Remember folks, Fox Sports and Fox News are 2 different entities...so please, watch the NFL on FOX so I can keep my job :D
Also be sure to catch FSN's Final Score!! Check your local listings.
lex400sc
quote:
Originally posted by Electrophile http://newsbusters.org/taxonomy/term/185 <-This website is such . The motto says it all, "Exposing and Combating Liberal Media Bias". I love the first story about Olbermann being "terrified" by an anthrax package. Apparently the "Newsbusters" believe that when a high profile citizen recieves a package with a white powder and a threatening note he/she does not have the right to panick or call 911.
The whole website appears to be run by Fox news as it constantly refers to ratings and time slots. Why think for yourself when Fox can think for you!
"Conservative Intellectual" is an oxymoron
hah, i didn't even click on dude's links. all you need to read is his post where he goes ape insane over someone in the media doing their job and scrutinizing the centers of power to know he's just another bush lap dog...
|Thrax|
SCRUFFY! YOU'RE ALIVE!!!!!!!!!!!!
sponger
the funny part of the "anthrax scare" was this
quote:
"An NYPD HazMat unit rushed to Olbermann's pad on Central Park South, but preliminary tests indicated the substance was harmless soap powder.However, that wasn't enough to satisfy Olbermann, who insisted on a checkup. "
but that is not the issue, him calling Wallace a "monkey" and ranting on about other BS like Clinton "trying" is the issue! Theres plenty of evidence of Clinton missing an opportunity to get UBL as i gave a link to one, so Wallace had every right to ask. He should of told Clinton not to touch him also. Olbermann is a moron, thats why noone watches his show. And if that website is bull then so are ones from the other side such as mediamatters and newshounds.us, right?
quote:
Why think for yourself when Fox can think for you
could say the same thing about every media outlet
sponger
quote:
Originally posted by lex400sc
hah, i didn't even click on dude's links. all you need to read is his post where he goes ape insane over someone in the media doing their job and scrutinizing the centers of power to know he's just another bush lap dog...
hey moron, wasnt Wallace doing the same thing? Olbermann is the one that was going ape over "someone in the media doing their job and scrutinizing the (former) centers of power".
great posts dude! :rolleyes:
Clovis86
quote:
Originally posted by sponger
hey moron, wasnt Wallace doing the same thing? Olbermann is the one that was going ape over "someone in the media doing their job and scrutinizing the (former) centers of power".
great posts dude! :rolleyes:
CLINTON IS OUT OF OFFICE. CLINTON WAS NOT IN OFFICE ON 9/11/01. The only reason Wallace asked that question, is because Fox news is bent on making Clinton look bad, and along with the ABC docu-drama, re-write history so they can put the blame for 9/11 on Clinton, which is ing bull.
Olbermann isnt going ape, he's STATING THE OBVIOUS which most people in America with half a brain will agree with. As he said, no one had been blamed for 9/11 untill this documdrama crap that is completely misleading. Clinton has every right to stand up for himself, especially since, as he said, this discussion is irrelevant today. 9/11 happened. There were failures in our government, in our security systems that have been addressed by the 9/11 commission.
Osama Bin Laden currently has a get out of jail free card, living in Pakistan, where the local Taleban just signed a peace treaty with the military. You want to talk about failure to GET BIN LADEN? HOW ABOUT RIGHT ING NOW? What does Iraq have to do with 9/11? I'm surprised Saddam wasnt in ABC's film.
lex400sc
quote:
Originally posted by sponger
hey moron, wasnt Wallace doing the same thing? Olbermann is the one that was going ape over "someone in the media doing their job and scrutinizing the (former) centers of power".
great posts dude! :rolleyes:
starting off every post by calling people moron surely validates your posts as well. go wave a flag.
lex400sc
so clinton didn't get bin laden in 1998. in 1998 did anyone care about bin laden? did you? i love how the rightwingnuts ALWAYS point out 'the post 9/11 world is different' 'we're fighting a new war' 'in the aftermath of 9/11 blah blah blah' all kinds of lovely excuses for bush, but no one bothers retroactively applying that to pre-9/11. if clinton did go after bin laden back then, we'd have to hear people like sponger crying about liberal waste and wagging the dog
in the end the capture/killing of bin laden won't be felt as strongly as america believes it will. bin laden is such a small fish, at most he's a financier of terrorism. it's been neccessary to paint him up as this larger-than-life supervillian leader of some huge network of terror against the west so that we could persecute equally ambitious conflicts against the middle east.
sponger
quote:
Originally posted by Clovis86
CLINTON IS OUT OF OFFICE. CLINTON WAS NOT IN OFFICE ON 9/11/01. The only reason Wallace asked that question, is because Fox news is bent on making Clinton look bad, and along with the ABC docu-drama, re-write history so they can put the blame for 9/11 on Clinton, which is ing bull.
And so what that he was not in office?? if Bush took office on Sept 10 would that make him solely responsible for what happened on 9-11?? NO Point is that Clinton had a chance to take out UBL and didnt, and in that sense he bears some responsibility for 9-11! Rewrite history?? THeres plenty of evidence he didnt take opportunities to take out UBL so what the hell are you talkin about!? Just like there is evidence that the Bush administration didnt take warnings seriously enough. Both administrations bear some responsibility, although id blame Clinton more for not taking out UBL when he had the chance!!! Thats why he asked him the question, and Clinton got all mad and defensive cause he knows himself that its true! CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NBC, all try to make Bush look bad so dont complain about Fox doint it to Clinton! Again, Wallace asked a reasonable question that was brought up from the 9-11 docudrama!
quote:
Olbermann isnt going ape, he's STATING THE OBVIOUS which most people in America with half a brain will agree with.
That Wallace is a monkey?? He wasnt just stating, he pretty much was going ape.
quote:
As he said, no one had been blamed for 9/11 untill this documdrama crap that is completely misleading.
actually heres a link to a poll you might wanna look at.blame poll
quote:
Osama Bin Laden currently has a get out of jail free card, living in Pakistan, where the local Taleban just signed a peace treaty with the military. You want to talk about failure to GET BIN LADEN? HOW ABOUT RIGHT ING NOW? What does Iraq have to do with 9/11? I'm surprised Saddam wasnt in ABC's film.
Umm no he doesnt have a "get out of jail free card", atleast we have a coalition of militaries in afghanistan fighting the taliban and looking for UBL. Look im not gonna argue that Bush couldnt of done more to get him, but that wouldnt of prevented 9-11. The Bush adm. killed or captured more terrorist leaders than Clinton ever had! Facts are as Wallace pointed out, Clinton for sure could have taken UBL out and didnt, cant really compare that with not being able to find him or what happened at Tora Bora. All Clinton did was fire a couple cruise missiles and bomb an aspirin factory.
sponger
quote:
Originally posted by lex400sc
starting off every post by calling people moron surely validates your posts as well. go wave a flag.
atleast its based on something he said which i though was moronic.
cant say much about this post though
quote:
sand in your vagina much?
moron
sponger
quote:
Originally posted by lex400sc
so clinton didn't get bin laden in 1998. in 1998 did anyone care about bin laden? did you?
i certainly did, if you didnt then well, you are a moron.
"Bin Laden has been implicated in a string of deadly attacks on the United States and its allies: the 1993 World Trade Center bombing; the 1998 bombings at the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania that killed more than 200; and the 2000 bombing of the USS Cole in Yemen. Bin Laden also claims responsibility for a 1993 gunfight that killed 18 U.S. troops in Somalia and the 1996 bombing of the Khobar military complex in Saudi Arabia that left 19 U.S. soldiers dead." source: infoplease.com
quote:
if clinton did go after bin laden back then, we'd have to hear people like sponger crying about liberal waste and wagging the dog
WTF?
quote:
in the end the capture/killing of bin laden won't be felt as strongly as america believes it will. bin laden is such a small fish, at most he's a financier of terrorism. it's been neccessary to paint him up as this larger-than-life supervillian leader of some huge network of terror against the west so that we could persecute equally ambitious conflicts against the middle east.
actually he has a lot of power due to his vast support, but he may even be dead now. Anyway isnt it Bush who said hes not worried so much about UBL, and liberals use that against him??
|Thrax|
Please run a grammer check on your posts so you don't look like a bigger moron then you already are.
I actually hate arguing and I am no right wing nutjob. I hover somewhere around a conservative liberal.
But even I can see you are making a complete and utter fool out of yourself.
How about we just take this to the politics forum where a thousand other more educated people will rip you and your statements to pieces.
*breathes*
The point in every administation makes mistakes and some are crazier then others on how they go about running their own agenda (websters: see Bush administation) but spouting off your mouth and personally attacking an individual that does not share your idealistic views is not the way a proper debate is supposed to be fought, it's more like an eight year old jumping up and down in the middle of the supermarket.
Clinton was a decent president, everything seemed to run smoothly. Did we know that TEH TERRARISTS were coming for us, probably, maybe are all terms that we can call irrevalent to the current state of the nation.
We need to stop living in the past and throwing blame around, it just makes them look very foolish because everything comes around.
