Kashiwaba Tomoe Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2012/07/24/Jon-Stewart-Slams-ABCs-Brian-Ross-For-Tea-Party-Shooter-Error This is a great Daily Show clip. Basically, ABC news decided to have their first reaction to the Colorado shooting be to check the local tea party website, and then when someone had a name similar to the gunman, say THAT was the gunman. (they also have since claimed that they also called that guys mother at 5:45 A.M. and she confirmed that was her sons name, and are therefore blaming her) This is whats wrong with journalism these days.
Guest Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 Can't say that I'm surprised. Those news stations are desperate for something to say. RIP Journalism 1605-2012
Kamen Rider Kuuga Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 You can never demonize the Tea Party enough! MORE! DEMONIZE THEM MORE!
gregathit Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 You can never demonize the Tea Party enough! MORE! DEMONIZE THEM MORE! Alrighty then....and in other news.... You have to love how threatened both parties (especially dem's) are so hateful of the tea party. Personally I love them just cause they make the folks in washington nervous.
Kashiwaba Tomoe Posted July 25, 2012 Author Posted July 25, 2012 Whats funny is how a ethnically diverse group whose only causes are lower taxes and more responsible government first get mocked, then when they win elections, they suddenly are racists.
Kamen Rider Kuuga Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 I smell a Tea Party member! SOMEBODY GET THE PADDLES!
thesapien Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 I worry the Tea Party is hijacking the Libertarian Party. But I also think it's worth the risk because Libertarians always had a marketing problem and identity crisis. "No, liberal means republican!" might had once been true but why argue against sentiments and confusing everyone over labels during an election? "Tea Party" sounds like a nice party with tea, harkens back to great American imagery, and just totally works for marketing. This won't happen, but how awesome would it be if the Tea Party replaced Republicans while the Pirate Party from Europe came in and replaced Democrats? Just the imagery, alone, works for me. They'd both throw great costume parties!
Kashiwaba Tomoe Posted July 25, 2012 Author Posted July 25, 2012 The libertarian party has a simple problem sapien, they want you to agree fully with their platform or GTFO. Me, myself, I agree with them on domestic policy, but not foreign policy (they're too head in the sand-ish there). I'd just settle for Tea party replacing the GOP (it's allready happening). Unlike the GOP as a whole, they have balls.
Fyrecontroll Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 What exactly is "too head in the sand-ish" to you? As far as the events we immerse ourselves in overseas, do you think it would be OK for China to send troops to California looking for dissidents? Or an even more apt example: A Canadian national creates a huge cloud of mustard gas in Shanghai killing thousands, then hides in Mexico. Would it be OK for China to invade the US because we might be producing chemical weapons?
gregathit Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 What exactly is "too head in the sand-ish" to you? As far as the events we immerse ourselves in overseas' date=' do you think it would be OK for China to send troops to California looking for dissidents? Or an even more apt example: A Canadian national creates a huge cloud of mustard gas in Shanghai killing thousands, then hides in Mexico. Would it be OK for China to invade the US because we might be producing chemical weapons? [/quote'] Wait.....what? Yes, Obama and his cronies (Hitlery Clinton as one of the worst) tend to stick their noses in the strangest places....just one more reason to vote them all out of office come November!
Kashiwaba Tomoe Posted July 25, 2012 Author Posted July 25, 2012 What exactly is "too head in the sand-ish" to you? As far as the events we immerse ourselves in overseas' date=' do you think it would be OK for China to send troops to California looking for dissidents? Or an even more apt example: A Canadian national creates a huge cloud of mustard gas in Shanghai killing thousands, then hides in Mexico. Would it be OK for China to invade the US because we might be producing chemical weapons? [/quote'] That's an irrelvent example, Afghanistan and Iraq were rogue states. If such a person were in Canada/America, the person would be hunted down. Dunno about mexico, pretty fucked up country currently. That said I still could see China sending troops over, the ChiComs are itching for a war currently, if you keep up with events.
Kashiwaba Tomoe Posted July 26, 2012 Author Posted July 26, 2012 Which is why the fair tax is a pipedream it seems, unforgettably.
thesapien Posted July 26, 2012 Posted July 26, 2012 Me' date=' myself, I agree with them on domestic policy, but not foreign policy (they're too head in the sand-ish there). [/quote'] The Libertarian Party is the only party that has the nation's interests in mind when it comes to foreign policy. Otherwise, most foreign policy is about special interests. We're like the country for hire. War, Inc. That said I still could see China sending troops over' date=' the ChiComs are itching for a war currently, if you keep up with events. [/quote'] I keep up with world news and am not at all sure what you're referring to here. It doesn't make sense for Americans to call Chinese "communists". What's next? Gonna start calling them fat?
Kashiwaba Tomoe Posted July 26, 2012 Author Posted July 26, 2012 It doesn't make sense for Americans to call Chinese "communists". What's next, saying it doesn't make sense to call them Chinese ?
Fyrecontroll Posted July 26, 2012 Posted July 26, 2012 The Chinese practice communism in the same sense that the US practices democracy. (The US is not, nor has ever been a democracy)
gregathit Posted July 26, 2012 Posted July 26, 2012 The Chinese practice communism in the same sense that the US practices democracy. (The US is not' date=' nor has ever been a democracy) [/quote'] Cry "Republic" ... "Republic". It is a common inter-change anymore (an ignorant one, but common). Democracy is nothing more than mob rule, whereas a republic offers some protection in the form of the bill of rights (or similar type guarantees) and other processes to protect minorities.
Fyrecontroll Posted July 26, 2012 Posted July 26, 2012 The Chinese practice communism in the same sense that the US practices democracy. (The US is not' date=' nor has ever been a democracy) [/quote'] Cry "Republic" ... "Republic". It is a common inter-change anymore (an ignorant one, but common). Democracy is nothing more than mob rule, whereas a republic offers some protection in the form of the bill of rights (or similar type guarantees) and other processes to protect minorities. My statement still stands.
gregathit Posted July 26, 2012 Posted July 26, 2012 My statement still stands. LOL! I wasn't disputing it, but rather expounding on it.
prideslayer Posted July 27, 2012 Posted July 27, 2012 They call themselves communists, and are closer to it than most, that's enough for me. The "but it's not real communism" is rather played out. "Real" (or 'pure', or 'full', or whatever) communism hasn't been tried because it's impossible, what has been tried thus far is about as close as it can get given human nature.
Kashiwaba Tomoe Posted July 27, 2012 Author Posted July 27, 2012 They call themselves communists' date=' and are closer to it than most, that's enough for me. [/quote'] Hence: ChiComs. And if they don't like it tough shit. If they're offended: Great.
thesapien Posted July 28, 2012 Posted July 28, 2012 They call themselves communists' date=' and are closer to it than most, that's enough for me. The "but it's not [i']real[/i] communism" is rather played out. "Real" (or 'pure', or 'full', or whatever) communism hasn't been tried because it's impossible, what has been tried thus far is about as close as it can get given human nature. People call themselves many things. If we ignore labels for a moment and just compare apples to apples, say looking at business and economics, the US and China are quite similar. Both have command economies with central planners controlling and regulating central banks and exchanges. Both countries have very similar everything when it comes to doing business. Actually, many people doing business in China say they have more a free market. The labels we use on governments are mostly just fashion and style. Name branding.
prideslayer Posted July 28, 2012 Posted July 28, 2012 They call themselves communists' date=' and are closer to it than most, that's enough for me. The "but it's not [i']real[/i] communism" is rather played out. "Real" (or 'pure', or 'full', or whatever) communism hasn't been tried because it's impossible, what has been tried thus far is about as close as it can get given human nature. People call themselves many things. If we ignore labels for a moment and just compare apples to apples, say looking at business and economics, the US and China are quite similar. Both have command economies with central planners controlling and regulating central banks and exchanges. There is a difference (with a distinction, though perhaps not forever) between control and regulation. The government in the US exerts no direct controlling power over the markets beyond adjusting the prime rate. All other effects come secondarily as side effects (intentional and not) of regulation, notwithstanding attempts at direct intervention like bailouts and subsidies. China exerts much more controlling influence directly on the economy and market sectors, including state run corporations that constitute large sections of some markets -- look at their defense and energy industries for large examples. It may feel nice to sit around looking for similarities rather than differences in some attempt at magnanimity, looking for a common ground, or simply to feel somehow superior to those that see vast (sometimes superficial) differences. There are however fundamental differences that are very real. Of course, the system is human, and despite the best intentions of their founders (if they had them), greed always wins -- which is why capitalism always wins. It's no surprise that China has an ever growing set of capitalist characteristics; centrally planned economies are still subject to market forces that may be at odds with the planned direction. China has been moving away from central economic planning for the past 50 years, but they are still mostly planned, and have a long way to go.
Kashiwaba Tomoe Posted July 28, 2012 Author Posted July 28, 2012 Of course, in the US women don't have forced abortions 9 months into a pregnancy for having one kid to many. And political prisoners don't have their organs harvested to be sold for transplants......
Symon Posted July 29, 2012 Posted July 29, 2012 I'm still waiting for the hammer to drop on Fox News myself. Some very interesting stuff concerning Murdoch's 'news gathering techniques', 'reporting accuracy', 'access to power and politicians' and 'ethics' in the News International meltdown over here in the UK. Rather a lot of top news executives have been indicted on criminal offenses. At some point, a Senate committee might like to look at Fox in the states.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now