I will never forget a conversation I had with an organizer with the anti-war protest in Los Angeles. He tells me out one side of his mouth that they are against war, but 5 minutes later defended a bloody revolution within America by the communists and socialists.

This is who Donahue is in bed with.

:D

. . .and the too strange to be funny part of it is, Seattle actually does police the garbage. They actually fine you if you are throwing away recyclables. :eek: Tho' they haven't started to torch anyones home over it . . .yet.

( luckly, I live on an island just outside of Seattle.)

Oh, and Shaun, I get that you were making a counter-point; Saddam hates recyclables. ;)

It's bush who hates recyclables i thought. and big government.

Okay, you're losing me again.

So you weren't making an anaology about over reaction to Iraq?

oye . . i need a sammich .. . I'm going over to the newest "lets talk about me - c_c" thread.

I just had a honey peanut butter and cherry preserves on russian honey wheat. and some milk. and some chips and guacomole I made the other day. I'm stuffed.

Car house girl butt snake I'm wheat they I poison dog nerd apple drink Vegas pelican Barney sugar bones liver wallet fireplace haircut judge tail bedroom flies grass blue.

Donahue should be wearing one of G9's dresses.

G9Shaun has a picture of himself prancing around in some G9 girl dolphin shorts...Same thing right?

I'm sure I do, but just to make sure, what's a dolphin short?

BTW, dresses are '07. We're just now launching watches, locker kits and belts this season, footwear, bed and bath next year... sheesh, let us breathe a little, we're doing the best we can.

you mean like at the present time when Republicans control every level of government?

Do you need an invitation to have your way? Maybe we should have brought over a nice apple pie when you took over to welcome you into power.

A more worthwhile mano a mano debate on this subject, between Christopher Hitchens and George Galloway, last Friday at Baruch College, part of a series between these two men.

And one even more revelatory of the ersatz pacifism, latent anti-semitism, crypto-fascism and very nasty fraudulence of very many on the far Left.


http://www.seixon.com/blog/archives/2005/09/galloway_vs_hit.html

as a European , i'm just amazed how a journalist ( that's whay O Reilly technically is ) can have such strong opinions and such bully tactics on television...

i can't imagine any news reporter or journalist anywhere on any eurpean television channel, trying such a thing, i even think a journalist would be booted if he did ... they are supposed to cover the news neutrally, not tell one version of what they think the news should be like

i'm not exactly sure how this works over here, as far as i can tell it's a mix of legislation designed to guarantee accurate news( or at least as accurate and objective as possible) and self regulation by the journalist professional organisations and the networks... but in my opinion it sort of works

sure they can ask sneeky questions , and try to pull some answers out of somebody they interview.... they can try to trick someone if they suspect something, they can try , but they can't actually argue the case of some theory or party or belief...

you might argue freedom of speech , but that's a personal thing , not a professional thing, just like a doctor is not allowed to disclose patient information , just like a priest does not tell anyone what you confessed

it's a responsibility that comes with the job

so as such , i can't understand the o'reily show, it seemingly fails on most counts of objectivity, and journalistic ethics... or maybe i'm missing something

I think O'Reilly is a tactless dolt, but he is NOT a new anchor. He has no stated or implied obligation to be objective. His show is classified as "news entertainment". We have lots of shows like that, from both the right and the left. They are not to be confused with news anchors.

Yes. You are missing something. It is not news. Ethics never figure into it. It is first and foremost ENTERTAINMENT. It is disguised slightly as information, but really it is entertainment...or info-tainment if you will.

Also, I read the European press pretty often. I have rarely seen more slanted reporting than that in The Guardian or The Sun. Tabloidic to be sure, but surely the "News as Entertainment" game gets played on both sides of the Atlantic.

This is a natural outgrowth of the many competing channels from which people can derive their information. 25 years ago, there was no internet at there were a mere 13 channels on the TV. You got one local paper and maybe a national paper and a few news magazines....and of course radio

Now, with the 90+ channels on TV, satellite radio and the vast expanse of the internet, all the conventional new sources have to compete much harder for viewers and subscribers. That means sensationalism. That means headlines in 70pt font. That means meaningless diatribes like Donahue and O'Reilly. They have to literally SCREAM for attention.

OMG, O'Rielly is a tool.

Angry, loud, accusational, self righteous, finger-pointing, shaming.

"You have no clue how to fight a war..." !!!!
"Don't you go there...." !!!!
"I'll boot you off..." !!!!

What an ass.

I would have a beer with D any day of the week, he likes O'Rielly more than O'Rielly likes O'Rielly! What a pro.

With that said, Donahue ain't bad, but he's no Gore Vidal.

Bill lost it a bit...never been a big fan of him, but I understand his emotional reaction when the "anti-war" movement is simply anti-Americanism in tye-dye:

NationalReview

Something the left-wing advocacy press (read mainstream media) seems to conveniently overlook.

Mul, you can't look deeper into their motives, contributors, or connections unless it is to attack a rightwing organization.

I mean, come on. NationalReview :rolleyes:


:D

I thought "Billy's" (hehe - no doubt deliberate) list of things wrong with the war was interesting. All that was really left was "we must stay the course to stop terrorism".

Since most opponents of the war don't think staying the course stops terrorism, it doesn't seem to be a strong arguing point.

Capitulation and passivism has proven itself ineffective Cam...In fact, according to Osama's critique of Clinton's America, it made us a prime target.

The alternative to 'staying the course' is what, exactly?

- leave and they fall into total anarchy, get taken over by terrorists, al Qaeda has a new home, they win
- commit more troops - more angry leftists (and Donahues) mad that we're "sending more boys to die"
- stay the course, continue making small amounts of progress, which will end up with a stable Iraq, hopefully.