• Hello!

    Either you have not registered on this site yet, or you are registered but have not logged in. In either case, you will not be able to use the full functionality of this site until you have registered, and then logged in after your registration has been approved.

    Registration is FREE, so please register so you can participate instead of remaining a lurker....

    Please be certain that the location field is correctly filled out when you register. All registrations that appear to be bogus will be rejected. Which means that if your location field does NOT match the actual location of your registration IP address, then your registration will be rejected.

    Sorry about the strictness of this requirement, but it is necessary to block spammers and scammers at the door as much as possible.

Racism Instigation

I think the main problem (at least my main problem) with 'news' networks is bias, bias, and bias. They are all so biased!. They are no longer reporting news, they are making news to fit their biased agenda by means of spinning (no spin zone my butt!), twisting, half truths, out-of-context quotes and videos, etc...

I can very much understand calling FOX news "entertainment" rather than "news". But I don't think FOX has a monopoly on bias....where FOX is clearly biased towards the right, MSNBC is clearly biased toward the left. I like Rachel Maddow and I used to listen to her back during the Air America days, but she is biased too. And Fox and MSNBC aren't the only ones either.

This isn't news anymore, it's propaganda.

No wonder Americas political opinions seem so polarized! Mind you, I think it's better than Canada's situation, apathy. And I mean that in an overall sense, there are people with strong views but you don't really see the hardcore political threads on Canadian boards like you do the American ones.

Unless there is a reptile ban going on, then we hate on whoever is proposing it.
 
Don't assume anything about me charlie1, and your second question is just silly. Everyone by now knows the story is false, but YES, I've watched the entire video. Here it is:
 
... Tsst - Yes, call it opinion shows, but that doesn't change the fact that they are talking about the news of the day/moment. In the case of liberal media (Colbert, Maddow, etc) any information and investigation added to the news can be double checked for veracity. As for their opinions, that's just that... their opinions, which I can filter out myself while still keeping the factual information. ...
You can't really be that naive about the media (liberal or conservative) can you? Let's take your video from the OP. Ms Maddow shows some 50 year old videos of segregationists and talks about wielding axe handles in an attempt to draw a parallel to a 20 year old video about racial job quotas in an attempt to draw a parallel to today's conservative white populous. Add in her polar opposites with a video from Rush and Beck so her league of followers know for sure she is right because anything anti-theotherside has to be right. Her most prominent statement (repeated more times than I was willing to count) was look out white America the black people are coming to get you.

Out of the 12 mins of my life spent watching it she gave maybe 15 seconds of factual data. So she splashed in 15 secs of facts mixed with about 11 mins and 45 secs of, what could only be described as fitting your thread title perfectly, racism instigation.

She may not have come out and said all white republicans are racists but her inference was just as strong as Beck shouting dems are reverse racists. If you missed her attempt your 'filters' may be deceiving you. :shrugs:

...So if we are supposed to name TV entertainment properly, what should FoxNEWS be called? :uhoh:

My point is that the name of the program should not matter that much.
...
I, like Wade, watch little news on TV but when I do watch I segue from one to the other to get a balance. But speaking of Fox in particular, when watching I see local folks here in northeast Ohio that report facts, sports and weather both local and national. Most have not always been just on Fox but previously on NBC or CBS or ABC. Most have been part of the local news teams for decades and are trusted. :spinner:
 
Actually, I haven't even watched the videos. I'm making more of a point along the lines of those two articles I linked about how people will believe what they already believe, even when presented with other evidence. Congrats, you're a sheeple too now.

thank you for elucidating your nonpoint.

An interesting ditty you have not heard of about the wonderful journalism being done by our fine national media:

http://dailycaller.com/2010/07/20/documents-show-media-plotting-to-kill-stories-about-rev-jeremiah-wright/
 
JP I kind of see you doing what you accused other of earlier in this thread. You seem to think that people who agree with you are speaking the truth and all others have been brainwashed by Fox News. Frankly, you are starting to sound a lot like Chris.
 
Don't assume anything about me charlie1, and your second question is just silly. Everyone by now knows the story is false, but YES, I've watched the entire video. Here it is:

You are right but it is used as an example to show how racist the right is and to discredit so called right wing news sources in their entirety. Truth is not the issue in Maddow's report. I am so glad we are now so post racial and all.:)
 
I find brilliant how Maddow links past and present. Aren't we supposed to learn with our mistakes? Perhaps filters differ from person to person, but I didn't find she was instigating racism. In my opinion she was pointing out the fact Fox News used race in a false story. She repeated "look out white America the black people are coming to get you" over and over again (perhaps a little too many times) but that had the purpose to highlight what Fox News was trying to do when they aired the short clip of Sherrod's video.

For me 15 seconds of factual data is more worth than 20 minutes of pure fiction (putting it nicely).

And I hear what you say about the local Fox News. This may surprise you, but I watch my local Fox News every weekday morning. I guess the liberal Californian anchors are not so bad. ;)
 
JP I kind of see you doing what you accused other of earlier in this thread. You seem to think that people who agree with you are speaking the truth and all others have been brainwashed by Fox News. Frankly, you are starting to sound a lot like Chris.

I don't see how you got to this conclusion but you are entitled to your opinion. I am not accusing people of being brainwashed by Fox News and maybe the last part of my post to Tsst will make that a little more clear to you.

Try to stick to the OP Wade... save the jabs. :cheers:
 
I find brilliant how Maddow links past and present. Aren't we supposed to learn with our mistakes? Perhaps filters differ from person to person, but I didn't find she was instigating racism. In my opinion she was pointing out the fact Fox News used race in a false story. She repeated "look out white America the black people are coming to get you" over and over again (perhaps a little too many times) but that had the purpose to highlight what Fox News was trying to do when they aired the short clip of Sherrod's video.

For me 15 seconds of factual data is more worth than 20 minutes of pure fiction (putting it nicely).

And along those lines a few gems from Joseph Goebbels:

“The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly - it must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over”

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”
 
You can't really be that naive about the media (liberal or conservative) can you? Let's take your video from the OP. Ms Maddow shows some 50 year old videos of segregationists and talks about wielding axe handles in an attempt to draw a parallel to a 20 year old video about racial job quotas in an attempt to draw a parallel to today's conservative white populous. Add in her polar opposites with a video from Rush and Beck so her league of followers know for sure she is right because anything anti-theotherside has to be right. Her most prominent statement (repeated more times than I was willing to count) was look out white America the black people are coming to get you.

Out of the 12 mins of my life spent watching it she gave maybe 15 seconds of factual data. So she splashed in 15 secs of facts mixed with about 11 mins and 45 secs of, what could only be described as fitting your thread title perfectly, racism instigation.

She may not have come out and said all white republicans are racists but her inference was just as strong as Beck shouting dems are reverse racists. If you missed her attempt your 'filters' may be deceiving you. :shrugs:

TSST: your analysis is dead on. You have the now almost extinct capability to think critically.
 
And along those lines a few gems from Joseph Goebbels:

Let's see... what are some common ones of the lies big enough... I know! "Show us the Birth Certificate!"
"Weapons of Mass Destruction!"
"Homosexual Marriage will destroy families!"
 
Help my out JP, where did I leave the topic? You mean the part where I didn't agree with you?

All snark aside, I'd say the part where you compare JP to someone you obviously don't get along with. For just once... just *once* I'd like to see you truthfully, and thoughtfully, contribute to a topic like this one rather than throw around veiled and sometimes not-so-veiled insults. You're an intelligent guy. I'd like a chance to actually *see* that intellect be used constructively.
 
Help my out JP, where did I leave the topic? You mean the part where I didn't agree with you?

I don't mind you don't agree with me Wade. I don't expect you to. We have such different lives.

I am not disrespecting you or your opinion. I've told you before in a different thread that I do "this" because I like debates.

So, regarding your question, the OP implies that the media should check the veracity of the information that they broadcast (maybe you are having trouble reading through it because you don't agree with me everywhere else? :shrugs:).
 
Let's see... what are some common ones of the lies big enough... I know!
"Weapons of Mass Destruction!"

I could not agree more about those lying liars and their lies:

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." -- From a letter signed by Joe Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Milulski, Tom Daschle, & John Kerry among others on October 9, 1998

"This December will mark three years since United Nations inspectors last visited Iraq. There is no doubt that since that time, Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to refine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer- range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." -- From a December 6, 2001 letter signed by Bob Graham, Joe Lieberman, Harold Ford, & Tom Lantos among others

"Whereas Iraq has consistently breached its cease-fire agreement between Iraq and the United States, entered into on March 3, 1991, by failing to dismantle its weapons of mass destruction program, and refusing to permit monitoring and verification by United Nations inspections; Whereas Iraq has developed weapons of mass destruction, including chemical and biological capabilities, and has made positive progress toward developing nuclear weapons capabilities" -- From a joint resolution submitted by Tom Harkin and Arlen Specter on July 18, 2002

"Saddam's goal ... is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed." -- Madeline Albright, 1998

"(Saddam) will rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and some day, some way, I am certain he will use that arsenal again, as he has 10 times since 1983" -- National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, Feb 18, 1998

"Iraq made commitments after the Gulf War to completely dismantle all weapons of mass destruction, and unfortunately, Iraq has not lived up to its agreement." -- Barbara Boxer, November 8, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retained some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capability. Intelligence reports also indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons, but has not yet achieved nuclear capability." -- Robert Byrd, October 2002

"There's no question that Saddam Hussein is a threat... Yes, he has chemical and biological weapons. He's had those for a long time. But the United States right now is on a very much different defensive posture than we were before September 11th of 2001... He is, as far as we know, actively pursuing nuclear capabilities, though he doesn't have nuclear warheads yet. If he were to acquire nuclear weapons, I think our friends in the region would face greatly increased risks as would we." -- Wesley Clark on September 26, 2002

"What is at stake is how to answer the potential threat Iraq represents with the risk of proliferation of WMD. Baghdad's regime did use such weapons in the past. Today, a number of evidences may lead to think that, over the past four years, in the absence of international inspectors, this country has continued armament programs." -- Jacques Chirac, October 16, 2002

"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow." -- Bill Clinton in 1998

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security." -- Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002

"I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons...I saw evidence back in 1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those trucks out." -- Clinton's Secretary of Defense William Cohen in April of 2003

"Iraq is not the only nation in the world to possess weapons of mass destruction, but it is the only nation with a leader who has used them against his own people." -- Tom Daschle in 1998

"Saddam Hussein's regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal." -- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

"The debate over Iraq is not about politics. It is about national security. It should be clear that our national security requires Congress to send a clear message to Iraq and the world: America is united in its determination to eliminate forever the threat of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction." -- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

"I share the administration's goals in dealing with Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction." -- Dick Gephardt in September of 2002

"Iraq does pose a serious threat to the stability of the Persian Gulf and we should organize an international coalition to eliminate his access to weapons of mass destruction. Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." -- Al Gore, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." -- Bob Graham, December 2002

"Saddam Hussein is not the only deranged dictator who is willing to deprive his people in order to acquire weapons of mass destruction." -- Jim Jeffords, October 8, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." -- Ted Kennedy, September 27, 2002

"There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein's regime is a serious danger, that he is a tyrant, and that his pursuit of lethal weapons of mass destruction cannot be tolerated. He must be disarmed." -- Ted Kennedy, Sept 27, 2002

"I will be voting to give the president of the United States the authority to use force - if necessary - to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." -- John F. Kerry, Oct 2002

"The threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but as I said, it is not new. It has been with us since the end of that war, and particularly in the last 4 years we know after Operation Desert Fox failed to force him to reaccept them, that he has continued to build those weapons. He has had a free hand for 4 years to reconstitute these weapons, allowing the world, during the interval, to lose the focus we had on weapons of mass destruction and the issue of proliferation." -- John Kerry, October 9, 2002

"(W)e need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime. We all know the litany of his offenses. He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. ...And now he is miscalculating America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction. That is why the world, through the United Nations Security Council, has spoken with one voice, demanding that Iraq disclose its weapons programs and disarm. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but it is not new. It has been with us since the end of the Persian Gulf War." -- John Kerry, Jan 23, 2003

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandates of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." -- Carl Levin, Sept 19, 2002

"Every day Saddam remains in power with chemical weapons, biological weapons, and the development of nuclear weapons is a day of danger for the United States." -- Joe Lieberman, August, 2002

"Over the years, Iraq has worked to develop nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. During 1991 - 1994, despite Iraq's denials, U.N. inspectors discovered and dismantled a large network of nuclear facilities that Iraq was using to develop nuclear weapons. Various reports indicate that Iraq is still actively pursuing nuclear weapons capability. There is no reason to think otherwise. Beyond nuclear weapons, Iraq has actively pursued biological and chemical weapons.U.N. inspectors have said that Iraq's claims about biological weapons is neither credible nor verifiable. In 1986, Iraq used chemical weapons against Iran, and later, against its own Kurdish population. While weapons inspections have been successful in the past, there have been no inspections since the end of 1998. There can be no doubt that Iraq has continued to pursue its goal of obtaining weapons of mass destruction." -- Patty Murray, October 9, 2002

"As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." -- Nancy Pelosi, December 16, 1998

"Even today, Iraq is not nearly disarmed. Based on highly credible intelligence, UNSCOM [the U.N. weapons inspectors] suspects that Iraq still has biological agents like anthrax, botulinum toxin, and clostridium perfringens in sufficient quantity to fill several dozen bombs and ballistic missile warheads, as well as the means to continue manufacturing these deadly agents. Iraq probably retains several tons of the highly toxic VX substance, as well as sarin nerve gas and mustard gas. This agent is stored in artillery shells, bombs, and ballistic missile warheads. And Iraq retains significant dual-use industrial infrastructure that can be used to rapidly reconstitute large-scale chemical weapons production." -- Ex-Un Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter in 1998

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years. And that may happen sooner if he can obtain access to enriched uranium from foreign sources -- something that is not that difficult in the current world. We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." -- John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002

"Saddam’s existing biological and chemical weapons capabilities pose a very real threat to America, now. Saddam has used chemical weapons before, both against Iraq’s enemies and against his own people. He is working to develop delivery systems like missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles that could bring these deadly weapons against U.S. forces and U.S. facilities in the Middle East." -- John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002

"Whether one agrees or disagrees with the Administration’s policy towards Iraq, I don’t think there can be any question about Saddam’s conduct. He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do. He lies and cheats; he snubs the mandate and authority of international weapons inspectors; and he games the system to keep buying time against enforcement of the just and legitimate demands of the United Nations, the Security Council, the United States and our allies. Those are simply the facts." -- Henry Waxman, Oct 10, 2002
:uhoh:
 
Let's see... what are some common ones of the lies big enough... I know! "Show us the Birth Certificate!"
"Weapons of Mass Destruction!"
"Homosexual Marriage will destroy families!"

Also have to add I: Homosexuals will not destroy families because heteros have already done that. You guys like that birth certificate stuff you should not be so fixated on it it is a diversionary tactic of the right.
 
Also have to add I: Homosexuals will not destroy families because heteros have already done that. You guys like that birth certificate stuff you should not be so fixated on it it is a diversionary tactic of the right.

Charlie, there are people out there who truly, honestly believe that Obama's real birth certificate is in Kenya. That the one shown them from Hawaii is a fake. Once again leading back to those articles. Everyone has biases. It's why I tend to get my news from my housemate who is editor of a little local paper and despises anything other than straight facts.
 
All snark aside, I'd say the part where you compare JP to someone you obviously don't get along with. For just once... just *once* I'd like to see you truthfully, and thoughtfully, contribute to a topic like this one rather than throw around veiled and sometimes not-so-veiled insults. You're an intelligent guy. I'd like a chance to actually *see* that intellect be used constructively.


You are absolutely correct. I agree 100%. I am sorry. I don't know where my snakry attitude comes from, I didn't use to be this way. Thank you for pointing that out to me.
 
I think everyone may be missing something -- news media are PROFIT-DRIVEN. Whatever gets them viewers/listeners/readers is going to improve their AD REVENUE which is how they make money.

So apparently demagoguery & bias WORK to attract the US population to consume the media outputs, whether that's right-wing bias or left-wing bias.

There is an answer -- educate people to seek out less biased sources of media information. Educate them to demand that the media label opinion as opinion and try to present the facts in as unbiased a fashion as possible SEPARATE from the expression of unbridled opinion. If we all did that we'd get a lot more useful information & be able to sort out information from opinion.
 
Charlie, there are people out there who truly, honestly believe that Obama's real birth certificate is in Kenya. That the one shown them from Hawaii is a fake. Once again leading back to those articles. Everyone has biases. It's why I tend to get my news from my housemate who is editor of a little local paper and despises anything other than straight facts.

and some people believe the earth is flat, the moon landing was a scam, Bush blew up the levies in NO and that tea party supporters and conservatives are intolerant racist homophobes because they dont like confiscatory taxation. I am sick of the labels. We can talk all we want about inciting racism. But once just once I would like a liberal that spews racism and other vitriol to avoid honest debate to stop and think just for a minute that their rhetoric might be inciting people who do not like being labeled as something they are not. Some of us are tired of the never ending attacks on religion, family, morals, individual liberty, profit, wealth and an honest days work. It is neither multi cultural or tolerant to attack people who do not share the views of the power elites or the popular mob. These politicians of all parties and ilk--including their propaganda machines in the msm--do not have our best interest at heart and they revel in the dissent they sow.
 
Back
Top