Someone Please Explain the Palin Hatred!

[Bishop Hedd]

Check how many times you've posted in this thread compared to me, and then tell me who's obsessing.

'tween maalox, la bills, tommy boy et al the far right here seems to have a thing for Levi's "Johnston".

[DC Tom]

'tween maalox, la bills, tommy boy et al the far right here seems to have a thing for Levi's "Johnston".

 

A third of your posts over the past year have been about Palin, meathead.

[Magox]

No, no, no, no...It's Bishop Hedd who obsesses over Sarah Palin. Joe's got issues, yes...just not that particular one.

you're right, but it's still funny how AP assigns 11 reporters to Fact Check Sarah's book and only 2 for Health Care.

[DC Tom]

you're right, but it's still funny how AP assigns 11 reporters to Fact Check Sarah's book and only 2 for Health Care.

 

They're reporters. Coloring books are more at their level.

[/dev/null]

They're reporters. Coloring books are more at their level.

And it takes 11 of them to find Waldo

[IDBillzFan]

They're reporters. Coloring books are more at their level.

Unless they're sports writers.

[Magox]

They're reporters. Coloring books are more at their level.

The credibility of AP as a 'news agency' just went down another notch. When you have something as important as Health Care Reform and you only assign 2 reporters to cover the debate (btw, where are the Fact Checkers on all the liberals false claims?), which will have a huge impact on this country, and then decide to expend 11 reporters towards Fact Checking Palin's book, then it clearly shows that the AP has a liberal agenda.

[The Big Cat]

The credibility of AP as a 'news agency' just went down another notch. When you have something as important as Health Care Reform and you only assign 2 reporters to cover the debate (btw, where are the Fact Checkers on all the liberals false claims?), which will have a huge impact on this country, and then decide to expend 11 reporters towards Fact Checking Palin's book, then it clearly shows that the AP has a liberal agenda.

 

Or it shows that they wanted to fact check her book while it was still relevant, i.e. within the first five days it hits the shelves. They have more time to comb through the health care nonsense.

 

The AP does not have a liberal agenda.

[Magox]

The AP does not have a liberal agenda.

[The Big Cat]

 

Alright, let's do this.

 

What's a "liberal agenda?" Prove it to me.

[Magox]

Alright, let's do this.

 

What's a "liberal agenda?" Prove it to me.

I just did, with this: The credibility of AP as a 'news agency' just went down another notch. When you have something as important as Health Care Reform and you only assign 2 reporters to cover the debate (btw, where are the Fact Checkers on all the liberals false claims?), which will have a huge impact on this country, and then decide to expend 11 reporters towards Fact Checking Palin's book, then it clearly shows that the AP has a liberal agenda.

 

Now if you dont see that as a clear liberal bias, then you truly are an idiot or a partisan shill, which is it?

[The Big Cat]

I just did, with this: The credibility of AP as a 'news agency' just went down another notch. When you have something as important as Health Care Reform and you only assign 2 reporters to cover the debate (btw, where are the Fact Checkers on all the liberals false claims?), which will have a huge impact on this country, and then decide to expend 11 reporters towards Fact Checking Palin's book, then it clearly shows that the AP has a liberal agenda.

 

Now if you dont see that as a clear liberal bias, then you truly are an idiot or a partisan shill, which is it?

 

Yeah, i read your opinion the first time you posted it. Then I offered an explanation as to why they assigned who they did.

 

But you know for certain this kind of manpower discrepancy exists only when a conservative icon like Palin writes a book? That's what makes this act a part of a "liberal agenda." This is not at all like when they devote fact checkers to Michael Moore's work, right?

 

I'm sure you're also taking into account the popularity of Palin stories (when they're relevant (and that door is closing fast)) and the importance of producing a marketable product in the bleak landscape that is modern journalism?

[Magox]

Yeah, i read your opinion the first time you posted it. Then I offered an explanation as to why they assigned who they did.

 

But you know for certain this kind of manpower discrepancy exists only when a conservative icon like Palin writes a book? That's what makes this act a part of a "liberal agenda." This is not at all like when they devote fact checkers to Michael Moore's work, right?

 

I'm sure you're also taking into account the popularity of Palin stories (when they're relevant (and that door is closing fast)) and the importance of producing a marketable product in the bleak landscape that is modern journalism?

So what you're saying is that you are a partisan shill.

 

Got it

[The Big Cat]

So what you're saying is that you are a partisan shill.

 

Got it

 

Ah, I now see your point. Eloquently made, as usual.

[DC Tom]

Or it shows that they wanted to fact check her book while it was still relevant, i.e. within the first five days it hits the shelves. They have more time to comb through the health care nonsense.

 

The AP does not have a liberal agenda.

 

Most "liberal news agencies" don't have a "liberal agenda"...they're just staffed with a large majority of people who lean liberal, through virtue of the fact that the industry by nature tends to be more attractive to idealists, who themselves are far more likely to be liberal.

 

It's not an "agenda" nearly as much as it is representative of companies that are homogenous in attitude and belief, and have little in the way of internal references or self-checks for any other kind of opinion.

[The Big Cat]

Most "liberal news agencies" don't have a "liberal agenda"...they're just staffed with a large majority of people who lean liberal, through virtue of the fact that the industry by nature tends to be more attractive to idealists, who themselves are far more likely to be liberal.

 

It's not an "agenda" nearly as much as it is representative of companies that are homogenous in attitude and belief, and have little in the way of internal references or self-checks for any other kind of opinion.

 

Alright, on a related, but tangential note:

 

Would you say that folks who are "liberal leaning" have a world-view that is boxed in by their ideology? Or are liberals more likely to have a world-view that is not only subject to change, but also divergent from other "liberal-leaning" people?

[3rdnlng]

Alright, on a related, but tangential note:

 

Would you say that folks who are "liberal leaning" have a world-view that is boxed in by their ideology? Or are liberals more likely to have a world-view that is not only subject to change, but also divergent from other "liberal-leaning" people?

 

 

From my experience, I would say that most liberals don't think outside their boxed-in ideology. They refuse to actually listen to opposing views while practicing the art of being obtuse. They rarely state facts to back up their opinions but dress up their statements with a lot of Obama sounding fluff.

[Gene Frenkle]

From my experience, I would say that most liberals don't think outside their boxed-in ideology. They refuse to actually listen to opposing views while practicing the art of being obtuse. They rarely state facts to back up their opinions but dress up their statements with a lot of Obama sounding fluff.

[DC Tom]

Alright, on a related, but tangential note:

 

Would you say that folks who are "liberal leaning" have a world-view that is boxed in by their ideology? Or are liberals more likely to have a world-view that is not only subject to change, but also divergent from other "liberal-leaning" people?

 

Nevermind "liberal"...Typically, I find that most people who hold to any ideology have opinions that are in by that ideology, end of story. The second-hardest thing in the world is to question one's own assumptions - the hardest is to identify them in the first place.

 

I could give plenty of real-world examples from my own experience (hell, my own family - a large, diverse, and not always intelligent bunch. My mother, for example, takes everything Bill O'Reilly says as gospel). But one need not look any further than the current top five topics on this board - Hedd's mindless Palin-bashing, billsfan4life's unabashed jingoism, a global warming thread that is almost entirely dogmatic... The big difference between this board and reality, though, is that in reality people tend to seek out and associate with like-minded people, so find their intellectual prejudices reinforced at every turn rather than questioned.

 

 

EDIT:

From my experience, I would say that most liberals don't think outside their boxed-in ideology. They refuse to actually listen to opposing views while practicing the art of being obtuse. They rarely state facts to back up their opinions but dress up their statements with a lot of Obama sounding fluff.

 

 

Cases in point...

[3rdnlng]

 

Intelligent and well thought out response.