Print

[pug_ster]

http://abcnews.go.co...=2822061&page=1

Looks like Neo-cons are trying to swiftboat Obama by suggesting that he went to terrorist school in Indonesia when Obama was a child.  Not just that, it was suggested by the same neo-cons that hilliary did this.

[BCfosheezy]

QUOTE(pug_ster @ Jan 25 2007, 10:33 AM)

http://abcnews.go.co...=2822061&page=1

Looks like Neo-cons are trying to swiftboat Obama by suggesting that he went to terrorist school in Indonesia when Obama was a child. Not just that, it was suggested by the same neo-cons that hilliary did this.

 

I hadn't actually heard about that. It is probably isolated. Is neo-con supposed to be derogatory? What exactly do you mean by it?

 

Also, if you're a democrat and look at the front-runners on the conservative ticket, you don't see anyone moderate enough for your tastes. If you are a conservative looking at the democrat ticket, you don't see any front-runners moderate enough for your tastes. Since our choices are so far from center, of course both sides are bashing the others. That's to be expected. Don't just point out things that benefit your cause though.

[throwingks]

I had heard Obama already rebutted the allegations.

I also heard, probably false, that Hillary started the rumors.

It was all over digg.com for a while.
Edit: Here is a link I found just looking real fast:
http://www.digg.com/...gainst_Fox_News

[BCfosheezy]

QUOTE(mike96sc2 @ Jan 25 2007, 12:05 PM)

By Neo-con I'm assuming he's referring to the ultra-conservative nature of Fox news. In the article they mention the story wasn't going anywhere until the Fox news program "Fox & Friends" started their roundtable discussion amongst themselves.

I don't hate Fox news entirely, I dislike a lot of it, but I despise Fox & Friends, for those who haven't ever seen it, it's similar to a beauty parlor gossip show, only they make much wilder claims and are much less an authority on the matter.

I think the problem is there's going to be conservatives and liberals. We can't seem to just have people. If I were to run as a third party I'd be considered a wacko or have no chance of getting onto the ballot.

You're going to like stuff I don't, I'm going to like stuff you don't, however I don't feel the government should have a place in saying either of us are right or wrong. Instead they should be saying as long as what I do doesn't mess with what you do then enjoy. If I start infringing on your rights then take action, but that's a whole other thread.

 

Well I agree with the bottom portion of your article, and I believe that most of the members who participate in this particular forum would tell you I'm a conservative, although I'm not actually. The people here are just so far to the left that to stay closer to reality I have to take that position. At any rate, I am conducting a study on the news agencies and it includes ABC, NBC, CNN, CBS, FOX, MSNBC. The only things applicable are live reporting of a story where the facts are obvious. Then compare that to how the different agencies report it. You'll probably be shocked to know that the actual reporting (not the talk shows) is very accurate on Fox. Talk shows are meant to tell opinions. Also, the definition of "Neo-Con" is not someone on Fox and friends.

[throwingks]

^ The talks shows are meant to make money. The opinions they tell, are the ones that get them the best Nielson Ratings.

I know it isn't the same but my buddy (Pro Baseball Player) went on 1 of those shows for a local sports news thing. They told him what stance to take before the show started. He just said "Okay." After all he was gonna be on TV.

[pug_ster]

At least the Democrats are smarter to debunk these myths as soon as they come up.  Although I wouldn't be surprised that the neocons would probably swiftboat Obama is by using the race card like what happened in the Senate Race last year in Tenessee.  It would be harder to debunk Hillary and it would be harder to play the woman card because more than 50% of the voters are women.

Who knows, next thing those Neocons would probably do is to suggest that Obama have an affair with a white woman by showing a picture of him kissing a white woman in the cheek.

[BCfosheezy]

QUOTE(pug_ster @ Jan 25 2007, 08:02 PM)

At least the Democrats are smarter to debunk these myths as soon as they come up. Although I wouldn't be surprised that the neocons would probably swiftboat Obama is by using the race card like what happened in the Senate Race last year in Tenessee. It would be harder to debunk Hillary and it would be harder to play the woman card because more than 50% of the voters are women.

Who knows, next thing those Neocons would probably do is to suggest that Obama have an affair with a white woman by showing a picture of him kissing a white woman in the cheek.

 

It was already suggested that the "Neo Cons" aren't even responsible for this but instead your beloved Hillary. The speculation about them playing "the race card" simply shows your bias and hatred and therefore removes any open-minded person's ability to listen to what you have to say. Also, please don't refer to your party by their correct name but the other party as a slanderous name. If you choose to use "Neo Con", then please be fair and refer to yourself and your party as what you are and say "ultra liberal". That's only fair.

 

Anyways, what you fail to realize is, the conservatives don't want either liberal cadidate to be elected as they are seen as equally bad for our country. There is no reason to push one over the other.

[pug_ster]

If you don't like the name Neo-cons, what should I call them?  Conservatives?  BCfocheezys?  Anti-Democrats?  Americans?  You tell me a name what I should call.  The only reason I used the name neocons was that this dumb rumor mill about Obama was started by Fox & Friends whom are a bunch of Neo-cons anyways, who can't tell the difference between Responsible Journalism and rumor mill news.  You referred me as an Ultra-liberal many times and now I used the word 'Neo-con', which i didn't say you are one anyways, and now you write a paragraph why I shouldn't do that?  Give me a break.

The fact is that Fox can start their rumor mill news and they don't have seem to have to be responsible for their actions whereas mainstream news gets punished if they mis-claim what they said (remember Dan Rather?)

Here's the link to Fox & Friends video in youtube, you tell me if it is 'Fair and Balanced'.

http://www.rawstory....Obama_0119.html

[BCfosheezy]

QUOTE(pug_ster @ Jan 26 2007, 10:42 AM)

If you don't like the name Neo-cons, what should I call them? Conservatives? BCfocheezys? Anti-Democrats? Americans? You tell me a name what I should call.

There really was no need for that. I'm not sure how you deduced that I "don't like the name Neo-cons". I don't care what you call them, as long as you remain fair. I made that clear.

QUOTE

The only reason I used the name neocons was that this dumb rumor mill about Obama was started by Fox & Friends whom are a bunch of Neo-cons anyways, who can't tell the difference between Responsible Journalism and rumor mill news.

Well I don't think you can prove any of that. Secondly, even if what you said were true I have very strong evidence of at LEAST one show on each other the other major networks has liberal-biased talk shows. It's really unfair to pick out one talkshow and especially one network. We should band together to insist that our news agencies report FACTS instead of opinion.

 

QUOTE

 You referred me as an Ultra-liberal many times and now I used the word 'Neo-con', which i didn't say you are one anyways, and now you write a paragraph why I shouldn't do that? Give me a break.

If the term "ultra-liberal" offends you... I'm sorry and I will not use it anymore.

QUOTE

The fact is that Fox can start their rumor mill news and they don't have seem to have to be responsible for their actions whereas mainstream news gets punished if they mis-claim what they said (remember Dan Rather?)

Well they will be held accountable for their actions as they should be. So should the other news agencies and us citizens should demand that no matter what kind of spin you use in your news, it is unacceptable.

[BCfosheezy]

I just realized you said "mainstream news" gets punished for reporting non-factual information. Fox news IS mainstream news. As a matter of fact, due to it being the most factually accurate news station on the air it gets quite a bit of viewers. I'm not really sure why hardcore liberals bash Fox. I think it's because the truth does not help their cause. At any rate, your "mainstream news" have a heavy liberal bias. It's sad that people don't want to hold ALL news agencies to the truth. I know I do.

[pug_ster]

QUOTE(BCfosheezy @ Jan 26 2007, 09:03 PM)

I just realized you said "mainstream news" gets punished for reporting non-factual information. Fox news IS mainstream news. As a matter of fact, due to it being the most factually accurate news station on the air it gets quite a bit of viewers. I'm not really sure why hardcore liberals bash Fox. I think it's because the truth does not help their cause. At any rate, your "mainstream news" have a heavy liberal bias. It's sad that people don't want to hold ALL news agencies to the truth. I know I do.

My "mainstream news' have heavy liberal bias?  So I assume ABC, CBS, and NBC is heavy bias.  We must live in a liberal world.  Then why don't I hear Fox news apologized when they wrongly accused Obama as a terrorist?  That's being accountable for you.

[BCfosheezy]

QUOTE(pug_ster @ Jan 26 2007, 03:20 PM)

My "mainstream news' have heavy liberal bias? So I assume ABC, CBS, and NBC is heavy bias.

Yes it does. This is pretty well-known. That is why most conservatives and moderates watch Fox. I'm watching a liberal-biased talk show right now on cnn. Later I will watch Keith Olberman's ultra-lib-biased show on msnbc. Let's just be honest about it.

 

QUOTE

We must live in a liberal world. Then why don't I hear Fox news apologized when they wrongly accused Obama as a terrorist? That's being accountable for you.

We actually live in a society that leans slightly to the right. Can you post the transcript of the show where they "wrongly accused Obama as a terrorist"? I think if you did, it would shed some light on what really happened. I know you don't watch the show, because you hail Fox as "neo-cons" so I know what you heard was 3rd party. Let's get the story straight before we assume what you say is true. Again, don't make this a me vs. you battle. Let's stick to the facts.

[pug_ster]

QUOTE(BCfosheezy @ Jan 27 2007, 12:31 AM)

Yes it does. This is pretty well-known. That is why most conservatives and moderates watch Fox. I'm watching a liberal-biased talk show right now on cnn. Later I will watch Keith Olberman's ultra-lib-biased show on msnbc. Let's just be honest about it.

Then I suppose that other msnbc's commentators like Scarborough and Tucker are also ultra-liberals.

QUOTE

We actually live in a society that leans slightly to the right. Can you post the transcript of the show where they "wrongly accused Obama as a terrorist"? I think if you did, it would shed some light on what really happened. I know you don't watch the show, because you hail Fox as "neo-cons" so I know what you heard was 3rd party. Let's get the story straight before we assume what you say is true. Again, don't make this a me vs. you battle. Let's stick to the facts.

I posted the link earlier but I guess you didn't bother to look.

http://www.rawstory....Obama_0119.html

[BCfosheezy]

QUOTE(pug_ster @ Jan 26 2007, 08:21 PM)

Then I suppose that other msnbc's commentators like Scarborough and Tucker are also ultra-liberals.

Don't put words in my mouth.

QUOTE

I posted the link earlier but I guess you didn't bother to look.

http://www.rawstory....Obama_0119.html

I didn't, because frankly i don't follow any links you post anymore. You're simply too far to the left for mine and most people's tastes so I usually don't pay attention to what you have to say anymore. HAD YOU LISTENED to the video posted there, Fox and Friends cited their source as "The Hillary Clinton Campaign". They go on to cite THAT source as "Insight Magazine". It was just ammunition for libs to attack Fox for reporting what had already been published by Insight magazine.

 

You lose.

[pug_ster]

QUOTE(BCfosheezy @ Jan 27 2007, 06:38 AM)

Don't put words in my mouth.

I didn't put words in your mouth.  You said msnbc is a bunch of ultra-liberals because of people like Olberman yet they also have conservative commentators.  I think it is 'fair and balanced' if one network have both kind of commentators in the same network.  

QUOTE

I didn't, because frankly i don't follow any links you post anymore. You're simply too far to the left for mine and most people's tastes so I usually don't pay attention to what you have to say anymore. HAD YOU LISTENED to the video posted there, Fox and Friends cited their source as "The Hillary Clinton Campaign". They go on to cite THAT source as "Insight Magazine". It was just ammunition for libs to attack Fox for reporting what had already been published by Insight magazine.

Insight Magazine is a Conservative Magazine run by Washington times.  Their sources are just as reliable as Drudge or newsmax.  Like what mike96sc2 said, it seems those guys didn't even bother to verify their sources before reporting is just plain irresponsible.