myiW Current Conditions and Forecasts Community Forums Buy and Sell Services
 
Hi guest · myAccount · Log in
 SearchSearch   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   RegisterRegister 
the big lie "the media is liberal"
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 130, 131, 132 ... 147, 148, 149  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
cgoudie1



Joined: 10 Apr 2006
Posts: 1333
Location: Killer Sturgeon Cove

PostPosted: Tue Jul 08, 2014 9:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

You meant Al Franken, right?

-Craig

[quote="bajaDean]Oliely is a known liar with more media time than any liberal on the face of the planet. Note he does not back up his facts, he never does. L franken did a great job of showing his lies, and again Oliely has the money to sue, and was not able to get a judgement against Frankin.

[/quote]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
bajaDean



Joined: 02 Jul 2011
Posts: 1053
Location: on earth

PostPosted: Tue Jul 08, 2014 10:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

yep that is the frankin, and Oliely did not sue him for showing how delusional Oliely is.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fox_v._Franken
Quote:
Rupert Murdoch's News Corporation had founded Fox News Channel in 1996, in part to counter what it contended was systemic liberal bias on the part of other U.S. news outlets.[citation needed] To bolster this perception, Fox used "Fair & Balanced" and "We Report. You Decide." as slogans, and obtained federal trademark registrations for each.[2][3] Critics such as FAIR[4] and Media Matters for America[5] have accused Fox of having a pervasive conservative bias; on many Web sites and blogs, "fair and balanced" became widely used as an ironic euphemism for perceived right-wing media bias on Fox and other media outlets.

On May 31, 2003, the cable network C-SPAN2 broadcast a panel discussion on political books that was taking place at BookExpo America, a trade show for the book publishing industry. The panel included Franken, whose Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them was scheduled for release in the autumn, and Fox News personality Bill O'Reilly, who was promoting his own book Who's Looking Out For You?, which was due for release at about the same time as Franken's. Saying that he felt the need to explain why a fellow panelist's face was on the cover of a book entitled Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them, Franken told a story about O'Reilly's incorrect statements that Inside Edition, a show that he had formerly worked for, had won two Peabody Awards, when it in fact won a Polk Award for work conducted after O'Reilly severed his ties with the program. The two then engaged in a heated confrontation, which culminated in O'Reilly shouting "Shut up! Shut up!" after Franken interrupted him. A link to footage of the program quickly circulated among blogs, which had the effect of providing valuable publicity for Franken's upcoming book.


Quote:
On August 7, 2003, Fox News filed for relief in New York State court. On August 14, Franken's publisher removed the action to the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on federal question grounds.[citation needed] In what author and editor Richard Blow described as "an eight-inch thick legal filing,"[6] the network contended that it had been irreparably harmed by the publicity surrounding Franken's use of the phrase "fair and balanced" on the preliminary cover of Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them, which Fox claimed it had first become aware of following the BookExpo panel discussion in May. The filing stated that Franken had "been described as a 'C-level political commentator' who is 'increasingly unfunny'", and claimed that the comedian was "shrill and unstable" and had "appeared either intoxicated or deranged" at a press correspondents' dinner in April 2003. The filing cited only two sources for those quotes, one of which was a website to which Bill O'Reilly was a contributor, and the other was a website where anyone could contribute. Fox also requested a temporary restraining order (denied August 20, 2003) to restrain the distribution of the book until their request for a preliminary injunction was heard by the court.[7]

In response, Franken joked that he had trademarked the word "funny", and that Fox had infringed his intellectual property rights by characterizing him as "unfunny." Franken's then-unreleased book subsequently rose to the #1 sales position on Amazon.com's best-seller list from number 489 (his second #1 bestseller after Rush Limbaugh Is a Big Fat Idiot and Other Observations, which attained the top of the New York Times' list in 1996)
.

funny how Fox thought they owned the words "fair and balanced". Assume they have nothing better to do with their money than try to suppress freedom of speech, again they tried to stop the publishing of a book.

_________________
when good people stay silent the right wing are the only ones heard.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bajaDean



Joined: 02 Jul 2011
Posts: 1053
Location: on earth

PostPosted: Thu Jul 10, 2014 1:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

lets see if this gets out to the media and is brought out. something the right wing owned media would not like the americans to know.

http://www.latimes.com/business/healthcare/la-fi-health-law-uninsured-california-obamacare-20140709-story.html

Quote:
The percentage of Californians without health insurance was cut in half in the last nine months during the federal health law's expansion of coverage, a new survey shows


amazing what can be done when there is a governor that believe in america and democracy....

and note how the rate of increase in health care costs have plummeted under the dem in the whitehouse.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/wp/2014/07/10/did-health-insurance-premiums-jump-50-percent-because-of-obamacare/



where is the media hammering home the rate of increase is not double digit like under Bush...

where is the media in playing the sound bites of the right wing telling us our world would end if we had any socialized medicine. well we have it.. the right wing owned media will not hold those responsible for their fear mongering...

_________________
when good people stay silent the right wing are the only ones heard.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
techno900



Joined: 28 Mar 2001
Posts: 1542

PostPosted: Thu Jul 10, 2014 2:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Since the employer mandate isn't required yet by Obamacare, it's not surprising that the premiums have been going down. Wait until 2015 when it's required for businesses with over 100 employees and 2016 for companies with 50-99 employees, and then let's see what happens to premiums.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bajaDean



Joined: 02 Jul 2011
Posts: 1053
Location: on earth

PostPosted: Thu Jul 10, 2014 2:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

techno900 wrote:
Since the employer mandate isn't required yet by Obamacare, it's not surprising that the premiums have been going down. Wait until 2015 when it's required for businesses with over 100 employees and 2016 for companies with 50-99 employees, and then let's see what happens to premiums.


what???????????? this went right over your head....... do you know how to read a chart at all?

It shows under Bush every year the average was way higher increases vs under a dem in office the rate increases are much lower. This was true under reagun Bush 1 and Clinton. When you have the get government off the business way that businesses know best the rate of increase in health care premiums are at a all time high. When democrat is in office the rate of increase in cost of the health care is lower.

Again don't let the facts ge in the way of reality, we spend more than double the average of all developed nations in the world in healthcare and there is not one specific metric that shows our healthcare is better in any way. You know they would point it out with the money they spend in propaganda to allow the highest priced per person health care in the world. They certainly have the money. again what the right wing does not care about is this adds to us not being competitive on the world market that we have to spend double the amount per employee hour on everything we make. It makes us uncompetitive price wise for pure man hours.

_________________
when good people stay silent the right wing are the only ones heard.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bajaDean



Joined: 02 Jul 2011
Posts: 1053
Location: on earth

PostPosted: Thu Jul 10, 2014 3:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

someone posted this link on another thread but it is the same thing, the right wing media keeps attacking Obama for his recess appointments. I bet if a survey was done the majority of voting americans would say (because of the right wing propaganda) that reagun and bushes did not abuse this and that Obama is the first to really abuse it. Where is the so called liberal media that apparently would not allow its readers to be so ignorant of the facts.

Obama lags his predecessors in recess appointments
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/01/13/obama-lags-his-predecessors-in-recess-appointments/



_________________
when good people stay silent the right wing are the only ones heard.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
nw30



Joined: 21 Dec 2008
Posts: 1912
Location: The eye of the universe, Cen. Cal. coast

PostPosted: Thu Jul 10, 2014 3:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It's pretty tough to claim the media is conservative when there is suppression going on by the W.H. But I'm sure you'll find other examples to support your claim, it seems to be your only mission, that and claiming Republicans were worse at whatever BHO tries to do, eventhough the supremes have stricken down BHO 13 out of 14 times over constitutional issues.
Have fun with your thread.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Censorship: 38 journalism groups slam Obama's 'politically-driven suppression of news'

By Paul Bedard | July 9, 2014 | 11:21 am

In unprecedented criticism of the White House, 38 journalism groups have assailed the president's team for censoring media coverage, limiting access to top officials and overall “politically-driven suppression of the news.”

In a letter to President Obama, the 38, led by the Society of Professional Journalists, said efforts by government officials to stifle or block coverage has grown for years and reached a high-point under his administration despite Obama's 2008 campaign promise to provide transparency.

Worse, they said: As access for reporters has been cut off, the administration has opened the door to lobbyists, special interests and “people with money.”

And as a result, they wrote, Obama only has himself to blame for the current cynicism of his administration. “You need look no further than your own administration for a major source of that frustration – politically driven suppression of news and information about federal agencies. We call on you to take a stand to stop the spin and let the sunshine in,” wrote David Cuillier, president of SPJ.

The administration has dismissed similar charges from other journalism groups, notably the White House Correspondents’ Association, but the new letter sent Tuesday provided several examples of censorship and efforts to block reporter access. Among them:

• Officials blocking reporters’ requests to talk to specific staff people.

• Excessive delays in answering interview requests that stretch past reporters’ deadlines.

• Officials conveying information "on background" — refusing to give reporters what should be public information unless they agree not to say who is speaking.

• Federal agencies blackballing reporters who write critically of them.

“In many cases, this is clearly being done to control what information journalists — and the audience they serve — have access to. A survey found 40 percent of public affairs officers admitted they blocked certain reporters because they did not like what they wrote,” added the letter.

In addition to asking for openness, the groups demanded Obama create an ombudsman position to help clear away barriers to news coverage.

“It has not always been this way,” concluded the letter. “In prior years, reporters walked the halls of agencies and called staff people at will. Only in the past two administrations have media access controls been tightened at most agencies. Under this administration, even non-defense agencies have asserted in writing their power to prohibit contact with journalists without surveillance. Meanwhile, agency personnel are free speak to others — lobbyists, special-interest representatives, people with money — without these controls and without public oversight.”

SPJ's Cuillier told Secrets, "I feel this excessive message management and information control are caused by the professionalization of PR in the bureaucracy — in all levels of government."

And, he added, "It is up to journalists — and citizens — to push back against this force. Hard!"

http://washingtonexaminer.com/censorship-38-journalism-groups-slam-obamas-politically-driven-suppression-of-news/article/2550647

_________________
I don't drink the 'cool' aid, I drink tequila, it's more honest.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pueno



Joined: 03 Mar 2007
Posts: 2763

PostPosted: Thu Jul 10, 2014 4:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

nitwit30 wrote:
It's pretty tough to claim...

...blah...

...blah...

...blah...

http://washingtonexaminer.com/....blah...

Ahh, witless one, you are sooooooo predictable.

The Washington Examiner.

"The Washington Examiner is a political journalism publication based in Washington, D.C., ...owned by MediaDC, a subsidiary of Clarity Media Group, which is owned by Denver billionaire Philip Anschutz and which also owns the influential conservative opinion magazine The Weekly Standard. From 2005 to mid-2013, the Examiner published a daily tabloid-sized newspaper...largely focused on local news and conservative commentary.

"When Anschutz started the Examiner in its daily newspaper format, he envisioned creating a conservative competitor to The Washington Post. According to Politico, "When it came to the editorial page, Anschutz’s instructions were explicit — he 'wanted nothing but conservative columns and conservative op-ed writers,' said one former employee." The Examiner's conservative writers include Byron York (National Review), Michael Barone (American Enterprise Institute, Fox News Channel), and David Freddoso (National Review, author of The Case Against Barack Obama).

"The daily newspaper endorsed John McCain in the 2008 presidential election and Adrian Fenty in the Democratic primary for mayor in 2010. On December 14, 2011, it endorsed Mitt Romney for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination, saying he was the only Republican who could beat Barack Obama in the general election, releasing a series of articles critical of Obama."

You are soooooo predictable, witless one.

Before you piss and moan about me source-bashing, you must acknowledge that you used an admittedly biased source of political news. Why don't you vet your sources before you post your horseshit?

Oh, wait...... my bad. You revel in horseshit.
.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
nw30



Joined: 21 Dec 2008
Posts: 1912
Location: The eye of the universe, Cen. Cal. coast

PostPosted: Thu Jul 10, 2014 8:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

pueno wrote:


Oh, wait...... my bad. You revel in horseshit.
.

You are just like jimmymac, just slam the source, and then just walk away w/o offering ANYTHING that proves that what was said is wrong.
That is nothing but a horse shit flinger, as well as an eater, chow down nwodeno, it's your favorite flavor.

_________________
I don't drink the 'cool' aid, I drink tequila, it's more honest.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 5560

PostPosted: Thu Jul 10, 2014 10:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Oh, but whiny boy, you never post anything that shows you actually read on both sides of an issue. You never actually summarize what you think should be done, or why. And when people take apart not merely the source, but the completely corrupt technique of cherry-picking the temperature record, you ignore the rebuttal--and post the same horseshit from a different right wing news source.

It is possible to exchange ideas with GT and Techno and actually learn something. You? No chance. You're the California version of Mike Fick. Time to replay Danny Hicks and scare your paranoid and irrational sense some more.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 130, 131, 132 ... 147, 148, 149  Next
Page 131 of 149

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum

myiW | Weather | Community | Membership | Support | Log in
like us on facebook
© Copyright 1999-2007 WeatherFlow, Inc Contact Us Ad Marketplace

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group