Who says that liberal media is bias?

Discussion in 'Politics & Religion' started by peilthetraveler, Jan 16, 2010.

  1. So MSNBC personalities are so biased in their political views that they publicly advocate cheating for their Party to be victorious.

    <object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/OB3j9fpTKkk&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/OB3j9fpTKkk&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
  2. Bias is better than stupidity.
  3. Lucrum


    Right wing bias is better than left wing stupidity?
    Or is it the other way around?
    Or maybe it's all a matter of opinion.

    Reminds me of a George Carlin joke.

    "You ever notice how everyone driving faster than you is a lunatic and everyone driving slower than you is an idiot?"
  4. That said, you have to be pretty stupid to advocate cheating on national television. Guess the liberals get to hold the majority in bias and stupidity.
  5. The 'right' wing makes it pretty clear there is no bias, they are pretty dogmatic about it as well. They clearly state what the agenda is and stick to it, no matter what.
  6. I am not defending the guy in anyway, I can't care less but far worse stupidity goes on everyday on television for this to be made a moral issue.
  7. This is the face of the radical left. What's really disturbing is that Ed Schultz is not just some nitwit posting on a message board. Having a show on a major cable network makes him a player. You think this story might have a wee bit more coverage had Beck said it?
    As the radical left goose steps it's way towards total control of the Dem party, party loyalists need to take pause. They may find themselves on the losing end of one of the most lop sided election in our nations history come November. I sure Stalin, Hitler and Mao would be impressed with the progression of todays leftist movement, but America won't swallow it all at once. Can the leftist endorsement of re-education camps be far behind. These people are dangerous, very dangerous.
  8. <object width="518" height="419"><param name="movie" value="http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/eyeblast.swf?v=Gd2GytQunz" /><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" /><embed type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/eyeblast.swf?v=Gd2GytQunz" allowfullscreen="true" width="518" height="419" /></object>
  9. The comrades at MSNBC are doing their best to fan the flames of panic, which is about all Coakley has left. I still have my doubts that an upset of this magnitude can come off in a Dem stronghold like Mass., but I'd love to see it. A bitch slap of reality might just knock some sense in to some of the more sensible Dems. Left unchecked, the radical left will be the demise of the Dem party.
  10. Bush had the support of the majority of Americans when he invaded Iraq. (not mine, I might add). Hell, most of the Democrats in Congress voted for the invasion. (At least before they voted against it)

    Virtually no one has supported these radical, ideological, leftists on anything they've done, (they've even managed to split their own base). America has had a look at the far-left and will soon repudiate it outright.

    #10     Jan 18, 2010