Thursday, February 08, 2007

More on Double Standards and Media Bias

Hillary has to be nervous. Despite leading in the polls, she’s being edged out in the Goo Primary. Her natural allies in the media suddenly are more adulatory toward Barack Obama – and more defensive of anyone who would dare question his exotic biography.

Insight magazine
, a long-standing publication of The Washington Times Company, published a gossipy item with anonymous “Democratic Party” sources (they claimed some of them came from Hillary’s camp) that Obama had attended a madrassa, a radical Islamic school, in Indonesia as a child. The story was unproven, and should not have been published in its sorry condition.

The most obvious media outlet coming to the rescue was CNN, which now might be the Obama News Network, and not just the Clinton News Network. “DEBUNKING A SMEAR,” screamed the headline on CNN. Reporter John Vause reported from the scene in Indonesia that Obama was actually schooled in a state-run school that touched on religion only once a week “in one of the wealthiest neighborhoods in Jakarta.”

Wolf Blitzer repeatedly described CNN as doing “serious journalism,” and that “CNN did what any serious news organization is supposed to do in this kind of a situation. We actually conducted an exclusive firsthand investigation.” Further to the point, CNN president Jon Klein milked the issue to savage the competition, telling the New York Times it was irresponsible for Fox News to mention the Insight tale “without bothering to — or being able to — ascertain the facts.”

Earth to CNN: Facts are important, but you might want to save the lecturing for someone who didn’t hire Peter Arnett to shovel Saddam’s horse manure on your airwaves. Or outrageously aired a “news documentary” that falsely accused America of gassing its own soldiers in Laos. Factually challenged smears? CNN has a record unchallenged on cable.

Let’s be clear about this. The liberal media don’t care what Democratic love objects do when they’re in grade school, even in Indonesia, just as they didn’t care what Bill Clinton was doing touring Russia and the Soviet bloc in his twenties, just as they didn’t care how he dodged the draft or whether he inhaled, just as they didn’t even want to know if Clinton raped a woman when he was 32.

But Obama ought to thank his lucky liberal stars that he’s not a Republican. This is not the standard the media had for George W. Bush in 1999, when the entire liberal media ran in a pack suggesting Bush was a cokehead.

How did CNN, that oasis of “serious journalism” that always attacks a story facts first, approach the Bush-cocaine flap in August of 1999? First, in early August, they teased the reader with talk of “rumors” about Bush on “Larry King Live.” Then it surfaced on several weekends as rumor-floating on “The Capital Gang,” and as a media ethics discussion on “Reliable Sources.”

Then it arrived on the news shows, but always presented in play-dumb terms as an unmanned missile, a question anonymously “dogging” Bush. (What rich irony!) CNN only had a candidate who refused to answer a question, beyond saying he’d pass a government background check. Wolf Blitzer and the president of CNN didn’t send reporters anywhere to investigate. There were no lectures about getting ahead of the facts. The dominant expectation of CNN for days and days was that Bush must answer the charge. He had to deny something no one had credibly accused him of doing.

How low could it go? On its old all-female chat show “CNN & Company,” Chicago Tribune reporter Ellen Warren upped the ante, speculating that Bush was into heroin, not just cocaine: “No, the questions aren't going to go away. And if George Bush used cocaine or mainlined heroin, somebody did it with him, somebody saw it, and reporters will find out about it.”

CNN not only presented and fed the rumors, it then accused others of having done it. Blitzer reported that while Democrats were “not going to out and start making those kinds of accusations” of cocaine use directly, they're happy “that at least some of the Republicans on the far right, some of the more right-wing Republicans, are doing in effect their work for them.” He said this without giggling.

But the richest irony in the contrast is this: Obama has admitted in his biography to using cocaine in high school and college. CNN doesn’t care. While they scour the globe to rebut madrassa stories, they’re not asking him about this settled truth. Serious journalism, indeed.

As usual, CNN devotes its “serious” journalism to very partisan goals: defeating Republicans and making the path straight and flowery for Democrats. Now that’s just reporting the facts.

51 Comments:

At 5:42 PM, Blogger Brooke said...

Just when you think the MSM can't get any more hypocritical...

 
At 6:07 PM, Blogger beakerkin said...

I suspect that the Clintonistas fed the Madrassa story to FOX.
Obama has some serious issues but far less than Bill Clinton had when he became President.

In a way Obama is mor qualified than Hillary to be President. He is certainly more in touch with the average person than the ice princess. He also ran grass roots community progams. What has Hillary run?

I do not understand why people think Senators should be President.
The skills of an administrator are not learned in Congress.

Will Gov Richardon please stand up
and make a statement. Thank you.

 
At 6:45 PM, Blogger FreeCyprus said...

All media is biased.

I wouldn't recommend religiously watching any network if one wants to maintain some semblance of objectivity (and sanity). Watch all of them I guess...

 
At 7:14 PM, Blogger American Crusader said...

beak...I would have to say that most people don't think Senators should be President. It's been quite a while since we've had A Senator become President.
Nominating a Senator has been a losing strategy.

 
At 9:39 PM, Blogger nanc said...

debbie had a great article today on this at right truth.

the left is pist at gw for calling barack "articulate" - you'd have thought he called him everything but a white man!

*:]

p.s. i have a surprise "churchill of the week"...

 
At 6:12 AM, Blogger Gayle said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

 
At 6:13 AM, Blogger Gayle said...

"Articulate" is a bad thing? Perhaps the left feels Bush is being condescending. Well, #@!&! the left!

AC, CNN and many other stations go on the belief that Americans have very short memories. Unfortunately the only way they've been able to get away with all of this is because for the most part it's true! CNN and "journalism" never were in the same building anyway.

Americans must wake up! Far to many are to ignorant of politics to vote, but they vote anyway. It's really discouraging.

Excellent post.

 
At 6:34 AM, Blogger American Crusader said...

At one time, CNN was so big and had virtually no other competition that they could basically get away with anything. The world got their news from CNN and they used it to push their agenda.

 
At 8:21 AM, Blogger Mr. Ducky said...

This is stunning, the word "muslim" is attaching itself to Obama (D - Empty suit). Man, he must be the damn Manchurian Candidate (over rated film but the first with Sinatra is pretty good, absolutely avoid the remake).

Then we have a complete list of allegations against Clinton (which must all be true because they are blogged here in the spirit of complete paranoia) and one accusation that The Little Prince used to do blow, which is completely inconsistent with everything we know about this guy, correct?

Liberal media, liberal media, liberal media.... you folks have become like a bunch of parrots.

... and I can't understand why you're getting all bent out of shape over another Democratic Leadership Council candidate. Corporate America isn't going to let this country drift left any time soon.

 
At 9:50 AM, Blogger American Crusader said...

You might not know this ducky but that's because you haven't been paying attention.
In Arab culture and under Islamic law, if your father is a Muslim, then guess what...so are you.
Now he might not identify himself as a Muslim but let's not pretend that this is some plot to associate Obama and Islam.
I suppose the swift boat veterans somehow changed his middle name to Hussein.
Now, as for President Bush, CNN and every other left-wing news outlet couldn't wait to accuse Bush of snorting cocaine with out any evidence. Obama has admitted to using cocaine (but surely not the frequency) and it's treated like no big deal.
That's called a DOUBLE STANDARD.
Something the prior President took complete advantage of.

 
At 10:23 AM, Blogger Mad Zionist said...

CNN produces serious journalism just like al Jazeera. No need to even begin to take them seriously, except to watch the latest talking points and propaganda from the left being reported as if it were actually news.

They all suck, every last television news broadcast, with the exception of Fox, who just kinda suck.

 
At 10:59 AM, Blogger Always On Watch Two said...

I read as much as I could of Obama's two books. My take: Lots of words but not a lot of substance. He writes in circles, particularly in the 2nd book, as if he's attempting to be all things to all people.

In his 2nd book, he mentions being a Muslim--in only an outward sense. He also says that his mother, an atheist, didn't care if he participated in the Muslim call to prayer or if he understood the Catholic catechism.

Upon reading the portion about his conversion to Christianity, what Obama wrote left me flat. I felt as if he is no more committed to following Christ than he was to following Allah. Hmmmm....

----------------------------

Obama is the media's darling. Even my husband, one who hates following politics, has commented on the media's obsession with Obama. This Sunday, Obama and his wife will be on 60 Minutes for an interview. For some reason, I am reminded of how Jimmy and Rosalynn Carter launched Jimmy's Presidential run from that same platform. I'll watch that upcoming segment of 60 Minutes to see if the question of his cocaine use is soft-pedaled. Perhaps he'll say "I used cocaine, but I didn't snort or smoke it."

 
At 11:01 AM, Blogger WomanHonorThyself said...

great post AC...the double standard is so blatant its embarassing but only to those who arent 'afraid of the truth."
Have an awesome weekend!..:)

 
At 11:12 AM, Blogger American Crusader said...

I'm impressed that even attempted to read his books AOW. Especially with your work schedule and regular blogging, and family, I'm sure your free reading time is limited.
I think he came out about his cocaine use only because he knew it would not be kept secret. I have a feeling he was a regular user, I've known to many people who claim to only use occasionally.
Maybe his excuse will be that he liked "the way it smelled".

 
At 11:15 AM, Blogger American Crusader said...

Good comparison MZ, I might even accept Al Jazeera's word over CNN. I love how they trot out Lou Dobbs as their conservative commentator.
What a joke.

 
At 11:41 AM, Blogger Brooke said...

He sure is skinny... Maybe it was all of that Diet "Coke."

Heh.

Seriously, the drug thing doesn't get me if he's absolutely clean now, and has been for awhile.

It's isn't really even the madrassa, although it does bother me a bit. Even Walid Shoebat used to be a terrorist.

The two things that unsettle me about Obama are that he is head of the (110th) Congressional Black Caucauss (sp?), and that he used his religion in a very grandiose photo op in Time Magazine a few months back.

Little things, I know, but they make my ears perk up.

 
At 11:56 AM, Blogger American Crusader said...

Well the madressas have pretty much been discounted as overzealous and bad journalism. Whether or not Hillary's camp was behind Insight Magazine's report is still unclear.

But his drug use, whether now clean or not, does bother me. It shows a pattern of bad decisionmaking, impulsivity and disregard for the laws of this country.

Wasn't one Bill Clinton enough? Do we need a black version now?

 
At 12:49 PM, Blogger Freedomnow said...

Ducky said, “Liberal media, liberal media, liberal media.... you folks have become like a bunch of parrots.”

Are you trying in your own feeble manner to say that the media is not biased towards liberal causes?

1. I would love an explanation of how the media is not biased.

2. If you cant deny this fact, then why would you suggest that no one should tell the truth?

Either way, you have maneuvered yourself into an undefendable position.

 
At 2:34 PM, Blogger John Brown said...

AC,

Ah, history!

When Obama was growing up Indonesia was run by a fascist dictator who took orders from Uncle Sam.

That's probably why Obama was there, actually... in a rich neighborhood.

Uncle Sam overthrew the democratically elected government there in the 1960s and then installed a corrupt dictator who proceeded to kill hundreds of thousands of people.

You know... just like they tried to do and failed in Venezuela.

When you want so much to be a lacky and tool to Uncle Sam, sometimes ignorance is a valuable, valuable thing.

Then you don't have to remember to forget facts like these.

You can forget to remember... and focus on SKY GOBLINS!!!

It's so much easier than studying the factual record.

 
At 2:37 PM, Blogger John Brown said...

The media is biased, FN.

They are a corporation, and the way they make money is by selling ads to other corporations.

So they say and show whatever they can to make their advertisers happy.

So they sell wars, Anna Nicole Smith, tickets to heaven, and pharmaceutical drugs for 'restless leg syndrome'.

They sell anything to get people to stop thinking and buy shit they don't need.

That's called a capitalist bias, I suppose.

 
At 3:21 PM, Blogger Brooke said...

"Well the madressas have pretty much been discounted as overzealous and bad journalism. Whether or not Hillary's camp was behind Insight Magazine's report is still unclear."

I hadn't heard that... Funny how Shrillary hasn't apologized for it, either.

The drug usage does show bad decision making, but the ability to recognize that one has a serious problem, decide to stop, and go through the arduous process of cleaning up shows determination, in my view.

Was Bill ever clean? lol!

 
At 6:22 PM, Blogger American Crusader said...

Yes JB, instead of capitalism, we should let the state decide what information to pass on. State run media is known for its unbiased journalism.
Your point about pandering to the advertisers has merits but your communist preferences make a mockery of "Free Press".
Pravda provided the Soviet people with all the "truth" they could want. Let the PARTY decide what is printed. As much as I dislike the New York Times and CNN for their left-wing bias, I prefer it to having the State set the agenda.

 
At 6:11 AM, Blogger John Brown said...

AC,

You can't get much more silly or hypocritical than CONSTANTLY using, trusting, believing, and relying upon anonymous government sources - as both you and the Judy Miller's of the world do - and then behaving as though you don't want state-run media.

The NYT, Washingon Post, Fox News, etc. ARE embedded, state-controlled media. Were it not for the New York Times and the the others pushing their government fantasies (Iraqi WMD, Iran's nuke program, Palestinian terrorism, Comrade Chavez's anti-democratic tendencies) the government would have more difficulty when they want to fabricate imperial wars to a population.

So these privatized institutions dope their views up on Anna Nicole Smith, 'restless leg syndrome' drugs, etc. and fill them full of bullshit.

That's their job. Bullshit fillers.

Privatized government propaganda functions for reasons of state.

The government needs a few, highly centralized dictatorships (corporations are dictatorships with highly-centralized decision making processes) so that lemmings such as yourself know what to believe.

Governments need centralized propaganda so that you remain ignorant about Uncle Sam's role in the slaughter of Indonesia, for example.

 
At 6:57 AM, Blogger Obob said...

co-president obama will not be stopped, no matter waht your crazy right winger conspirators care to try. I will crush your spirits as I have created the poltical juagernaut of the 21st century. My Press Sec, CNN, will inform you how to speak about his highness Barak in time.
Let's Talk,
Co-President Hiallary Rodham
p.s. I showed Barak pics of the dead John Foster, heh heh heh

 
At 7:19 AM, Blogger American Crusader said...

JB said....."The media is biased, FN.

They are a corporation, and the way they make money is by selling ads to other corporations.

So they say and show whatever they can to make their advertisers happy."

And then said...
"The NYT, Washingon Post, Fox News, etc. ARE embedded, state-controlled media."

Can't you see that these are diametrically opposed to each other? Is it corporate or state? I can't defend my position if you keep changing yours.

I should have said this earlier but I really didn't think it through.
You claim that the news outlets bias their media to advertising but the truth is just the opposite.
Advertisers go to where the people are.
You can put on a show of almost anything(i.e. American Idol) and if it brings in viewers, it will bring in advertisers.

"Bullshit fillers"...no argument there.

"Centralized propaganda"...that's a staple of communism, if your claim was true, we would be seeing an entirely different picture in Iraq.
Slick Willie's office blowjob would never have made it into the news.

Lastly, if you're claiming the New York Times is an embedded state-controlled media source, then you're the one who is being "silly" and a little bit naïve.

 
At 1:50 PM, Blogger American Crusader said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

 
At 2:03 PM, Blogger Farmer John said...

...Uncle Sam overthrew the democratically elected government there in the 1960s and then installed a corrupt dictator who proceeded to kill hundreds of thousands of people.

You know... just like they tried to do and failed in Venezuela.

Were it not for the New York Times and the the others pushing their government fantasies (Iraqi WMD, Iran's nuke program, Palestinian terrorism, Comrade Chavez's anti-democratic tendencies) the government would have more difficulty when they want to fabricate imperial wars to a population.

 
At 4:41 PM, Blogger Freedomnow said...

JB,

You are absolutely hilarious. Of course you think that the media is biased in favor of America… it is an American media that is made up of American people. You are a Communist and you openly support our enemies in every conflict. Hell, twenty years ago many Communists were more loyal to Moscow than Washington.

While liberal activism destroys US foreign policy, it is simply designed to undermine our Republican leadership. The goal of Democratic Party’s support for anti-American activism is simply to seize power. When they accomplish this goal then they feel that they go back to supporting the best interests of our country. I never said that the media favors terrorists over America (as you desire), they favor liberal ideology over conservative. Therefore, they seek to undermine our foreign policy at every step, but they do not actually favor terrorists. They are simply, “useful tools”.

Our foreign policy under liberal Democrats has been little different than the Republicans. JFK and Lyndon Johnson got us involved in Vietnam, Jimmy Carter attempted an aborted military solution to the Iranian hostage crisis, Bill Clinton bombed Serbia and Baathist Iraq, etc…

Maybe one day the glorious Communist revolution can overthrow the US government and then we can switch allegiance to Arab terrorists, but that’s not likely.

 
At 10:43 PM, Blogger John Brown said...

...Uncle Sam overthrew the democratically elected government there in the 1960s and then installed a corrupt dictator who proceeded to kill hundreds of thousands of people.

You know... just like they tried to do and failed in Venezuela.

Were it not for the New York Times and the the others pushing their government fantasies (Iraqi WMD, Iran's nuke program, Palestinian terrorism, Comrade Chavez's anti-democratic tendencies) the government would have more difficulty when they want to fabricate imperial wars to a population.

 
At 11:51 PM, Blogger John Brown said...

AC asks whether I'm so absurd as to suggest that Viacom, Time-Warner, GE, and that old Nazi outfit Walt Disney serve the state on policy as "embedded" reporters, a term they wear with pride.

Are you challenging the fact that these corporations "embed" reporters with the US government? If so, I see no point in going any further here. It's like denying you have a brain. I'll assume the contrary and move on.

Each of these companies - for economic reasons - enrich themselves off war: whether as for-profit media or defense contractor, they gain.

You ask, "Can't you see that these are diametrically opposed to each other? Is it corporate or state?"

No. Of course not.

That's absurd.

AC, can't you see that the power of the two emerged congruently here on Sam's Plantation? The capitalist economy - based on the exploitation of labor for individual gain - got a corporate kickstart from Uncle Sam.

Free market fantasy aside, capitalism can't succeed unless the speed with which the ruling class steals from the working class accelerates. For this, capitalist economies always need government assistance.

Often that's the job of Congress. That's why we have bankruptcy laws and a corrupt health-care system and a foreclosure problem and a currency problem and a debt problem.

These things aren't accidents. They're planned by the lobbyists who elect candidates and make policy.

"You claim that the news outlets bias their media to advertising but the truth is just the opposite," AC says.

This is an assertion, AC. There's nothing to argue: you didn't dispute any point or make any point. You may not like it or care to address it, but for-profit media put profit - surplus value - ahead of anything else. That's sort of how capitalism works.

I'm not separating 2 parts of a company's strategy to increase distribution from production as a whole.

That's silly.

It's obviously true, as you say, that "advertisers go to where the people are."

But it has nothing to do with the close relationship between the handful of corporations (some of whom supported Nazis) who monopolize the nation's media and Uncle Sam's government, who sanctioned their actions... Nazi past and all.

Attacking my belief that "embedded media" is a form of "centralized propaganda," AC retorts: "if your claim was true, we would be seeing an entirely different picture in Iraq."

Without saying why, you're offering a counter-intuative gut feeling - Time-Warner & General Electric don't have an interest in war - as fact. You're asking everyone to ignore the histories of these corporations without saying why.

Similarly, you're teling us - without giving one example - that the privatized "embedded" media have been "pro-Resistance."

How can you be pro-Resistance when you never even leave a Baghdad fortress controlled by Uncle Sam? The thought is absurd beyond comprehension. These clowns don't know anything that's not fed to them by the government or people like Ahmad Chalabi. They sit around all day fill their heads with nonsense about EVIL alCIAda MUSLIM GOBLINS and CIVIL WAR and bring it to us live.

Maybe you can tell us a little bit about what Victoria Clarke did during the 2003 blitzkrieg of Iraq or what Pete Williams did during Uncle Sam's brutal slaughter in Panama back in 1989.

You can tell us about Tony Snow or Wolf Blitzer.

I'm sure you'll have no problem asserting - perhaps even with a straight face - that none of these people would ever have anything to do with the state.

They're in the "free market."

Nothing about Indonesia, AC. Are you educating yourself or choosing to live in denial?

 
At 9:35 AM, Blogger Farmer John said...

If the CIA had wanted to overthrow Chavez, Chavez would be dead. Contrary to popular opinion... the CIA is very good at what they do. For the Indymedia fantasy of CIAGOBLINS to be true, the organization would have to have been run on the Keystone Cops model.

 
At 9:46 AM, Blogger Farmer John said...

Indymedia's King & self-annointed Queen of Hearts. And jb, you're just their joker. They'll cut you out of their deck as soon as they've stuffed their bank accounts with sucker money.

 
At 9:48 AM, Blogger Farmer John said...

...let's try that Queen again...

 
At 10:57 AM, Blogger Farmer John said...

Indymedia = Leftymedia. The only thing worse than the MSM.

 
At 4:45 PM, Blogger Always On Watch Two said...

Crusader,
I am a multi-tasker. Otherwise, I couldn't get much done. LOL.

I think he came out about his cocaine use only because he knew it would not be kept secret. I have a feeling he was a regular user...

Yep, yep.

On 60 Minutes tonight, Michelle Obama invited any who see her husband smoking cigarettes to rat him out to her. Apparently, she demanded that he quit smoking before he run for President.

 
At 4:47 PM, Blogger Always On Watch Two said...

I noticed something else on tonight's 60 Minutes. If I recall correctly, Obama's first book, pictures showed his mother in a hijab; but the pictures tonight didn't show her that way.

My memory might be faulty about those pictures. On the other hand....

 
At 12:58 AM, Blogger Freedomnow said...

Geez JB you put a lot of stock into superficial arguments that sound like they make sense if nobody bothers to put them into proper context.

You wrote profusely about how the US controls embedded reporters in Iraq. Well, it was Kevin Sites that broke the insurgent execution story in Fallujah while he was an embedded reporter. That story was severely damaging to the US military.

Then there was the embedded photographer, Chris Hondros, who was embedded with a US foot patrol that fired upon a speeding car that they mistook for a VBIED. The photos that he took while on this embed patrol became icons for the “anti-war” movement.

These are only a drop in the bucket in the number of embedded reporters that published unfavorable stories against our military without being censored by US authorities.

……….You also take the stance that it was wrong for some media corporations to do business with Germany in the prewar era. It never ceases to amaze me the double standards the Left can foist upon us. You stupid leftwing fascist bastards were allies with the Nazis from 1939 to 1941. You split Poland between yourselves and took the Baltic Republics as a part of the bargain.

Sorry, but you deserved that language. While the Communists collaborated with Hitler, Roosevelt was arming Great Britain.

So what’s next? Are you going to call the Jews Nazis? Oh, I forgot you already did… Ludicrous, it’s absolutely ludicrous.

You are living proof of why Americans need to educate themselves before revisionists like you change all history.

 
At 5:59 AM, Blogger Steve Harkonnen said...

I find these early running announcements to be a bit drole, but on the other hand, it's interesting to see Obama and Hitlery go at it head to head against one another.

Between the two, I would vote for a ham sandwich.

 
At 6:39 AM, Blogger Always On Watch Two said...

From this source on February 12, 2007:

Obama's religious background has come under scrutiny because he attended a Muslim school in Indonesia from age 6 to 10.

Obama is a member of the United Church of Christ. Information about that denomination is HERE and HERE.

I note from this list that Howard Dean is also a member of the United Church of Christ. Readers might like to look at other members' names.

Some information about doctrines and beliefs:

The motto of the United Church of Christ comes from John 17:21: "That they may all be one." The UCC uses broad doctrinal parameters, honoring creeds and confessions as "testimonies of faith" rather than "tests of faith," and emphasizes freedom of individual conscience and local church autonomy. Indeed, the relationship between local congregations and the denomination's national headquarters is covenantal rather than hierarchical: local churches have complete control of their finances, hiring and firing of clergy and other staff, and theological and political stands.

In the United Church of Christ, creeds, confessions, and affirmations of faith function as "testimonies to faith" around which the church gathers rather than as "tests of faith" rigidly proscribing required doctrinal consent....


Much more at the above links.

My question: Is the United Church of Christ a church of syncretism and of interfaithing?

I note that each church is quite independent. I haven't yet researched the specific church to which Obama belongs. That sounds like an important project!

 
At 6:44 AM, Blogger Always On Watch Two said...

Information from UCC's web site. Note the "justice" causes this church supports.

 
At 7:07 AM, Blogger Farmer John said...

Maybe JB could explain why everyone's leaving the Bolivarian Republic... if Chavez is such a great guy...

 
At 7:36 AM, Blogger Mr. Ducky said...

Everyone so upset about Obama's parentage but you never hear a thing about Rahm Emanuel's father being Irgun.

Double standard?

 
At 7:45 AM, Blogger American Crusader said...

AOW.. That list was a Who's Who in the Democratic Party. Interesting.
I also watched 60 minutes last night. CBS didn't ask too many hard questions...no big surprise.

 
At 8:05 AM, Blogger American Crusader said...

JB..CounterPunch is your reference? Aren't they the ones who blamed 911 on Israel?
Tell me that you aren't buying into these conspiracy theories.

 
At 8:16 AM, Blogger Freedomnow said...

Nice one Ducky. Are you planning another Polish pogrom like Moskal???

Anyways, no one would even care if Emanuel was the Prime Minister of Israel as long as he continues to criticize Bush. Maybe you arent happy because he prefers Clinton over Obama, but is afraid to say it?...

 
At 3:19 PM, Blogger John Brown said...

FN:

How about addressing the point... or do you just talk shit?

Does it matter that Emanuel's a foreign fighter who comes from a family of terrorists?

 
At 3:25 PM, Blogger John Brown said...

While Roosevelt and Stalin were chummy, Walt Disney, Ford, and the Bush family were genuflecting before the Nazi flag, FN.

They were all imperialists, and WWII was an imperialistic war.

My point on embedding is an institutional one. Until you're capable of dealing with the issue of privatized embedded media at an institutional level, further discussion is fruitless.

Vanilla Sam has you too brainwashed.

 
At 3:32 PM, Blogger John Brown said...

FJ,

Back in 2003, I wrote in Indymedia that Bush was lying about Iraq.

Meantime, the little Nazi-lover punked your goofy ass: he had you believing and spouting all sorts of silliness and nonsense, I'll bet.

When you're on your knees for government propaganda, mocking Amy Goodman hardly makes you look smart.

The CIA have gotten used in South America for years. Occasionally they succeed in perpetuating a bloodbath, running a massive drug racket (which MULLAH MICKEY the JOOish NAZI, or installing a fascist dictator.

But since Chavez - or, rather, the Bolivarian Revolutionaries - threw the coup back in the CIA's face, they've failed at every turn.

 
At 9:01 AM, Blogger Freedomnow said...

OK JB lets have it your way.

Should the U.S. ban embedded reporters because there is a possibility that these reporters could develop a pro-U.S. slant, despite the fact that this has not been the case over the last couple of years?

Think about it, does that sound logical? The U.S. military provides the "antiwar" movement with a great service. It allows reporters to report closer to the fighting and create more sensational anti-American propaganda. Western reporters have no other access to the battlefield because they are targeted by insurgents.

…And thank you for revealing the truth about WWII. I thought we were fighting against a fascist/genocidal Nazi dictatorship and an imperialistic warmongering Japanese empire.

I am beginning to love revisionism. Lets rewrite the history of the Soviet Union as well... hmmmm... where to begin? Ummmmmm well... lets just forget about Soviet history instead, it could be very embarrassing for Socialism to dwell on this topic.

 
At 9:23 AM, Blogger Freedomnow said...

Is there anything good to say about Amy Goodman?

She is the living incarnation of Doopy, the liberal dwarf.

The woman flat-lined a long time ago. In such a case, a person can be resuscitated, but the loss of oxygen to the brain will result in permanent brain damage.

 
At 5:49 PM, Blogger Farmer John said...

Thanks for just pointing out to the world WHO Indymedia is, jb... know-nothings w/attitudes.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket