Obama's media (ABC/NBC/CNN/MSNBC) attacking Americans again.

Now it's clear. Everyone but fox news is Obama's media to you. That's what you mean when you say MSM. So, who is organizing them?

 

Actually, it seems like it's you who is missing the point. Yes, protests are organized. Often, they have to get permits and shit in advance so they have to be organized. These are town halls, where an obviously organized group of people are attempting to create disruptions. It's kind of different. When liberals do shit like that, there's usually no more than about two or three of them involved and they seem to eventually get dragged off by somebody shortly after they start doing it.

I'd like to know who feels they need to organize disruptions at town halls instead of organize protests.

Oh, and FNC isn't suddenly a second-rate network just because they happen to STILL be the only shill for the republican agenda. Nothing changed there. There has been a rather obvious change at MSNBC, though. They're like the anti-FNC now, and it's disappointing. To be fair, I pay no serious attention to either.

But it sounds an awful lot the more i read your posts that you're playing victim cards for republicans. Calling out the entire MSM without including the republican shill doesn't really help.

 

Fine, let's look at your silly video...

Talk to your neighbors, argue aggressively with people to correct their misconceptions about who he is.

You've probably got your panties bunched about "get in their faces" and "argue with them" but one thing is that argument is not a bad thing, and in the context of what he was saying it's pretty obvious that when he says "get in their face" he means to be aggressive, not to push them around.

In any case, you continue to ignore that neither what he suggested to his supporters during a presidential election nor a typical street protest are anything even in the same league as going to a public meeting and trying to filibuster it to death.

If you are in college and you think these things are EXACTLY THE SAME, then I feel sorry for the university you named before. I wouldn't want the free press.

Hey, I'm glad you've finally joined the rest of us who aren't republican shills in not liking it so much when we're getting smeared. Where were you when you weren't one of us?

Wait. Do you come here just so you can find pot smokers to argue with because you think they're all a bunch of hippie faggot communists or something?

I'm not so sure, but I don't pay attention. My point was that if they are even competing then you can't exclude them when you're talking about MAINSTREAM media. My channel is watched by so many more people than those other MAINSTREAM channels... how dumb does that sound to you?

 

In this case things ARE different because the situations ARE different. I notice you clipped that out and ignored it. Another warning sign that you are wasting our time.

I've explained my position clearly and in simple language. Your failure - or more likely REFUSAL - to acknowledge or understand, is not cause for you to play the victim card. You're actually kind of making a mockery of some decent points by doing that.

You've pretty much failed at everything except producing studies (that I knew existed) showing an alleged leftist bias. Of course, the slant isn't the point - the BIAS is. You don't seem to care, you just go right on believing in some kind of left-wing media conspiracy when the facts on the groud really point more to a corporate media conspiracy (makes a lot more sense from a business POV anyway). So you succeed technically, but you fail on style.

Everything else has been bluster, ignored my positions, or presented logical fallacies. Again, bad form.

May I suggest an elective for you? Basic Reasoning. sign up.

No, I'm sorry, I don't. And you're ignoring the point. To you, mainstream media is all media that isn't a conservative shill. That seems to be what you just said. All I've said is you can't talk about mainstream and not include shit like FNC. That's like talking about mainstream sports and not including the NFL.

 

One more time for the dumb:
I'm okay with protests (street protests).
I'm okay aggressive campaigning (acting to make the case or spread a message).
I'm not okay with abusive campaigning (intimidating, assaulting, etc).
I'm not okay with disrupting public events such that they can't serve their function.

There are no double standards in these statements, because there are no qualifiers for specific groups of people reserving them special rights within those statements. That's what a double standard is, and it doesn't exist above. You desperately want it to, but it doesn't.

Liberals shout shit at events and get removed, as they should. Guess what? That's disrupting a public event and I'm not down with that. I'm not down with it because I'm not down with doing that, not because I dislike a party.

That's just not the case (ok MSNBC since november). Not sucking the republican teat is not the same as shilling for democrats, sorry.

I might be wrong but I feel like my position on the matter is reasonable and logical, and therefore I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of people feel the same way as me. Hell, it might even be some kind of socially accepted etiquette or something.

Many of the times they actually did report protests against Bush, they always focused on the negative such as anarchists who aren't even leftists or violence of some kind. Of course, I'm a mature adult and I never considered that to mean the entire media was biased.

As for showing you anything, you've already convinced me that any time I spent trying to satisfy you would be wasted so you can forget about that.

 

Hahaha.

Obama's media huh? Okay maybe MSNBC, but not PBS, C-SPAN, Lou Dobbs or CNN.

Fox? Ah no.

This time in Bush's first term, all they were covering about him was about how much brush and wood he cut in the backyard of his Texas ranch that day...

 

Congratulations on reaching the limits of my patience.

Regardless of your spam, it doesn't change things I have observed with my own senses. End of discussion.

 

The fact that ANY news media is shilling for either side IS the problem here. The people of this country have forgotten how to be objective. There is the left news and the right news (if it's even news at all...3 weeks of Michael Jackson news anyone?) and somewhere in between is the real truth of a situation . By watching news from any shill source (including subversives like Alex Jones) the people of this country are being constantly fed their daily dose of moral outrage and talking points so that they don't have to think for themselves.

 

Finally, some insight in this thread. kudos

 

There is nothing legitimate what so ever about the American media and it has been this way for as long as I have been watching the news.

Their job is to guide and control the opinions of the masses and Boxer just admitted it.

During the Clinton impeachment it was the same crap.

Listen people, they are playing good cop - bad cop, thesis - antithesis - synthesis.

Fox plays the part of the right because someone has to, and the others play the opposition.

They are ALL shills, shames, frauds and liars.

 

ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN and MSNBC equals State Run Media

 

QFT. All the media is there to do is tell us what they want us to know.

 

Lobbyists are everywhere! Beware!!!

America has no one to blame for it's insatiable appetite for bullshit, but itself.

The truth is that Bush was a giant asshole, and was probably about to cause a civil war in America. He should be in prison right now, giving Jack Madoff some head.

It sounds like his fascist supporters are still trying to start the war.

Should fascists not be countered by their own propaganda techniques?

It's funny how some people hide their true colors, and some wear them openly.

The civil war option is apparently fading rapidly, thusly, we see the increase in hysterical misinformation about healthcare, and incriminating thread titles on marijuana websites, designed to spur unrest in even the most unlikely of all zones.

Go righties!!! Rebels with a Curse!