Congradulations Mr. Obama

Originally posted by torch71
Sorry you feel that way. The atheist in the interview has "waged a war on God" hence the article headline and the group of atheists that he is with and he did not deny it.

If that hurts the feelings of other atheists imagine the christians.

But in my opinion atheists which was the group of atheist the man in the interview was with spent 40,000 dollars on a sign that says "WHY BELIEVE IN GOD" which is directed at christians.

how can he wage a war on God is he doesn't believe in God? Thats like saying Im going to wage a war on fairies.

"WHY BELIEVE IN GOD" which is directed at christians.

that is discrimination isn't it?

Originally posted by Barts
"Unbiased", but you'd better be a conservative if you want a good chance of getting on Fox, granted it's a pretty old link, but I'm just posting the first things I'm finding with google.

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1072

I really like the part where you said "i'm just posting the first things I'm finding with google"...more evidence how you liberals don't think for yourself but just believe what you read on the internet, which is 98% liberal. Your next post uses a link to pipa.org an extemest left propaganda maching funded by many extremists from the left, including none other that the tides foundation and George Soros whose sole purpose is to attack the right and push his progressive left agenda on america. Here are some information on Tides who finances Pipa.org:
"The Tides Foundation promotes a multitude of leftist agendas, as evidenced by its assertion: "We strengthen community-based organizations and the progressive movement by providing an innovative and cost-effective framework for your philanthropy." Among the crusades to which Tides contributes are: radical environmentalism; the "exclusion of humans from public and private wildlands"; the anti-war movement; anti-free trade campaigns; the banning of firearms ownership; abolition of the death penalty; access to government-funded abortion-on-demand; and radical gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender advocacy. The Foundation is also a member organization of the International Human Rights Funders Group, a network of more than six-dozen grantmakers dedicated to finaning leftwing groups and causes.

Immediately after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, Tides formed a "9/11 Fund" to advocate a "peaceful national response." Tides later replaced the 9/11 Fund with the "Democratic Justice Fund," which was financed in large measure by the Open Society Institute of George Soros, who has donated more than $7 million to Tides over the years. Reciprocally, the Tides Foundation is a major funder of the Shadow Party, a George Soros-conceived nationwide network of several dozen unions, non-profit activist groups, and think tanks whose agendas are ideologically to the left, and which are engaged in campaigning for the Democrats."
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/funderProfile.asp?fndid=5184

Your other link was from project censored....great left source bart..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Phillips_(activist)

Same goes for your other source FAIR.ORG

You and Kazet are the same, just like most liberals, CANT think for themselves--just google up a topic and believe whatever you read. You REALLY THINK that your points are valid when you quote far left web sites. Look at who is running, and funding, these sites before you spout off your opinion to which you actually know nothing about.

Who is running and funding Fox News again?

And once again, I am not a liberal in the American sense of the word.

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
Who is running and funding Fox News again?

And once again, I am not a liberal in the American sense of the word.

you are a kool aide drinker.

There is a reason shows like the O'reilly factor have the highest ratings..and it's not because they are biased. It's because they are not.

Originally posted by NimzovichLarsen
I really like the part where you said "i'm just posting the first things I'm finding with google"...more evidence how you liberals don't think for yourself but just believe what you read on the internet, which is 98% liberal. .

98% of the stuff on the internet is liberal? If this is true, it would imply that liberals are vastly more capable of (or at least interested in) using the internet to express their views. Why would this be?

Originally posted by NimzovichLarsen
you are a kool aide drinker.

There is a reason shows like the O'reilly factor have the highest ratings..and it's not because they are biased. It's because they are not.

ALL of the cable news networks should come with a disclaimer that says, "For entertainment purposes only". Highest ratings=most unbiased? What a joke. Anybody who believes Fox is unbiased is eqaul to those who think MSNBC is unbiased. The only difference is those who watch Fox will go to the grave, guns blazing that they along with Fox news are unbiased and bipartisan. And they make fun of people worshiping Obama with cult like devotion. Look in the mirror kids.

Originally posted by StTito
ALL of the cable news networks should come with a disclaimer that says, "For entertainment purposes only". Highest ratings=most unbiased? What a joke. Anybody who believes Fox is unbiased is eqaul to those who think MSNBC is unbiased. The only difference is those who watch Fox will go to the grave, guns blazing that they along with Fox news are unbiased and b ...[text shortened]... And they make fun of people worshiping Obama with cult like devotion. Look in the mirror kids.

MSNBC does a pretty good job with it's Morning Joe show -- The main voice is actually very conservative (Joe Scarborough) but others on the show offer other viewpoints.

Scarborough is clearly conservative, and he feels that much of Obama's domestic agenda is "radical". But he expresses his views in a dignified, intelligent way. I disagree with many of his positions but I respect everything that he says. The GOP would do very well to tap him as a leader.

Originally posted by Melanerpes
The GOP would do very well to tap him as a leader.[/b]

Why do we need the GOP? After all, it appears Obama has all the answers and has no opposition whatsoever in Congess.

Originally posted by NimzovichLarsen
I really like the part where you said "i'm just posting the first things I'm finding with google"...more evidence how you liberals don't think for yourself but just believe what you read on the internet, which is 98% liberal. Your next post uses a link to pipa.org an extemest left propaganda maching funded by many extremists from the left, including ...[text shortened]... tes before you spout off your opinion to which you actually know nothing about.

I see that you aren't in fact trying to refute the evidence that I provided on Fox's bias (as shown in it's guest breakdown) and questionable ethics (as shown by their trail for the right to lie), but are instead shooting the messenger. Now, I can't really complain about that, my own posts were indeed shooting the messenger named Fox, but what differentiates me from you is how we do it. I do it by finding facts, you by yelling "left wing propaganda".

So please, prove me wrong, tell me that this count of guests was wrong, or maybe too small a sample, the following months could have been filled with liberals, also tell me that court case didn't happen, that Fox wouldn't ever pressure their reporters into telling falsehoods, show me that the poll on the correlation between misinformation and news stations was flawed. (By the way, though the report was hosted by PIPA, the actual poll was undertaken by the university of Maryland, which also wrote that report, so unless you're saying even universities are left wing propaganda machines, then you're little tantrum about were it was hosted is pretty much irrelevant.)

And a bit as an open question to everyone here, how is finding reports and data that support my theory evidence of me not thinking for myself ?

Originally posted by Barts
And a bit as an open question to everyone here, how is finding reports and data that support my theory evidence of me not thinking for myself ?

Fretting about something NimzovichLarsen said to you is borderline "not thinking for [your]self". Go to his homepage and trawl through his public forume posts and you'll see what I mean.

Originally posted by Barts
I see that you aren't in fact trying to refute the evidence that I provided on Fox's bias (as shown in it's guest breakdown) and questionable ethics (as shown by their trail for the right to lie), but are instead shooting the messenger. Now, I can't really complain about that, my own posts were indeed shooting the messenger named Fox, but what differentiates m ...[text shortened]... hines, then you're little tantrum about were it was hosted is pretty much irrelevant.)

I'll say it. Universities are propaganda machines of the worst kind. I knew a guy that tried to got on in the history dept. of the University of Wyoming. He was told he had no chance because of his conservative political views. I swear this is a true story!!!

Originally posted by NimzovichLarsen
I really like the part where you said "i'm just posting the first things I'm finding with google"...more evidence how you liberals don't think for yourself but just believe what you read on the internet, which is 98% liberal. Your next post uses a link to pipa.org an extemest left propaganda maching funded by many extremists from the left, including ...[text shortened]... tes before you spout off your opinion to which you actually know nothing about.

Ok, I'll post it again, since you ignored it before.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fox_News_bias

there you go.

From the wikipedia page:

"Glenn Beck, the host of an eponymous afternoon commentary show, has used rhetoric on his program that critics claim is over-the-top and extreme. In early 2009, Beck -- who had previously hosted a show on the CNN-affiliated Headline News -- stated on his program that the economic policies of President Barack Obama were "communist", "socialist", and later, "fascist." Beck also outlined various doomsday scenarios for guests to analyze in the segment called "War Room". After the 2009 Pittsburgh police shootings, MSNBC host Keith Olbermann and Media Matters for America claimed that Beck's inflammatory commentaries were a factor in the murders, after it was revealed that the killer -- who held far-right views[76] -- posted a clip from Beck's show on the neo-Nazi Stormfront website[77]. Beck denied that he had any influence on the killer"

"Alan Colmes is touted by Fox as "a hard-hitting liberal",[83] who was used to counter the conservative opinions of his co-host, talk radio personality Sean Hannity, on the now-defunct political debate program Hannity & Colmes. However, he had admitted to USA Today that "I'm quite moderate." He has been characterized by several newspapers as being Sean Hannity's "sidekick".[84] Liberal commentator Al Franken lambasted Colmes in his book, Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them. In the book, Colmes' name is printed in smaller type than all other words. Franken accuses him of refusing to ask tough questions during debates and neglecting to challenge erroneous claims made by Hannity or his guests.[84] In 2008, Colmes announced that he would be leaving the program in January 2009, which led to Hannity becoming the sole host of the show that replaced Hannity & Colmes, simply titled Hannity. This caused critics to further question Fox News' objectivity, given that Colmes was widely cited by Fox News personalities and management as an example of the network's neutrality, and that Hannity's new weeknight show would now more closely resemble his weekend opinion program, Hannity's America. [85] "

"Photocopied memos from Fox News executive John Moody instructed the network's on-air anchors and reporters to use positive language when discussing pro-life viewpoints, the Iraq war, and tax cuts, as well as requesting that the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse scandal be put in context with the other violence in the area.[55] Such memos were reproduced for the film Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism, which included Moody quotes such as, "The soldiers [seen on FOX in Iraq] in the foreground should be identified as 'sharpshooters,' not 'snipers,' which carries a negative connotation."


so, what do you think?

Originally posted by NimzovichLarsen
you are a kool aide drinker.

There is a reason shows like the O'reilly factor have the highest ratings..and it's not because they are biased. It's because they are not.

highest ratings..and it's not because they are biased. It's because they are not.

argumentum ad populum.

Originally posted by NimzovichLarsen
you are a kool aide drinker.

There is a reason shows like the O'reilly factor have the highest ratings..and it's not because they are biased. It's because they are not.

Aha, that explains the popularity of talk radio then.