Fox tips the balance again!

Taichiliberal

Taichiliberal

Shaken, not stirred!
This morning I was watching "Good Day New York" on Channel 5, which is part of the FOX network. The co-host were interviewing a guy who is part of the on-going occupation of Wall St., and were (of course) repeating the media standard line by questioning the man as to why there is no set goals or leadership to advocate such goals. During his response, the man pointed out that it's about all types of people pointing out that nothing is being done about the economic inequality and subsequent crimes perpetrated by Wall St./banking giants (individuals and corporations)....and that you had leaders from various backgrounds join in. He stated that Al Sharpton "a self made man from the streets like me" was joining.....at which time co-host Greg Kelly interjected (twice) that like Al Sharpton, Rupert Murdoch is a self made man.

:whoa: Come again?

Rupert Murdoch INHERITED HIS FATHER'S OWNERSHIP OF TWO NEWSPAPERS IN THE U.K. (Australia). He did NOT start out in the copy room of some local city paper and work his way up to mogul.

Al Sharpton grew up doing the preacher circuit for his particular brand of religion. Big difference.

I saw this as just another Fox flunkie pushing the "class warfare" line that's heard from the neocon/teabagger pundits in the media. By trying to equate Murdoch as a successful "every man", co-host Greg Kelly pushes the subliminal context that the Wall St. protesters are just "jealous" of "successful people".

Typical Fox BS....but not unexpected.
 
Rupert Murdoch inherited a daily rag called 'The News'.... and afternoon daily tabloid in South Australia......hardly a media monster money maker.....

Not much different than Sharpton getting to preach in his fathers church....Big Al never even had a real job other than tour manager for James Brown for a short period....

his biggest break was getting hired by another race baiter name Jesse...I don't think either of them ever worked for a living other than hustling......so lets not get carried away with them comparing dicks....



Typical TCLibby bs, but not unexpected....:palm:
 
This response is based off of a different conversation but according to Elizabeth Warren there are no self-made men.
 
cawacko said:
This response is based off of a different conversation but according to Elizabeth Warren there are no self-made men.
Click to expand...

Different conversation, different point by Warren... for another thread. The point HERE is that Fox flunkies consistently push one type of mantra and defense of those mantras...whether by implying/alluding to, or directs declaration.
 
:lol:


"Good Day New York" on Channel 5.

Why any protest group would want Al Sharpton to join them is beyond me, the biggest idiot of all the race baiters out their. Have no idea how he got MSNBC to give him a show on politics.


Al Sharpton on MSNBC discussing Hermain Cain

I don't begrudge him for not making my choice, but I do begrudge him for acting like we're brainwashed because we went with a Party that stood up for the Civil Rights Act of '64 and Voting Rights Act of '65. There's a reason blacks did not stay with the Republican Party.


Ooops......

The House version of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was supported by only 61 percent of that Chamber's Democrats versus 80 percent of the Republicans.


More importantly, it was Republicans that ended a Democrat filibuster preventing a vote on this bill in the Senate. 82 percent of Republicans voted for cloture versus 66 percent of Democrats.


In the final Senate vote on the Act, 82 percent of Republicans voted "Aye" versus 69 percent of Democrats.
 
webbway said:
:lol:


"Good Day New York" on Channel 5.

Why any protest group would want Al Sharpton to join them is beyond me, the biggest idiot of all the race baiters out their. Have no idea how he got MSNBC to give him a show on politics.


Al Sharpton on MSNBC discussing Hermain Cain

I don't begrudge him for not making my choice, but I do begrudge him for acting like we're brainwashed because we went with a Party that stood up for the Civil Rights Act of '64 and Voting Rights Act of '65. There's a reason blacks did not stay with the Republican Party.

Ooops......

The House version of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was supported by only 61 percent of that Chamber's Democrats versus 80 percent of the Republicans.


More importantly, it was Republicans that ended a Democrat filibuster preventing a vote on this bill in the Senate. 82 percent of Republicans voted for cloture versus 66 percent of Democrats.


In the final Senate vote on the Act, 82 percent of Republicans voted "Aye" versus 69 percent of Democrats.
Click to expand...

On the surface it would indeed appear that the Republicans, and not the Democrats as commonly assumed, were the champions of civil rights in the 1960s.

However, a slightly more careful analysis of the Civil Rights Act voting record shows a distinct split between Northern and Southern politicians. Among the southern states (Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia), Senate Democrats voted 1-21 against the bill (5%) while Republicans voted 0-1 (0%). In the House, southern Democrats voted 7-87 (7%) while southern Republicans voted 0-10 (0%). Among the remaining states, Democrats voted 145-9 in favor of the bill (94%) while Republicans voted 138-24 for the bill (85%). In both the North and the South, Democrats supported the 1964 Civil Rights Act at a higher rate than the Republicans.
http://themoderatevoice.com/53521/r...presents-history-on-civil-rights-legislation/

Been reading Coulter and Limbaugh again? Or maybe Mein Kampf. Throw The Turner Diaries away and try to understand that you are brainwashed. Fucking idiot.
 
Crashk said:
On the surface it would indeed appear that the Republicans, and not the Democrats as commonly assumed, were the champions of civil rights in the 1960s.

However, a slightly more careful analysis of the Civil Rights Act voting record shows a distinct split between Northern and Southern politicians. Among the southern states (Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia), Senate Democrats voted 1-21 against the bill (5%) while Republicans voted 0-1 (0%). In the House, southern Democrats voted 7-87 (7%) while southern Republicans voted 0-10 (0%). Among the remaining states, Democrats voted 145-9 in favor of the bill (94%) while Republicans voted 138-24 for the bill (85%). In both the North and the South, Democrats supported the 1964 Civil Rights Act at a higher rate than the Republicans.
http://themoderatevoice.com/53521/r...presents-history-on-civil-rights-legislation/

Been reading Coulter and Limbaugh again? Or maybe Mein Kampf. Throw The Turner Diaries away and try to understand that you are brainwashed. Fucking idiot.
Click to expand...


Now that is spin at its best....remove or ignore a portion of the states so you can count whats left to arrive at a favorable figure.....
Its not a geography issue ass....its the party, the whole party, and nothing but the party....

Talk about brainwashed....you're closer to braindead, you're such a hack....
 
bravo said:
Rupert Murdoch inherited a daily rag called 'The News'.... and afternoon daily tabloid in South Australia......hardly a media monster money maker.....

Not much different than Sharpton getting to preach in his fathers church....Big Al never even had a real job other than tour manager for James Brown for a short period....

his biggest break was getting hired by another race baiter name Jesse...I don't think either of them ever worked for a living other than hustling......so lets not get carried away with them comparing dicks....



Typical TCLibby bs, but not unexpected....:palm:
Click to expand...


Oh yeah..."hardly any difference" between INHERITING TWO NEWSPAPERS and what Sharpton did...you are the most pathetic example of a partisan hack I have ever seen...and I spend a great deal of time with noted Mentalist, The Amazing Yurskin!

I bet if you tried real hard you could come up with something even more ludicrous than your just plain stupid comparison between Murdoch and Sharpton.
 
"In both the North and the South, Democrats supported the 1964 Civil Rights Act at a higher rate than the Republicans."

In your world if facts don't go along with Faux 'news' ideology and propaganda then you just ignore it. Free your mind your fat ass will follow.
 
ZappasGuitar said:
Oh yeah..."hardly any difference" between INHERITING TWO NEWSPAPERS and what Sharpton did...you are the most pathetic example of a partisan hack I have ever seen...and I spend a great deal of time with noted Mentalist, The Amazing Yurskin!

I bet if you tried real hard you could come up with something even more ludicrous than your just plain stupid comparison between Murdoch and Sharpton.
Click to expand...

INHERITING TWO NEWSPAPERS ?

WHAT two newspapers did Rupert Murdoch inherit ?????
 
Crashk said:
"In both the North and the South, Democrats supported the 1964 Civil Rights Act at a higher rate than the Republicans."

In your world if facts don't go along with Faux 'news' ideology and propaganda then you just ignore it. Free your mind your fat ass will follow.
Click to expand...

1964 Civil Rights Act

The original House version:


  • Democratic Party: 152-96 (61%-39%)
  • Republican Party: 138-34 (80%-20%)
Cloture in the Senate:


  • Democratic Party: 44-23 (66%–34%)
  • Republican Party: 27-6 (82%–18%)
The Senate version:


  • Democratic Party: 46-21 (69%–31%)
  • Republican Party: 27-6 (82%–18%)
The Senate version, voted on by the House:


  • Democratic Party: 153-91 (63%–37%)
  • Republican Party: 136-35 (80%–20%)
The RATE is the percentage.....
Definite Fail......TRY AGAIN...
 
webbway said:
:lol:


"Good Day New York" on Channel 5.

Why any protest group would want Al Sharpton to join them is beyond me, the biggest idiot of all the race baiters out their. Have no idea how he got MSNBC to give him a show on politics.


Al Sharpton on MSNBC discussing Hermain Cain

I don't begrudge him for not making my choice, but I do begrudge him for acting like we're brainwashed because we went with a Party that stood up for the Civil Rights Act of '64 and Voting Rights Act of '65. There's a reason blacks did not stay with the Republican Party.


Ooops......

The House version of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was supported by only 61 percent of that Chamber's Democrats versus 80 percent of the Republicans.


More importantly, it was Republicans that ended a Democrat filibuster preventing a vote on this bill in the Senate. 82 percent of Republicans voted for cloture versus 66 percent of Democrats.


In the final Senate vote on the Act, 82 percent of Republicans voted "Aye" versus 69 percent of Democrats.
Click to expand...

Yeah, Al got that one mixed up. They were called DIXIECRATS. After that year, the Republican party courted that vote....highlighted by Nixon's "Southern Strategy". In other words, times change.

Now that we've cleared that up, if YOU cannot disprove what I stated regarding the BS the Fox News toadie pushed about comparing Murdoch to Sharpton as a "self made man", then either STFU or continue to try to change the subject and blow smoke as usual.
 
ZappasGuitar said:
Originally Posted by bravo
Rupert Murdoch inherited a daily rag called 'The News'.... and afternoon daily tabloid in South Australia......hardly a media monster money maker.....

Not much different than Sharpton getting to preach in his fathers church....Big Al never even had a real job other than tour manager for James Brown for a short period....

his biggest break was getting hired by another race baiter name Jesse...I don't think either of them ever worked for a living other than hustling......so lets not get carried away with them comparing dicks....



Typical TCLibby bs, but not unexpected....
Click to expand...



Oh yeah..."hardly any difference" between INHERITING TWO NEWSPAPERS and what Sharpton did...you are the most pathetic example of a partisan hack I have ever seen...and I spend a great deal of time with noted Mentalist, The Amazing Yurskin!

I bet if you tried real hard you could come up with something even more ludicrous than your just plain stupid comparison between Murdoch and Sharpton.
Click to expand...

Notice the drunken barfly didn't mention The Sunday Mail....90 years and still going mainstay of Australia.

This is why I have dumb donkey's like Bravo on IA....because he's are proud of his ignorance....and loves to suck up to the defense of people who shit on him daily. If more people IA him, we won't have to deal with his stupidness.
 
Taichiliberal said:
This morning I was watching "Good Day New York" on Channel 5, which is part of the FOX network. The co-host were interviewing a guy who is part of the on-going occupation of Wall St., and were (of course) repeating the media standard line by questioning the man as to why there is no set goals or leadership to advocate such goals. During his response, the man pointed out that it's about all types of people pointing out that nothing is being done about the economic inequality and subsequent crimes perpetrated by Wall St./banking giants (individuals and corporations)....and that you had leaders from various backgrounds join in. He stated that Al Sharpton "a self made man from the streets like me" was joining.....at which time co-host Greg Kelly interjected (twice) that like Al Sharpton, Rupert Murdoch is a self made man.

:whoa: Come again?

Rupert Murdoch INHERITED HIS FATHER'S OWNERSHIP OF TWO NEWSPAPERS IN THE U.K. (Australia). He did NOT start out in the copy room of some local city paper and work his way up to mogul.

Al Sharpton grew up doing the preacher circuit for his particular brand of religion. Big difference.

I saw this as just another Fox flunkie pushing the "class warfare" line that's heard from the neocon/teabagger pundits in the media. By trying to equate Murdoch as a successful "every man", co-host Greg Kelly pushes the subliminal context that the Wall St. protesters are just "jealous" of "successful people".

Typical Fox BS....but not unexpected.
Click to expand...

Al Sharpton?

The racist Al Sharpton?
 
Liberty said:
"Dude" has got to be kidding.

You're (Dude) defending Al Sharpton?

WOW!
Click to expand...


The chronology of the posts shows EXACTLY what I was discussing regarding the false premise that Murdoch is a "self made man" just like Al Sharpton. Your personal likes or dislikes of either man non-withstanding. If you can't disprove what I stated about Kelly's erroneous comparison, then you're just being your usual libertarian lunkheaded self in trying to change the focus of the conversation. Carry on.
 
Al Sharpton is a street hustling preacher. Anyone who can't see this has led a sheltered life. The Black community who tolerate the Al Sharptons and Jesse Jacksons know exactly who and what they are. They bring home the bacon and that's all that matters.
 
Al Sharpton is a street hustling preacher. Anyone who can't see this has led a sheltered life. The Black community who tolerate the Al Sharptons and Jesse Jacksons know exactly who and what they are. They bring home the bacon and that's all that matters. Only naive white liberals take Al Sharpton, et al, seriously.
 
Since Alias and his equally moronic buddies cannot refute or disprove what I stated regarding Fox and Murdoch, Alias lashes out like some petulant child with a blatant biased BS diatribe in a desperate ploy to change the subject.

Alias fails as usual.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top