Today's Left, Yesterday's Left

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

syzygy

Diamond Member
Feb 5, 2001
3,038
0
76
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Lets see, we have the Neocons killing thousands and thousands of Iraqis to save them and Iraqis killing Americans and Iraqis, presumably so they can kill them exclusively. Then we can read PNAC and see that none of this had even the most remote connection to the welfare of the Iraqi people, but rather a Dream of Communism, I mean, a New American Century, the latest psychopathic ism on the scene. No wonder the war was illegal and the American people were lied too. Psychopathology sells best only when people are terrorized. Only the terrorized kill people to save them. Another word for terror is certainty.


here is a case in point of someone cooked between the ears, who long
ago lost his compass, and who now sees up as down and down up. i suppose
in all that drivel there is a kernel of compassion for some conceptualized third
worlder. well, i would tell that luckless indigent to appreciate the honesty of
his dictator's evil rather than accept the hand of a leftist who's terminally
confused on the basics. if you think your fate is bad now, poor sir, wait 'til
the moonies of the world get through 'helping' you.

in reading robert conquest's book, the communists were 'helping' the ukrainians
realize their social potential by killing them off, which is the type of politicized moral
perversions that moonie spews forth. from what i can tell, moonie is trapped in
his own hypocrisy, projecting the same insecurities which he himself feels but
does not know how to exorcize.

 

Pabster

Lifer
Apr 15, 2001
16,986
1
0
Originally posted by: tss4
I wouldn't expect to see any coverage of the anti-sheehan caravan. How would a news peice on it stir up contraversay and ratings?

Normally, I'd agree with that point as well. Except that the MSM had no problem pointing out the "other side" with respect to anti-War rallies and protests (you know, the one they claimed attracted 300,000+ but didn't even muster 100K?) or Farrakhan's MMM debacles.
 

imported_tss4

Golden Member
Jun 30, 2004
1,607
0
0
Originally posted by: Pabster
Originally posted by: tss4
I wouldn't expect to see any coverage of the anti-sheehan caravan. How would a news peice on it stir up contraversay and ratings?

Normally, I'd agree with that point as well. Except that the MSM had no problem pointing out the "other side" with respect to anti-War rallies and protests (you know, the one they claimed attracted 300,000+ but didn't even muster 100K?) or Farrakhan's MMM debacles.

Well, you're entitled to your opinion, but I can completely understand why an anti war rally would attract coverage while an anti-anti-war rally would not (since the pro war movement is allready represented). And as far as Farrahhan, that guy is a nut case, so anytime he does something its going to be entertaining. The news is a business that has little to do with the news and lots to do with entertaining the masses.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
74,817
6,778
126
Originally posted by: syzygy
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Lets see, we have the Neocons killing thousands and thousands of Iraqis to save them and Iraqis killing Americans and Iraqis, presumably so they can kill them exclusively. Then we can read PNAC and see that none of this had even the most remote connection to the welfare of the Iraqi people, but rather a Dream of Communism, I mean, a New American Century, the latest psychopathic ism on the scene. No wonder the war was illegal and the American people were lied too. Psychopathology sells best only when people are terrorized. Only the terrorized kill people to save them. Another word for terror is certainty.


here is a case in point of someone cooked between the ears, who long
ago lost his compass, and who now sees up as down and down up. i suppose
in all that drivel there is a kernel of compassion for some conceptualized third
worlder. well, i would tell that luckless indigent to appreciate the honesty of
his dictator's evil rather than accept the hand of a leftist who's terminally
confused on the basics. if you think your fate is bad now, poor sir, wait 'til
the moonies of the world get through 'helping' you.

in reading robert conquest's book, the communists were 'helping' the ukrainians
realize their social potential by killing them off, which is the type of politicized moral
perversions that moonie spews forth. from what i can tell, moonie is trapped in
his own hypocrisy, projecting the same insecurities which he himself feels but
does not know how to exorcize.
So when are you leading the charge on North Korea? I have a wreath for those who die in the first wave. Oh wait, I bet you had in mind somebody else should go. You nut-case idealists always do. But you should go first so you can stomp through the guts of children who will never have their own thanks to you. You are a demented cowardly dreamer, syzygy, just like Stalin and all the other Saviors.

 

Pabster

Lifer
Apr 15, 2001
16,986
1
0
Originally posted by: tss4
Well, you're entitled to your opinion, but I can completely understand why an anti war rally would attract coverage while an anti-anti-war rally would not (since the pro war movement is allready represented). And as far as Farrahhan, that guy is a nut case, so anytime he does something its going to be entertaining. The news is a business that has little to do with the news and lots to do with entertaining the masses.

The problem with that theory is that the MSM did cover the "anti-anti-war" rally.

It's a perfect, glaring example of the bias that exists.

At least we can agree on Farrakhan.
 

Pabster

Lifer
Apr 15, 2001
16,986
1
0
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
You are a demented cowardly dreamer, syzygy, just like Stalin and all the other Saviors.

Ah, another of Moonie's famous personal attacks.

You sound an awful lot like Dick "Nazi And Gulags" Durbin.

 

imported_tss4

Golden Member
Jun 30, 2004
1,607
0
0
Originally posted by: Pabster
Originally posted by: tss4
Well, you're entitled to your opinion, but I can completely understand why an anti war rally would attract coverage while an anti-anti-war rally would not (since the pro war movement is allready represented). And as far as Farrahhan, that guy is a nut case, so anytime he does something its going to be entertaining. The news is a business that has little to do with the news and lots to do with entertaining the masses.

The problem with that theory is that the MSM did cover the "anti-anti-war" rally.

It's a perfect, glaring example of the bias that exists.

At least we can agree on Farrakhan.

It was very limited coverage. I'm really at a lost for how you can say its a glaring example of the bias that exists. For gods sakes, FOX mentioned it.

This is the irony of it all. Fox news (supposedly conservative news outlet) and the other outlets (supposedly liberal outlets) cover the exact same things! The only difference comes when the opinion peices and shows are on. Sure, I'll grant that the opinion shows differ between stations and show a bias, but the stories the stations cover are based on what sells advertising time.
 

Pabster

Lifer
Apr 15, 2001
16,986
1
0
Originally posted by: tss4
It was very limited coverage. I'm really at a lost for how you can say its a glaring example of the bias that exists. For gods sakes, FOX mentioned it.

LOL. Of course Fox covered it. They have a right bias, and I'm sure you wouldn't disagree on that.

What about the rest?

I'd be interested to hear what you call "covering one side of the story"?

 

imported_tss4

Golden Member
Jun 30, 2004
1,607
0
0
Originally posted by: Pabster
Originally posted by: tss4
It was very limited coverage. I'm really at a lost for how you can say its a glaring example of the bias that exists. For gods sakes, FOX mentioned it.

LOL. Of course Fox covered it. They have a right bias, and I'm sure you wouldn't disagree on that.

What about the rest?

I'd be interested to hear what you call "covering one side of the story"?



see above, I edited to address the point that stations with supposedly different biases all cover the exact same news!

And I never claimed they covered all sides of the story. I merely pointed out that they cover the sensational parts. The parts that sell newspapers and get viewers. I don't see how you could claim otherwise when liberal and conservative outlets cover the exact same stories. If they were puesueing an agenda with the stories they select to cover, then they should be showing different stories.
 

Pabster

Lifer
Apr 15, 2001
16,986
1
0
Originally posted by: tss4
And I never claimed they covered all sides of the story. I merely pointed out that they cover the sensational parts. The parts that sell newspapers and get viewers. I don't see how you could claim otherwise when liberal and conservative outlets cover the exact same stories. If they were puesueing an agenda with the stories they select to cover, then they should be showing different stories.

That's just not true. For example, how many stories does Fox report on in a given week that the (rest of) the MSM does not?
 

imported_tss4

Golden Member
Jun 30, 2004
1,607
0
0
Originally posted by: Pabster
Originally posted by: tss4
And I never claimed they covered all sides of the story. I merely pointed out that they cover the sensational parts. The parts that sell newspapers and get viewers. I don't see how you could claim otherwise when liberal and conservative outlets cover the exact same stories. If they were puesueing an agenda with the stories they select to cover, then they should be showing different stories.

That's just not true. For example, how many stories does Fox report on in a given week that the (rest of) the MSM does not?

I can't think of a single notable news story that would indicate bias (not talking about the flulff stories here) that MSM or FOX aired that the other did not. I'm all ears though. Since you say that they have a bias, perhaps you could give me 3 or 4 examples over the last few months.

Remember you pointed to the Sheehan coverage as proof of bias, yet the coverage was the same. Like I said, I'll readily admit that the opinion peices are different, but the stories covered are chosen because they are entertaining and will sell ad space.
 

Pabster

Lifer
Apr 15, 2001
16,986
1
0
Originally posted by: tss4
I can't think of a single notable news story that would indicate bias (not talking about the flulff stories here) that MSM or FOX aired that the other did not. I'm all ears though. Since you say that they have a bias, perhaps you could give me 3 or 4 examples over the last few months.

I suppose that depends heavily on your definition of "fluff".

Remember you pointed to the Sheehan coverage as proof of bias, yet the coverage was the same. Like I said, I'll readily admit that the opinion peices are different, but the stories covered are chosen because they are entertaining and will sell ad space.

Could you perhaps show me where the MSM covered the anti-Sheehan crowd, other than Fox? I certainly don't recall any spots about it on network news, for example.
 

imported_tss4

Golden Member
Jun 30, 2004
1,607
0
0
Originally posted by: Pabster
Originally posted by: tss4
I can't think of a single notable news story that would indicate bias (not talking about the flulff stories here) that MSM or FOX aired that the other did not. I'm all ears though. Since you say that they have a bias, perhaps you could give me 3 or 4 examples over the last few months.

I suppose that depends heavily on your definition of "fluff".

Remember you pointed to the Sheehan coverage as proof of bias, yet the coverage was the same. Like I said, I'll readily admit that the opinion peices are different, but the stories covered are chosen because they are entertaining and will sell ad space.

Could you perhaps show me where the MSM covered the anti-Sheehan crowd, other than Fox? I certainly don't recall any spots about it on network news, for example.

I'm at a loss here. Perhaps you need to clarify. You just said:

MSM did cover the "anti-anti-war" rally.

So, how can you be claiming they did not now? Look, I knew about the anti-anti war protests and I don't watch FOX news often. We both know it was there, because it was entertaining.

And I quick search on MSNBC got this

"Conservatives counter-protest
Conservative activists and military families were en route to Crawford from California on a tour called ?You don?t speak for me, Cindy!? The caravan coordinated by Move America Forward plans to hold a pro-Bush rally in town Saturday."

and this

"The protest also sparked counter rallies by Bush supporters who accused Sheehan of using her son?s death to push the liberal agenda of groups supporting her. Critics also said the anti-war demonstration was hurting U.S. troop morale while boosting the Iraqi insurgency.

Many Bush supporters pointed out that Sheehan never spoke against Bush or the war when she and other grieving families met the president about two months after her son died last year."

I could continue and paste more, but I think you get the point. It was covered.

If you want to find some, I would use the phrase "counter protest" by the way.
 

imported_tss4

Golden Member
Jun 30, 2004
1,607
0
0
Originally posted by: Pabster

I suppose that depends heavily on your definition of "fluff".

I would define fluff as things that have nothing to do with politics. What were you thinking it should be defined as? Like a news peice on how a study found that the sound of dolphins can increase fetal development.
 

Pabster

Lifer
Apr 15, 2001
16,986
1
0
Originally posted by: tss4
And I quick search on MSNBC got this

I could continue and paste more, but I think you get the point. It was covered.

If you want to find some, I would use the phrase "counter protest" by the way.

MSNBC? I would hardly call them mainstream. I know many people here consider Fox to be mainstream, but I'm not sure how you can call a channel "mainstream" when it requires a subscription to receive it (as in not free OTA television that many Americans still use and rely on.)

Take a look at the "Big 3" and see what you find.
 

Pabster

Lifer
Apr 15, 2001
16,986
1
0
Originally posted by: tss4
I would define fluff as things that have nothing to do with politics. What were you thinking it should be defined as? Like a news peice on how a study found that the sound of dolphins can increase fetal development.

I define "fluff" as stories which are opinion pieces for one party or another. As you might imagine, I find a lot of "fluff" in the MSM these days.
 

OneOfTheseDays

Diamond Member
Jan 15, 2000
7,052
0
0
our country would be a lot better off if we were focused on the real problems instead of Cindy Sheehan and Michael Moore. I think we should focus our attention on those who are actually in power, novel idea don't you think?
 

imported_tss4

Golden Member
Jun 30, 2004
1,607
0
0
Originally posted by: Pabster
Originally posted by: tss4
And I quick search on MSNBC got this

I could continue and paste more, but I think you get the point. It was covered.

If you want to find some, I would use the phrase "counter protest" by the way.

MSNBC? I would hardly call them mainstream. I know many people here consider Fox to be mainstream, but I'm not sure how you can call a channel "mainstream" when it requires a subscription to receive it (as in not free OTA television that many Americans still use and rely on.)

Take a look at the "Big 3" and see what you find.


MSNBC.com is where nbc news points you to from the web. It covers most of the same stuff that nbc nightly news does. However, here are quotes from cbs news and abc news. I respect your opinion, but at this point, I think I've shown that with regard to the counter protest, the MSM covered it just as much as Fox. In fact, I went over to Fox news to see if, perhaps, the coverage was more lengthy than I found at CBS and ABC and it wasn't. I found two articles refering to the counter rallies. This was all done in less than ten minutes. So, clearly, neither Fox nor the MSM was hiding this info in hard to find places.


"She has a political agenda that goes way beyond her son's death in combat," said Taylor, whose conservative group has held pro-troop rallies since the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks and counter-protests of anti-war demonstrations. "

And here is a article devoted to the two rally camps:

(CBS) Several thousand people descended on President George W. Bush's adopted hometown Saturday, most in a cross-country caravan for a pro-Bush rally and others to support an anti-war demonstration led by grieving mother Cindy Sheehan.

Bush supporters gathered for an event marking the culmination of the "You don't speak for me, Cindy!" tour, which started last week in California. The crowd of about 1,500 chanted, "Cindy, go home!"

"You are giving hope and encouragement to the enemies of America," said former California Assemblyman Howard Kaloogian, a Republican who co-founded the group that coordinated the rally.

Meanwhile, busloads of war protesters gathered several miles away at "Camp Casey," named for Sheehan's 24-year-old son who died in Iraq last year.

CBS News Correspondent Mark Knoller reports that President Bush remained on the grounds of his ranch behind a security perimeter but he made his case about Iraq in his Saturday radio address.

"Our efforts in Iraq and the broader Middle East will require more time, more sacrifice and continued resolve," Mr. Bush said. "Yet people across the Middle East are choosing a future of freedom and prosperity and hope."

A bell-ringing ceremony on Saturday honored soldiers serving in Iraq. Organizers estimated the crowd at more than 2,000 but it appeared smaller.

"I know that the Camp Casey movement is going to end the war in Iraq," Sheehan said, adding that no other families should have to suffer the loss of a relative. She led the crowd in chanting "Not one more!"

At the pro-Bush rally several miles away, there were some heated moments when two members of Protest Warrior, a group that frequently holds counter protests to anti-war rallies, walked in with a sign that read "Say No to War ? Unless a Democrat is President."

Many Bush supporters only saw the top of the sign and believed the men were war protesters, so they began shouting and chasing the pair out. One man tore up their signs. When Will Marean of Minneapolis, Minnesota, kept repeating that he was on the Bush side and tried to explain Protest Warrior's mission, one Bush supporter shook his hand and apologized.

A few Bush supporters went to the edge of the anti-war camp on Saturday, trying to remove some of the hundreds of white crosses bearing fallen soldiers' names. They had a list from families who did not want their sons' or daughters' names associated with Sheehan's group.

Sheriff's deputies said they could remove the name tags but not the crosses, so the group removed a few tags and left without incident.

Sheehan, of Vacaville, California, started camping out off the road leading to Bush's ranch on Aug. 6, soon after the president's Texas vacation began. She vowed to remain unless he talked to her about the war with Iraq that claimed the life of her son Casey and more than 1,870 other U.S. soldiers.

Sheehan said that after the protest ends Wednesday, some of the group will spread its message on a tour, with the first stop probably in the Texas district of Republican Tom DeLay, the Majority Leader of the U.S. House of Representatives.

Bush has said he appreciates Sheehan's right to protest and understands her anguish but will not change his schedule to meet with her. His vacation is to end Sept. 2.

Sheehan and other grieving families met with Bush about two months after her son died last year, before she became a vocal opponent of the war.


and here's a one from ABC

A caravan proclaiming support for U.S. troops began a tour through California on Monday and stopped in the hometown of Cindy Sheehan, the anti-war mother who gained national prominence during a vigil outside President Bush's Texas ranch.


Conservative activists and military families embarked on a tour they are calling "You don't speak for me, Cindy!" and are planning rallies in several California cities before heading to Crawford, Texas.


"It's time to lay down the anger. We need to continue to uphold those people over there, to uphold those men and women with their boots on the ground," said Deborah Johns, head of the Northern California Marine Moms, who helped organize the caravan.


"That's not the message being made" by the mother of the fallen soldier, Johns said during a rally in Sheehan's hometown, where about 30 Bush supporters gathered outside the Vacaville Reporter newspaper.


Vacaville was among several stops for the caravan, which is being sponsored by Move America Forward, a Bay Area-based group. Other rallies Monday were scheduled in San Francisco, Sacramento, Fresno and Bakersfield.


A verbal confrontation erupted when the caravan arrived in Sacramento outside radio station KFBK-AM, where it was met by anti-war protesters chanting "Bring them home."


Tempers flared when Sheehan supporter Dan Elliott, 71, confronted caravan members by waving a sign reading "Death is not support" and heckling Johns as she addressed the crowd.


"You are ruining the morale over there," responded Greg Parkinson, a Bush supporter who said he was on leave from the Army after serving seven months in Iraq. "You don't understand."


Members of the caravan called the anti-war protesters communists and said they were "aiding and abetting the enemy." Those comments enraged Sheehan supporter Dee Ann Heath of Sacramento, who said she has two sons serving in Iraq and another preparing to leave.


"I don't support the war, but I support my sons," she said. "I simply want them to come home."


Several people traveling with the caravan said they have family members serving in the military, and some said they knew Sheehan and her son, Casey.


Toni Colip, 50, of Vacaville, said her son, David, went to high school with Casey Sheehan and is now in the Marines, although not in Iraq. She said her son opposes Sheehan's activities and has asked her to support his military service even if he is injured or killed.


"He said, 'Don't dishonor me. Don't walk on my grave,'" Colip said.


Sheehan's 24-year-old son, Army Spc. Casey Sheehan, died last year in Iraq. She began a protest vigil Aug. 6 on the road leading to Bush's ranch, an act that has encouraged anti-war activists to join her and prompted peace vigils throughout the country.


She vowed to remain until Bush agreed to meet with her or until his monthlong vacation ended, but she flew to Los Angeles last week after her 74-year-old mother had a stroke.


The pro-Bush caravan plans to join fellow supporters who have set up their own camp in downtown Crawford as a reaction to the Sheehan-inspired vigil. Bush was in Salt Lake City on Monday, where he spoke to a national veterans group to rally support for the war.


Several of those in the caravan said they understood Sheehan's anger but disagreed with her protest.


"This is not the way to honor her son," said Lori Judy, 49, of Vacaville, whose son, Tim, served in Iraq.


Drivers waved flags as the caravan left Vacaville on its way to Sacramento, led by a recreational vehicle and a moving van covered with a sign reading, "Cindy Sheehan does not speak for me."



I've clearly shown that the counter war protest were covered by the MSM.
 

imported_tss4

Golden Member
Jun 30, 2004
1,607
0
0
Originally posted by: Pabster
Originally posted by: tss4
I would define fluff as things that have nothing to do with politics. What were you thinking it should be defined as? Like a news peice on how a study found that the sound of dolphins can increase fetal development.

I define "fluff" as stories which are opinion pieces for one party or another. As you might imagine, I find a lot of "fluff" in the MSM these days.

and FOX uses the opinion peices cause it sells the news, just like sex. And these 24 hour news stations can't actually find 24 hours of entertaining news.... thus the filler.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
74,817
6,778
126
Originally posted by: Pabster
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
The enemy is not the left or the right but true believers as demonstrated by Israel and Palestine.

That sounds like something Cindy herself would muster.

After all, she's also shown herself to be quite frustrated with our policy towards Israel and some would even label her anti-Semite.

It only sounds that way to a simplistic stereotype thinker who is programmed to respond by regurgitating the latest right winged pablum. You are a true believer who knows the 'right side'.


Originally posted by: Pabster
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
You are a demented cowardly dreamer, syzygy, just like Stalin and all the other Saviors.

Ah, another of Moonie's famous personal attacks.

You sound an awful lot like Dick "Nazi And Gulags" Durbin.

Demonstrating once again your tin ear..................


When do we invade North Korea? Hum?
 

Proletariat

Diamond Member
Dec 9, 2004
5,614
0
0
Originally posted by: syzygy
Originally posted by: Proletariat

I would agree that the left does sometimes get caught up in idealism and loses sight of reality. But its pretty insulting to insinuate that the left ever excuses or turned a blind eye tto Stalins actions. If anything the left has been strong in pointing out vile actions by Communist governments, I.E. Tibet, Xinjiang etc. The whole Iraq thing just strikes me as dirty because of our support and then betrayal of Saddam. Its like we're using people for our geo-political gain. But then again you are admitting that.

Once you have though, where do you go from there? The world is assured to remain the same place it always was.

true. there were western communists who did try to reveal the genocide against ukrainian
peasants, don cossacks, and the like. but there were not the majority.

in the intervening decades, ofcourse, the radical left has changed their story. stalin is
now a bad man and the peasants are now victims. too late though.

as i stated, the magnitude is not the same. the iraqi situation is not comparable. but the
perversions employed by certain loud, and sometime influential, quarters on the left
does not appear to have changed. thank you.

I'm curious as to who these Western Communists were. From my knowledge there were Western Socialists. Do you have any links about these Western Communists aiding and abetting Stalin?

There has never really been a true Communist leader as well. Most leaders used Communism as a way to dupe the people into something that sounded nice or used it as a galvanizing philosophy against Imperialism and/or to gain freedom.

And if you are somehow construing far leftists in America as Communist, thats quite false. There are a lot of far leftists in America that are simply Socialists but in the skewed political system in America are relegated to the outside of the mainstream.