• 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!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Murtha Showcased, Lieberman Ignored

Deegan said:
Well get off the forum, and get some facts on the internet......oh that's right, that's why you're already screwed in the head. I am so tired of this crap, you get what you want to hear, and that is where your sorry asses will reside.:roll:
Click to expand...

And you are any different?
 
Deegan said:
In their defense, it's the way they sell papers, people don't want to read good news, They like things like the twin towers burning, seriously, they do. It's a sickness this world has, good news takes a backseat to bad, I doubt that will ever change, as sad as that seems.
Click to expand...

Aren't you conseratives the ones who always preach Capitalism?

Well, news is a business just like everything else, they are going to push something controversial as the "big issue" in order to sell...... You should know this.
 
mpg said:
I agree that Lieberman's comments about Iraq don't need to get any more coverage than they got, but why do Murtha's comments get so much coverage?
Click to expand...

Because its controversy, its news, and it sells.

Thats capitalism for ya!
 
mpg said:
I agree that Lieberman's comments about Iraq don't need to get any more coverage than they got, but why do Murtha's comments get so much coverage?
Click to expand...

Because the media is Liberal and they will publish anything that reflects bad on President Bush and his administration...
 
Navy Pride said:
Because the media is Liberal and they will publish anything that reflects bad on President Bush and his administration...
Click to expand...

Negative, because Controversy Sells........

Hey, Its just Capitalism!

Lieberman's neutral comments aren't controversial.
Murtha's are.

Controversy sells, as it attracts people to look at it.
 
Caine said:
Negative, because Controversy Sells........

Hey, Its just Capitalism!

Lieberman's neutral comments aren't controversial.
Murtha's are.

Controversy sells, as it attracts people to look at it.
Click to expand...
I mostly agree with that, EXCEPT for the fact that Congress took action with Murtha's comments and didn't with Leiberman's....

That tells me that Murtha's comments were made to be more than just a media story and they hyped his comments so much that it started a argument in the Legislature...

You claim its for capitalism, which is valid, but the agenda angle cannot be discounted...
 
cnredd said:
I mostly agree with that, EXCEPT for the fact that Congress took action with Murtha's comments and didn't with Leiberman's....

That tells me that Murtha's comments were made to be more than just a media story and they hyped his comments so much that it started a argument in the Legislature...

You claim its for capitalism, which is valid, but the agenda angle cannot be discounted...
Click to expand...

Oh, no no... You get me wrong.

When it comes to the comments, Leiberman's comments should have had just as much effect on Policy than Murtha's comments. Yes, I agree that the hype caused by the media might have caused action in the legislature.

But My argument was to that of "Liberal Media"
Media during a Democrat majority legislature and executive is expected to be viewed as "conserative" in my opinon, just like during our current administration it will be viewed as "Liberal"
This is because the media will report on any "scandalous" stories first and foremost, and most people tend to pay more attention to scandal from actions of the white house, so that is what is reported, and purchased.
 
Caine said:
Negative, because Controversy Sells........

Hey, Its just Capitalism!

Lieberman's neutral comments aren't controversial.
Murtha's are.

Controversy sells, as it attracts people to look at it.
Click to expand...

Wrong again, Leiberman's put partisan politics aside and backed President Bush..........Murtha's comments were criticizing President Bush....You figure it out.......
 
Navy Pride said:
Wrong again, Leiberman's put partisan politics aside and backed President Bush..........Murtha's comments were criticizing President Bush....You figure it out.......
Click to expand...

Leiberman was stating his opinion on what he saw.

Murtha was stating his opinion on what he saw.

Murtha's opinion was more controversial because it made an interesting story, THATS why the news media caught on to it more than Lieberman's story, THATS what sells. Are you arguing that???


Now, it SOUNDS like YOUR trying to be partisan instead, I don't think Ive made a partisan comment in THIS thread, yet you refuse to set partisan politics aside and admit that controversy sells, there was no 'liberal bias'

Now, if you want to get technical, who is to say that Leiberman didn't see Iraq from a completely different view? Different area....Different unit with a different level of morale and equipment than Murtha did?
Im not saying that he DIDN'T see the same thing, but you can't assume that.
Not all areas and operations in Iraq are the same.. not everybody has the same living conditions, not the same access to MWR, not every unit has the same level of morale (this could be due to the access to MWR or the way thier leadership works).

You gotta look into it more than just throwing 'LIBERAL MEDIA!!!' and finding anything that looks negative as a personal attack on Bush.
 
Caine said:
Leiberman was stating his opinion on what he saw.

Murtha was stating his opinion on what he saw.

Murtha's opinion was more controversial because it made an interesting story, THATS why the news media caught on to it more than Lieberman's story, THATS what sells. Are you arguing that???


Now, it SOUNDS like YOUR trying to be partisan instead, I don't think Ive made a partisan comment in THIS thread, yet you refuse to set partisan politics aside and admit that controversy sells, there was no 'liberal bias'

Now, if you want to get technical, who is to say that Leiberman didn't see Iraq from a completely different view? Different area....Different unit with a different level of morale and equipment than Murtha did?
Im not saying that he DIDN'T see the same thing, but you can't assume that.
Not all areas and operations in Iraq are the same.. not everybody has the same living conditions, not the same access to MWR, not every unit has the same level of morale (this could be due to the access to MWR or the way thier leadership works).

You gotta look into it more than just throwing 'LIBERAL MEDIA!!!' and finding anything that looks negative as a personal attack on Bush.
Click to expand...

Murtha was spouting the party line.......Anyone can do that...Leiberman was talking against the party line...That should be much more contreversial.....
 
Navy Pride said:
Murtha was spouting the party line.......Anyone can do that...Leiberman was talking against the party line...That should be much more contreversial.....
Click to expand...

And you didn't address half of what I said, and your STILL being very partisan in your view.
Okay, im done with this discussion until you can intelligently address my arguments.
 
Caine said:
And you didn't address half of what I said, and your STILL being very partisan in your view.
Okay, im done with this discussion until you can intelligently address my arguments.
Click to expand...

I am a right wing Conservative.........You are a left wing liberal....The difference between us I am proud of what I am and you are ashamed of what you are.......

Discussion over my liberal friend.....
 
Navy Pride said:
I am a right wing Conservative.........You are a left wing liberal....The difference between us I am proud of what I am and you are ashamed of what you are.......

Discussion over my liberal friend.....
Click to expand...

Bwuahahahahahaha.
Im proud to be left wing progressive.

And this argument means nothing to the fact that you still haven't commented on my arguments on this issue.
I'll take it that you admit your wrong.
 
Caine said:
Because its controversy, its news, and it sells.

Thats capitalism for ya!
Click to expand...

That must be why Anita Hill is far more famous than Juanita Broadrick.
 
Caine said:
Negative, because Controversy Sells........

Hey, Its just Capitalism!

Lieberman's neutral comments aren't controversial.
Murtha's are.

Controversy sells, as it attracts people to look at it.
Click to expand...

How are Lieberman's comments more neutral or less controversial?
 
Navy Pride said:
Murtha was spouting the party line.......Anyone can do that...Leiberman was talking against the party line...That should be much more contreversial.....
Click to expand...

That's correct.
 
mpg said:
How are Lieberman's comments more neutral or less controversial?
Click to expand...
Hmmmm.... Lets see....
A Democrat goes to Iraq, comes back and says things are going good...
WhoopDeeDoo!!!!! Lots of Republicans do the same thing.

Murtha, a respected vietnam veteran, goes to Iraq, comes back, and says things are messed up.....not that big in itself... but then... here is the catch.

He suddenly speaks out and demands that we withdraw our troops quickly, demands a timetable and all that stuff. Now THAT is controversy.

And THAT sells.
 
mpg said:
That's correct.
Click to expand...
No, thats a biased view, and an attempt to blame the media for being "liberal"

If you two aren't going to stop being so partisan, Im finished here, nobody has bothered to address my remarks other than the fact that it is controversial and trying to find some way to pull partisanship on it.
 
Caine said:
Bwuahahahahahaha.
Im proud to be left wing progressive.

And this argument means nothing to the fact that you still haven't commented on my arguments on this issue.
I'll take it that you admit your wrong.
Click to expand...

I did not say anything abour a progressive.......... I know that is how you lefties try and identify yourself now becasue your ashamed to be identified as to what you really are but very few are buying it.....
 
Caine said:
No, thats a biased view, and an attempt to blame the media for being "liberal"

If you two aren't going to stop being so partisan, Im finished here, nobody has bothered to address my remarks other than the fact that it is controversial and trying to find some way to pull partisanship on it.
Click to expand...

Well take your ball and go home.........No one cares......
 
Navy Pride said:
What bugs me is rags like the NY Times......They ran the Iraq prison scandal 59 straight days on their front page and when it comes to Leiberman He lucky if he makes page 20.........
Click to expand...

NP - do you have a source for this baseless accusation?
I thought not. Take a look at the reality below:
You must subscibe to the NYT to access these.

Lieberman's Iraq Stance Brings Widening Split With His Party
*Please Note: Archive articles do not include photos, charts or graphics. More information. December 10, 2005, Saturday
By RAYMOND HERNANDEZ AND WILLIAM YARDLEY (NYT); National Desk
Late Edition - Final, Section A, Page 1, Column 4, 1166 words
Click to expand...
http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F30C15F83A550C738DDDAB0994DD404482


Weicker May Return to Politics Over Lieberman's Support of War
*Please Note: Archive articles do not include photos, charts or graphics. More information. December 6, 2005, Tuesday
By WILLIAM YARDLEY (NYT); Metropolitan Desk
Late Edition - Final, Section B, Page 1, Column 1, 693 words
Click to expand...
http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=FB0913F838550C758CDDAB0994DD404482
 
hipsterdufus said:
NP - do you have a source for this baseless accusation?
I thought not. Take a look at the reality below:
You must subscibe to the NYT to access these.


http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F30C15F83A550C738DDDAB0994DD404482



http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=FB0913F838550C758CDDAB0994DD404482
Click to expand...

The Source I had was Wolf Blizer who brought it up on his show about the prison abuses awhile back...........

You know I don't read the NY Times or moveon.org my friend........
 
Navy Pride said:
The Source I had was Wolf Blizer who brought it up on his show about the prison abuses awhile back...........

You know I don't read the NY Times or moveon.org my friend........
Click to expand...

LOL.....Your funny, he told you what was in the articles with the link and you still refuse.
This is why I refuse to show you any links anymore, cause you never read them in the first place.... Point in case, Jews for Jesus.
 
Caine said:
Hmmmm.... Lets see....
A Democrat goes to Iraq, comes back and says things are going good...
WhoopDeeDoo!!!!! Lots of Republicans do the same thing.

Murtha, a respected vietnam veteran, goes to Iraq, comes back, and says things are messed up.....not that big in itself... but then... here is the catch.

He suddenly speaks out and demands that we withdraw our troops quickly, demands a timetable and all that stuff. Now THAT is controversy.

And THAT sells.
Click to expand...

You're right. I was wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom