• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

1,000-member secretive progressive journalist group uncovered

The rebels used the chemical weapons on civilians.

Obama's hands were tied on Syria, stop lying about this. Clinton was dispatched to the UN on three occasions to secure a resolution for use of force, all three times Russia and China said NO!!!!!

The UK parliament said no to military action in Syria.

Congress would not authorize the use of force in Syria.

70% of Americans were against military action in Syria.

I know you would have preferred Obama be the belligerent that Bush was.

His hands are always tied for some reason

On Ukraine, on the Border issue, on Syria, on Issis, on Benghazi on Egypt.

Every foreign policy disaster is no fault of his.

It just reinforces the importance of electing a qualified lead every 4 years
 
Why does the left feel the need to hide their true beliefs? C'mon, shout it out, if it's so great.
You guys hate the Constitution, want that gone. Too restrictive on what government can do. Taxes are never high enough, you want government to take more of what we make. You never, ever want to cut government, because they are not yet into our lives enough yet. Tell me, when will that be?

When will you say, "Hey, government has grown big enough, and has enough control of our lives. Government has taken enough freedoms from us. Let's put a stop to it."

And really, why hide behind names like "progressive" or "liberal"? I have more respect for those on here that come right out and call themselves Communists than the people that are, but won't say it.

Actually.................it was bush that saw the constitution an impediment, had you not allowed him to get away with it then, we wouldn't be talking about it now!

Washington, BC- In response to a Federal Judge's ruling that his warrant-less surveillance and wiretappings were illegal and unconstitutional, President Bush held a press conference at his personal retreat.
At this conference, President Bush lashed out as what many see as his biggest impediment: the United States Constitution.
"I strongly disagree with that document. Strongly disagree," President Bush said. The president called the Constitution, "out of touch with 21st century terror."
"Now look, here's the Constitution, it was written 200 years ago. They didn't have this kind of a threat. They didn't have to be adaptive. They made all these restricting rules, and there's no way to change it. It is out of place in this century, in this fight. Al-queda doesn't care about it, so we can't either."

http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/UnNews:Bush_Calls_U.S._Constitution_"Naive"
 
His hands are always tied for some reason

On Ukraine, on the Border issue, on Syria, on Issis, on Benghazi on Egypt.

Every foreign policy disaster is no fault of his.

It just reinforces the importance of electing a qualified lead every 4 years

Oh, his foreign policy is a disaster, but on Syria, unless you would have preferred he ordered a military strike without UN approval, against the will of congress and the majority of Americans, oh wait, you probably would have supported that.
 
No, I'm talking about the whole " Bush lied people died " manufactured false narrative.

WASHINGTON -- These days, when we think of George W. Bush, we think mostly of what a horrible mess he made of the economy. But his even more tragic legacy is the loss of our moral authority, and the transformation of the United States of America from global champion of human rights into an outlaw nation.

History is likely to judge Bush most harshly for two things in particular: Launching a war against a country that had not attacked us, and approving the use of cruel and inhumane interrogation techniques.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/22/the-two-most-esssential-a_n_786219.html
 
It must not be very secretive or we wouldn't be talking about it here, eh?

Who wants to bet that this thread won't turn into a partisan battle about BS?
 
Actually.................it was bush that saw the constitution an impediment, had you not allowed him to get away with it then, we wouldn't be talking about it now!

Washington, BC- In response to a Federal Judge's ruling that his warrant-less surveillance and wiretappings were illegal and unconstitutional, President Bush held a press conference at his personal retreat.
At this conference, President Bush lashed out as what many see as his biggest impediment: the United States Constitution.
"I strongly disagree with that document. Strongly disagree," President Bush said. The president called the Constitution, "out of touch with 21st century terror."
"Now look, here's the Constitution, it was written 200 years ago. They didn't have this kind of a threat. They didn't have to be adaptive. They made all these restricting rules, and there's no way to change it. It is out of place in this century, in this fight. Al-queda doesn't care about it, so we can't either."

UnNews:Bush Calls U.S. Constitution "Naive" - Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Well, that's a bit off the path of my post. Every President feels restricted by the Constitution, they just don't abuse it they way Obama does.
 
WASHINGTON -- These days, when we think of George W. Bush, we think mostly of what a horrible mess he made of the economy. But his even more tragic legacy is the loss of our moral authority, and the transformation of the United States of America from global champion of human rights into an outlaw nation.

History is likely to judge Bush most harshly for two things in particular: Launching a war against a country that had not attacked us, and approving the use of cruel and inhumane interrogation techniques.

The Two Most Essential, Abhorrent, Intolerable Lies Of George W. Bush's Memoir



LOL !!

A Huffington Post Op ed ? You're joking right ?
 
Not sure if this is going to be considered the right place to post this, but I think it is breaking news to uncover the corruption going on in the media these days....In true Journ O list form this is far more corrosive...The marriage between left wing, (possibly socialist/communist) professors in our University system to shape what we are told, and not told is the end of journalism as we knew it.

No longer is it just the facts, but pure propaganda spewing from the left. It is dangerous to a free society, somethings today's progressive seems to relish.

That's a mighty big leap.
 
Well, that's a bit off the path of my post. Every President feels restricted by the Constitution, they just don't abuse it they way Obama does.

Off the path, or a path you don't want to go down because it exposes the fact that Bush too was an enemy of the constitution. You know, if you really cared about our constitution more then a dumb elephant party, you'd call abuses to it out EVERY TIME you see it, and not just when a democratic president does it. That's the folly of the partisan.

Many presidents have been hostile to our constitution. Nixon's SoS had this to say about it.

As quoted in "Sunshine Week Document Friday! Kissinger Says, “The illegal we do immediately; the unconstitutional takes a little longer. But since the FOIA, I’m afraid to say things like that.” in Unredacted : The National Security Archive, unedited and uncensored
 
Last edited:
LOL !!

A Huffington Post Op ed ? You're joking right ?

Uh, no! This reflects the views of many Americans, in fact you see it on this board regularly.
 
And really, why hide behind names like "progressive" or "liberal"? I have more respect for those on here that come right out and call themselves Communists than the people that are, but won't say it.

I wouldn't respect someone who's a communist but refused to say, either. I don't know any communists, but I do know a fair number of liberals. They're different than communists.
 
Not sure if this is going to be considered the right place to post this, but I think it is breaking news to uncover the corruption going on in the media these days....In true Journ O list form this is far more corrosive...The marriage between left wing, (possibly socialist/communist) professors in our University system to shape what we are told, and not told is the end of journalism as we knew it.

No longer is it just the facts, but pure propaganda spewing from the left. It is dangerous to a free society, somethings today's progressive seems to relish.

1,000?

It's more than that - the media in general is progressive. As a Libertarian that has no allegiance to the right or left I can tell you that just about everything I read has a progressive slant and the strong majority of media outlets are massively progressive.

There is certainly a conspiracy - traditional journalism is dead.
 
Uh, no! This reflects the views of many Americans, in fact you see it on this board

Sure there are " differing views ", but that doesn't mean those views are correct or even relevant.

If you want to trade away any semblance of credibility by linking to hack Web sites then be my guest.

Just don't expect to be taken seriously.
 
Well, that's a bit off the path of my post. Every President feels restricted by the Constitution, they just don't abuse it they way Obama does.

Abuse it? Obama doesn't even acknowledge we have a Constitution or Bill of Rights.....

I can't even believe he got a second term (voter fraud obviously)...
 
It really is funny...the op is naming every source the progs are using to say nuh-uh....

Have you ever been over to "Think Progress?"

Think Progress makes the Huffo look like Fox News.
 
1,000?

It's more than that - the media in general is progressive. As a Libertarian that has no allegiance to the right or left I can tell you that just about everything I read has a progressive slant and the strong majority of media outlets are massively progressive.

There is certainly a conspiracy - traditional journalism is dead.

Or maybe it just means that you're not part of their target market. The middle.
 
Or maybe it just means that you're not part of their target market. The middle.

Exactly, however News shouldn't have a "target market" it should be honest objective journalism - not pandering to the right or the left.

I would love to just open a paper and not have to read a news article that is basically an op-ed piece presented as a legitimate non-partisan story of information.

I was going to be a journalist until I realized how full of **** the media and journalists are..... These "professors" teach you how to be a deceptive journalist... They teach you nonsense like "burying" the facts or information that contradicts YOUR opinion as a journalist at the end of the article or how to be vague when it comes to ideas you as a journalist don't agree with.... It's horrible...

There is no honesty, integrity or objectivity in journalism anymore - no it's all about pandering to your target audience..

Hell, I have to read like 5 different articles to get the real story.... It sucks..

I don't care what the journalists partisan position on a story is - I just want the REAL facts - not THEIR perspective on the news.
 
Fortunately, the mainstream media now enjoys the same level of trust with Americans as Jerry Sandusky.
 
As I thought. You're so far out there everyone else is a leftist conspirator.
 
Sure there are " differing views ", but that doesn't mean those views are correct or even relevant.

If you want to trade away any semblance of credibility by linking to hack Web sites then be my guest.

Just don't expect to be taken seriously.

HuffPo is mainstream. Furthermore, your repeated address of my opinions demonstrates you take me seriously, all attempts at GOP damage control, lol.
 
Exactly, however News shouldn't have a "target market" it should be honest objective journalism - not pandering to the right or the left.

I would love to just open a paper and not have to read a news article that is basically an op-ed piece presented as a legitimate non-partisan story of information.

I was going to be a journalist until I realized how full of **** the media and journalists are..... These "professors" teach you how to be a deceptive journalist... They teach you nonsense like "burying" the facts or information that contradicts YOUR opinion as a journalist at the end of the article or how to be vague when it comes to ideas you as a journalist don't agree with.... It's horrible...

There is no honesty, integrity or objectivity in journalism anymore - no it's all about pandering to your target audience..

Hell, I have to read like 5 different articles to get the real story.... It sucks..

I don't care what the journalists partisan position on a story is - I just want the REAL facts - not THEIR perspective on the news.

He said the middle, which is where most people set.
 
Back
Top Bottom