• 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!

Fox News Shows Their Love For Howard Kurtz

Grant said:
Where is there a move to make the USA a theocracy? Is this more 'mainstream media'??
Click to expand...

How about a website?

WallBuilders' goal is to exert a direct and positive influence in government, education, and the family by (1) educating the nation concerning the Godly foundation of our country; (2) providing information to federal, state, and local officials as they develop public policies which reflect Biblical values; and (3) encouraging Christians to be involved in the civic arena.

WallBuilders - Overview
Click to expand...
 
winston53660 said:
How about a website?

WallBuilders' goal is to exert a direct and positive influence in government, education, and the family by (1) educating the nation concerning the Godly foundation of our country; (2) providing information to federal, state, and local officials as they develop public policies which reflect Biblical values; and (3) encouraging Christians to be involved in the civic arena.

WallBuilders - Overview
Click to expand...

So an obscure website wants more Christianity in the United States and it will therefore become a theocracy? And you buy into it? There are probably more Muslims interested in this idea than Christians.
 
Who?

Probably another ignorant US mainstream television 'journalist'.
 
sangha said:
Wrong.

You should learn about that Pulitzer before you post about it
Click to expand...

The Pulitzer was awarded to the NYT staff for explanatory reporting.
During Miller's tenure at the The New York Times, she was a member of the staff that won a Pulitzer Prize for "explanatory reporting." In fact, an article for which she had the byline, was one of the articles upon which the committee based the prize awarded to the staff of the Times.[8]
When the Pulitzer was awarded, Miller and Jim Risen were selected as the staff members most appropriate to accept it. There's a photo on the Pulitzer web site.:mrgreen:
 
Jack Hays said:
The Pulitzer was awarded to the NYT staff for explanatory reporting.
During Miller's tenure at the The New York Times, she was a member of the staff that won a Pulitzer Prize for "explanatory reporting." In fact, an article for which she had the byline, was one of the articles upon which the committee based the prize awarded to the staff of the Times.[8]
When the Pulitzer was awarded, Miller and Jim Risen were selected as the staff members most appropriate to accept it. There's a photo on the Pulitzer web site.:mrgreen:
Click to expand...

Yes, "the staff" as a whole won it. Not Ms Miller.
 
sangha said:
The staff won it; not her
Click to expand...

If she was part of the staff then she was part of the win.QED
Her standing is further enhanced by the fact that an article of hers was specifically cited by the Pulitzer committee as a basis for the award. That's why she was one of two staff members selected to accept the award.:mrgreen:
 
Jack Hays said:
If she was part of the staff then she was part of the win.QED
Her standing is further enhanced by the fact that an article of hers was specifically cited by the Pulitzer committee as a basis for the award. That's why she was one of two staff members selected to accept the award.:mrgreen:
Click to expand...

She did not win a pulitzer. The staff did.
 
Jack Hays said:
If she was part of the staff then she was part of the win.QED
Her standing is further enhanced by the fact that an article of hers was specifically cited by the Pulitzer committee as a basis for the award. That's why she was one of two staff members selected to accept the award.:mrgreen:
Click to expand...

Why do some people seem to have a problem offering congratulations for a job well done, no matter their political leaning? :confused: Sad....

Good afternoon, Jack. :2wave:
 
polgara said:
Why do some people seem to have a problem offering congratulations for a job well done, no matter their political leaning? :confused: Sad....

Good afternoon, Jack. :2wave:
Click to expand...

Small minds, small hearts.
Good evening, Polgara.:2wave:
 
polgara said:
Why do some people seem to have a problem offering congratulations for a job well done, no matter their political leaning? :confused: Sad....

Good afternoon, Jack. :2wave:
Click to expand...

Judith Miller: From the Times to the nuts - Salon.com

Judith Miller used to be a superstar. She was a major reporter at the New York Times for decades — at the DC bureau, in Cairo, in Paris, special correspondent to the Persian Gulf, embedded with a special unit in Iraq. She had the best sources. She had amazing scoops. Now she’s writing — on contract, not full-time — for Newsmax, a goofy right-wing magazine where conservatives you’ve never heard of (and John Stossel, apparently) report, constantly, that Barack Obama is bad and unpopular. It’s a steep fall, and it couldn’t have happened to a worse journalist.

Since her early days at the Times, when she inserted CIA misinformation into a piece on Libya, she’s always been a tool of power. She was the voice of the Defense Department, embedded at the Times. She was hyping bull**** stories about Iraq’s WMD capabilities as far back as 1998, and in the run-up to the war, her front-page scoops were cited by the Bush administration as evidence that Saddam needed to be taken out, right away.

Lying exile grifter Ahmad Chalabi fed her the worst of the nonsense designed to push America into toppling Saddam Hussein (and giving Iraq to him), and she pushed that nonsense into the newspaper of record. She got everything wrong, and for some insane reason, she remained employed at the Times until 2005, when she negotiated her separation from her longtime professional home.

snip

​
 
pbrauer said:
Judith Miller: From the Times to the nuts - Salon.com

Judith Miller used to be a superstar. She was a major reporter at the New York Times for decades — at the DC bureau, in Cairo, in Paris, special correspondent to the Persian Gulf, embedded with a special unit in Iraq. She had the best sources. She had amazing scoops. Now she’s writing — on contract, not full-time — for Newsmax, a goofy right-wing magazine where conservatives you’ve never heard of (and John Stossel, apparently) report, constantly, that Barack Obama is bad and unpopular. It’s a steep fall, and it couldn’t have happened to a worse journalist.

Since her early days at the Times, when she inserted CIA misinformation into a piece on Libya, she’s always been a tool of power. She was the voice of the Defense Department, embedded at the Times. She was hyping bull**** stories about Iraq’s WMD capabilities as far back as 1998, and in the run-up to the war, her front-page scoops were cited by the Bush administration as evidence that Saddam needed to be taken out, right away.

Lying exile grifter Ahmad Chalabi fed her the worst of the nonsense designed to push America into toppling Saddam Hussein (and giving Iraq to him), and she pushed that nonsense into the newspaper of record. She got everything wrong, and for some insane reason, she remained employed at the Times until 2005, when she negotiated her separation from her longtime professional home.

snip

​
Click to expand...

"inserted CIA misinformation into a piece on Libya"??? Nonsense.:cool:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom