HapSmo19 wrote:Ron Paul represented change.
He also represented nutbar.
Moderator: Community Team
HapSmo19 wrote:Ron Paul represented change.
Wayne wrote:Wow, with a voice like that Dancing Mustard must get all the babes!
Garth wrote:Yeah, I bet he's totally studly and buff.
Dancing Mustard wrote:HapSmo19 wrote:Ron Paul represented change.
He also represented nutbar.
Juan_Bottom wrote:Dancing Mustard wrote:HapSmo19 wrote:Ron Paul represented change.
He also represented nutbar.
I don't think so. I don't think he was so far off from what we need.
Nobunaga wrote:pimpdave wrote:pimpdave wrote:Aggressive Reporter Picks on the Wrong Mark
Did no one watch that video? Did Derrick's reasoning finally silence all of you neocons? I'm sure you can flip out and find some way to counter it with a bunch of ridiculous, unsubstantiated claims.
... Hey, Pimp, you an Obama supporter? Tell us why, and be specific. (and no, "He's not a neocon" is not specific.)
... War, immigration, gas prices, huge national debt - hit on those in your answer.
....
pimpdave wrote:Juan_Bottom wrote:Dancing Mustard wrote:HapSmo19 wrote:Ron Paul represented change.
He also represented nutbar.
I don't think so. I don't think he was so far off from what we need.
Wow, this exact exchange occurred on the streets of Berlin, 1933, when Hitler was still only the Chancellor, and hadn't yet declared himself Dictator for Life.
Just swap the names and presto!
Juan_Bottom wrote:Did you just call Dr. Ron Paul
Hitler?

Wayne wrote:Wow, with a voice like that Dancing Mustard must get all the babes!
Garth wrote:Yeah, I bet he's totally studly and buff.
Some yes. All though? Well, would you consider me far right? Or Religious far right for that matter?PLAYER57832 wrote:Well, when you consider that republicans have re-defined conservativism as being almost exclusively the far right (and further, more often the religious far right, too boot!) It is absolutely no wonder these liberals are so prevalent.
Most likely yes, though in a more classical way, as many Conservatives view themselves (myself included).If Ronald Reagan were alive right now, HE would be labeled a "liberal". (and YES, I absolutely DO know of what I speak!).
As someone once said, "Shit happens."Interestingly, the media policies and reporting have not changed much at all since they were labeled bastions of conservatism not so long ago! Only the LABELS have changed.
No arguments there.Further, Fox media has long since come into the fray with the absolute STATED position of preserving and reporting conservative values! So, if you compare the other media to them, they will definitely appear "liberal".
Independent doesn't really mean "unbiased, honest and fair." It means that they are simply not one of the larger "sources." Also, I don't think I get NPR here anyways. As for BBC, well, they really don't say much on Wyoming or the Mountain West for that matter, so I don't bother. Though I'd say 9 News is actually a pretty honest and fair news network (based in Denver) in comparison to the already known news outlets. And ABC news, despite it's conservativeness (or liberalness, whichever you prefer) is pretty honest on what they report (at least over the radio).For HONEST and FAIR reporting, NPR radio coverage (all things considered) has been continually recognized by independent sources. The BBC, though it has gone through changes, is still a good source for world coverage.
muy_thaiguy wrote:Some yes. All though? Well, would you consider me far right? Or Religious far right for that matter?PLAYER57832 wrote:Well, when you consider that republicans have re-defined conservativism as being almost exclusively the far right (and further, more often the religious far right, too boot!) It is absolutely no wonder these liberals are so prevalent.
Snorri1234 wrote:muy_thaiguy wrote:Some yes. All though? Well, would you consider me far right? Or Religious far right for that matter?PLAYER57832 wrote:Well, when you consider that republicans have re-defined conservativism as being almost exclusively the far right (and further, more often the religious far right, too boot!) It is absolutely no wonder these liberals are so prevalent.
Religious...I don't know.
But what sort of conservative you are and what sort of conservatives are in the republican party are rather different. It's not all the voters who are far right, but most of the politicians are.
muy_thaiguy wrote:Snorri1234 wrote:muy_thaiguy wrote:Some yes. All though? Well, would you consider me far right? Or Religious far right for that matter?PLAYER57832 wrote:Well, when you consider that republicans have re-defined conservativism as being almost exclusively the far right (and further, more often the religious far right, too boot!) It is absolutely no wonder these liberals are so prevalent.
Religious...I don't know.
But what sort of conservative you are and what sort of conservatives are in the republican party are rather different. It's not all the voters who are far right, but most of the politicians are.
Then you need to insert that word, otherwise it is making a huge generalization.
saxitoxin wrote:Your position is more complex than the federal tax code. As soon as I think I understand it, I find another index of cross-references, exceptions and amendments I have to apply.
Timminz wrote:Yo mama is so classless, she could be a Marxist utopia.
Dancing Mustard wrote:Ron Paul is not Hitler. Ron Paul is Magneto.
Magneto would be a worse president than Hitler. Case closed. Don't vote Ron Paul, AKA Magneto.
MeDeFe wrote:FFS just stop labeling yourself and each other as either "conservative" or "liberal", often using it as an insult when talking about whichever side you perceive yourself not to be. Make up your own labels if you have to, but there's no reason you should let your viewpoints be sorted into what is essentially a binary system.
HapSmo19 wrote:MeDeFe wrote:FFS just stop labeling yourself and each other as either "conservative" or "liberal", often using it as an insult when talking about whichever side you perceive yourself not to be. Make up your own labels if you have to, but there's no reason you should let your viewpoints be sorted into what is essentially a binary system.
Exactly. I am a Nationalist.
(guess what's coming)
InkL0sed wrote:I'd like to think of myself as a Pragmatist.
Snorri1234 wrote:Journalists leaning personally more to the democratic side does not mean the news itself is biased.
protectedbygold wrote:Snorri1234 wrote:Journalists leaning personally more to the democratic side does not mean the news itself is biased.
Snorri1234 wrote:Are journalists now supposed to have no personal beliefs?