadcasting station, there are no guarantees. Thank you for watching.
    Last edited by eye4magic; July 23rd, 2012 at 08:20 PM.
    Close your eyes. Fall in love. Stay there.
    Rumi

    [Eye4magic]
    Super Moderator
    ODN Rules

  23. #19
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    2,087
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Dark Knight shooting in Colorado. Liberal attack dogs in 3...2...1...

    Quote Originally Posted by Talthas View Post
    There is a historical pattern of omission of damning facts about the left on the part of the media in this country, by and large. Otherwise, we would have known a lot sooner about Obama's "Choom Gang," there would have been a general hue and cry about exactly how much money the "most transparent President in history" (/sarcasm) has spent to keep his school transcripts and other relatively innocuous parts of his life hidden from the public eye, while demanding ever-increasing amounts of disclosure from his opponents, and there would have been a lot more vetting of Obama's associates, history and political and philosophical background. Nope... dead silence from the liberal media, who have gone on outright witch hunts about non-issues about almost every major conservative candidate.
    OMG - paranoia overload. I don't know how you and Sigfried got to this point but I don't think I can help you from the brink. Moving on ...

    Quote Originally Posted by Talthas View Post
    Not a politician, not a major news organization. Outside the scope of the debate.

    I happen to agree with his opinion, but it's hardly an indictment about a person who runs an opinion show known to espouse conservative views. You don't see me getting up in arms about the latest inane crap to spew forth from Joy Behar's mouth, do you? No... because the View isn't billed as news, either. Irrelevant and outside the scope of the debate.

    Opinion... which everyone has a right to. Also, last time I checked, Rick Warren isn't a major news outlet. Irrelevant and outside the scope of the debate.

    Because we all agree that the Westboro Baptist Church represents anybody but themselves and their own opinions.. right. Certainly not a major news outlet... or really anything to anybody except who they choose to annoy this week. Outside the scope of the debate... and hardly surprising, considering what a bunch of hateful whack-jobs they are.

    Opinion... and seems to be pretty well-grounded in psychological theory, if you ask me. But as far as I know, he's not a major news media outlet or reporter. Irrelevant and outside the scope of the debate.

    All outside the scope of the debate, because none of them is involved in the major media as far as I'm aware. If I'm wrong, please feel free to point this out with specifics about which news channel they report for, when they did so, and the like.
    These are illustrations of how some on the right have reacted to the same event. I'm not really arguing about who is right and who is wrong but that people have instincts as to who to blame. Worming out of the examples by saying they are not specifically from a journalist from a media-outlet is a little disingenuous - everything is media these days, not just TV stations.

    I think for the most part the traditional media on both 'sides' did a stellar job over the weekend.

    Edit: Except for Breitbart.com who falsely claimed that Bourne was a registered Democrat in their article gloating about the ABC debacle is titled:
    EXCLUSIVE: CONTRA ABC NEWS, DARK KNIGHT AURORA, CO SHOOTING SUSPECT JAMES HOLMES COULD BE REGISTERED DEMOCRAT - UPDATE: NOT REGISTERED?


    followed later on with "Update: Not registered". I trust this is a major enough of a media outlet for you; I don't, but it's your OP - you judge.


    My objection with your OP is that it was a non-story by the time you got around to posting it and I thought it was wrong for you to do so when it was a wholly isolated incident. It was clearly a mistake, admitted as much and fully retracted and the journalist has been duly punished for his hastiness. I'm not clear how it got from that one incident to your first paragraph here (Sig obviously pushed some weird buttons) but I would like to know why you chose the evening of the day it happened, many hours after the incident, after three apparent attempts, to make this a topic of discussion. The liberal attack dogs, was really just one dog, who ended up being booted back to his kennel.

    The purpose of the illustrations was that if you want to paint a particular group of people with a single brush, you'd need more than a few examples, as I tried to do above: It is a factual statement that there will be Republicans who will blame either liberals, socialists, hollywood, the media, media, gays, lack of Jesus, or Muslims or any combination therein for anything terrible that happens.

    Quote Originally Posted by Talthas View Post
    I have *never* shied away from a healthy debate about gun control when I've had the time to engage in it, and I don't recall ever having lost a debate about it. If you feel up to the challenge, I welcome the chance to re-educate you about why a position that heavily favors the restriction of personal ownership of firearms is totally untenable and flawed on every premise.
    Not sure when we'd ever debated ownership of firearms with anyone, so I'm not sure about the 're-education'. That said, so long as the Constitution calls for an armed militia, that is what's legal, so I don't really have any objection.

    Quote Originally Posted by Talthas View Post
    I have a reasonable objection to the fact that just about every time someone gets shot in this country, since the inception of the Tea Party, there has been at least some attempt on the part of the mainstream media to try to link the Tea Party to the shooting, even when there was not a single shred of evidence linking them together. It's exactly your kind of snide and totally unjustified smears that has the Tea Party so angry... there's absolutely no basis in fact for your accusations of "culling the US of Muslims." But it's exactly this kind of crap that gets repeated over and over again, as if saying the lie enough times will make it true.
    Hmm:

    Well, other than Bachmann's latest unfounded screed, there is:

    Jul 2012: The TN Tea Party calling for the critcism of Governor Bill Haslam for hiring a Muslim:
    Conservatives and Tea Party activists in Tennessee have recently pushed several Republican Party county organizations to pass resolutions criticizing the state’s Republican governor for, among other things, employing Muslims, gay people, and Democrats.
    ...
    At least two of the resolutions, from Stewart County and Williamson County, oppose the Haslam administration’s recent appointment of Samar Ali, 30, as international director at the state’s Department of Economic and Community Development (ECD). Ali, a lawyer and a2010-2011 White House fellow, received both her undergraduate and law degrees from Vanderbilt University in Nashville, where she was the first Arab-Muslim student body president. In an emailed statement, Clint Brewer, assistant commissioner for communications for ECD, called Ali “one of the brightest leaders of her generation from this state.”

    May 2012: Herman Cain, presidential candidate, said
    Would you be comfortable appointing a Muslim either in your Cabinet or as a federal judge?" the blogger asked.

    "No, I will not," Cain replied. "And here’s why. There is this creeping attempt, there’s this attempt to gradually ease Sharia law and the Muslim faith into our government. It does not belong in our government."

    July 2012: Tea party leader says all Muslims a ‘threat’ to U.S.; seeks recall of McCain
    Harris said he believes Muslims’ loyalty to the U.S. is questionable because their ultimate loyalty is to the Quran and Islam, which he described as “more a fascist type of organization.”
    “Have you ever read the Quran? I suggest you do so, because anyone that is a Muslim is a threat to this country, and that’s a fact,” Harris told the Arizona Capitol Times. “There is no such thing as a moderate Muslim. If they are Muslim they have to follow the Quran. That’s their religion and that’s their doctrine.”

    July 2012: Louisiana [Tea Party] Republican: When I Voted for State Funds to go to Religious Schools, I Didn’t Mean Muslim Ones
    Rep. Valarie Hodges, R-Watson, says she had no idea that Gov. Bobby Jindal’s overhaul of the state’s educational system might mean taxpayer support of Muslim schools.
    “I actually support funding for teaching the fundamentals of America’s Founding Fathers’ religion, which is Christianity, in public schools or private schools,” the District 64 Representative said Monday.

    “Unfortunately it will not be limited to the Founders’ religion,” Hodges said. “We need to insure that it does not open the door to fund radical Islam schools. There are a thousand Muslim schools that have sprung up recently. I do not support using public funds for teaching Islam anywhere here in Louisiana.”


    And I'm sure I can find more. I don't recall any other political group consistently making anti-Muslim statements other than the Tea Party in such a brazen and public manner. But maybe when you go to your next Tea Party event, you can do some fact finding and discuss Bachmann and whether American-Muslims are 'fit' to take political office and what your fellows think of Islam and Muslims in America.

    Until you report back, I don't think there is any point continuing down this line; it was largely for jest but there is truth to it and whilst you may claim to love Islam and Muslims yourself (or at least not object to them), you cannot deny that there are elements within the Tea Party itself that give voice to many who share anti-Muslim tendencies. Whether or not painting the whole Tea Party with the same brush is fair or not would only be up for debate if these types dialog weren't tempered by more measured thinkers within the Tea Party itself. As it stands, it seems the Tea Party against the Establishment Republicans.

    If you repudiate your fellow Tea Partiers for their anti-Muslim statements then say so and remove yourself from criticism, but I am not clear what you are defending: the right to say such things (of course, they can); that it is a Tea Party platform (it isn't); that these statements above are false (they're not).

    Quote Originally Posted by Talthas View Post
    I remember wiping the floor with you last time you made an unfounded assertion about the Tea Party being racist. If you feel like you've got the stones, you can go again with me for round 2, and I'll re-educate you on that topic, too. Otherwise, leave the uncalled for smears out of it.
    Actually, I remember pulling out ONLY because of the technicality that I said "All" when in fact it should have been clear I said "Some". And I recall about two weeks of daily hate from the right, which I can restart any time.

    But since you confuse Muslim, a member of a RELIGION, with a RACE, I don't think you're really qualified to re-educate anyone. Remember, Muslims can also be white-skinned and come in all sorts of races around the world!
    Last edited by SharmaK; July 24th, 2012 at 04:50 AM.

  24. #20
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    37
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Dark Knight shooting in Colorado. Liberal attack dogs in 3...2...1...

    C'est la faute à Heath Ledger. As soon as I heard I thought that Heath was responsible. No other celebrity entered my mind. If Heath was still living the press would immediately within hours would have accused him of mass murder.

 

 
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 33
    Last Post: February 17th, 2012, 11:03 AM
  2. shadow knight? lets see you back that argument up!
    By Bf55 in forum General Debate
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: August 24th, 2008, 01:22 AM
  3. The Dark Knight
    By AlexanderWright in forum Entertainment
    Replies: 105
    Last Post: August 13th, 2008, 05:11 PM
  4. NIU shooting = more insanity
    By Spartacus in forum Social Issues
    Replies: 47
    Last Post: February 27th, 2008, 02:16 PM
  5. CSAP[colorado student assesment program]
    By dbogjohnson in forum General Debate
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: January 23rd, 2008, 05:35 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •