How to tell you are talking to a leftist.

"Liberals ignore the polls, public opinion, and overall proof of a liberal lean in todays media"

You can provide all the polls you want of how most Americans think the media has a liberal bias, but that does not prove anything.

The 1992 RNC chairman admitted that there is no liberal media* and that it's just a myth conjured by Republicans. He described crying "liberal media!" similar to "working the refs".

Bill Kristol even said that the liberal media "never was very strong".

And when the first liberal to solo host a cable news talk show, Chris Donahue, got the job, Pat Buchanan called it "affirmative action."

(Oh, and by the way, yes, you're right, you can't use Bill O'Reilly and Sean Hannity as evidence of a bias because they are understod to be commentators. However, one could argue that the show "Hannity & Colmes" is not fair as Hannity does most of the talking and is stronger, while Colmes has been described as "squirelly-looking", talks less, and is not strong by any means. This could be used as evidence of a conservative bias on Fox.)

*There is a liberal media, as there is a conservative media, and it is made up of the Nation, the New Yorker, etc. When the chairman said there was no liberal media, he meant the major mainstream media was not liberal. This explains why Kristol said the liberal media never was strong, but existed. The chairman denied that the mainstream media was liberal. Kristol said there was a liberal media, but it's not the mainstream media sources.

Then why do democrats get a pass from the media in this country? Why was there a media frenzy over Tom Delay, but totally ignored top ranking democrats who did the same thing, and one's who actually violated the law?

Why was there no media coverage of the trial of the Clinton fundraiser? You know if that was a Republican it would be front page news.

Anyways, this post wasn't about the liberal media, just the same rhetoric the left uses.

I'm a lefty, and...

Bush "stole" the election, or he was "appointed" by the Supreme Court.

I don't believe this or even talk about it.

The U.S. is now a "police state".

Nope. We all have to be vigilant about protecting our liberties (just as the right-wing gun folks so adamantly do), but the US is nothing like a police state. Not in the least.

Fox News or the liberal line "Faux News".

Fox News has a right-wing slant to it. It's still the news, but the news stories and and issues it chooses to highlight are more in line with right-wing thought. The talking heads on Fox News also tend to be conservatives.

I prefer MSNBC, but I watch Fox News from time to time (particulary while waiting for my kids to get a hair cut because it's the only thing they show in the barber shop on base), and I'm able to follow the news with it and recognize anything that I feel is slanted or biased reporting and view it as just that.

I see bias in other news reporting, right and left, but I am able to make my own mind up about things without having to be told what to think by a guy in a suit or a chick with big hair and lipgloss.

hey dog! nice article.. fair and balanced if I do say so myself. Yes fox is slightly slanted right, I do not have enough time on the planet left to name all the left leaning news outlets, but here I go, cbs, left, abc, left nbc, left
cnn so far left they should report from france instead of atlanta, msnbc more left than right, whewww Now I am tired and must go lay down on my right side to balance out all the lefty crap here.

Lets see what the left has to say when the medical records of Rush put him in jail for "Doctor Shopping"

#5 by COL Gene Monday, June 06, 2005 Lets see what the left has to say when the medical records of Rush put him in jail for "Doctor Shopping"

And how about when the ACLU gets the charges thrown out for violating Florida's constitutional right of privacy and doctor-patient confidentiality?

Heres how you know your talking to an independent (who tend to be more calm, relistic, and rational)

Bush lost the election Popular vote should be used to determine president. thats the realistic fraction of people who voted for a candidate. The electoral college is outdated

U.S. is now more guarded and it shows The U.S. is more cautious these days than ever before but thats just something that comes with being an american and protecting what's yours in America. Its a necessary evil. It sucks that it has to be that way but it just does. Oh well.

Fox News. Not bad; there are better Fox news leans toward the right. its true. They have every right to do so. It's America. a lot of news outlets also lean a little left Most of us, however are more inclined to get our news from a more unbiased source, and then make our own opinions. After all its America.

Just thought i might as well make this point of view known here. seems like as good a place as any

Lets see what the left has to say when the medical records of Rush put him in jail for "Doctor Shopping"

I think rush is a pig extraordinaire. And, I don't doubt for a minute that he was doctor shopping to get his vicoden fixes. What makes him so dispicable is his hypocrisy for calling all addicts criminals and scum, etc., basically doing what rush does best - foaming at the brain.

However, having said that, I think that doctors should not be releasing his medical records unless rush approves it. If the feds have specific evidence, then use that. They should never be given carte blance to go on fishing expeditions to nail anyone. This is a basic example of a police-leaning state, and totally unacceptable. Not for rush, not for anyone.

Which, of course leads to yet another newsworthy medical records fishing expedition by the feds - planned parenthood, to find out who had abortions and when. WRONG WRONG WRONG. But, this is another issue.

So, COL, what's your point?

Lets see what the left has to say when the medical records of Rush put him in jail for "Doctor Shopping"

First of all, Rush will not go to jail. Nobody should go to jail for "doctor shopping". Next, what does this have to do wtih this post anyways?

Bush lost the election Popular vote should be used to determine president. thats the realistic fraction of people who voted for a candidate. The electoral college is outdated

It will never happen. Why? because there are a lot more small states than big states, and if the vote was popular, besides having 50 Florida 2000s, the candidates would ignore the small states.

You may not like it, but it is hardly out dated. It is there to give small states a reasonable voice in the politics of the nation.

I think rush is a pig extraordinaire. And, I don't doubt for a minute that he was doctor shopping to get his vicoden fixes.

It was Oxycontin. Cant even get your hate right! And we know why you hate him. He is right and you are not.

Bush lost the election Popular vote should be used to determine president. thats the realistic fraction of people who voted for a candidate. The electoral college is outdated

Well the fact is our system is not based on popular votes, it's based on the electoral college.

It was Oxycontin. Cant even get your hate right! And we know why you hate him. He is right and you are not

I wonder if they think the people on air america who advocate violence against the President and his family are just as bad?

Great additions whip.

Posted by little_whip:

WAR FOR OIL: No matter how much evidence is presented to the contrary, leftists stubbornly insist that the only reason we went to war with Iraq was to "steal their oil." I started a thread once, asking any and all to provide some concrete proof of that, and posting all sorts of statistics that do prove that the amount of oil we import from Iraq is miniscule in comparsion to the other markets we acquire it from, and could easily be replaced if we never got another drop from them. 200 posts later, still no proof. But they still like to make the claim, to me, it just makes them look like idiots.

To start out, I am a leftist, bordering on radical. Just so no one gets confused or so on.

It may be true that the percentage of oil is small in comparison to the other countries we import from {I'd like to see your source on that, as well}, but if you haven't noticed, many of the countries we go to war with or leap to defend or so on have something that we want. What comes to mind first is Sudan- a place we aren't- and conviniently enough, Sudan has nothing for us there. Namely oil, I suppose.

Also posted by little_whip {as are the rest of these}:

Cawed loudly from every rooftop anytime God is even mentioned in public life. Hey, if a government official announces that he's a skydiver, is that shoving skydiving down your throat?

Does being a skydiver infringe upon someone's right to believe what they want?

However, religion is being shoved down our throats in some ways. I went to the Official Navy Birthday Ball last year- sometime in November, I believe, and there they did a flag-folding ceremony. Which is supposed to be strictly military and religion-free. However, the 13th fold of the flag was for our "Lord and Savior Jesus Christ." Yes, that is what it said exactly. This was at a public, military function- a place where religion has no seat. However, it was still there, and I personally found it extremely disrespectful to all those who might not believe in "Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ-" as I don't. Propriety demanded that I stay in my seat, and respect for the ceremony itself demanded that I not stand up and yell my incredulity at the statement. That is, very much so, having religion shoved down my throat.

Religion is taking more and more of a stand in our country, and it's my opinion that it shouldn't be there at all. People can feel free to practice whatever religion or lack thereof they want- as long as they keep it out of the public's view. Separation of Church and State is there for a reason, but lately everyone seems to be ignoring that.

A few days ago I asked a well known lefty in JU to show me some examples of the left's tolerance towards Christians, since my argument that they are intolerant of Christians had been called "nonsense."

Fine. Over half of my good friends are Christian {the others are Muslim, Greek, and atheist}- and I'm atheist, so if that's not tolerance to some point than I don't know what is.

Many of the liberals I know are Christian- again, if that's not tolerance...how can you be intolerant of your own religion? I mean, if someone hates it that much, than why are they participating in it?

My personal belief is not that leftists are intolerant towards Christians alone, we are intolerant towards those who try to openly enforce their religion on us, no matter what it is. Unfortunately for the Christians, they are the largest, loudest, and most recognized group. That isn't my fault. I try to keep as open a mind as possible in concern to just who is "shoving religion down my throat," and it has been my finding that every person who has ever tried to convert me or encouraged me to join in in public displays of religion has been Christian.

Typical liberal tactic though, when you can't prove your own statement, call the other person an idiot and vacate the scene.

You don't like us generalizing on conservatives or righties. I would really appreciate you not generalizing on us. Have I called anyone an idiot yet? Have I "vacated the scene?" No, sorry. If you want us to take you seriously and give you good, thought-out answers, then don't bash on us as well. If people are bashing on you and they're liberal, then I'm sorry. But you're not going to make the problem better, or earn our respect, if you bash right back.

Cheers, Pads.

What comes to mind first is Sudan- a place we aren't- and conviniently enough, Sudan has nothing for us there. Namely oil, I suppos

Sudan has oil.

OIL Sudan contains proven reserves of 563 million barrels of oil, more than twice the 262 million barrels estimated in 2001. Because much of Sudanese oil exploration has been limited to the central and south-central regions, Sudanese Energy Ministry representatives estimate proven reserves at 700 million barrels and total reserves at five billion barrels, including potential reserves in northwest Sudan , the Blue Nile Basin , and the Red Sea area in eastern Sudan . Oil production has risen steadily since the completion of an export pipeline in July 1999. Crude oil production averaged 343,000 barrels per day (bbl/d) in 2004, up from 270,000 bbl/d during 2003. In December 2004, Sudanese Energy Minister Awad al-Jaz announced that oil production will likely increase to 500,000 bbl/d in 2005. Sudanese production may reach 750,000 bbl/d by late 2006 if increases in output progress as planned.

Link

drmiler

The top Fl Court has ruled his records may be opened to see if he committed a crime. He got four prescriptions from four different doctors during the same period and had then all filled at the same drug store. He got almost 2,000 pills and is an admitted drug user. There is every reason why his medical records should be open to see if he was "Doctor Shopping".

#18 by COL Gene Wednesday, June 08, 2005 drmiler The top Fl Court has ruled his records may be opened to see if he committed a crime. He got four prescriptions from four different doctors during the same period and had then all filled at the same drug store. He got almost 2,000 pills and is an admitted drug user. There is every reason why his medical records should be open to see if he was "Doctor Shopping".

Sorry but that is just wrong! Unless you give "written" authorization you med records are suppossed to be sealed! Rush has NOT given the authorization so therefore they are/will be in violation of Florida's constitutional right of privacy and doctor-patient confidentiality! Christ even your right hand believer dabe says it's wrong.

However, having said that, I think that doctors should not be releasing his medical records unless rush approves it. If the feds have specific evidence, then use that. They should never be given carte blance to go on fishing expeditions to nail anyone. This is a basic example of a police-leaning state, and totally unacceptable. Not for rush, not for anyone.

And like my previous post states: The ACLU is already on this.

*sighs* You expect us to automatically see the disclaimer and realize that you're not referring to all leftists, but again yell at us when we generalize. I'm not trying to pick a fight with this- it's completely the wrong topic, but I still don't appreciate it. In the tone you were writing, it appeared to the public that you were referring to all liberals. I'm sorry that I don't know you well enough, or have not read enough of your posts, or whatever that I cannot discern the difference between your comments about all leftists and some leftists.

Righty: "N. Korea shouldnt have nukes!" Lefty: "Well, WE have them!" Righty: "N. Korea would use them, though!" Lefty: "OH YEAH? WELL WE ALREADY DID!"

We have already used them, and I don't believe it's particularly fair of us to say we're allowed to use our weapons, but N. Korea, an independant country with its own laws, can't.

Is there something wrong with America looking out for her own interests above all others? Isn't that what our leaders are supposed to do? I suppose you'd rather see us as some sort of global nanny/benevolent world cop, spreading our resources so thin in an effort to make the world right for all that we ourselves end up living in far worse conditions than we have now? It's only fair, right?

I didn't say that. And no, I wouldn't. I would rather we stayed out of everyone's business and got on with our own lives- instead of trying to mess up governments elsewhere. Terrorists attacked us, yes, but not an entire country. So, why are we going to war with the ENTIRE country, then? Because we believe something is bad there. That's fine. We can believe it all we want, but we have no right or place going in and screwing everything up just because we don't like it. I don't want America to to be starving in order to help other people, I want us to just leave all the other people alone. We can participate in global affairs, of course, and be an active country, but going gallavanting off on our own adventures won't help the world. America isn't the only country out there, and I'd be a lot more comfortable living in it if I knew that we discussed things calmly and agreed to take actions only when they were in the general interest of the global population in general versus just what we want.

tried to find my article entitled "War For Oil? Time To Prove It!" but JU is so retardedly slow this morning the page keeps timing out, but go take a look at your leisure. I have NO intention of getting into that tired old argument again here, it was disgusting enough when it occured on that thread, but just to answer your question about source, I used current statistics from the American Petroleum Institute, which can be found here. Link

Thank you.

I'm sorry, but I hardly call merely hearing the words "Our Lord Jesus Christ" spoken is shoving religion down your throat. Propriety aside, you were still free to leave if you were that offended. If they required you to profess a faith in Jesus Christ in order to attend this Birthday Ball, that would be shoving it down your throat.

I have nothing against hearing the words "Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ" spoken in public. What I don't appreciate is that they oriented these words- and therefore, the Christian religion- with our FLAG. The flag is the symbol of our country- which is supposed to be nondenominational as a whole. However, when you start associating Jesus with the flag, that makes our country not so "free religion" as it could be. It's symbolism. Symbolism that is directly contradicting what our country stands for.

This is a prime example of lefty intolerance towards Christians. The mere utterance of a religious phrase at any public event is seen as some sort of effort to force conversion upon all who hear it. Did you convert, DH? Did you feel you would miss out on some governmental benefit if you didn't? Are you being denied any civil rights due to your lack of conversion?

No, I'm not being denied civil rights. But I am seeing my country going down the drain and saying directly the opposite of what it's supposed to stand for. People are trying to integrate religion into most everything now- places where religion should be kept completely separate. The point of a public school is to ensure that everybody gets an equal opportunity to learn without having any strict guidelines as to what they're learning, or how, or the environment in which they do. But when the schools starts holding morning prayers for everyone, then that starts to go against our right to free religion. I'm sorry, I can't just walk out of school without having to suffer consequences. And why should I have to suffer consequences for protecting my first amendment right?

Give it a rest, lefties. If you want to see what having religion shoved down your throat really looks like, you need look no further than the middle east, where one can be beaten on the streets for showing a lock of hair, or executed for adultery

And this has what to do with religion again...

Sudan has oil.

But do they sell it to us?

Cheers, Pads
~The Grim~

Sudan has oil. But do they sell it to us? Cheers, Pads ~The Grim~

Actually, yes they do.

Sudan has oil. But do they sell it to us? Cheers, Pads ~The Grim~ Actually, yes, they do

Then I won't bring it up anymore. I apologize.

Cheers, Pads

The US becoming a police state is not the sole domain of the liberals. We are not yet a police state, but I assure you, that to some people in America, there is little difference.

Have you ever been detained because you weren't carrying "papers"? I have (in many communities, no ID and no money on your person is grounds for you to be locked up for vagrancy). Ever been threatened with a 48 hour detention without cause if you refused a consent search? Again, I have. Ever had to flee from one community in the middle of the night because an overzealous individual used CPS as a weapon to try to remove your children from you because of a conflict in values? Once again, I have (ironically, however, by a militant member of the left).

If you travel between cities in this country using any form of public transportation, photo identification is required and you are subject to random searches and/or ID checks (don't believe me? Try Albuquerque, New Mexico, where on our most recent move, we were stopped and our ID's were checked and we were searched before reboarding the bus).

No, we are not a police state...YET. But the fact remains, those who claim we aren't a police state are ignoring the fact that we are fast becomming a police state because the majority of the American public refuses to be diligent.

And I am NOT a liberal!

Why? because there are a lot more small states than big states, and if the vote was popular, besides having 50 Florida 2000s, the candidates would ignore the small states.

News flash: many candidates ALREADY ignore the small states precisely BECAUSE of the electoral college. In 1992 (being young and foolish), I wanted to work on the Clinton campaign in Oklahoma. Long story short, there WAS no Clinton campaign in Oklahoma; the dems didn't want to even try for those votes. There are liberal states that the Republicans likewise ignore.

This is one of those arguments where I DEFINITELY see both sides. Because the interests of the people within each states vary so widely, however, this is a MAJOR reason I advocate for a minarchist federal government; a federal government of a country with such varied demographics cannot be reasonably expected to represent the interest of all, or even most, in their legislation. So most laws should be left to the STATES ro decide.

(incidentally, and oddly enough, my "perfect" world would consist of a Libertarian federal and state government, and a democratic socialist local government).

When does anything that dabe has to say have anything to do with the topic at hand?

--When its his tpoic....

I have nothing against hearing the words "Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ" spoken in public. What I don't appreciate is that they oriented these words- and therefore, the Christian religion- with our FLAG. The flag is the symbol of our country- which is supposed to be nondenominational as a whole. However, when you start associating Jesus with the flag, that makes our country not so "free religion" as it could be. It's symbolism. Symbolism that is directly contradicting what our country stands for.

--Our country (USA) was founded by religous (don't freak out,its just a word) followers,christian,catholic,whatever, they believed in a faith.....namely christianity...it is engrained in our history and culture, no one realizes that...

(NOTE: the comments in () are sarcastic.)

I'm terribly sorry that you feel our country is going down the drain because Christians dare to speak and act on their beliefs in public

If that is truly what he believes, then he is hypocritical when he says he believes in rights...

I'm terribly sorry that you feel our country is going down the drain because Christians dare to speak and act on their beliefs in public If that is truly what he believes, then he is hypocritical when he says he believes in rights..

No, that's not what I believe. I believe our country is going down the drain because many people are trying to force their beliefs on us when that is nothing like what our country stands for.

Our country (USA) was founded by religous (don't freak out,its just a word) followers,christian,catholic,whatever, they believed in a faith.....namely christianity...it is engrained in our history and culture, no one realizes that...

I realize that. I also realize that those same people were the ones who founded our country under the belief that everyone should be free to practice their own religion, etc, regardless of what other people are. And, for the most part, that's true. It's starting to become less true, but the basis of it is still there. ...mm, and I'm not going to freak out. i haven't freaked about anything people have said yet, and religious has been used many times.

Now I really have to ask what planet you've been living on. Public schools are SO forbidden from prayer that even Christian Student Groups have been barred from holding prayer meetings outside the building before or after classes, away from other students

Same planet as you. But my school has morning prayers around the flagpole {again with the symbolism}, and maybe three Christian clubs. of course, the Focus on the Family Headquarters is also right across the street from us, so that could be some influence, I suppose.

How can you be so wrong? No strict guidelines as to what they're learning? Ever hear of curriculum? Tests? Meeting state and federal guidelines? No strict guidelines on school environments? Is that why kids get expelled nowadays for carrying a nail file to school or wearing 'offensive' clothing? Public school is one of the most regulated environments in America!

True. My wording above was horrible. I think {looking back on it I'm not entirely sure what I was trying to say} I meant that public school is free of guidelines in that you can believe what you want and in most places, to an extent, wear what you want. As long as it doesn't infringe upon other people's rights, etc. School environment was also referring to personal beliefs. If you go to a private schol, they have a more set way of thinking, I believe. I can't back anything up with that statement; I've never been to a private school. But my experience with them {indirectly at least} is that many of them can focus a lot on personal beliefs as well as "normal school stuff." Or something.