Become a part of one of the fastest growing adult communities online. We have something for you, whether you’re a male member seeking out new friends or a new lady on the scene looking to take advantage of our many opportunities to network, make new friends, or connect with people. Join today & take part in lively discussions, take advantage of all the great features that attract hundreds of new daily members!
Ok you know what? Don't talk about rhetoric when you just spewed a whole lot of BS that you don't even realize is BS, because of course, you don't actually fact check anything, you just swallow whatever load of BS the DNC prepackages for you without the benefit of critical thinking.
Lets see, where do I start? Lets start with this - I have a TV that just gathers dust. I don't watch FOX News, I don't watch the O'Reilly Factor, and I don't tune into Limbaugh. I get my news and information from a very wide variety of sources. Ironically enough, the majority of the news stories I read are links on the Huffington Post. Pretty sure no one can hang a conservative label around their necks. So don't try the rhetoric or talking points angle with me. That dog don't hunt.
Lets move on. Yes, Roger Ailes does acknowledge that he created FOX News with the purpose of having a media outlet that provides a conservative perspective. That is just awful given that every other media outlet - CNN, ABC, NBC, MSNBC, etc provides media content with a liberal bias. And it bothers you to have one media source with a conservative slant? I'm waiting with baited breath for your condemnation of MSNBC et al.'s liberal bias.
But now, lets talk about that bias shall we? Do you even know the difference between news reporting and political punditry? I'm not certain that you do. Chris Matthews, Rachel Maddow, O'Reilly, Limbaugh - these are pundits, not reporters. Do you know the difference?
So what do the experts have to say about which media outlet is furthest from center in news reporting? Note: I've shifted gears from discussing political punditry to actual news reporting, a distinction I realize you have difficulty making. I am betting you would be shocked and dismayed to learn that Pew Research Center consistently rates FOX News closer to center than all other news networks. The one and only difference being that FOX leans right of center, while all other media outlets - every. single. one. of. them. - lean left of center.
Pardon me, your hypocrisy is showing.
Why does the O'Reilly Factor earn more money than your so-called "regular" shows? Its all about the ratings. O'Reilly spanks his competitors in his time slot day after day, week after week. Just as the other shows on FOX - Hannity, Greta, and others - regularly spank their competitors in ratings.
And, just so we are clear here. Is this the sort of "regular" news shows that attempts to present news in a fairer manner?
Very important stuff here!
All the news that's fit to print! (err, mock) So tolerant! So professional!
Yup, more honesty from MSNBC!
To my dying day I will never stop laughing at the bimbo opining about "racial overtones". I love that clip!
+1
And don't forget Costello's remarks regarding what she considers to be the "best of the best" news!
Or when ABC's lead anchor, Charlie Gibson, was asked on WLS Radio's "Don & Roma Show" what he thought about the ACORN scandal:
Quote:
Don: OK, here’s my question, Senate bill yesterday passes cutting off funds to this group called ACORN. Now we got the…we got that bill passing, we got the embarrassing video of ACORN staff giving tax advice on how to set up a brothel with 13 year old hookers. It has everything you could want corruption and sleazy action at tax funded organizations that’s got government ties. But nobody’s covering that story why?
Charlie Gibson: (laugh) I don’t even know about it. Uh, so you got me at a loss, I don’t know. Uh, uh, but, but, My goodness if it’s got everything including sleaziness in it we should talk about it this morning.
Roma: This is the American way…
Charlie Gibson: Well maybe, maybe that’s one you just leave to the cables.
Roma: Well I think that this is a huge issue because there’s so much funding that goes into this organization and it’s a multi…
Charlie Gibson: Well, I know we’ve done some stories about ACORN before but uh, uh, this one I don’t know about.
Roma: Jake Tapper did some blogging on it. I know he’s at least blogged once on this scandal.
Charlie Gibson: You guys, you guys are really up on the uh on the website. (transcript)
I have an idea. Let the market set the wage, and if someone wants to earn more, they can work harder or get some education. I know the idea of people taking personal responsibility for themselves offends many of you, but it will result in a stronger, smarter workforce. But I understand it is easier to gain votes by giving people stuff they haven't earned, but in the long run it makes for a weaker, less stable economy.
I have an idea. Let the market set the wage, and if someone wants to earn more, they can work harder or get some education. I know the idea of people taking personal responsibility for themselves offends many of you, but it will result in a stronger, smarter workforce. But I understand it is easier to gain votes by giving people stuff they haven't earned, but in the long run it makes for a weaker, less stable economy.
Yes, let the market set the wage so that corporations can hire child labor and pay them 30 cents a day. That's what your "market" does in China you pathetic doddering fool.
No minimum wage means that people with no experience, no education just trying to start off their careers in retail or fast food could be earning less than $7.25/hr....that's practically a death sentence.
It also means that companies would much rather hire, for example, part-time students to do those jobs because they usually will accept a much lower wage. Like it or not, there are people who still support their families on minimum wage.
A capitalist market without boundaries is like condoning some of the worst crimes ever committed. There is no such thing as a "free-market" that works out in the best interest for everyone.
I have an idea. Let the market set the wage, and if someone wants to earn more, they can work harder or get some education. I know the idea of people taking personal responsibility for themselves offends many of you, but it will result in a stronger, smarter workforce. But I understand it is easier to gain votes by giving people stuff they haven't earned, but in the long run it makes for a weaker, less stable economy.
This is what they did before the laws changed. The worker got screwed and people made pennies an hour. THAT offends me. Stronger, smarter, workforce? Bullshit. Only someone as stupid as you would complain that people earning minimum wage aren't deserving of it.
Yes, let the market set the wage so that corporations can hire child labor and pay them 30 cents a day. That's what your "market" does in China you pathetic doddering fool.
No minimum wage means that people with no experience, no education just trying to start off their careers in retail or fast food could be earning less than $7.25/hr....that's practically a death sentence.
It also means that companies would much rather hire, for example, part-time students to do those jobs because they usually will accept a much lower wage. Like it or not, there are people who still support their families on minimum wage.
A capitalist market without boundaries is like condoning some of the worst crimes ever committed. There is no such thing as a "free-market" that works out in the best interest for everyone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by WombRaider
This is what they did before the laws changed. The worker got screwed and people made pennies an hour. THAT offends me. Stronger, smarter, workforce? Bullshit. Only someone as stupid as you would complain that people earning minimum wage aren't deserving of it.
Great minds
Letting the free market set wage rates in regards to the lower skilled workers is bullshit. Capitalism reveals our worst traits as human beings.
Yes, let the market set the wage so that corporations can hire child labor and pay them 30 cents a day. That's what your "market" does in China you pathetic doddering fool.
No minimum wage means that people with no experience, no education just trying to start off their careers in retail or fast food could be earning less than $7.25/hr....that's practically a death sentence.
It also means that companies would much rather hire, for example, part-time students to do those jobs because they usually will accept a much lower wage. Like it or not, there are people who still support their families on minimum wage.
A capitalist market without boundaries is like condoning some of the worst crimes ever committed. There is no such thing as a "free-market" that works out in the best interest for everyone.
Actually, the Chinese make about 1.70 per hour, and they have lower costs of living.
