On Election Eve the Repub Congressional Candidate for Montana's Only House Seat "BodySlams" Reporter
-
Do we just forget Fox News' coverage of the Bush Administration? How about Rush, Bill, Glenn & Hannity? These all unbiased far right journalists? Can we at least be honest in here.
Rush Limbaugh: not a journalist, never claimed to be one.
Bill O'Reilly: not a journalist, never claimed to be one.
Sean Hannity: not a journalist, never claimed to be one.
Glen Beck: Not a journalist, never claimed to be one.
These guys are commentators. They give out their opinions and they are free to do so because they only claim to be commentators and not journalists. It is on the left where journalists have gone off the rails of being unbiased reporters to activists and making commentary when journalists should not be doing that.
ugh.... AND I QUOTE
Glen Beck: Not a journalist, never claimed to be one.
This is objectively false. I posted a video where Beck refers to himself as a journalist.
Will you admit that you were incorrect?
Ja.brill Peppers - Cleveland Brown OldBrownsFan, on 02 Jun 2017 - 5:09PM said: "No you are not the work of the devil but you are deceived by the devil." Who's got it better than us? Nooooobody! -
So by def then hardly anybody on tv is a "journalist". So no more complaining about the msm
-
ugh.... AND I QUOTE
Glen Beck: Not a journalist, never claimed to be one.
This is objectively false. I posted a video where Beck refers to himself as a journalist.
Will you admit that you were incorrect?
ugh.... AND I QUOTE
This is objectively false. I posted a video where Beck refers to himself as a journalist.
Will you admit that you were incorrect?
LOL Woody I was correct and incorrect. None of those guys are journalists but it looks like Beck at one time claimed to be one (and at other times claimed he wasn't) when by definition he is not. BTW - nobody I saw was buying that Beck was a journalist either.
By definition of what journalists are you can see with the biased reporting today there are few real journalists out there. Real journalists don't take sides or report 90 percent negative stories about Trump because they don't like him.
-
So by def then hardly anybody on tv is a "journalist". So no more complaining about the msm
So by def then hardly anybody on tv is a "journalist". So no more complaining about the msm
Too many claim to be journalists today when they aren't. My primary complaint is the dishonesty among those who call themselves journalists. I don't have a problem with commentators because they are not being dishonest. Too much dishonest reporting is going on today.
-
Any good P I attorney will tell you to go to straight to the emergency room.
He should probably sue Donald Trump because according to the left wing media it's his fault.
?
WSS
Any good P I attorney will tell you to go to straight to the emergency room.
He should probably sue Donald Trump because according to the left wing media it's his fault.
Our President certainly was a tone setter during the campaign. Although last I heard he's yet to pick up the legal fees for a couple "supporters". But what's one more campaign promise down the drain.
It is hard for democrats to win in Montana but Montana does have a democrat governor.
What may have really helped the republican Gianforte was the early voting with most voters already having voted before the assault incident. But early voting is something the democrats always want because it helps them but in this case it hurt them. How many would have switched their votes on election day if they had the chance?
... and one of Montana's two US Senators is a Dem... Testor... who IIRC was a former Governor.
The early voting certainly did not hurt Gianforte's chances, but there was a disappointing amount of "deserved it" evident in voter interviews. But since we needed another billionaire in Congress, I guess the right man won...
"When you have a shared vision it is a lot easier to make unpopular decisions." - Paul DePodesta "When you win, say nothing. When you lose, say less." - Paul Brown Complete 2017 Browns Board Mock: http://thebrownsboard.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=46196 -
Any good P I attorney will tell you to go to straight to the emergency room.
He should probably sue Donald Trump because according to the left wing media it's his fault.
Our President certainly was a tone setter during the campaign. Although last I heard he's yet to pick up the legal fees for a couple "supporters". But what's one more campaign promise down the drain.
It is hard for democrats to win in Montana but Montana does have a democrat governor.
What may have really helped the republican Gianforte was the early voting with most voters already having voted before the assault incident. But early voting is something the democrats always want because it helps them but in this case it hurt them. How many would have switched their votes on election day if they had the chance?
... and one of Montana's two US Senators is a Dem... Testor... who IIRC was a former Governor.
The early voting certainly did not hurt Gianforte's chances, but there was a disappointing amount of "deserved it" evident in voter interviews. But since we needed another billionaire in Congress, I guess the right man won...
Our President certainly was a tone setter during the campaign. Although last I heard he's yet to pick up the legal fees for a couple "supporters". But what's one more campaign promise down the drain.
... and one of Montana's two US Senators is a Dem... Testor... who IIRC was a former Governor.
The early voting certainly did not hurt Gianforte's chances, but there was a disappointing amount of "deserved it" evident in voter interviews. But since we needed another billionaire in Congress, I guess the right man won...
...or Montana didn't want another socialist in congress?
-
there is no mounting evidence, just mounting hostility at losing the election and
the undoing of Obamao's marxist attempts at "transforming" our country.
sore losers. dang.
there is no mounting evidence, just mounting hostility at losing the election and the undoing of Obamao's marxist attempts at "transforming" our country.
sore losers. dang.
Your desperate generalizations are approaching panic level.
No perhaps about it I have been consistent about condemning violence. And Paul Ryan is a RINO and Cal is right there is no mounting evidence of collusion between the Russians and the Trump campaign. This investigation has been going on for a year or so and still there in no evidence to support collusion. None.
Fighting the Politicized, Evidence-Free ‘Collusion with Russia’ NarrativeRead more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/447915/trump-russia-collusion-john-brennan-testimony-how-fight-politicized-narrative
If Ryan is a "RINO", I have no idea what a Republican looks like anymore...
As for evidence... Direct smoking gun? No... Plenty of smoke? Yes... and, IMO, it's getting thicker.
But the real question is why the rush? Investigations into Benhgazi began within days of the 2012 attack in various Congressional Committees including: Armed Services Committee, Foreign Affairs Committee, Intelligence Committee, and Oversight and Government Reform Committee
A House Select Committee was formed in May of 2014.
The House Select Committee issued its final report in June, 2016... over two years after its formation and nearly four years after the first committee hearings.
So why the rush now?
-
"Students of politics know that Ryan has long benefited from his reputation as a conservative, but the question that needs to be asked is, conservative compared to what? In recent years, at least, his reputation has been undeserved. Ryan is a conservative only in the dual sense that he supports the status quo and that his policy objectives and votes in the House of Representatives are to the right of the overwhelmingly left-wing and radical left-wing members of the media-entertainment-academia complex.
When it comes to actually doing things instead of just flapping one's lips, Ryan is somewhere between a liberal and a mushy moderate. In choosing a successor to John Boehner (R-Ohio), it is essential that Ryan be judged by his actual deeds, not just by his public image.
Whether Ryan is a RINO depends on where you sit. As a colleague reminds me daily – no, make that hourly – the RINO epithet is not primarily an ideological descriptor. A "Republican In Name Only" is first and foremost a self-identified Republican who refuses to fight. For example, no serious person would argue that Rudy Giuliani, who is out of step with most Republicans on abortion and gun control, is a RINO. Rudy, who is willing to take the fight to his adversaries, is about as tough as they come.
Ryan is certainly no wimp. He definitely has a lot of fight in him. But on issues of importance, he's regularly working against conservative goals.
Fighting for the right ideas is a key distinction between conservative Republicans and Republicans In Name Only. RINOs won't fight for the conservative beliefs they claim to hold, so they become experts at lying. To remain in power, they have to be adept at fooling the party's base into believing they are serious, committed conservatives. They get away with it most of the time because even among the better-informed members of the base, not too many assiduously track how lawmakers vote.
RINOs excel at paying lip service to conservative stances. When pressed, they rain down a blizzard of excuses for why Republicans can't do the right thing: we don't have the majority we need; we don't have the super-majority we need; we don't have both houses of Congress; we don't have the White House; we don't have the Supreme Court; and so on. And then there are the whispered and unspoken excuses of the cowardly: we don't want to be called racist or mean or the Party of No, and we don't want to alienate women or Latinos or blacks or illegal aliens who will be voters one day.
If Paul Ryan isn't a RINO, he at least has some powerful RINO tendencies.
Ryan currently receives a "Liberty Score" of just 58 percent from the Conservative Review website, which corresponds to a failing grade of "F."
According to Conservative Review:
He opposes crony capitalism in theory, but this has not stopped him from endorsing bailouts for banks and the auto industry, as well as a failed stimulus package. He continually supports status quo transportation spending, and even led the charge in the House to make amnesty a reality. Friendly Republicans will defend Ryan’s consistent moves to the middle as “pragmatic,” but the policy results are the same—gains for a big government agenda. (Mediaite) While Ryan may have an eye toward a more conservative governing vision, and would one day like to see that vision realized, it is a mistake to see him as an enemy of Speaker Boehner or the establishment—he simply provides no true contrast to their culture of surrender.
Ryan wanted to reduce veterans' earned benefits instead of cutting unearned welfare benefits for illegal aliens.Seriously? What kind of coservative does that?"
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/10/paul_ryan_a_poor_choice_for_speaker.html
-
Caoatse doesnt know what a libertarian is. And per usual he wont educate himself. Libertarians are socially liberal coatse, u ignorant sock puppet
Caoatse doesnt know what a libertarian is. And per usual he wont educate himself. Libertarians are socially liberal coatse, u ignorant sock puppet
Basic difference between "reading" and "reading comprehension"... but when handicapped by an entrenched ideological filter, the bridge between the two is long and tenuous...
Fox is/was right down the middle....
For as long as I have listened to Chris Wallace, this has been true of him. Pretty much ditto for Shep Smith... Brett Baier? Close, but there's a reason he's had to issue as many retractions and corrections as he has.
Rush Limbaugh: not a journalist, never claimed to be one.
Bill O'Reilly: not a journalist, never claimed to be one.
Sean Hannity: not a journalist, never claimed to be one.
Glen Beck: Not a journalist, never claimed to be one.
These guys are commentators. They give out their opinions and they are free to do so because they only claim to be commentators and not journalists. It is on the left where journalists have gone off the rails of being unbiased reporters to activists and making commentary when journalists should not be doing that.
I might give you Bill-O... and maybe Beck, if I'm in an extra generous mood... as commentating...
But Sean and Rush are entertainers. They lack true conviction in their views... they blow wherever the winds of their following, take them. This year it was to Trump. To Sean's credit, he saw the trend much earlier than Rush did.
But the entertainer label was not always applicable to Rush. Once upon a time he actually constructed Beck-style arguments. I used to listen to him a couple mornings a week while commuting.in the late-70s/early-80s. Until he found out he did not have to work so hard; he just needed to be more assertive, more outrageous... so long as he picked the right targets... I mean... correct left targets...
-
Your desperate generalizations are approaching panic level. Dreamer Tourish
But Sean and Rush are entertainers. They lack true conviction in their views... they blow wherever the winds of their following, take them. This year it was to Trump. To Sean's credit, he saw the trend much earlier than Rush did.
****************************************************************
yep. liberals see the world emotionally - reality doesn't set in - they don't think.
I've been listening to Rush and Hannity, etc.. for years. Never once have I figured they didn't believe what
they were saying.
That's old liberal slant silliness. "Oh, those who oppose us aren't sincere, and they secretly know our feelings
are exact, they are just posturing and..."
anything to discredit real opinions that make liberal emoting look worse than "out there"
-
ugh.... AND I QUOTE
This is objectively false. I posted a video where Beck refers to himself as a journalist.
Will you admit that you were incorrect?
LOL Woody I was correct and incorrect. None of those guys are journalists but it looks like Beck at one time claimed to be one (and at other times claimed he wasn't) when by definition he is not. BTW - nobody I saw was buying that Beck was a journalist either.
By definition of what journalists are you can see with the biased reporting today there are few real journalists out there. Real journalists don't take sides or report 90 percent negative stories about Trump because they don't like him.
LOL Woody I was correct and incorrect. None of those guys are journalists but it looks like Beck at one time claimed to be one (and at other times claimed he wasn't) when by definition he is not. BTW - nobody I saw was buying that Beck was a journalist either.
By definition of what journalists are you can see with the biased reporting today there are few real journalists out there. Real journalists don't take sides or report 90 percent negative stories about Trump because they don't like him.
Actually was ready to take your side for once... and Beck's...
... but now I'm not sure what your stance is... 
Beck in his FNC hay-day did research his topics. While I might question his sources... and his conclusions... he did do research, both through reading "literature" (of a sort) and conducting interviews, and those are journalistic traits.
"When you have a shared vision it is a lot easier to make unpopular decisions." - Paul DePodesta "When you win, say nothing. When you lose, say less." - Paul Brown Complete 2017 Browns Board Mock: http://thebrownsboard.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=46196 -
LOL Woody I was correct and incorrect. None of those guys are journalists but it looks like Beck at one time claimed to be one (and at other times claimed he wasn't) when by definition he is not. BTW - nobody I saw was buying that Beck was a journalist either.
By definition of what journalists are you can see with the biased reporting today there are few real journalists out there. Real journalists don't take sides or report 90 percent negative stories about Trump because they don't like him.
Actually was ready to take your side for once... and Beck's...
... but now I'm not sure what your stance is... Beck in his FNC hay-day did research his topics. While I might question his sources... and his conclusions... he did do research, both through reading "literature" (of a sort) and conducting interviews, and those are journalistic traits.
Actually was ready to take your side for once... and Beck's...
... but now I'm not sure what your stance is... Beck in his FNC hay-day did research his topics. While I might question his sources... and his conclusions... he did do research, both through reading "literature" (of a sort) and conducting interviews, and those are journalistic traits.
Beck has claimed at times not to be a journalist and at other times claims to be a journalist. I never considered him to be journalist as much a well informed commentator.
-
Beck in his FNC hay-day did research his topics. While I might question his sources... and his conclusions... he did do research, both through reading "literature" (of a sort) and conducting interviews, and those are journalistic traits. Tour
****************************************
Use to listen to Glenn Beck a lot. His research was really deep - his conclusions were alarming, but there was
all that evidence.
Then, he changed. True - research went out the window, apparently, and he started changing subjects from
where he says we are headed, to more less hard hitting subjects that seemed to be nonsense. I don't listen
to him anymore - way, way too much comical? jibber jabber, and superficial appraisals that are boring...
I bought his "Agenda 21" book...because agenda 21 does exist. But his book was a piece of futuristic garbage that
completely misses the point of watching agenda 21 moves by the UN. Just really, really stupid. So I threw it away.
Didn't even put it in the garage sale for a nickle. That's a ***stupid*** book.
-
It is very clear though, regardless what they claim, they're viewed as a news source. Not an opinion source.
-
Paul ryan doesnt "fight" for anything? Wut? He fought obama evem on shit thst made sense, for 8 years. So giuliani is more of a republican because he gets on tv and says rash, bombastic statements.....now that he's unencumbered by office and the necessity to compromise...this makes him more of a republican than a guy who in effect has to navigate through a primate enclosure within his own party to even attempt to get shit done.
You've utterly lost it obf
-
I'm glad this older congressman kicked this mellinial's ass. Shows what pussies they are. Faggots.
-
Cal, so if a person differs just on one thing they are a liberal? Even if they are for small government, fiscal conservatism, pro 2nd Am. etc.? Logic would be that then means any person who identifies as liberal but is pro-life would be a conservative.
Am I missing something or are you just fishing to get one on Tia?
Cal, so if a person differs just on one thing they are a liberal? Even if they are for small government, fiscal conservatism, pro 2nd Am. etc.? Logic would be that then means any person who identifies as liberal but is pro-life would be a conservative.
Am I missing something or are you just fishing to get one on Tia?
no, no, no. it isn't one thing, it's a general trend, relating to issues based on emotion, most all the time. "social liberal conservative"
is worse than an oxymoron. Nobody always agrees on issues; liberals are consistently flipping their stances
as soon as flipping gets them what they want.
obamao was pro 2nd Amendment...pro-Real Marriage, etc etc etc. He emotionally vented...and or... LIED out his wazoo.
it is whatever gives them an advantage, then that is their take.
Like the dems warning reps to not use the nuclear option. What to the dems do? They use the nuclear option,
of course.
Then, when the reps control Congress, they demand that the reps not use the nuclear option.
and on and on it goes. Freedom of Speech - is REALLY IMPORTANT when they want it.
When conservatives want it... nope. Then there should be censorship. and consequences.
the msm and liberals everywhere went apecrap over Rush saying he hoped Obamao failed to transform
America.
all liberal hell broke loose - about how dare somebody hope America fails ,...etc etc etc etc etc.
yet, NOW...they are actively insisting/legislating/maneuvering/threatening/"investigating/obstructing
Trump, to make his agenda fail.
That trend of emotionally flipping on advantage (hypocrisy in action), is truly what makes a liberal.
Emotionally, they see nothing wrong with it, because that's how they feel. Principle gone out the window.
-
So....nothing. You've got nothing.
Again, the phrase "socially liberal" really means ' none of my fucking business'. The queers can be queer, the stoners can smoke, the gun owners keep their guns, etc etc. Everybody is happy.
I enjoy freedom, I guess that's just a crazy concept?
-
So....nothing. You've got nothing.
Again, the phrase "socially liberal" really means ' none of my fucking business'. The queers can be queer, the stoners can smoke, the gun owners keep their guns, etc etc. Everybody is happy.
I enjoy freedom, I guess that's just a crazy concept?
I enjoy freedom, I guess that's just a crazy concept?
Freedom to cal is doing what him and his kind wants and we havebto abide. But they feel perfectly ok picking and choosing freedoms based on their own beleif structure. Thetes nothing american about them. It was people like him that drove people out of europe in droves centuries ago to come here
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login