Sour Grapes of Wrath
 

Last night, just before I tuned in to The Daily Show, I caught a freaky little press conference that featured an obviously flustered and scary-looking dude from an organization with the purposefully disingenuous name of The Media Research Center. He actually looked kinda drunk. Regardless, here is what he had to say:

?And then they [the Republicans] had the problem with the national press. I will say this unequivocally: In 25 years of looking at the national media, I have never in my life seen a more one-sided, distorted, vicious presentation of news and non-news by the national press. The national press ought to be collectively ashamed of itself. They might as well take out membership in the Democratic national party, they were simply microphones for the party. They need to be ashamed of themselves for what they did."

http://www.wildfreshness.com/brian/archives/bozell.jpg

I won't go into all the obvious reasons why this asstard's theory is comically delusional, but I will say that he must think all of America is stupid.

And see that fake blond in the back. That's Wendy Wright, President of the equally ambiguous Concerned Women of America . You can always count on Right Wing organizations to give themselves names that either say nothing about their agenda, or sound just the opposite of what they really are; think "Clear Skies Initiative."

What a bunch of losers (literally).

If there was a Liberal Media Conspiracy then why would they let people like this get on TV ??? . . . DUH.

Very clever thread title, too.

right, right, I meant to mention that...
 

What I want to know is why there are never accusations about the evil "liberal" media when the GOP wins big? And how about when the "liberal" press was all over Clinton about the Lewinski affair? And I really notice how Dobson and other Focus on the Family types have been gagged. Notice how hard it is to find a single word uttered by a member of the Christian Wrong these days?

None of you people have the wisdom, it seems, to actually read the guy's magazine: The American Spectator. A year of that would enlighten even a hard-case like Marichiko. I frequently page through it in the library, picked up some stuff to argue with Mari over the Allende regime and its deserved end -- I'm discerning enough to be impressed.

In none of my experience of Brent Bozell's output, Pangloss, has he ever said anything nasty about hermaphrodites.

So if you're not discerning you wouldn't be impressed UG? lol

What about if someone said, I'm discerning enough to know it's a load of crap?

Would that mean we're all discerning?

I'm certainly discerning enough to tell the good stuff from the fertilizer.

The "if I weren't discerning" thing is simply too hypothetical to be of any application.

That's easy;
Good stuff = what most people post.
Fertilizer = what you post.
:rolleyes:

Sweetheart, the fact that you can pick up a rag like The American Spectator, is proof that neither the liberal media nor anyone else is censoring the right or even the whacko's.

And you NEVER replied to my quite lengthy and well researched reply concerning Latin America. That must have been your other girl friend on some different board that you responded to. Or, it could have been that time you were serving 30 days in the county jail for vagrancy.

Whatever the reason for your lack of response, I don't bother with anymore arguments with you, except top of my head insults.

Quick! Who is Bernardo O'Higgins and no fair googling the name.

Hugs and Kisses as always,

- Mari

There you have it folks. Urbane Guerrilla and American Spectator approve of massacres and torture by Pinochet to save Chile from evil. Clearly American Spectator must be the word of good people. We have Urbane Guerrilla's personal recommendation for murder and torture to save Chile from that evil Allende. Tens of thousands of deaths justified because Urbane Guerrilla and American Spectator say so. Clearly marichiko must be corrected because she does not advocate slaughter and torture. Only words from American Spectator can save her.

Scary - no 'spin' summarized what Urbane Guerrilla posted. UG approves of Pinochet's homicide. To think we worry about irrelevant things like extraordinary redention and WMDs. There is real evil out there like Allende. UG tells us this is so that the evil marichiko cannot deceive us. Wow. The world is really that simple!

The Queen of Evil here doesn't have to deceive anyone. Chile was the most stable, most continuous democracy in Latin America for a 100 years or so. Then its people unwisely elected Allende during the height of the Cold War. The CIA assasinated Allende and the rest is history

Except to UG who gets his history out of the yellow press.

If there was a liberal media bias, why did we hear about John Kerry last week?

This is where I get confused about the whole liberal media thing. It seems to me to be so closer to right than left. Is it just perspective? Someone mentioned that there are sheep in America who believe the liberal media. I always felt it was the sheep who were following the Bush administration, not unlike Jim Jones in Guyana.

Don't drink the Kool-aid, folks. It's just not worth it.

Tw's Soviet Communist notions of history trip him once again, and I've got the fool by the balls.

It is a matter of historical fact, tw, that Allende's Cabinet officials were beginning to put plans in motion to consolidate their oligarchy's grip on power by killing off approximately 9 million Chileans, within about the first Allende term in office. No visible remorse, no worries about it, nothing but a Mao-style climb to power at the pinnacle of millions of innocents slain for the heinous crime of holding views unpopular with the regime. This is the kind of thing you like? Fried yarbles to you. In the Allende Cabinet, it was the Communists who were the moderates.

You can imagine what a mess such a set of policymakers would have made of the economy.

The total butcher's bill for all seventeen years of Pinochet was approximately 1370. His death squads seem of a rather conservative bent next to your heroes, eh? You may take your tens of thousands, tw, spindle them, and insert them. I've said to you before that you do not have a shred of moral superiority to claim, and your petty resentments merely exacerbate your condition. There's another word that rhymes with exacerbate that describes a good many of your doings here.

Turning to Spexx: if there were NO media bias, 1) why are they so uniformly registered Democrats, rather than more widely distributed across the political spectrum? 2) why aren't at least half the journalists pro-gun, and thus favoring ALL of the human rights?

Mari, simply go back to the thread where you first broached the idea of discussing/disputing South American history, and you will find the reply, at some length, that I made then. I doubt the scholar I quoted some and summarized more of, and named there, would quite qualify as (ha ha ha) "yellow" (Oh ho ho ho ho ho!) "press!" You seemed rather to lose interest in following the matter up just about then, so I let it ride.

Bruce: tripe, or bollocks, your choice. I am not going to be influenced by stupid, collectivism-tainted ideas. Do you have as much presence of mind? You always could, you know.

The left-of-center believe they are the center. This is a poorly-informed point of view, against which I set my face.