November 11, 2000 at 12:54 am #63319
Okay okay…this is why I hesitated to join this board (I am leery of big mole-hills)!
But seriously, Chris, I understand what you are saying but I just respectfully disagree with your view of the media as being totally "leftist". I don’t want to start a big Clinton discursion but, just as an example of a right-bias, consider how the media attacked & feasted on one of the most successful presidents of the century. The media cuts both ways because it really only runs on one bias, and that is a money-bias. As long as people buy the magazines & watch the trials, the media will continue to thrive on exploitation of the famous. I also think it is important to note that the media is largely owned by big corporations, and, to quote a friend of mine, Gore and Bush "both suck the d*cks of big corporations". [img]http://www.freakscene.net/ubb/smilies/eek.gif[/img] So in that sense you really do have an even distribution of liberal/conservative political influence in the media. And since people like Browne or Nader do not cozy up to the corporations, they get less money and less media exposure.
Also, just to clarify, my understanding is that "media" are any means by which people relay information to one another. Many internet sites & enterprises would not survive without advertising; that is what I meant when I said without media we would not be having this discussion.
I am also interested in the origins of the "99.7%" statistic.
Much respect Hager! & thanks for appreciating my 2c Allison! [img]http://www.freakscene.net/ubb/smilies/face-icon-small-smile.gif[/img]
[This message has been edited by rosa (edited November 11, 2000).]November 11, 2000 at 3:58 pm #63320
The media never feasted on Clinton. They helped foster the misconception that the Greatest Liar of All Time was somehow a success while helping to politically assasinate Newt Gingrich over nothing at all. They helped get him elected and protected him as much as possible from his own recklessness. The media had no choice but to cover the bigger news he was making with his shenanigans, but what about all the more dastardly things that never made it into the mainstream press at all or were held-off until after his first election? Higher-ups at 20/20 have admitted that they deliberately sat on the Gennifer Flowers thing until after the ’92 election because the polls were too close for comfort and they wanted "their man" in office.
Remember his nicely-timed Iraq bombing? This nice man was willing to bomb a foreign country – one which he had previously taken a soft-line approach to- to divert media attention away from him, and they did so with great glee, helping to somehow legitimize the timing. He’s our own version of Slobo, without a doubt. Had he been a Repubican, they would have focused all their attention on that rather than alluding to it as a genuine but absurd possibility.
Democrats suck just as much corporate wee-wee as Republicans, including Big Tobacco, by the way, another fact glossed over by the media. But listen, I have much more respect for Browne and Nader (primarily Browne as I am a Libertarian at heart and Browne strikes me as more intelligent than any of the others). The web may be a form of media (small m) but is not part of the US mainstream Media (capital M) The web is part of the internet which is owned/controlled by NO ONE. Not one single governmental organization has total authority over it. That’s why we love it. If ever there existed a powerful tool for the rapid spread of information, to be used for subverting different governmental propoganda and lies, here it is. The US Media (cap M) all have a presence on the web, but no more than anyone else.
Regarding my percentage, I was a little off, I inadvertantly exaggerated the number higher [img]http://www.freakscene.net/ubb/smilies/face-icon-small-smile.gif[/img]. It is actually 89% which is totally non-representative of the US population, which is my whole point. Here’s a link referring to the poll, as well as more info on media bias, from the non-partisan organization Accuracy In Media:
I’m out of this conversation now, as I come to this site primarily out of love for J’s music and I really hate politics (mainly because I have strong feelings on the subject.) Convincing someone of bias in the media is difficult if that person’s ideals are along the same lines as those being reported anyway, as I mentioned earlier.
Peace to all, at least you are concerned!
[email protected] [img]http://www.freakscene.net/ubb/smilies/earl.gif[/img]
[This message has been edited by hager (edited November 11, 2000).]November 12, 2000 at 2:54 am #63321
Hi Chris, I’m out of the media/Clinton discussion now; it’s evident that people will never agree about it. I am always glad to hear other people’s views though; from time to time I learn valuable things.
The only thing I take issue with at this point is your implication that my "ideals are along the same lines as those being reported". I think you mentioned this twice. I don’t see how you can possibly know my ideals when A) I haven’t talked about them at all, and B) you don’t even know for whom I voted. I wasn’t making an argument for the leftist part of the media, I was just trying to express my opinion that both sides have equal influence.
I totally am happy to debate till my fingers are blue but it bothers me a little that you would make assumptions about just where it is I’m coming from. I take your arguments as you print them, nothing more, & I would appreciate the same courtesy.
Thanks Chris. I really think you rock & I hope we can message more without making it personal! I would hate to think that we were brought together by music & ripped apart by politics.
"Lyrics have no dress code, from KRS to Depeche Mode" — Method Man
[This message has been edited by rosa (edited November 12, 2000).]November 12, 2000 at 4:38 am #63322
what a little cry baby, i mean that in all due respect!
lets not let this topic get to full on as some people can get a bit touch-eeeeeeeee about politics.
"its better than a kick in the face with a golf shoe"
[This message has been edited by antipop (edited November 12, 2000).]November 12, 2000 at 4:29 pm #63323
This was an interesting conversation with people expressing their view in a civil manner…..as fans of Mascis we are just showing our superior intellect…just kidding. No need to be so creepy about it antipop….again. The topic appears to be over and jeez didn’t need that ending.
[This message has been edited by bates (edited November 12, 2000).]November 12, 2000 at 10:32 pm #63324
Well she was having a bit of a cry dont ya think? Look when people are stating their opinion on a subject or making a comment there is no need for every1 to get so uptight. We r here as friends not just to slag every single comment some1 makes. Looks like this site needs a bit more humour instead of all the toucheee little members. Remeber if you always have to watch what ya say all the time things become abit boring and fake!
"its better than a kick in the face with a golf shoe"November 13, 2000 at 12:15 am #63325
Sorry if I seemed overly harsh, maybe I was projecting some anger your way as the BEARS just lost another game and their qb for the year(NFL…american football). Or I just really don’t like seeing people treated unfairly….part of my personality profile.
Anyway I agree the main point here is whatsup with J and the Fog and a sense of humor helps everything along….check out my post on the CRAP party in canada…actually happened…god.
so to end it…..whatevers cool,
November 13, 2000 at 2:00 am #63326
I didn’t mean to assume you were coming from left of center. Actually I made the assumption because of your statements of how you felt the media were biased in favor of the right. From my own experience I think bias is most difficult to detect if one’s own views are being validated by the biased reporter. I say in my own experience because of my aforementioned example about the Fox News Network. They are made of predominantly of known conservative journalists (Tony Snow – who fills in for Rush Limbaugh when he takes a day off, Brit Hume, et al) and I always thought they were evenly balanced until I actually questioned my own ability to detect a bias in the favor of my own philosophies. It’s hard.
Still…was I wrong? [img]http://www.freakscene.net/ubb/smilies/biggrin.gif[/img] Love ya.
[email protected] [img]http://www.freakscene.net/ubb/smilies/earl.gif[/img]November 13, 2000 at 7:57 pm #63327
Welli think its wrong that the ballot was screwed up and that all those people waster thier votes, and i think the manual ballot is necesary by state law, i mean if a computer fucks up the first time by over a 1000 votes then something is wrong, Bush is scared because if the trend of al gore gaining votes continues hes going to lose and now hes trying to stop the manual recount and get recount in other close states so he wouldnt need florida to win. All i have to say is a recount should not be done but in a instance like this something has to be done, we are so technologicaly advanced yet were going to screw someone out of the presidency no matte who wins the other candidate is screwed,because they both have a good case for becoming president, and just because if one president wins florida doesnt mean he will become president someone in the electoral college could vote for the other candidate (If offered a good position in the presidents cabinent or something) Im glad to see that so many people care about there life and politics here, i also think we need more than two strong partys becuase all we do is vote for the lesser of two evils,
something got to be done
"You look down at me and see a fool, you look up at me and see your lord, you look at me and see yourself"
Charles MansonNovember 14, 2000 at 12:45 am #63328
Hey…don’t shut down this conversation until I weigh in. That would be denying my right to annoy the hell out of some of you, therefore, denying the "will of Jebus."
1) The 19,000 votes that were supposedly "thrown out" were actually ballots which were disgarded when the voter made a mistake and asked for another ballot. There was not 19,000 "wasted votes." Of course, we rarely hear this.
2) We’ve had two recounts as of this moment. A hand recount, to me, brings in the probability of human error, plus the high possibility of fraud. Voter fraud is alive and healthy in this country.
3) Jesse Jackson really annoys the hell out of me.
4) I think the major media outlets, plus CNN, leans left also. I too watch FOX. Plus, FOX has lots of hot polichicks. Love that Paula Zahn. I like O’Reily as well. Dig the Beltway Boys. Dislike Hannity and Colms quite a bit.
5) Exit polling sucks.
6) Did we hear as much "get rid of the Electoral system" when it was Bush that was thought to win the popular vote, but lose the electoral??
7) How does this country, in the booming economy and technological wizardry world we currently live in, sleep at night knowing that we have such a screwy voting system. Here in Oklahoma, I was given a cardboard sheet, a marker and told to "connect them thare dots by the candidates name of your choice." Why don’t I just take a rock and scratch "R" or "D" on the inside of the voting booth??
8) Anybody for tax cuts??
9) It’s very cool to see some conservatives on this board. And a LIBERTARIAN!!! That rules. I voted for Harry Browne last time around, and damn near did again this time.
10) The coolest Presidential slogan i’ve ever seen: "Oklahoman’s for Bush."
–HomerJ.November 14, 2000 at 12:39 pm #63329
Yeah, there are many many examples of "spoiled" ballots in this election and all past elections. I understand that due to the tightness of this election why spoiled ballots would be a concern, but shit happens. Plus there are other accounts of heavily Republican counties in other states that had as many as 26,000 spoiled ballots. It always happens. Here’s the bottom line: The absentee ballots are the big mystery here. There are about 30,000 out there that have not been counted yet. Most of them are military and I know from personal experience that at least 7 out of 10 military personnel are Republicans. I have heard that alluded to in the press, and I am telling you, I was in the military for 7 years and I know its a fact. So, despite the many hand-counts, the numbers have stayed basically the same, and when the absentees are counted Saturday morning, I predict we will see a strong shift in favor of Bush.
Regarding the popular vote/electoral vote controversy, Gore’s popular vote lead over Bush is a small fraction of the total number of nation-wide absentee ballots yet to be counted, so even that isn’t written in stone yet.
The only recount mandated by Florida state law (by the way state laws override federal laws most of the time) was the machine recount. A hand recount is an ignorant undertaking for reasons too numerous to go into. It’s a stall-tactic by the Goreites. Another Florida state law states that the non-absentee ballots must be in for certification no later than 5pm, 7 days after the end of the election. SO, when the federal judge in Miami was supposedly handing out a Gore legal victory yesterday by allowing the hand counts to continue, he was really passing the ball back to the State of Florida, which has the authority to enforce the 5PM dealine – much too soon for hand counts to be completed. Not only that, in at least one Florida county, they stopped counting by hand when they realized the numbers were going to turn out exactly the same anyway!
Those butterfly ballots are common, and were approved in advance via a mail survey by the same goombahs who are complaining now. Goombahs who, by the way, didn’t complain until they realized their man was losing.
This is all so F’d up anyway. Everyone should just vote Libertarian and send a message to the big Coke-n-Pepsi of politics
that WE WANT DR. FRIGGIN’ PEPPER!
WE NEED FREEDOM FROM BIG GOVERNMENT…AMERICA IS NOT A DAYCARE CENTER FOR ADULTS.
[email protected] [img]http://www.freakscene.net/ubb/smilies/earl.gif[/img]November 14, 2000 at 4:00 pm #63330
About Gore’s "lead" in the popular vote… I love hearing Warren Christopher repeat over and over "Gore has won the popular contest with more votes that any other election in history exept one…" Failing to mention the fact that Bush is trailing by roughly .002% of the votes. If this isn’t a whole lot of spin on behalf of the Gore campain, I don’t know what is…
Of course, as Chris said, the overseas vote aren’t even tallied yet. I’d love to see Bush overtake the popular vote once all votes are in, as well as, take the election… That’d be a serious kick in the pants for the Gore campain…
Of coarse, from what I’m seeing, the Gore campain are using the "Scorched Earth" policy. Where, if they don’t win, they’ll "burn the fields" so to speak, ruining the office for Bush by creating a lot of negative spin. If they can’t have it, no one can…
"If you can’t pay money… At least pay attention!" – My DadNovember 14, 2000 at 6:31 pm #63331
Well i like
America Wants Bush
America Wants Gore
like liberman said the candidates sound like a hollywood movie bush and gore
J MAscis For President 2004
"You look down at me and see a fool, you look up at me and see your lord, you look at me and see yourself"
Charles MansonNovember 14, 2000 at 6:34 pm #63332
In light of this new train of thought, I’d just like to say I definitely prefer Bush to Gore [img]http://www.freakscene.net/ubb/smilies/biggrin.gif[/img]
[email protected] [img]http://www.freakscene.net/ubb/smilies/earl.gif[/img]June 22, 2004 at 12:57 pm #63333
Ohh god so many People Voted for Bush here, look what you helped to to this country,
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
- Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)
- Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
- Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
- Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
- Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)
- Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)
- Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)
- Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)
- Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window)
- Click to share on Skype (Opens in new window)