Story Comments
Posted by: TonyByron 1 year, 10 months ago
This page is a permanent archive of the comment below and its replies.
To view this comment in the context of the full discussion for the story, use this link.
-
Neutral
TonyByron1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"(O'Reilly and Rush Limbaugh two of the primest [sic] examples)
"It appears to be an effort to control the masses, which is not only grossly unpatriotic, it borders on being criminal. We ALL need to start paying better attention to what the FCC allows, folks."
Yeah newswarrior, let's outlaw conservative voices on the airwaves. That sounds "democratic".
A perfect example of what namecritic was attacking.
Reply-
Neutral
david_nwpa1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I am not so sure that was NewsWarrior's intent. He is not trying to outlaw all conservative commentators. To be sure though, do we really need to have those behind the mic who will do nothing more than use vitriol to shout down as unpatriotic anyone who disagrees with President Dimwit?
Reply-
Neutral
TonyByron1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Umm, it sure sounded like NW's intent. What was your take?
"To be sure though, do we really need to have those behind the mic who will do nothing more than use vitriol to shout down as unpatriotic anyone who disagrees with President Dimwit?"
Fine, you shut up the vitriolic Olberman and I'll shut up the vitriolic Limbaugh.
Oh, "President Dimwit"? Kinda shows your level of maturity (or lack thereof).
Reply-
Neutral
scott42611 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
One difference:
Kieth Olbermann may be angry, but with good reason. ...and he is truthful. IMO, he is the Edward R. Murrow of this generation.
On the other hand, Rush Limbaugh is a disciple of supply-side Reaganomics. His mission is not the truth. His mission is to cast his flawed philosophy is the best light possible, even if it means doing so through distortion and lies.
And most historians seem to agree that President Bush will go down as the worst president in the history of his great country.
Reply-
Neutral
TonyByron1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
K.O. is a pompous, petty, biased, partisan snipe. Edward R. Murrow he is not.
Limbaugh spins to the right just as much as Olbermann spins to the left.
"And most historians seem to agree that President Bush will go down as the worst president in the history of his great country."
Really? Which historians do you refer to? Do tell please.
Reply-
-
Neutral
TonyByron1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
No, a better question would be "Why don't you list the historians you refer too"?
Answer the question instead of changing the subject.
You risk being labeled as one of those who namecritic accuses of avoiding questions, don't you agree?
Reply-
Neutral
scott42611 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
History WILL be the judge...
and BTW, here's one of MANY links:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/ar...
History will NOT be kind to that nimrod.
Reply-
Neutral
TonyByron1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Please scott, Foner is a liberal, to put it mildly.
In the story you link to Foner himself says: "Historians are loath to predict the future." He goes right on though to do that very thing that historians loathe, doesn't he? This was written about a year ago. Does that make it "history"?
Oh, and he cherry-picks Lincoln doesn't he? If I'm not mistaken Lincoln suspended suspended habeas corpus for Americans, didn't he?
Illegal, enemy combatants never had any rights under our constitution. They are condemned by the Geneva Convention. You lose, please try again.
Reply-
-
Neutral
david_nwpa1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Not sure if you are a lawyer or not, however, you seem to be a bit lacking in terms of the law. As I recall, the USA PATRIOT Act allows the President the power to declare anyone (including US citizens) to be apprehended and put in confinement. Enemy combatant status can be thrust upon anyone, which last I checked is in direct violation of the US Constitution.
Reply -
JohnQPublicComment removed: Retracted by user
-
-
-
-
-
JohnQPublicComment removed: Retracted by user
-
JohnQPublicComment removed: Retracted by user1 Reply
-
-
-
Neutral
ybdogsct1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
TONY:
"Umm, it sure sounded like NW's intent. What was your take?"
My take is that NEWSWARRIOR is urging us to be more vigilant media consumers. Just because the FCC allows something to be aired does not mean that news article is free from bias, political/personal agenda, and misleading assertions. I don't think NEWSWARRIOR wants to "outlaw [all] conservative voices on the airwaves," especially since NEWSWARRIOR himself admits that he is a "life-long Republican." Or did you miss this detail in your rush to condemn him?
TONY:
"You shut up the vitriolic Olberman and I'll shut up the vitriolic Limbaugh."
Olbermann's news commentary personality was only created in response to people like Limbaugh, O'Reilly, Hannity, Coulter, and Malkin. So, "shut them up" and Olbermann will also fall silent in response.
Reply-
Neutral
TonyByron1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Ybdogsct,"Just because the FCC allows something to be aired does not mean that news article is free from bias, political/personal agenda, and misleading assertions."
No kidding, that's not their job. There are those who would reinstate the Fairness Doctrine (born 1949, died 1987). It is a liberal dream though. NW mentioned only Bill and Rush in reference to "paying better attention to what the FCC allows,...". Whether he is a life-long Republican or not makes not one whit of difference to me.
You made me chuckle here: "Olbermann's news commentary personality was only created in response to people like Limbaugh, O'Reilly, Hannity, Coulter, and Malkin. So, "shut them up" and Olbermann will also fall silent in response." If I shut up 5 conservative voices one liberal voice will "fall silent"? What can I trade for the NYTimes, WAPO, Bostglobe, LAtimes, NBC, CNN, NPR,...Thanks for the laugh.
Reply-
Neutral
donald511 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Yah Tony, don't forget it was one of your icons who vetoed the Truth in Telecommunications Act with BS rationales too. So why not allow both sides to be presented regardless of time, particularly if that is the only medium in some areas?
Our current bush appointed FCC Chief would love to allow big media to further control the smaller limited markets - like the Repug energy bill has thrown out the anti-monopoly laws from the 1930s. What greed adn evil from the repugs put into action daily for more power and control!
Reply -
Neutral
ybdogsct1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
TONY:
"There are those who would reinstate the Fairness Doctrine"
The Fairness Doctrine does NOT attempt to control the views of reporters and commentators. It only asks that news outlets demonstrate their commitment to public service by giving both political sides an equal opportunity to respond on air. What's the matter? Don't you like your news outlets to be "fair and balanced"?
TONY:
"What can I trade for the NYTimes, WAPO, Bostglobe, LAtimes, NBC, CNN, NPR"
How about a conservative print news affiliate that has as many Pulitzers as the NYTimes, Boston Globe, and LA Times have? (Oh, I'm sorry. There is NO conservative print affiliate with nearly as many Pulitzers). Or how about a conservative broadcast news outlet that has won as many Peabodies as PBS, NPR, CNN, and NBC? (Oh wait. There is NO conservative print affiliate with nearly as many Peabodies either.) Thank YOU for the laugh, Tony. It goes to show just how reliable your news sources are.
Reply -
-
-
-
Neutral
MajJohn1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Another post with the sole purpose to slam the president and give all the anti-Bushies another propaganda platform. To say that all Republicans are neocons & believe that attacks on the president are unpatriotic is in itself a leftist lie. Republicans & Dems with a brain in their head knows the difference in a personal attack on the President or a legitimate attack on his or his parties politics. There's a big difference between calling the President a dimwit, a drunken dope head and so on, and calling the war policy stupid. And what makes the righteous think that all conservatives think lock step w/ O'Reilly or Limbaugh? The liberals put this out as another lie no better than than the lies about people who disagree with the war as being unpatriotic. This post was interesting in that it gave a good list of all the lies put out by liberals against conservatives. The bloggers jump right in and then add more lies. The biggest lie of all is accusing the other side of lies.
Reply -
-
-
-
loading ...
vidman04
AlphaGnosis
ML2007
Wolfie2007
joey-evans
david_nwpa
Shadowolf
Radiofreeeuropa
JohnQPublic
scott4261
Post Reply
You are not signed in to Propeller.com. Please sign in to post a reply.