FoxNews.com Screws Over Obama Story [Pic]

Submitted by: []D(())(()) 6 years ago in

Hey Fox News, we get it, you f"ing hate Obama, but c"mon, even we think this is completely retarded, even for you.
There are 275 comments:
Male 1,106
You can find these kind of misleading headlines on every other supposedly neutral news organizations out there... most of which make conservatives look bad.
0
Reply
Male 313
@davymid [quote"> I would just like to point out that the most rabidly anti-liberal, Bush/Palin supporting, Teabagging mouthpieces on IAB that keep telling us to "keep drinking the kool-aid", are almost exclusively 40+, or 50+. They`ve had their day. Give it time.

Liberalism is called "Progressive" for a reason. These old dinosaurs will be extinct soon enough. [/quote"> lol that was funny stuff .... it`s called wisdom and experience. You Have Much to Learn, My Young Padawan. Much.

I was a teenager in the 60`s and looked at life a lot different then. I see it through different bifocals now.
0
Reply
Male 15,832
[quote]I REALLY hope the teabaggers win. They will so royally drat up this country it will probably be the final nail in the coffin.[/quote]
Funny, I almost voted for Obama for this exact same reason. I figured he and the Pelosi-Reid congress would f*ck things up so bad that the Democrats would be in utter disgrace for two generations. It looks like my wish is coming true better than I ever could have dreamed.

However, if the Republicans take over and f*ck up the way they did the last time -- trying to "get along" by enacting a bunch of liberal crap like Medicare Part D and NCLB -- we`d better start stocking up on canned goods and ammo.
0
Reply
Male 15,832
[quote]But I do believe there have to be some restrictions on smoking. Hospitals for example.[/quote]
Do hospitals really need the government to tell them to do this? I quit smoking years ago, but I don`t think the government should have any say in smoking policy on PRIVATE property. In government facilities, policy should be set by the elected bodies that have jurisdiction over that facility, i.e., city buildings, city rules; state buildings; state rules; federal buildings, federal rules; but for PRIVATE buildings, PRIVATE rules!
0
Reply
Male 10,855
[quote]For the same reason dogs lick their balls: because they can.[/quote]

Well at least we have an agreement there. :-)

But I do believe there have to be some restrictions on smoking. Hospitals for example. Bars and restaurants on the other hand can set their own restrictions.
0
Reply
Male 197
I REALLY hope the teabaggers win. They will so royally drat up this country it will probably be the final nail in the coffin. Sarah Fncking Palin might actually become President. How fncking insane is that?!
0
Reply
Male 15,832
[quote]you`re all missing the point, your country`s president has time to sit and write a book?[/quote]
I`d much rather he did that than actually work to implement his radical socialist ideas.
0
Reply
Male 15,832
[quote]Tell me why the government says I can`t grow a single cannabis plant in my apartment?[/quote]
For the same reason dogs lick their balls: because they can.

Someone please tell me why it took a constitutional amendment to enact alcohol prohibition, but drug prohibition has been enacted by legislative fiat?
0
Reply
Male 10,855
It`s you who`s been drinking Bush`s Kool-Aid 5Cats.


"some of the intelligence related to related to Iraq`s was twisted to exaggerate the Iraqi threat"
-Joseph Wilson
The 550 tons of yellowcake that was found had already been documented by UN Inspectors. The Yellowcake was remnants from decades old reactor projects.

YOU should stop drinking the Kool-Aid my friend.
0
Reply
Male 2,516
you`re all missing the point, your country`s president has time to sit and write a book?
0
Reply
Male 40,772
"There was no Yellowcake" you keep mixing more kool-aid, long after your credibility has died! lolz!
550 tons = nothing
And it`s a mineral! It can be stored in a big pile, outdoors! Sure it needs like eleventy more steps of refinement, but there it is!
@davymid, I think Crackr was using that there sarcasm, you know, replacing the "smoking` with the "gay" to illustrate how foolish the arguement is?
0
Reply
Male 1,452
" I DON`T LIKE THE HEAVY LIBERAL BIAS IN THE NEWS, SO I`M GOING TO WATCH SOMETHING WITH A HEAVY CONSERVATIVE BIAS"= the logic of faux news watchers
0
Reply
Male 67
I just find it funny that all they did was change the title and then copy/pasta it off of USA Today`s site.
0
Reply
Male 12,138
[quote]Crakrjak said: "It`s funny how liberals think smoking is disgusting, But two gays getting married is just fine... Homo-sex, no matter YOUR personal experience, is disgusting, un-clean, and harmful to more than just the persons fuçking.[/quote]
Yeah, I don`t even think I need to make a clever counter-comment. I`m going to just leave that little nugget of conservative homophobic vitriol standing there for all to see. You go, Crakrjak.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
[quote]might have something to do with not finding WMDs eh?[/quote]

There was no Yellowcake and any Chemical weapons there were not stored properly and were unuseable. As a matter of fact most of the facilities that were there were destroyed in the first gulf war.

Why did he resist? He didn`t want to look like a pussy.
0
Reply
Male 12,138
I would just like to point out that the most rabidly anti-liberal, Bush/Palin supporting, Teabagging mouthpieces on IAB that keep telling us to "keep drinking the kool-aid", are almost exclusively 40+, or 50+. They`ve had their day. Give it time.

Liberalism is called "Progressive" for a reason. These old dinosaurs will be extinct soon enough.
0
Reply
Male 40,772
@Student_Law you`re lseriously ignorant of things called FACTS:
[quote]Iraq did not attack USA. Iraq did not attack anny ally of USA[/quote]
#1 After Iraq invaded Kuwait, the UN authorised an liberating force to remove Iraq`s army.
#2 When his ground forces were beaten to a pulp, Saddam quickly negotiated a "cease fire" which stopped the UN forces from overthrowing his government.
#3 Saddam VIOLATED that agreement by threatening the WMD search people, throwing them out of Iraq, which just might have something to do with not finding WMDs eh?
#4 Saddam had almost 2 years to hide or move his programs while the UN dithered, and skimmed BILLIONS of $$ in graft and corruption (of course)
#5 The US and Britian (amoung others) finally got the UN to impose a deadline for the return of inspectors, when that date passed it meant the UN AUTHORISED the re-invasion.

If you violate a cease-fire, it`s back to war. So simple even a liberal can understand it!
0
Reply
Male 40,772
@jtrebowski you cannot even make a single sentence that makes sense?
[quote]the swift boat farce, ... perpetuated by right-wing media[/quote]
Swift boat farce: you mean regular people telling the truth? That makes it a farce? Exposing the LIES of someone who wished to be PoTUS is a bad thing?
Perpetuated: the same media that attacked the Swift Boaters every single way they could? That tried to shut down their ads? That tried (in vain) to dredge up ANYTHING about them so they could throw poo at them?
You live in a delusional world if you think there exists a "right-wing media" Fox News isn`t "the media" or the MSM eh?
0
Reply
Male 10,855
Tell me why the government says I can`t grow a single cannabis plant in my apartment?
0
Reply
Male 15,832
Altaru, please explain to me how a PRIVATE individual using PRIVATE capital can start a PRIVATE sector business on PRIVATE property, and as soon as he opens the door, some @$$hole bureaucrat barges in, plants the flag of the state, and declares it to be a PUBLIC place? What gives him the right to set that business`s smoking policy? What ever happened to property rights? The only one who has the right to decide if and where people can smoke is the property owner. You don`t have a right to smoke in my place -- you don`t even have a right to smoke in my parking lot if I don`t want you to. Neither do you have the right to demand a smoke-free environment if that`s not what I care to provide.

"I own it, so I`m the f***ing boss! If you don`t like my smoking policy, GTFO and go somewhere else!"
0
Reply
Female 614
we were here before the us citizens, non-nice individual. that`s why the call us NATIVE AMERICANS. get over yourself fox news.

plus custer was a f><cktard.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
Enjoy your Kool-Aid tridirk. Looks delicious!
0
Reply
Male 10,855
Well I got a little confused about a statement I made earlier.

I thought you, Crakr, and Tridirk were repeating the "concerned about your rights and not others` rights" dialogue.
0
Reply
Male 313
Don`t get too excited... had to squeeze a little work in while trying to reply to the pablum I read.

Thanks for the discussion.... off to play.
0
Reply
Male 313
Enjoy
Is that what you got from the discussion? I thought libs were supposed to be of greater intellect?



0
Reply
Male 3,482
Gotcha...

Why do I always end up seeing posts that get deleted shortly after I reply to them?

Like tridirk`s post with nothing but a picture of kool-aid.

It`s not even like I refresh that often... I`m distracted with /w/ right now, so I`m only half-paying attention to this forum, yet for some reason I STILL catch every post that gets deleted.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
Never mind
0
Reply
Male 3,482
[quote]@alt People like you tend to fail to understand one important thing: no matter WHAT rights you have, other people have those same rights.


Thanks for confirming my point about libs=arrogant[/quote]
So now it`s arrogant to protect EVERYONE`S freedoms over the self-appointed "freedoms" of a select few that inconvenience or downright harm others?

What bullsh*t.

Once again, you`re so wrapped up in your own "freedoms" that you forget other people have as many rights as you do.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
FYI I removed the happy meal reference.

[quote]no matter WHAT rights you have, other people have those same rights[/quote]

Excuse me but didn`t CrakrJak made a simaliar statement?
Or unless I should start saying cons=arrogant.
0
Reply
Male 313
@alt [quote]People like you tend to fail to understand one important thing: no matter WHAT rights you have, other people have those same rights.[/quote]

Thanks for confirming my point about libs=arrogant

[quote] "It`s for the good of the people", allows you to choose to limit personal freedom, make choices for others, and pay for it all with the money from others.[/quote]

Of course using that logic there isn`t anything that wouldn`t come under the "It`s for the good of all", or "It`s for the good of mankind, the people", ... I guess a lib truly believes that the needs of the many are more important than the freedoms of the few?

Libs=arrogant. They know best what should be for everyone.
0
Reply
Male 17,511
I mean, McD`s french fries are good but I don`t know of anyone that would kill for them.
0
Reply
Male 17,511
Cajun: Equating fried foods, guns, profits, etc... to drugs is no comparison.

Basing laws on `For our own good` is not good, It`s tyranny, But illicit drugs are in a completely different category of stupid. People don`t get high off of french fries, guns, or money, They don`t stop eating and sacrifice their personal relationships for them either.
0
Reply
Male 17,511
Cajun: I don`t agree with the happy meal toy ban, censorship, or banning violence in video games.

I don`t think there is any argument that drugs like heroin, cocaine, meth, and steroids are not only addictive but mood altering, lethally dangerous, and a detriment to society.
0
Reply
Male 3,482
[quote]Altaru: How is your bigotry any better than mine, hmm ?[/quote]



Should you so define my ideals as "bigotry," then I actually have reasons and logic behind mine.

You, on the other hand... You have "it`s ICKY" on your side. And a bullsh*t, made-up statistic that is, plain and simple, bigotry. It`s no better than the "studies" that claimed that black people have smaller brains.

I`m through with you.

EDIT: Dammit, IAB needs an edit button.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
[quote]to enact laws `For our own good`[/quote]

That`s the essential part of the drug policy of the United States and other moral values.

"gay sex isn`t good for you" - Sodomy Laws
"video games promote violence" - California banning certain video games.
0
Reply
Male 17,511
Altaru: Yes, Bigotry, You have it. Against Obese people, People that own guns, People that smoke, People that make a profit, And I`m sure others as well.
0
Reply
Male 17,511
Altaru: Guns don`t kill people, People kill people. But that`s beside the point. You can`t see that your tyranny is just as bad as the tyranny you accuse others of.
0
Reply
Male 3,482
[quote]Altaru: You rail against smokers forcing you to breathe carbon-monoxide, But You want to force laws down people`s throats based on your liberal values. [/quote]
Difference?

The first one kills people because of one particular group`s stupidity, laziness and lack of willpower.

The other protects a majority from the stupidity of a minority.

Metaphorically speaking, "one stupid/crazy man with a pistol can sometimes prove more dangerous than an army."

I`d rather there not be a stupid/crazy man with a pistol. You want to let him breed and make more.
0
Reply
Male 17,511
Altaru: How is your bigotry any better than mine, hmm ?
0
Reply
Male 10,855
[quote">prison rape[/quote">

Actually there`s only a 2% chance of it happening to any inmate.

0
Reply
Male 3,482
[quote]Altaru: I don`t see too much gay rape out there, now do I?


Never heard of prison have you ? It`s rampant in there.[/quote]
Wow, for christ`s sake you`re retarded.

And if THAT`S what you`re basing all of your anti-gay fever on, than you have officially lost both brain cells you may have once had...
0
Reply
Male 17,511
Altaru: You rail against smokers forcing you to breathe carbon-monoxide, But You want to force laws down people`s throats based on your liberal values.

Neither is right.
0
Reply
Male 3,482
[quote]Not to mention, That anyone comes into contact with their bodily fluids can get infected.[/quote]
Anyone that comes in contact with ANYONE`S bodily fluids can get infected. If you bump uglies with a straight person with AIDS, you could get infected.

Not only that, but I don`t think too many Africans got HIV from being gay, and they have the highest rates in the world...

It has less to do with sexuality as it does promiscuity, and since gay people tend to stick to sex with other gay people, I don`t see how their promiscuity affects you?
0
Reply
Male 3,482
[quote]Cajun: HIV spreads through IV drug use as well, and gays have a much higher incidence of IV drug use.[/quote]
That, my friends, is bigotry pure-and-simple.

If the people injecting themselves with various drugs HAVE done gay things, it`s probably in the desperate attempt to make more money to buy more drugs. It`s called gay-for-pay, and for the most part addicts and porn-stars are the only ones that do it.
0
Reply
Male 17,511
Altaru: [quote]I don`t see too much gay rape out there, now do I?[/quote]

Never heard of prison have you ? It`s rampant in there.
0
Reply
Male 3,482
[quote]But you want the government to legislate smokers out of existence, Except for pot smokers, right ?[/quote]
I`m not even for smoking pot. I prefer it in brownies, myself, but vaporizers are pretty cool too. And both are pretty clean methods of getting high, that don`t involve forcing it on everyone in the immediate vicinity.
0
Reply
Male 3,482
[quote]See how that works, You think smokers, obese people, guns, and profits are all disgusting and want to force laws onto people against their will to make them comply with your point of view.[/quote]
A) Guns were made to kill things. Plain and simple, they have NO other value besides death. Well, fear maybe, but mostly death.

B) Obese people cost more money to keep alive, because of higher rates of heart-disease and other complications.

C) Yes, profits ARE disgusting, if they come from exploiting the workers and consumers with no regard for humanity. I`m sure the workers back in the early 1900`s would agree with me, eh? You know, when books like The Jungle were written?

You really have no leg to stand on here. None of your "arguments" work...
0
Reply
Male 17,511
Cajun: What aggravates me, Is the attitude that liberals think it`s necessary to enact laws `For our own good`, On matters of personal responsibility and civility.

That`s not freedom, That`s the essence of fascism.
0
Reply
Male 3,482
[quote]Altaru: Homo-sex, no matter YOUR personal experience, is disgusting, un-clean, and harmful to more than just the persons fuçking.[/quote]
A) Explain how homo-sex is any more un-clean than normal hetero-sex?

B) Explain how homo-sex can harm another person any more than normal sex? And don`t bring up the higher STD counts. If someone`s gay, I`m pretty sure they`ve accepted that risk ON THEMSELVES, but I don`t see too much gay rape out there, now do I?

Smoking results in smoke in the air, nicotine on the walls, cigarette butts and ashes all over the place... Need I go on?
0
Reply
Male 10,855
[quote">gays have a much higher incidence of IV drug use[/quote">

I so beg to differ
0
Reply
Male 10,855
[quote]...smokers...pot smokers...[/quote]

ANY smoker will have to endure the same restrictions.
0
Reply
Male 17,511
Cajun: HIV spreads through IV drug use as well, and gays have a much higher incidence of IV drug use. Not to mention, That anyone comes into contact with their bodily fluids can get infected.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
[quote]to more than just the persons fuçking[/quote]

Stop with the lunacy will you?

Any form of unprotected penetrative sex is risky as the next. In fact it is why most gay men prefer frottage.
0
Reply
Male 17,511
Altaru: Once again, people like you are so caught up in your own rights, you forget everyone else has them too. But you want the government to legislate smokers out of existence, Except for pot smokers, right ?
0
Reply
Male 17,511
Altaru: Homo-sex, no matter YOUR personal experience, is disgusting, un-clean, and harmful to more than just the persons fuçking.

See how that works, You think smokers, obese people, guns, and profits are all disgusting and want to force laws onto people against their will to make them comply with your point of view.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
etcetera, etcetera,
0
Reply
Male 3,482
[quote]Now liberals think it`s fine to violate smokers civil rights and kick them outside in the rain. [/quote]
Smokers violate MY HUMAN RIGHT to breath f*cking oxygen when they start smoking around me.

But, of course, I should stop everything I`m doing and leave the area because it would violating some dumbasses "right" (what right? to be inside out of the rain while pouring out toxic chemicals into the air?) for me to ask/tell him to leave.

Once again, people like you are so caught up in one person/group`s rights, you forget everyone else has them too.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
[quote]It`s funny how liberals think smoking is disgusting, But two gays getting married is just fine.[/quote]


Your main statement was invalidated and now you`ll try to argue how two men/women are not capable to loving each other, incapable of raising a child, or why they shouldn`t have hospital visitation rights.

I get it now.
0
Reply
Male 3,482
On a side note, smoking is also and huge waste, considering that all the money spent on it, quite literally, goes up in smoke.

Tobacco sales may have helped fund this country`s economic beginning`s, but it`s about time we move on, since they`re clearly not doing anything for the economy now, eh?

[quote]It`s funny how liberals think smoking is disgusting, But two gays getting married is just fine.[/quote]
Wow, completely un-related much?

You`re retarded for even thinking there`s a connection there.
0
Reply
Male 3,482
[quote]That 2nd hand smoke propaganda is bullpoo.[/quote]
Right, so my grandmother and myself totally ended up with black lungs for some other, completely un-related reason...

My teachers thought I smoked because... Well, I can`t think of a reason for that...

My cousin is an asthmatic because of genetics, even though no-one in either of his blood-lines is known for having asthma...

Exceptions don`t change facts. Some people can live to 90 smoking. Others barely have to take a whiff of the second-hand and end up coughing.

Smoking, no matter YOUR personal experience, is disgusting, un-clean, and harmful to more than just the person smoking. Ever had to clean nicotine off the walls before moving into a new house?

It`s also just plain pathetic. Ask most smokers, they`ll admit to wanting to stop. Do they? No, because they don`t have the balls to resist a craving.
0
Reply
Male 17,511
Cajun: That 2nd hand smoke propaganda is bullpoo. I`m a non-smoker that has lived and worked with smokers most of my life, I don`t have lung cancer or breathing problems either. There used to be `smoking areas` inside for smokers, But no that wasn`t good enough. Now liberals think it`s fine to violate smokers civil rights and kick them outside in the rain.

It`s funny how liberals think smoking is disgusting, But two gays getting married is just fine.

0
Reply
Male 3,482
[quote]Don`t you mean if people would make the RIGHT f*cking decisions AS DEFINED BY YOU?

Does anyone here need any further proof that libs=arrogant?[/quote]
I don`t think it`s arrogance to remember that, while I DO have rights, and so do you, so does everyone else.

I have the right to breathe oxygen, and you have the right to breath your carbon-monoxide all you like, but since I don`t want to breath your carbon-monoxide, you DO NOT have the right to force it on me just because I`m in a public place.

And if the majority of people in a public place do not smoke, and do not want smokers to be around, the majority shouldn`t have to move because you don`t want to.

I have the right to freedom of speech, but according to you, if I`m still against a war after it starts, I should be hanged for treason...

Who`s arrogant here?
0
Reply
Male 10,855
"Liberty" is not arrogant notion OldOllie.


Smokers have the right to ruin their bodies but don`t have the right to ruin others`.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
@kittehdee

HA


As if anyone`s gonna read this book.
0
Reply
Male 15,832
[quote]If people would make the f*cking decisions themselves...[/quote]
Don`t you mean if people would make the RIGHT f*cking decisions AS DEFINED BY YOU?

Does anyone here need any further proof that libs=arrogant?
0
Reply
Male 282
this is definitely corporate media for you.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
[quote]Why do libs always want to make decisions for others?[/quote]

Which libs are you talking about? The libs I`ve heard of want the government to enforce civil rights. That and rights deemed "inappropriate" solely by conservatives.
0
Reply
Female 803
I`m glad to see that he didn`t write some sh*t autobiography that no one is going to read and instead wrote a book for his daughters.
0
Reply
Male 759
I`ve heard of Sitting Bull, but who`s this O`Bama bloke? Is he Irish and related to the O`keefs?
0
Reply
Male 1,598
I`m sure there are still people out there bitter about Little Bighorn... Anyone?
0
Reply
Male 3,482
[quote]Why do libs always want to make decisions for others?[/quote]
If people would make the f*cking decisions themselves, there wouldn`t NEED to be decision makers, now would there?

I don`t know how to word this properly, because I know that what I`m about to say is just going to get a sh*t-load of backlash, but here goes: A minority shouldn`t prove a burden and threat to a majority.

For example: The MINORITY of smokers shouldn`t be allowed to force their chemicals down the throats of the MAJORITY of non-smokers.

But the smokers don`t care that other people have the right to clean air, now do they? That`s why we`ve needed to enact laws that tell them this, and make it illegal not to understand that.

People like you tend to fail to understand one important thing: no matter WHAT rights you have, other people have those same rights.
0
Reply
Male 75
I see what you did there fox news!

0
Reply
Male 3,482
[quote]smokin in resturants or buildings is one thing but outside on patios (wich is outlawed in the part of canada i live in) seems too harsh[/quote]
I didn`t say limit them outside. Hell, having a separate, well ventilated room for them to go into is fine.

Fact is, it`s not just a bad habit. It`s dangerous, not just to the smoker themselves but people around them. A choice to destroy your own health and life by putting dangerous chemicals in your lungs is one thing, but forcing those chemicals on other people is wrong no matter how you look at it. And people shouldn`t have to leave the area for their own health just because one person is too pathetic to resist the impulse.

Smoking is just disgusting all around, but I`m willing to make a compromise.
0
Reply
Male 313
Why do libs always want to make decisions for others? libs=arrogant

The more I read, the more you Koolaid drinkers make the equation true. I guess your rational, "It`s for the good of the people", allows you to choose to limit personal freedom, make choices for others, and pay for it all with the money from others. Or is it just a problem of low self esteem? Does it give you power to travel in the herd and take care of everyone, whether they want it, need it, or ask?



0
Reply
Male 20
pubic places are public places there should be no law forcing one person to be treated as a lesser human then another no matter what theyre choice is.... i hate hipsters but i dont tell hipsters they cant do hipster things in public places because they destroy my very will to live... no i deal with it or i politly get up and go somewhere els.. smokin in resturants or buildings is one thing but outside on patios (wich is outlawed in the part of canada i live in) seems too harsh
0
Reply
Male 395
Yeah
0
Reply
Male 10,855
truedat!
0
Reply
Male 3,482
[quote]@Altaru

People kill people but I see your point.[/quote]
Yeah, I know, but I think guns do tend to help rather than hinder.

I`m not against guns. I intend to carry once I get out into the world full and proper.

The thing is, gun-nuts want to give everyone the same rights as a cop, without any of the training, regulation, or responsibility that a cop has.

Think about it. Cops have to go through countless courses and crap before they become full-fledged cops. If a cop uses his gun, there`s going to be people screaming abuse, an investigation (at least, there will be if the system is working properly), and they have to basically report any bullet they fire in the first place.

But EVERYONE should have the right to carry around the same tool as they do, without paper-work, training, etc.?
0
Reply
Male 10,855
@Altaru

People kill people but I see your point.
0
Reply
Male 25,416
meh...
0
Reply
Male 3,482
There is absolutely NO way to justify people smoking in the first place besides an incredibly weak will-power, let alone forcing other people to endure your smoking because you don`t want to deal with the consequences of your actions. Don`t tell other people "If you don`t like it, leave," in public places because they have just as much right to be there as you do. In fact, they really have more right, since they`re not basically forcing chemicals down other people`s throats because they`re too pathetic to kick an obviously bad habit.
0
Reply
Male 3,482
Being green: Oh, it`s absolutely horrible to try and make sure that there is an Earth for our descendants to live on one day. It`s apparently even worse to try and make sure that there`s enough of the resources we rely on for them to live comfortably...

Smoking: F*ck yeah put the bastards outside! Or at least limit where they CAN smoke! I have never smoked a cig in my LIFE, but I`ve gone to the doctor to find out I had nearly black lungs at one point because my parents did. Smoking doesn`t just affect the person smoking, it affects everyone in their immediate vicinity, including children, babies, etc. who don`t really have a choice.
0
Reply
Male 3,482
[quote]It`s the liberals that want to take away our guns, Our profits, and Our fried foods. They want to Censor dvds, games, cds, Force us to pay more for everything for the sake of being `Green`, and force smokers to stand out in the rain to smoke.[/quote]
Guns: Guns kill things. When in the wrong hands, guns kill people. You wanna give EVERYONE the same rights you would give a cop without ANY of the training or regulation...?

Profits: Is it horrible to protect workers against abusive companies that worry more about profits than human lives?

Fried foods: Well, if parents don`t want to accept the responsibility of instilling healthy diet and exercise routines into their children, then who can? Or should we just let the country end up flooded with obese f*cks who cost more money just to keep alive?

Censorship: Against. No matter what, I am absolutely against censorship.

(cont.)
0
Reply
Male 3,482
[quote]200 years ago, they all would have been hanged as traitors.[/quote]
So...

You`re such a conservative, who wants to return to the foundations of the country and all that... But if freedom of speech and opposition to a governmental decision disagrees with your POV, then they should be hanged as traitors?

I thought I was supposed to be the Fascist...
0
Reply
Male 3,482
[quote]I think all of you liberals` perceptions are colored by your seething hate for any news outlet that doesn`t spout Dear Leader`s version of the truth. You hate Fox News, not because they lie, but because they report facts that are incompatible with your worldview. Well, if your worldview is incompatible with facts, the problem isn`t in the facts.[/quote]
Dude, if The Force from Star Wars consisted of hypocrisy, you would be mother f*cking Darth Vader right now...

[quote]Nevertheless Obama opposed the war before Hillary did.

Isn`t then at least hypocrisy that he`s doing/done just what Bush had planned for Iraq and Afghanistan ?[/quote]
Opposing something from the start but finishing it once it`s already started, is not hypocrisy. If we left that mess as it is right now, do you have ANY idea what would happen?

I don`t support the war, but I support finishing it for the future`s sake...
0
Reply
Female 688
this book sounds absolutely beautiful! oh my gosh. i think i might have to get this shipped over.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
@sssfdg

Why the hell did they have to blow this little detail out of proportion?
0
Reply
Male 190
come on.... if anyone sees this as anything but petty biased reporting they have lost their grip on reality.
0
Reply
Male 4,680
"And we didn`t `illegally invade` any country, We freed Iraq from Saddam Husein`s madness and freed Afghanistan from the tyranny of of the Taliban."

Which is why there`s no trouble in Afghanistan today and all of the insurgents have been completely wiped out! All the troops came back years ago, and Afghanistan is now a peaceful and prosperous place thanks to American intervention!

Oh, wait.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
You want this expose from a conservative standpoint?

Here you go!
0
Reply
Male 10,855
Hell Fox News has lied about its OWN statements:

Video

Pay attention to the dates!
0
Reply
Male 171
Dudes! DUDES!!! Calm down! Don`t you see? We all have our different views, but we`re all people, just the same... except for those damned French Canadians.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
[quote]Well now we know where Cajun gets his news[/quote]

Better than the BS they sell at MSNBC and Fox at least Jon Stewart smart enough to point it out.

[quote]when did the threat from Afghanistan become "imminent?"[/quote]

First you tell me when Iran, North Korea, and Pakistan will become an imminent threat.
0
Reply
Male 15,832
[quote]We installed Hussein in the first place, and the Taliban are still going strong, especially now that we`ve given the average person reasons to hate us.[/quote]
Yeah, but we`ll never make them hate us as much as you do.
0
Reply
Male 15,832
Cajun, I believe I made my points regarding your nitpicking arguments against Limbaugh and Beck. Now let me ask you, how do these trifling, insignificant errors stack up against liberal icon Dan Rather using forged documents to slander a presidential candidate on the eve of an election, or NBC`s planting an incendiary device on a Chevy pickup to try to "prove" that they`re unsafe?

"And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother`s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?"
0
Reply
Male 15,832
[quote]I saw that on John Stewart actually he thought it was odd but at the same quipped at how MSNBC`s assertion was absurd.[/quote]
Well, now we know where Cajun gets his news.

[quote]We do have the right to defend this country, but not from non-existing threats.[/quote]
Ahh...the old "Iraq was not an `imminent` threat" cannard. Well, Cajun, when did the threat from Afghanistan become "imminent?" Please answer with a date.
0
Reply
Male 1,678
My god I never thought I`d ever be glad to see a spammer but it really is a welcome break from reading the pooe being spouted here.
0
Reply
Male 1,455
"It`s a prison for illegal combatants. "

Accused illegal combatants, some of which are US citizens, denied the right to trial to determine guilt.

"We freed Iraq from Saddam Husein`s madness and freed Afghanistan from the tyranny of of the Taliban. "

We installed Hussein in the first place, and the Taliban are still going strong, especially now that we`ve given the average person reasons to hate us.
0
Reply
Male 1,010
@crackr: yeah that`s a lot of factless statements... impressing.

Two millions died as a result of the american "liberation" (according to a study published in the Lancet, one of the worlds most acknowledged medical journals)- that has resulted in a totally ruined infrastructure. You take away people`s water supply. What do you think happens? Some flee, most die. It`s hot in Iraq. Electricity. Hospitals and medical aids. A tragedy that makes Saddams regime look like a kindergarden.

The invation was clearly illegal - and even a child can easily sum up to that because of simple facts: Iraq did not attack USA. Iraq did not attack anny ally of USA. Iraq did not pose a threat to the USA. Only dumbasses would actually take Powells "slide- show" with "trucks and factories" seriously. The UN denied, rightfully. Bush, in all his wisdom - recently said it himself: "I`m glad i wont be alive to know the verdict of my precidency. Well, you can se
0
Reply
Male 3,369
CJ said: "Then why did so many willingly collude with one another in the Journolist scandal ? Just one source of many, I can produce. "

I don`t know. That`s a valid point, however, I could bring up Tucker Carlsons fake e-mails, the swift boat farce, the birthers, the the "Obama is a Muslim" lies, the lies about ACORN, the Sherrod fiasco, etc all perpetuated by right-wing media, and we`d be right back to where we started, wouldn`t we?
0
Reply
Male 6,693
Just junk food for the brain.
0
Reply
Male 886
That is just ridiculous. I mean seriously what the frick.


I admire Sitting Bull. It is not hard to find admirable traits in your enemies. Especially after a century has come and gone.

Custer would be considered a war criminal in todays world along with many of these "heroes of the west" that Fox would have us admire instead.
0
Reply
Male 17,511
Student_Law: Guantanamo Bay is not a concentration camp, It`s a prison for illegal combatants. And we didn`t `illegally invade` any country, We freed Iraq from Saddam Husein`s madness and freed Afghanistan from the tyranny of of the Taliban. But you insist on spouting more socialist phrases you`ve been spoon fed, Blaming those that have your best interests at heart, Instead of the terrorists that would have no qualms about stoning you in public. So keep cheerleading for the terrorists, Your rhetoric won`t save you from their encroaching sharia law there.

You honestly sound like the type of person that broke into and rioted at the Tory party HQ last week, Or perhaps at least cheered it on.





0
Reply
Male 2,669
Only Rush Limpblob believes anything they see on Fox News.
0
Reply
Male 5
Go, FOX News, Go!!!
0
Reply
Male 1,010
@crackr: ok... *trying to dig through your eight grader- adhominem "argumentation" - i said any force of meaning, that means like a country, not some ex-CIA agents who got lost in the mountains of Afhanistan.

Besides - like several others here had to explaaain to you: the london attacks was a counter attack.

And you accuse me of doing what? Having a consetration camp on Cuba? Illegally invading and occupying other countries...?

I know a lot of nazis escaped to the US, but i had noe idea that they could breed so much in only a few decades...
0
Reply
Male 5,620
One simple analogy makes the WMD conversation moot.

If a man walks into a gas station, with his hand in a trench coat claiming he has a gun, you act on that. You don`t wait to see if he shots it. You don`t wait till better intel is available. You act on it, plain and simple.

When a leader walks up to the world, and claims he has WMD... you see where I am going with this right?
0
Reply
Male 17,511
fabarati: Well that`s because the communist ans socialist leaders in America have hijacked terms like `Liberal` and `Progressive` from their original meanings to hide what they truly represent.

Not unlike how North Korea calls itself the `Democratic People`s Republic of Korea`, When it`s neither democratic or a republic.
0
Reply
Male 17,511
Musuko42: There have been many, The 1972 Munich Olympics Massacre and numerous airline hijackings involving Europeans kept as hostages. I also believe there were some car bombings, a disco in Germany blown up, And embassies attacked, But I forget the dates and exact places.
0
Reply
Male 1,240
Oh, and I just looked it up. Those with classic liberal views started calling themselves libertarians in the 1950s.

So, yeah.
0
Reply
Male 1,240
Crackr: Actually, it`s america who has confused the term liberalism. In the US, liberal is what the rest of the world calls either a social liberal or even a socialist.

The purely liberal state is the Night watchman state. As small government as you can get. Now in my opinion, that`s taking things way, way too far.

But yeah, I`m a liberal in the original sense of the world, and I want the government to stop messing with my poo in the name of safety or whatever.
0
Reply
Male 561
how dare they misrepresent the facts, only liberal dems are allowed to do that with impunity.
0
Reply
Male 17,511
fabarati: America was founded on freedom from tyranny, They from the beginning that even an elected government could become just as tyrannical as a king and tried to guard against it. That is why the constitution is filled with amendments stating what the government can not do to it`s citizens.

I think you are confusing the term liberal with liberty and/or libertarianism. Liberals want more government authority, Not less.
0
Reply
Male 2,850
"Student_Law: You`re obviously forgetting the tube bombing in the UK and the rail bombing in Spain."

Both of which happened after, not before, the war on terror started.

If you want to play the "correlation equals causation" game, let`s suggest that these bombings would not have happened without Bush`s war.

Case in point: how many Islamic terror attacks were there in Western Europe before Bush`s war? Lockerbie? All the way back in 1988? Are there any more recent ones?
0
Reply
Male 1,240
I was gonna do a long rant about how you americans are using the term "liberal" wrong. But you know what? drat it. I can`t be bothered, it will still be used wrong, even by the people who would`ve read my post.

Just remember that USA was founded on liberalism and that full on liberalism is right wing.Read the article and skip the part about america today
0
Reply
Male 792
*Yawn* American politics...
0
Reply
Male 17,511
Student_Law: You`re obviously forgetting the tube bombing in the UK and the rail bombing in Spain. I see you are being fed a steady diet of "Bush is a war criminal" propaganda as well.

Since your brain fell out of your head from being `Open minded`, I can see there is no reasoning with you. You seem proud that your country is paying off terrorists rather than jail them for life. Yeah, And thanks for letting the Lockerbie bomber go free, Real smooth move there.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
One more before I go
back to the Limbaugh BS statements assertion.

WTF was with that "Michael J. Fox is exagerating it" wasn`t that total BS?
0
Reply
Male 255
Wow, there`s a lot of people here need to read up on critical thinking. So many fallacies, so little time..
0
Reply
Male 10,855
Wow we really went off on a tangent oh well.

G`night everybody!
0
Reply
Male 10,855
Say I just found something regarding the yellowcake claim.

That was also BS
0
Reply
Male 1,010
CrackJak: don`t drag all of Europe into this. I know the UK and Mr. Blair helped Bush fu*k up stuff, but nobody of any meaning or power, ever threatened Europe.

Bush, Rumsfelt and Cheney are still on the loose, but so are Ratko Mladic and his buddies as well... hopefully they will all be given justice some day, but the best would be if ya did it on your own of course.

P.S Wouldn`t it be wierd if Iran invaded the US? I mean, the Republican party hate Iran. They are clearly a threat. Even if they are not in government - well, it`s fair that in.eg. Egypt, Iran, Turkey and so on invaded the USA, because they threatened the US? U think it`s fair?

PS:

England pays compesation to Guantanamo victims
0
Reply
Male 10,855
No surprise, Saudi Arabia harbors terrorists.
North Korea has test launching missiles whilst spewing anti-US propaganda and Iran recently unveiled their new "ambassador of death" while their leader is always riling against the US. Al Qaeda on the other were making threats AND were actually attacking us.
0
Reply
Male 17,511
Cajun: Saddam continuously made threats not just against America, But toward Israel, Saudi Arabia, Iran, The UN, And Europe. He was funding terrorism in the west bank and put a hit out on George Bush Sr., Among other things.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
And Saddam Hussein wanted to destroy our country? With that tiny arsenal of his?
We do have the right to defend this country, but not from non-existing threats.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
I saw that on John Stewart actually he thought it was odd but at the same quipped at how MSNBC`s assertion was absurd.
0
Reply
Male 17,511
Cajun: [quote]...we do not have the inalienable right to invade another country for any reason.[/quote]

I disagree, We have the right to defend this country from those wanting to destroy it. I guess you don`t value your freedom very highly.
0
Reply
Male 17,511
Cajun: I guess you never saw the allegation that MSNBC made that the Tea Party was a racist `gun toting` organization, Then to `prove` their point they shown a partial video of a man carrying a guns on him at a Tea Party rally.



Unfortunately they edited the video so as not to show that the man carrying the guns was black. Yeah, They even edited video out of Beck`s rally in August so as to not show any of the blacks or hispanics there. Did you know that MLK Jr.`s niece was a there and spoke at that rally ? Of course not, It didn`t fit into the liberal media`s continuing false narrative that the Tea Party is racist.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
Nevertheless CrakrJak we do not have the inalienable right to invade another country for any reason.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
1) Where did he get this "idea"?
2) Why is he saying it?
3) Why is this relevant?
4) Your statement simply confirms it "false"
5) Mentioned it did not propose it
6) Then give NAMES not a number
0
Reply
Male 17,511
Cajun: Africa has been a basket case for a long time, The world is just not motivated to help them, Sadly. There are so many problems in that continent that even if you were to try and solve them, There are endemic societal problems there that make those e efforts futile. If the gorillas, cheetahs, lions, and other wildlife there don`t go extinct it would be considered a miracle. And if the wildlife don`t seem to stand a chance there then tell me how humans do ?
0
Reply
Male 10,855
MRC is conservative
Media Matters is liberal
AIM is conservative
FAIR is liberal (progressive)

Geez hard to find a "balanced" media analysis website. Tell you what though I`ve thoroughly read all the articles YOU`VE posted (when we`ve debated) why don`t you return the favor?
0
Reply
Male 15,832
Cajun, out of 1000s of hours, that`s the best you could come up with? Pretty trivial stuff if you ask me. Do any of them invalidate the points they were making? No, they don`t.

1 Limbaugh asked a QUESTION; PolitiFact said he made a statement. Who`s lying here?

2 Even Politifact admits, "Limbaugh`s assertion isn`t entirely out of left (or right) field."

3 This was an exaggeration, but the gist of it was true. Washington was deeply religious.

4 Again an exaggeration but mostly true. Very few countries allow anchor babies.

5 Actually true. Read the article again.

6 Another exaggeration, but the fact remains, the Obama administration is woefully lacking in private sector experience. You have a banker who ran a failed government program that lead to financial collapse, a scientist at AT&T who had NOTHING to do with business operations, and a part-time farmer. Not exactly "captains of industry"
0
Reply
Male 17,511
Btw Cajun, `Politifact` is ran by the St. Petersburg Times, A notoriously liberal newspaper. They are not impartial at all, Sorry.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
[quote]solve their own problems[/quote]

And that`s my point. Most of these countries rank low on civil rights. Others I haven`t mentioned have dictators who love to oppress the ever-loving daylights out of their citizenry and have the means of doing so. This however does not give us the right OR responsibility to invade another country.
0
Reply
Male 17,511
Cajun247: Hadn`t you heard ? Obama went on his `apology` tour over there, Bowed to the Saudi King, and has basically told Iran he doesn`t like Israel either. As for Somalia and Zimbabwe, He feels that`s up to them to solve their own problems.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
Darn it my finger slipped on the keyboards

Beck
Beck
0
Reply
Male 10,855
Male 17,511
Heureux: Most Republican`s aren`t about taking liberties away, I don`t know where you got that pablum.

It`s the liberals that want to take away our guns, Our profits, and Our fried foods. They want to Censor dvds, games, cds, Force us to pay more for everything for the sake of being `Green`, and force smokers to stand out in the rain to smoke.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
@CrakrJak

How about Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Zimbabwe, Iran?
0
Reply
Male 15,832
Heureux, somehow you completely misread what I wrote. Liberalism is the ENEMY of liberty! Republicans aren`t perfect in this regard, but they`re a whole damned lot better than Democrats. Can you imagine the howling from the left-wing media if BUSH had forced airline passengers to go through what Obama has ordered?

And I believe it`s OBAMA who wants to raise taxes on employers. Tell me, how the hell does he expect them to create more jobs with less money?
0
Reply
Male 1,054
"In order to be a liberal, you have to start by lying to yourself. How else can you maintain faith in a system of centralized government control that has failed miserably and tragically every time and place it has been tried? "

So you are opposed to the concept of liberty. Well, don`t worry, the Republicans will take what`s left of the liberties you have along with your money soon enough.

0
Reply
Male 17,511
Cajun247: As I`ve stated before, If it weren`t for China`s support of North Korea that problem would`ve already been solved. Either N. Korea would`ve eroded from within and there would`ve been an internal coup, Or they would`ve came to the negotiating table in good faith. The UN doesn`t have the stomach to invade N. Korea, So long as the North doesn`t attempt invading the South.
0
Reply
Male 8,300
Oh Bejayzuz, not another "US vs Them" political debate on IAB. Good to see after a few month`s a Sabbatical, some things never change - the Left and Right are still trying to convince each other that there`s a difference between them, and Davy`s still a Twat.

In fact, talk about deja-vu, I`m sure the say I set off on my hiatus we had this exact same debate with all the same comments and rebuttals from the same people... has someone been copy/pasting entire forums perhaps?
0
Reply
Male 15,832
[quote]In order to be a liberal, you have to start by lying to yourself.

I can list BS statements made by Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck.[/quote]
Well, that would be a first. An actual quote rather than just flinging poo? Please, go right ahead.
0
Reply
Male 8,300
> SarahofBorg
> OldOllie, I didn`t even bother to read past your first sentence

I didn`t even read past "Fox", that`s warning enough for me.
0
Reply
Male 15,832
We found several chemical artillery shells -- one in an IED that failed to detonate.

Of course, there`s no way he could have hidden significant stockpiles in the months leading up to the invasion, now could he?

But somehow he did manage to bury more that 2 dozen 75-ft. long, 25-ton Russian MIG Foxbat jet fighters. A hole big enough for just ONE of these jets could easily hold his entire suspected stockpile of chemical and biological weapons, and it could be anywhere in an area of over 100,000 sq. km.

Or they could have been moved to Syria or the Bekaa Valley. We have satellite images from before the invasion of Russian trucks pulling into suspected WMD sites, staying for several hours at the loading docks, and then driving off to the north. Of course, the Russians are our friends, right?
0
Reply
Male 39,955
"You see the world as black and white, good and bad, smart and no smart, "

There is a moral right and wrong. The world IS black and white. People cloud it with gray to confuse issues and mislead people or to cover their own faults. The the Gray is just a smoke screen for the Right/Wrong or Good/Bad issue.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
Very well then CrakrJak

Try applying that reasoning when trying to invade North Korea. For matter try pushing for it. China is in no hurry to sell our debt back to us.
0
Reply
Male 17,511


Just for some grins.
0
Reply
Male 17,511
Cajun247: No matter how you feel it was `sold`, Saddam and his sons were all crazy bastards that needed to be removed from power. The Iraqi`s (The vast majority of them) are thankful that he`s dead. The muslim zealots and foreign terrorists, That flooded in after Saddam`s demise, Are not representative of the Iraqi people.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
[quote]In order to be a liberal, you have to start by lying to yourself.[/quote]

I can list BS statements made by Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck.
0
Reply
Male 15,832
[quote]Ollie, liberals are dishonest by default?[/quote]
Yes. In order to be a liberal, you have to start by lying to yourself. How else can you maintain faith in a system of centralized government control that has failed miserably and tragically every time and place it has been tried?

And Saddam had much more than "nothing." For one, years before we knew he had sarin and mustard gas because he USED them on the Iranians and Iraqi Kurds. He never offered any proof that he actually disposed of it as he claimed.

He had the factories, supplies, materials, and expertise to make more chemical weapons on fairly short notice.

He had tons of uranium yellowcake from Niger which was later moved to Oak Ridge Nat. Lab.

We found the portable bioweapons labs exactly as Powell described them at the UN, but they had been stripped and scrubbed down with strong ammonia.

(cont.)
0
Reply
Male 17,511
davymid: Just how the hell is `Lebensraum` conservative ?

He wanted to conquer land for his expansion of the `master race`, Didn`t Communist Russia and China both conquer land for themselves as well ?

And No, I don`t think it was justified at all.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
[quote]yellowcake Uranium,...chemical warfare shells,...chemical labs[/quote]

Pennies to what Bush (and Democrats) was selling, mere tenths of pennies to what the US has.

Militarizing yellowcake requires more processing than civilian use. As such, even that was not a good case for invading.
0
Reply
Male 15,832
[quote]Ollie, liberals are dishonest by default?[/quote]
Yes. In order to be a liberal, you have to start by lying to yourself. How else can you maintain faith in a system of centralized government control that has failed miserably and tragically every time and place it has been tried?

And Saddam had much more than "nothing." For one, years before we knew he had sarin and mustard gas because he USED them on the Iranians and Iraqi Kurds. He never offered any proof that he actually disposed of it as he claimed.

He had the factories, supplies, materials, and expertise to make more chemical weapons on fairly short notice.

He had tons of uranium yellowcake from Niger which was later moved to Oak Ridge Nat. Lab.

We found the portable bioweapons labs exactly as Powell described them at the UN, but they had been stripped and scrubbed down with strong ammonia.

(cont.)
0
Reply
Male 10,855
Stalin and Hitler were niether liberals or conservatives.
They were extremists who loved to oppress the ever-loving daylights out of their citizenry.
Sure they had socialist/communist policies but those were a small part of their agenda.
0
Reply
Male 12,138
[quote">Please tell me what was so `conservative` about the nazis ? And please don`t bring up `nationalism`, Every country has at least some nationalistic pride, That`s not evil.[/quote">
Parting blow, if you think the Nazis were justified in their Lebensraum, then I have nothing more to say to you.
0
Reply
Male 17,511
davymid: "..He had nothing..."

Forgetting all the tons of yellowcake Uranium Saddam had and was found ? Also forgetting about the thousands of chemical warfare shells Saddam had hidden and were found ? And then there were the mobile chemical labs he had buried in the desert, Forgot about them too ?

Yes, He had some. Just not as much as everyone thought he had.
0
Reply
Male 313
Thanks for the discussion. Enjoyable and interesting. Good night to all.
0
Reply
Male 5,970
You all have a good night debating and all.

But it`s times like these where I`m glad not to be too over educated in the subject.
0
Reply
Male 12,138
...aaaand now I find myself desceding to your level. Carry on, chaps. I`ll see you in the next debate.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
[quote]You see the world as black and white, good and bad, smart and no smart, and like a typical lib=arrogant
your way, and your side is the only side.[/quote]

Really? Because that`s what I`ve thought extremists and extremists alone were like not liberals or conservatives.
0
Reply
Male 12,138
Ollie, Crakr, whoever else, please do me the personal courtesy of not accusing me of buying into lies.

You guys invented that sh*t.
0
Reply
Male 17,511
davymid: If you had bothered to read up on Jim Jones, He was in fact very liberal ideologically. He won awards from the city of San Francisco for his services to the community.

I`ve never stated that all conservatives are without sin, As your "...every Conservative was shrouded in the honeyed milk of angels." suggests. But it`s still a fallacy to declare that the German National Socialist Party, Wasn`t socialist, Didn`t put into practice the eugenics sought by liberals like George Bernhard Shaw, Or didn`t take away people`s guns, right to property, and enact socialists programs like `free health care`.

Please tell me what was so `conservative` about the nazis ? And please don`t bring up `nationalism`, Every country has at least some nationalistic pride, That`s not evil.
0
Reply
Male 15,832
[quote]little pissant senator
who became a household name after his keynote address at the 2004 DNC.

His opposition began in 2005 the year he took office.[/quote]
Yes, in 2004 he proved he could read a teleprompter. He still can`t compose a coherent sentence without it.

Yes, he opposed the war AFTER all the other Democrats decided that it was politically advantageous for them to side with with enemy in a time of war. Their rhetoric was EXACTLY the same as that of Tokyo Rose in WW II. 200 years ago, they all would have been hanged as traitors.
0
Reply
Male 12,138
But no, it was all Iraq, cause of their WMDs. I remember hearing a news clip of how they could launch a nuclear strike on the UK within 16 minutes. All deeply, deeply, retarded. The proposal was a war I could have gotten behind.

Unfortunatley, I was sold a lie.
0
Reply
Male 12,138
[quote]Yes, it is. The fact that you deny it only makes you a DISHONEST liberal, but that`s being redundant.[/quote]
Ollie, liberals are dishonest by default?

Iraq. Invasion. On grounds of Saddam having WMDs. The whole world said "OK, if he has WMDs that he is hiding, he needs to be stopped."

F*cking clown had nothing. NOTHING. And we went to a world war on that f*cker, all public support to remove his WMDs.

Again. HE HAD NOTHING.

Of course, then the right-wing media-machine shifted to say "well, he was a dick". Yes, yes, he was a dick, no dispute there. But the same argument could be made for Kim-Jong-Il, or President Mugabe of Zimbabwe, or just sending in some troops to sort out the clusterf*ck in the Sudan/Somalia.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
Actually that`s

fallacy of composition
fallacy of consequence
0
Reply
Male 313
Since when did [quote]If questioning authority, challenging unbridled power and corruption, and acting as a government and corporate watchdog is so bad[/quote] become the sole possession of liberal koolaiders? You see the world as black and white, good and bad, smart and no smart, and like a typical [quote]lib=arrogant[/quote] your way, and your side is the only side. For to be good or of good one must think as a lib. [quote]=arrogant[/quote]

I could swap links back and forth to you about liberal bias yeah or nay and what would it prove, that you need a lib study to back up your conclusions? Being somewhat less liberal and more conservative we/I think for myself rather than enjoy the koolaid. It doesn`t take much to see the liberal bias in action. Just open your mind and listen or watch. Here is a small example, Conservative guests are controversial...or radical. Yet, libs and their ideas are presented as normal and mainstream. Yeah, mainstream to the libs reporting them!
0
Reply
Male 10,855
[quote]Yes it is[/quote]
Fallacy of composition

No it does not. I barely watch ANY cable news and I hold libertarian views.

0
Reply
Male 13
Wow. That`s low, even for Faux News.
0
Reply
Male 2,004
i can`t stop imagining Obama singing
0
Reply
Male 10,855
[quote]little pissant senator[/quote] who became a household name after his keynote address at the 2004 DNC.

His opposition began in 2005 the year he took office.
0
Reply
Male 15,832
[quote]Just because I hate Fox doesn`t even make me a liberal. That`s not exactly the definition.[/quote]
Yes, it is. The fact that you deny it only makes you a DISHONEST liberal, but that`s being redundant.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
@hehehenerd

YOU FIRST!!!
0
Reply
Male 15,832
[quote]Nevertheless Obama opposed the war before Hillary did.[/quote]
When Obama opposed the war, he was a little pissant state senator whose opinion on the war was of absolutely no consequence whatsoever. All he was trying to do was to ingratiate himself to his constituents who included Rev. Wright and all the anti-American $#!+heads who cheered him when he said "God damn America."
0
Reply
Male 10,855
that should say "hypocrisy"
0
Reply
Male 17,511
jtrebowski: If liberals were so interested in "...questioning authority, challenging unbridled power and corruption, and acting as a government watchdog..."
Then why did so many willingly collude with one another in the Journolist scandal ? Just one source of many, I can produce.
0
Reply
Male 5,970
Go to bed Davy.
0
Reply
Female 3,562
OldOllie:

I didn`t even bother to read past your first sentence. Once you start saying "ALL you ___" you immediately act like you know me and everything I think. How do you even know I`m liberal? Just because I hate Fox doesn`t even make me a liberal. That`s not exactly the definition.
I mean, I SUPPOSE Fox could be saying that Obama supporting a man who indirectly killed a general is a GREAT thing because Obama is a great person. I suppose they could somehow be inferring Obama is GREAT BECAYSE he hates American generals. I have absolutely no idea how anyone could suppose that, but it`s plausible if you`re delusional enough.
I mean, I could say Obama hates puppies, but I actually mean that to be a good thing! After all, some puppies become dogs that are vicious and kill people. Therefore, Obama loves vicious killer puppies, and that`s why Obama is great!
0
Reply
Male 10,855
[quote]...hypocrosy...[/quote]

I`m leaning towards "doing what`s practical". Just rushing our troops out of Iraq would`ve been disastrous. I honestly don`t understand why people are complaining about small number of soldiers still there. They`re not combat troops they`re securing our embassies/military assets (STOP COMPLAINING!!!).
0
Reply
Male 3,369
@Davymid: I couldn`t have said it better. I can go to sleep now. :)
0
Reply
Male 12,138
[quote]davymid: The `koolaid` is a reference to the Jim Jones mass suicide in Guiana. He was a liberal pastor in San Francisco that started his own cult.[/quote]
Oh, Crakr, again there`s that cheeky word Liberal in there. Look, he was a crazy bastard. I could just as easily point to 9-11, where they were extremely conservative bastards.

Hey, I lean to the left, you lean to the right. We`ve done this dance before. You point out how Stalin was a extreme Commie left-winger, and I point out how Hitler was an extreme Fascist right-winger. Then comes the predictable post where you point out that the Nazis were in fact not right-wing in any way. They were all Liberals, those Nazi bastards with their free heathcare and social improvement programs!

Every evil bastard that has ever been was a Liberal, and every Conservative was shrouded in the honeyed milk of angels.

Yeah. We get it.
0
Reply
Male 12,138
[quote]I think all of you liberals` perceptions are colored by your seething hate for any news outlet that doesn`t spout Dear Leader`s version of the truth. [/quote]
Ollie, pot meet kettle. Your seething hate (or a better term, paranoia) for all things vaguely against your right-wing conservative world view is completely anathema to you. I find your post funny, and I wish I could say that it was in a "laugh with" kinda way.

To you, every smart college-educated person has been indoctrinated by liberal pinko junky marxist leftist professors who has usurped their minds. Every liberal is a force of evil who needs exorcised.

Your world is entirely black and white, them and us, if you`re not a friend, you`re an enemy who must be cleansed.

Dude, I`d find it hard to live like you. Eyeing up everyone in the street, or on the internet, as a potential foe. What a horrific way to go about your life.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
It`s why like to watch Stewart/Colbert mocking them rather than the screaming that comes from all that corporate news BS.
0
Reply
Male 17,511
[quote]Nevertheless Obama opposed the war before Hillary did.[/quote]

Isn`t then at least hypocrisy that he`s doing/done just what Bush had planned for Iraq and Afghanistan ?
0
Reply
Male 3,369
tridirk and crakr: Neither of you have provided any sources to back up your assertions, yet, when I provided mine, you simply attacked them as being funded by Liberals. When I asked you to prove it...you side-stepped the point. Guys, please. Crakr...I`m not sure where u got ur "change the world" quote, but you`re usually well versed not to have just pulled it out of your ass, so, I`ll just assume that your aversion to it is simply misunderstood. If questioning authority, challenging unbridled power and corruption, and acting as a government and corporate watchdog is so bad, than you are the one drinking the kool-aid.
It`s getting late...I`m not sure I`m gonna respond till tomorrow A.M, but I can`t wait! :)
0
Reply
Male 10,855
[quote]shape (editorialize) the news to fit their worldview[/quote]

And now we have corporations (not just Fox but MSNBC as well) that want to shape the news to fit their worldview. Both reasons why I don`t watch cable news.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
[quote]dozens of prominent Democrats all said Saddam had [WMDs][/quote]

To be fair if the War in Iraq didn`t become very unpopular opposing it would`ve been political suicide. Nevertheless Obama opposed the war before Hillary did.
0
Reply
Male 3,369
"what periodicals do you read?" Yeah..watch out for that "lame-stream gotcha media"! LOL!!!
0
Reply
Male 313
Koolaid for sure. Do you truly believe that the media in our USA is neutral? Really? Even your statement contradicts your argument. [quote]The reason why many journalists are liberal is because the have a desire to question authority and government, hence the distaste amongst the tea-baggers for the mainstream media.[/quote] I thought they weren`t liberal? Oh... I see they are liberal but it`s OK, because they have good intentions? LOL.... Koolaid,

Our media is left leaning and surely not neutral. I don`t have a problem with it, since ideas and ideals usually will work their way to the top. I just get tired or the lib hypocrisy about the media. They cry about Fox, because.... the other main media outlets report what they like to hear, read or see. .... and as far as questioning authority how is being a liberal amongst other liberals questioning authority? They dare not go against their lib peers. They want to be one of, or be looked up to by their own lib Koolaiders
0
Reply
Male 17,511
[quote]The reason why many journalists are liberal is because the have a desire to question authority and government[/quote]

Wrong, The reason why many liberals choose to be journalists is `To change the world`, That`s the problem right there. Liberal journalists aren`t interested in just reporting the news, They want to shape (editorialize) the news to fit their worldview.

This stems from British newspaper editor William Thomas Stead. Who believed in "government by journalism." Stead formulated his views in an 1885 essay, in which he proclaimed the "natural and inevitable emergence of the journalist as the ultimate depository of power in modern democracy."
0
Reply
Male 15,832
[quote]What`s in dispute is the idea that it`s somehow a bad thing that a Native American defended himself successfully.[/quote]
So, what was it in the article that said that the INDISPUTABLE FACT to which the headline referred was somehow a bad thing?

I think all of you liberals` perceptions are colored by your seething hate for any news outlet that doesn`t spout Dear Leader`s version of the truth. You hate Fox News, not because they lie, but because they report facts that are incompatible with your worldview. Well, if your worldview is incompatible with facts, the problem isn`t in the facts.

Many of you seem to take issue with selecting a particular fact from a story and making it the headline. Well, what do you call it when dozens of prominent Democrats all said Saddam had WMD, but according to all of YOUR favorite news sources, Bush was the only one who lied about it?

http://tinyurl.com/d4
Male 243
Has anyone been to Crazy Horse? I have. I`m native american.

Americans had Crazy Horse come under truce to a fort and then stabbed him to death. The monument is going to be an ENTIRE MOUNTAIN. The whole jist is that the white men asked Crazy Horse, "Where is your land now?" Crazy Horse pointed to the west and said "Where my dead lie buried."

Pwn`ed.
0
Reply
Male 3,369
And if you only have one conservative outlet, how come you cons keep trying to claim that Fox`s ratings are so important? (better think about that one, Skippy! LOL!!!!)
0
Reply
Male 17,511
davymid: The `koolaid` is a reference to the Jim Jones mass suicide in Guiana. He was a liberal pastor in San Francisco that started his own cult.
0
Reply
Male 3,369
tridirk said: " And you offer as proof two websites funded by Libs?"
Excuse me..anyone not funded by the Koch Bros. is a Liberal? I see no proof in your assertion. Just keep throwing pasta onto the wall until a noodle sticks, con. media bias
You also said: "So, that would make one news outlet for conservatives and how many for libs?"
Again///you have provided no proof to back up your assertion. Ask any person of real intelligence what they mean by "Liberal Media", and they will say "MSNBC" or "CommonDreams.org", but, like it or not, just because it`s not Fox or WorldNetDaily, doesn`t make it Liberal. The reason why many journalists are liberal is because the have a desire to question authority and government, hence the distaste amongst the tea-baggers for the mainstream media. They started gettin
0
Reply
Male 12,138
I wish someone would show me a glass of this "koolaid" that I`m often accused of drinking. Never really understood that insult, I must admit.

Though I am reminded of a guy back in high-school that was a seriously deranged conspiracy theorist. The moon landings were a lie recorded in a Hollywood studio, Americans were keeping alien technology from the Roswell crash a secret, the world was being taken over by the Illuminati, and the lie of climate change is purely a fabrication designed to establish a New World Order. Seriously, this was his bag. And HE was always accusing all us *sheeple* to keep *drinking the koolaid*. Soz, but that`s the only analogy I have to draw on when someone thumbs their nose at me and tells me to keep drinking the koolaid.

On a side note, that kid hung himself when he was 17. Not relevant, but just to throw that in there (true story).
0
Reply
Male 17,511
Custer was an non-nice individual, But Sitting Bull did not kill him (At least he didn`t participate in his death). After the battle Sitting Bull fled to Saskatchewan, He knew the US Army would use Custer`s defeat as the excuse to hunt down the rest of the free tribes and force them onto reservations.

Custer`s idiocy lead to the persecution of Indians for nearly a hundred years. Being part Indian myself I`m keenly aware of US history in this regard.

Yes, Fox wrote their `title` wrong, But it was based on the falsehood that USA Today wrote initially. This happens a lot, AP stories have to be corrected all the time.
0
Reply
Female 3,562
OldOllie: Nobody is disputing that Custer was killed by Sitting Bull`s tribe. What`s in dispute is the idea that it`s somehow a bad thing that a Native American defended himself successfully.
It`s like saying you`re proud of the fact that our beautiful free nation is built upon the foundation of slavery and slaughter of innocents.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
[quote]oral-action[/quote]
Really? I thought people were just p1553d at the Republicans.
0
Reply
Male 40,772
Be quiet @Altaru, adults are typing...
Except me, I`m off to dreamland! G`night!
0
Reply
Male 40,772
Fair point @Cajun, but then again, half are also newer...
And the point remains, it HAS gotten worse, not better, as evidenced by the oral-action Obama recieved.
The MSM "vetted" Joe The Plumber 10X as closely as a candidate for president? That says it ALL!
0
Reply
Male 3,482
[quote]I think most of us would agree that Journalists that vote Dem/Lib far out number those that vote Cons/Repub. Don`t you agree? [/quote]
I`d like to ask just how much you know about the actual news-reporting process?

Because if you honestly believe the views of the JOURNALISTS have a major affect on what gets reported and how, then, well... You jus` went straight up retarded...
0
Reply
Male 10,855
Here`s a more recent article.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
@5Cats

Half of the surveys from tridirk`s link are older than mine.
0
Reply
Male 3
Who gives a poo, Custer was a drating idiot and deserved to die. I feel bad for the men under his command though.
0
Reply
Male 40,772
@DrProfessor, Obama is a multi-millionaire, it`s not about money, it`s never about money! Did Hillary! Clinton publish her drek, um, book for the cash? no!
It`s all about vanity. Obama is the American Narcissus plain and simple.
0
Reply
Female 93
hahaha... this explains a lot
0
Reply
Male 40,772
@Cajun, a 12 year old response to an accusation that bias has gotten worse IN THE LAST TEN YEARS??
Fail...
Sorry bro, your link blows! Yea verily, and chunks!
0
Reply
Male 10,855
Scroll down to part III section C subsection 1.
0
Reply
Male 3,894
@GuardinGnome "His royalties are to go to a scholarship fund for the children of soldiers killed or disabled" - The USA Today article.

Yep. It`s all about the money. That damn greedy bastard.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
[quote">libs=arrogant koolaid drinkers[/quote">

tridirk = conservative tool

FAIR`s response
0
Reply
Male 2,893
He only "wrote" that to make money.
Come on people.
You know no matter how much you hate him, there is still gonna be that moron who loves the sh*t out of him.
0
Reply
Male 313
trebowski...
So, that would make one news outlet for conservatives and how many for libs? And you offer as proof two websites funded by Libs?

You have the news orgs stacked in your favor and complain about Fox? Here is a link for you. I think most of us would agree that Journalists that vote Dem/Lib far out number those that vote Cons/Repub. Don`t you agree?

libs=arrogant koolaid drinkers
0
Reply
Male 3,369
and I`ll also remember Fox repeating USA today!
0
Reply
Male 3,369
CrakrJak said: "jtrebowski: "Sitting Bull did not take a direct military role in the ensuing battle; as a head chief, he was charged with defensive responsibilities." Wiki Source

Sitting Bull did predict the battle and it`s outcome, But he did not participate in the attack on Custer`s 7th cavalry."

Ok..this seems to be an unbiased source. I`ll remember the next time you complain about using wikipedia as a source, though..lol!
0
Reply
Male 1,815
The editor was really reaching there...
0
Reply
Male 44
[q]I never said it WASN`T true, my point is that the way the facts are presented, and the fact that the title emphasizes a virtually insignificant detail to gather views[/q]

Yes. I don`t see what "liberalism" necessarily has to do with any of this.
0
Reply
Male 537
Fox... Rush Limbahs personal media outlet.

Fair and balanced!
0
Reply
Male 10,855
[quote]...your way to blow the smallest detail out of proportion...[/quote]

My point exactly!
0
Reply
Male 3,482
[quote]Why must the presenter of those facts be smeared, slandered, and ridiculed with childish name calling?[/quote]
Oh, and another thing...

When did I start calling names? You`re the one who started flinging out that "liberal" title you love to attach to anything you don`t like...

Nothing to see here folks, just OldOllie up to his typical bullsh*t again.
0
Reply
Male 3,482
[quote]What is it about the truth that liberals find to be overly inflammatory? Is it because it didn`t pass through one of your approved filters? When facts are contrary to your worldview, why is it that the facts must be suppressed? Why must the presenter of those facts be smeared, slandered, and ridiculed with childish name calling? [/quote]
I never said it WASN`T true, my point is that the way the facts are presented, and the fact that the title emphasizes a virtually insignificant detail to gather views is total bullsh*t.

Why is it that YOUR kind must always go out of your way to blow the smallest detail out of proportion to make anyone you disagree with look bad?
0
Reply
Male 10,855
[quote]and you obviously don`t[/quote]

I find it ridiculous when someone or some entity emphasizes a tiny (albeit controversial) little detail of a book just to get ratings. This book wasn`t about Custer, Sitting Bull, or Bighorn.
The book that is the subject of this "mini-media-circus" is about the First Family`s life in the White House. (not that it interests me that much mind you).
0
Reply
Male 15,832
[quote]Seriously, what`s in question here is the overly inflammatory spin on the title, and THAT`S not USA Today`s fault.[/quote]
What is it about the truth that liberals find to be overly inflammatory? Is it because it didn`t pass through one of your approved filters? When facts are contrary to your worldview, why is it that the facts must be suppressed? Why must the presenter of those facts be smeared, slandered, and ridiculed with childish name calling?

When is your side going to discover intellectual honesty?
0
Reply
Female 74
Custer was an ass anyway.
0
Reply
Male 511
You have to be really dumb to hate on a BAMF like Sitting Bull
0
Reply
Male 15,832
[quote]But it IS correct, is it not?

Why do you care?[/quote]
Because, SOMEBODY has to, and you obviously don`t.
0
Reply
Male 15,510
LMFAO
0
Reply
Male 10,855
@OldOllie

The Fox News completely missed the point of the article they cited.

[quote]But it IS correct, is it not?[/quote]
Why do you care?
0
Reply
Male 3,482
[quote]What point is it in questioning whether the content is true or false?

Sorry, I forgot, truth doesn`t matter to a liberal. [/quote]
OldOllie throwing out the liberal title quite... Liberally! Hah, puns, lol.

All puns aside, seriously, you WOULD resort to throwing it around... It`s so typical of you. "If it doesn`t agree with me, IT`S F*CKING LIBERAL AND THEREFOR WRONG!" *wipes foam from lips* *let`s the veins in neck go slack*

Tell me if I`m wrong. I don`t think I put enough rage and other raw emotions into it...

Seriously, what`s in question here is the overly inflammatory spin on the title, and THAT`S not USA Today`s fault.
0
Reply
Female 798
wow the title "Obama praises Indian Chief who killed US general" makes it seem like some evil foreigner killed an almighty American man, let`s remember who the Americans were Fox News (and it`s Native American, India is on the other side of the world)
0
Reply
Male 39,955
well, technically this is correct.

it`s stupid, but technically correct
0
Reply
Male 17,511
jtrebowski: "Sitting Bull did not take a direct military role in the ensuing battle; as a head chief, he was charged with defensive responsibilities." Wiki Source

Sitting Bull did predict the battle and it`s outcome, But he did not participate in the attack on Custer`s 7th cavalry.
0
Reply
Male 1,744
Fox is dumb (along with CNN, MSNBC, and the rest), and Custer got beat due to his own tactical ineptitude
0
Reply
Male 3,369
@CJ: How did USA Today get the story wrong? I won`t expect a reply for a while, because O`Really(?) is on now.
0
Reply
Male 955
wait wait..fox news made a mistake, thats impossible rofl
0
Reply
Female 58
haha good lord FOX! they really know how to twist the stories to fit their demographic don`t they.
0
Reply
Male 3,369
@ slut etta: nine year olds will just see the flowers..lol
0
Reply
Male 3,369
@tridirk and old ollie: spin is spin, whether it comes from the left or the right. There`s just a lot more that comes from the right. http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1067 "Liberal bias"
0
Reply
Male 17,511
So they quoted a story from USA Today, And it was USA Today that got their story wrong.

Shall I start posting all the crap that the Huffington Post has got wrong ? I have hundreds of examples of their BS stories I could post. Btw, Huff Po is being sued for stealing the idea for their website from 2 other guys.

0
Reply
Female 4,084
just as an aside, wasn`t georgia o`keeffe the lady who painted flowers that look like female genitalia? don`t think i`d want to explain THAT to a 9 year old.........
0
Reply
Male 44
@OldOllie

Of course it matters, but this is a matter of decency in how you put the facts on the table (which Fox obviously doesn`t have). I am simply implying the headline could be misleading, or give wrong first-impressions to people who read it (which seems to be Fox` "goal" here - hence the IAB-post in the first place).
0
Reply
Male 2,436
I can`t believe people are still trying to defend Obama.
0
Reply
Female 1,181
oh yeah, we sure got screwed over by those native americans. thank the great white lord that faux news was here to stick up for those poor, poor people.

oh, and kippran, you rate this 0/10? that`s probably a lot like the rating i`d give each of your 10 posts to date. don`t worry, though, i`m sure you`ll have a great career as an abortion and/or gay rights protester.
0
Reply
Male 313
lol...jtrebowski You are right if we all just read the NY or LA Times and watch SeeBS, ABC, NBC or MSNBC we will be so much better informed! Drink the Koolaid and all will be well.

I am glad our Pres can write a book to his daughters, aren`t you? Wonder if can use his office to promote the sales?

I feel guilty do you? These kind of stories help me to rid myself of my guilt for being born. In the USA and being not of minority birth. Therefore my forefathers and mothers must have been part of the European racists that came to our shores.

Sorry for that. Now I can feel a little better.
0
Reply
Male 47
I was expecting there to be something in this picture. All I see is an accurate article with an accurate title. Seems like someone at IAB headquarters is a hardcore liberal and stretched something (still don`t know what) in this article so that they could have something to get offended at. 0/10
0
Reply
Male 155
*yawn* huh? fox skewing things? today must end in y.
0
Reply
Male 15,832
[quote]What point is it in questioning whether the content is true or false?[/quote]
Sorry, I forgot, truth doesn`t matter to a liberal.
0
Reply
Male 40,772
So anyhow, Sitting bull IS a Great American, but not for the reasons Obama puts forth, eh? Was Sitting Bull a "healer" for touring with the Wild Bill show? In defeat, dispair and disgrace? I think not.
And Fox News quotes another news story, so that makes FOX stupid if the other story has an error in it?
This is a real sad attempt at flame generation...

How did someone get 15,577 posts here, but I`ve never seen his name before? lolz!
0
Reply
Male 44
@OldOllie

What point is it in questioning whether the content is true or false?
0
Reply
Male 2,441
Not even going to read this.
0
Reply
Male 40,772
"A Sioux Medicine man..." nooo, he was a WAR CHIEF! And thank goodness he killed that mass murdering "General" Custer and his band of rapists, child murderers and thugs.
Obama cannot do ANYTHING right, can he?
0
Reply
Male 15,832
[quote]It`s not the content of the article that is in question. It`s the headline.[/quote]
But it IS correct, is it not?
0
Reply
Male 121
@oldollie It`s not the content of the article that is in question. It`s the headline.
0
Reply
Male 15,832
[quote]Seriously? Are you gonna try and defend this?[/quote]
Why does this need defending? Are you saying there`s something in the article that isn`t true?
0
Reply
Male 2,402
Yes, The title of the article is correct. What is the big deal? Even though not personally killed by Sitting Bull. Custer was killed by the Lakota led by Sitting Bull at Little Big Horn. Where is the inaccuracy in that headline? One general defeating another such as historically throughout battles in world time lines. It was a war and Custer was the enemy of the Lakota at the time. Is I-A-B trying to infer more that Fox news is inciting adversity of now a common people due to Obama seeming to be subversive to the nation? If you read the article with an open mind the article does not demonstrate such.
0
Reply
Male 1,625
Fox "news" getting it wrong? What are the odds?
0
Reply
Male 3,482
[quote]What you mean "we," white-eyes?[/quote]
Seriously? Are you gonna try and defend this?
0
Reply
Male 10,855
[quote]What you mean "we," white-eyes?[/quote]

Would YOU care to elaborate?
0
Reply
Male 1,587
I bet it was a mistake... I mean Fox is screwed up at times (well... most of the time) but they prob couldn`t make up sh*t to fill a full anti-obama article on that article so they linked to another? Never mind, the article is still up, and the link is still the same. Oh Fox, why you soo messed up.
0
Reply
Male 1,116
Damn injuns! `merica!
0
Reply
Female 3,562
Well hey, they`re technically right. Apparently Obama hates America because he supports Native Americans. It`s true, if you think about it. The more you love America, the more you have to hate Native Americans. It`s one or the other. In fact, you`re not a true American unless you shoot a Native American today and build a Walmart on his reservation.
0
Reply
Male 3,649
If you actually read the article, it talks about the book that Obama wrote, of Thee I Sing. The only thing messed up is the article heading and the picture.

So messed up, yeah. Screwed over, no. Retarded, only for retards.
0
Reply
Male 3,915
agreed jtrebowski....

this is so sad...are they seriously supporting custer?

really? and i`m sure supporting Eisenhower would have had the same effect no? he killed thousands ya know...
0
Reply
Male 4,867
kudos for working that spin on it, but damn you retarded fox
0
Reply
Male 3,842
Yeah, because the Sioux were not REAL Americans! Them foreigners should just go back where they came from...oh wait...
0
Reply
Male 591
FoxNews: not an actual source of news. Never has been, never will be.
0
Reply
Male 15,832
[quote]...even we think this is completely retarded...[/quote]
What you mean "we," white-eyes?
0
Reply
Male 3,369
This is why I laugh when someone says they get their news from Fox. As far as I`m concerned, it`s an outlet to tell people how to think, and to keep them ignorant.
0
Reply
Female 1,008
Wow. Who let Chad write a news story?
0
Reply
Male 90
TLDR!
0
Reply
Female 200
Well in his defense, Custer had quite the case of Herp-Derpies at Little Bighorn.
0
Reply
Male 169
Link: FoxNews.com Screws Over Obama Story [Pic] [Rate Link] - Hey Fox News, we get it, you f`ing hate Obama, but c`mon, even we think this is completely retarded, even for you.
0
Reply