Oh my god, I am ripping my hair out here. Are you serious? Hate mongering. What the f*ck do you think the left is doing to Bush right now. I have never seen so much hate speech in my life. And it's all coming from the left. And for the 100th time, I will say this again. Political commentators can say anything they want. Got it? Dan Rather, Peter Jennings, and Tom Brokaw cannot. The reason they don't use hate speech is because they are suppose to be reporting the news with no bias, no opinion and no agenda. Understand? When you watch Fox news and they are just reporting the news, you will not see any of your so called hate speech. When you tune into one of their political talk shows, you will hear political commentary. Am I the only here that understands this? This seems like a first grader would understand this concept. My God, I cannot believe this simple concept is so confusing to people.
Take off your blinders and stop using the same old tired rhetoric....since you brought it up...what is HATE MONGERING? and gvie me a specific statement made by somebody on Fox? speaking of Hate mongoring...have you ever heard Charlie Rangle on Hannity and Colemns and listened to some of the things he says?
I don't believe you are a nice guy. You resort to ad hominem attacks as the first line of attack/defense. "Did your mother drop you on your head when you were a child?" I reposted that article because that is the argument, based on research and polling. The real problem these days, is most people don't know the difference between a reporter and Sean Hannity or Rush Limbaugh. Limbaugh tells his listeners that all the news they need they can get from him, and the dittoheads lap it up like a newborn with a bottle of formula. Facts are incontrovertible, that is why they are facts. Facts should be presented as facts, and opinions as opinions. Problem is that the neocons and the young left wing extremists don't understand the difference. If you ask people where they get their opinions from, and they say Rush, or Hannity, or Franken, or Carville.....it demonstrates that they lack the ability to form their own.
OK, so I will take that as no, I cannot answer any of your questions. Thank you for proving my point.
When you act in a civil manner, I will engage your questions. As long as you maintain an ad hominem approach, I will not.
I don't know if he still has a show, but Jesse Jackson used to have a show on one of the networks (CNN?). Al Sharpton who is running for president is interviewed regularly on various news networks. He also qualifies as a hate monger in my book. Cruz Bustamante, who ran for Governor in California never denounced his hate mongering ties to Mecha, and the liberal media gave him a pass. Were he a Republican, he would have been crucified in two seconds for being a hate monger. Fox news regularly has on this black professor from Berkley? who openly and passionately argues (yells) that white people are unqualified to teach classes in african american studies, and should not be allowed to do so. He qualifies in my book. James Carville... don't even get me started with this good ole boy. Ok there are a few, you made the original contention yet I put down a few names - I haven't seen your list yet... Exactly what do you consider to be hate mongering that Fox news doing? And to the point of namecalling. What namecalling have I done? It all is coming from your direction, including the accusations of namecalling. This again is the classic technique used by the Democratic party.
I think I can help out here. "hate speech" is any discussion or debate about an issue that liberals don't wish to have discussed. They like to take large segments of public policy totally off the agenda, because they know their views will not stand up to rational public examination. This is a corollary of the Liberal First Amendment, which reads "Anyone who disagrees with me shut the f*ck up." Affirmative action is a perfect example. You will be blackballed from academia, thrown out of top level corporate jobs, ruined in the military and be sidetracked or fired in any government post if you voice the slightest doubt about this highly unpopular and unfair policy. Using a combination of edicts and judicial make believe, liberals have managed to enshrine this as policy even though the public opposes it by huge margins. In fact it's not just affirmative action, it's the whole subject of race if your take on it varies more than a couple of millimeters from" discrimination is still a serious problem." Like all intimidation rackets, the racial grievance industry has to make examples of anyone brave enough to stand up to them. In this land of supposed free speech, where liberals bemoan the fact that people got upset over the Dixie Chicks and Sean Penn's odious statements, the most popular broadcaster in history and the Senate Majority leader were forced into humiliating resignations over offhand statements with racial connotations. Now we find that if you are in a position of prominence, it has suddenly become unacceptable to voice your religious beliefs if they are not either muslim or liberal jewish. Gen. Boykins, a Delta Force hero super trooper, is under fire for saying in a church meeting that terrorists are evil and from satan and will lose because we have the true God on our side. How insensitive of him. He may have offended some of the terrorists blowing up our troops. Can't have that.
Classic technicians of name calling: Rush Limbaugh Sean Hannity Anne Coulter Laura Ingraham Michael Savage The questions is this: If the Democrats are wrong in their approach, are the Republicans right in their response?
Mav, I like you and have the same pol views as you but really...tone it down...Et On a whole has been getting to revved up lately and YES i have done my fair share but this is a good conversation and there is no need to start escalating the tone peace