-
Hurricane Frances. Bill Clinton's heart bypass. Hurricane Frances. Bill Clinton's operation. On and on it went this past weekend. And now today the media is repeating over and over a "grim milestone" of 1,000 dead soldiers in the Iraq war. That's not something to be glossed over or forgotten but what about the slaughter in Russia?!
If you've read any of the newspaper (or online) coverage you'll notice that little to no mention is made of the ethnicity of the "terrorists" who slaughtered HUNDREDS OF CHILDREN. The networks and newspapers all covered the Abu Gharaib prison scandal repeatedly for days and days. But when MUSLIM EXTREMIST (Islamo-fascists) TERRORISTS slaughter hundreds of children the media gives it a brief mention and then it's on to what Kerry said and blah, blah, blah.
Why doesn't the media cover it? It's simple really. If they give the slaugher of hundreds of innocent children, women and men the proper amount of coverage than John and Jane Doe in America will see more brutal evidence of the enemy that we're all facing. And they'll be reminded of how important our security really is. And then they'll come to the realization that there's really no choice when it comes to who to vote for. They know that George Bush is the only choice for President if you're concerned with your safety and the safety of your family.
If you don't realize that the media is horribly biased ask yourself what about the slaughter of these children in Russia. And ask yourself one more question, what if 9/11 happened and countries around the world didn't cover the story? What would you say then? What would you say about their motives? :mad:
-
It's hard to believe that there are that many people in this country with their heads buried that far in the....well, where ever it is that they're buried. Every time I see a John Kerry sticker on a car, I just stare in amazement. I wnat to shout out at the top of my lungs, "what are you, STUPID!!!!?"
How many times have you heard the news report (now this is NATIONAL news, mind you) on the (female person) who called Kerry "hot!"? I heard it three or four times today. That's national news worthy? I'm so disappointed. :(
-
Did you hear that after Kerry loses the election he's going to get a job promoting the shampoo - "Really Big Head & Shoulders." :D
-
I think you hit that one right on the head Dan. In the liberal media's eyes the less attention directed towards terrorism right now the better for their preferred (weak ass I might add) candidate.
What's f'ed up is that if Kerry were to get elected and weaken our stance on defense and security and proactivity in the war we are in, every one of them is gonna take it right up the ass along with everyone else when the terrorists strike here in the US.
I firmly believe that we are in what could be called WW3 although no one will call it that (wouldn't want to alarm anyone). We have wide spread enemies of Islamic extremists throughout the world that would like nothing better than to nuke the US for no particular reason given the means to do so. The people that would have this weak excuse of a defender (Kerry) in office leading our country in this environment just amaze me too. It is like they have no brain. It's like me taking my wacker to Lake Ming and actually thinking and believing I'm gonna bring home a trophey in BGF. They are totally lame on their thinking on this "WAR WE ARE IN" HELLO you stupid ass Kerry sheep !!!!!!!!!!!!.
I guess because it doesn't feel like wartime here at home there is a level of complacency at work here. They attack Bush for life here at home that's pretty damn good for most. The same exact things that "insulate" us from that war. Focusing on their gay rights, welfare, economy, on and on... and ignoring the NUMBER ONE problem we face. The one problem that if not handled properly could end the US's existance as we know it. The problem that if not handled strongly and proactively NOW could make all those other issues moot points. I have some differences with the Bush admin on some issues (see sig for one) but there is not even a remote question in my mind who we need in command based on the choices running, to address the war and terror problems we and the world face.
ok I'm going back to work now that I've pissed myself off again on this subject. :hammer2:
-
They won't cover it because over 30% of the terrorists in that Russian school were of Arab descent, obviously part of the same "rent-a-terrorist" group that we're fighting in Iraq. As usual, these murderous fascists have been kindly referred to as "Chechan rebels". Gimme a Fn break.
-
They won't cover it because over 30% of the terrorists in that Russian school were of Arab descent, obviously part of the same "rent-a-terrorist" group that we're fighting in Iraq. As usual, these murderous fascists have been kindly referred to as "Chechan rebels". Gimme a Fn break.
What about when the soviets carpet bombed an entire city back in the 90's in chechnia?? did that get coverage? or the human rights abusues they did to them? where was that on prime time? there are two sides to the story and you are not hearing everything. Oh and didn't we get attacked under gw's watch? rabid dogs you are.
-
I read an article some time back that liberals "tend to" look at their political stance as their religion. Since a fair amount of liberals "tend to" have very little faith. I guess this is why we can't understand their reasoning on some issues. Trying to understand a liberal is like trying to understand a person of faith from a religion very different from your own. Now before I get bombed with that statement certainly not all liberals are this way.
As far as the media. I pretty much stick to Fox. I can tell you that they have covered the Russian act pretty extensively. I refuse to watch some of the other news stations because they just make me too damn mad. I will make a prediction though....... Fox and some of it's programs are gaining daily on veiwer popularity. The other stations will soon be forced to become more fair and balanced in order to stay up in the ratings.
-
Oh and didn't we get attacked under gw's watch? rabid dogs you are.
You still mad at GWB?
Glad you could stop by for a little name calling. Bbye.
-
I hadn't really noticed the lack of coverage, but I watch fox news and they had a segment abuot the Russiain massacre. But it is obvious that the liberal media does not want to do anything that might help Bush. It's really sad when you think about it. Some woman saying Kerry is hot (she must be blind) gets more coverage.
Have you ever noticed when you point a fact out to a liberal, they always counter with something like this, in my best whining voice " what about the carpet bombing? what about the abuses? what about the atrocities?"
What about when the soviets carpet bombed an entire city back in the 90's in chechnia?? did that get coverage? or the human rights abusues they did to them? where was that on prime time? there are two sides to the story and you are not hearing everything. Oh and didn't we get attacked under gw's watch? rabid dogs you are.
So what you are saying is, that the terrorists were justified, in taking over that school and killing all those kids. The old liberal 2 wrongs makes a right.
Talk about a rabid dog.
BTW the plot to attack the US, was hatched and planned, the poilots were trained, under Clintons watch. And of course Clinton was given the chance to take out Bin Laden, but he could not think of a reason to do it, or maybe he was to busy playing, bad president, with an inturn under his desk.
-
The other stations will soon be forced to become more fair and balanced in order to stay up in the ratings.
I want to believe this will happen (I want it to happen) but I can't. Did you notice that John Kerry's campaign just asked James Carville and I believe Paul Begala (two former Clinton campaing advisers) to help them out. Unbelievable thing is that BOTH of them are working at CNN (Communist News Network) at the same time as working for Kerry. And people wonder why we don't trust the media :o
