• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons 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.

"What Fox News Channel Would Have Done To Rosa Parks"

vergiss

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
2,356
Reaction score
1
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Sent by a friend, originally from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/cenk-uygur/what-fox-news-channel-wou_b_5514.html

Cindy Sheehan – in case you’ve been living in a box or you only watch the mainstream media – is the mom of slain Iraq War veteran Casey Sheehan. She is protesting in front of George Bush’s Crawford ranch this month. This grieving mom has been characterized as a flip-flopper, accused of putting on a public circus, lambasted as a publicity seeking grandstander and criticized for not truly speaking for her family since an aunt and a godmother Matt Drudge found somewhere in the Sheehan family disagrees with her.

The conservative attack machine is in high gear in the efforts to tear this woman down.

That made me think of how it would have been in the Civil Rights era if Fox News Channel, Rush Limbaugh, Matt Drudge and the rest of the gang were around back then.

O’Reilly: “Rosa Parks claims she speaks for all of the African-Americans in the South, but in fact, we have found two African-Americans who say they disagree with her. They say she’s just trying to gain publicity and doesn’t speak for anyone in her race. They would know, they’re black.”

Hannity: “Could Rosa Parks be angling for a Senate run? What does she have to gain from her public stand? Coming up next, the incredible story of how this woman might be deceiving the whole country!”

Drudge: “We have found three members of the Parks family who say that Rosa doesn’t speak for them. That, in fact, they are very happy with the government of the state of Alabama. The uncle, step-brother-in-law and niece three-times removed all agree that the better route is a dignified, respectful silent deference to authority. Developing …”

Limbaugh: “We have just found information that before Rosa Parks sat in the front of the bus, there were numerous times, she sat in the back of the bus! Ah ha! A flip-flopper!"

Drudge: “More stories on Rosa Parks scandalous history of consistently sitting in the back of the bus before she changed her position and insisted she would only sit in the front of the bus. Developing …”

Malkin: “I think I speak for the entire Parks family, and especially her children, when I say that they are so embarrassed by their mother who is making a public spectacle of herself.”

Hannity: “Rosa Parks has turned this whole so-called civil rights issue into a public circus. We have information that Ted Kennedy might have put her up to this. That amazing story when we come back!”

Colmes: “You’re right, Sean. I’m sorry.”

O’Reilly: “To question the government of Alabama and implicitly the entire United States government by defying the political order like this has to be considered treasonous. Civil disobedience is a code word for I hate America. These people are criminals, simple criminals. It's ridiculous that they think they don't have to live by the same rules as the rest of us.”

Scarborough: “Yeah, whatever they just said on Fox News Channel! Well … I mostly agree with it.”

Kaplan: “Can we hire Shep Smith to cover this? Maybe give him his own show?”

Limbaugh: “What did I tell you folks? These libs like Parks would rather live in France where they can sit anywhere they want on the bus. They hate America. They want special privileges to be able to sit anywhere they want. They hide behind the color of their skin to try to undermine this country.”

Coulter: “Rosa Parks is a dyke!”

Blitzer: “Dr. King, is it true that you support the liberal agitator Rosa Parks in her defiance of America? Can you confirm whether she has in fact sat in the back of the bus before? Do you think this makes her a flip-flopper? If she has been so inconsistent on this, how can we trust her on anything?”

Drudge: “MY SOURCES TELL ME THAT THIS MIGHT BE THE FIRST TIME ROSA PARKS HAS EVER SAT IN THE FRONT OF THE BUS. A whole life of sitting in the back of the bus and now this woman claims all of a sudden she wants to sit in the front of the bus. Developing …”

O’Reilly: “Unbelievable, just unbelievable. Ridiculous!”

Hannity: “Incredible!”

Scarborough: “What did they just say?”

In Unison: “Flip-flopper! Flip-flopper! Flip-flopper!”

Blitzer: “Ms. Parks left the bus in disgrace today after it was confirmed that some members of her family did not agree with her, she had ruined her credibility by working for the NAACP before the bus incident, and she had in fact sat in the back of the bus on previous occasions. Now back to the emotionally wrenching story of the girl missing in …”
 

Batman

Active member
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
407
Reaction score
7
Location
Fulton, KY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
The conservative attack machine is in high gear in the efforts to tear this woman down.
Her own actions and statements do a much better job.
 

AlbqOwl

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 12, 2005
Messages
22,769
Reaction score
11,834
Location
New Mexico
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent
Batman said:
Her own actions and statements do a much better job.
Indeed they do. But if it's the 'conservative attack machine' doing it, apparently her husband, parents, and siblings are part of that attack machine. :wink:
 

MiamiFlorida

Active member
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Messages
434
Reaction score
1
Location
Miami
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Batman said:
Her own actions and statements do a much better job.
A few commentators in one network disagree with this lady and the disproportionate coverage she gets from the liberal media (I heard she gets mentioned over 20,000 times a day).....and all of a sudden they resurrect Rosa Parks.

Go figure!:confused:
 
Joined
Aug 19, 2005
Messages
102
Reaction score
0
Location
Oregon
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
AlbqOwl said:
Indeed they do. But if it's the 'conservative attack machine' doing it, apparently her husband, parents, and siblings are part of that attack machine. :wink:
oh of course, because if her family disagrees with her that makes her completely false.
 

cnredd

Major General Big Lug
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 5, 2005
Messages
8,682
Reaction score
262
Location
Philadelphia,PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
If someone talked to Rosa Parks about Cindy Al-Sheehani, she would probably say, "Don't put my name in the same sentence with that fruitcake!"
 

vergiss

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
2,356
Reaction score
1
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
It's cute, how the Right can't stand the sight of someone with different views to their own - they feel they have to demonise them as being rabid psychos with bombs practically strapped to their chest. A tad threatened by any form of dissent, perhaps?
 

AlbqOwl

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 12, 2005
Messages
22,769
Reaction score
11,834
Location
New Mexico
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent
vergiss said:
It's cute, how the Right can't stand the sight of someone with different views to their own - they feel they have to demonise them as being rabid psychos with bombs practically strapped to their chest. A tad threatened by any form of dissent, perhaps?
Kinda sorta like your post does?
 

AlbqOwl

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 12, 2005
Messages
22,769
Reaction score
11,834
Location
New Mexico
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent
AllAmericanRageJunky said:
oh of course, because if her family disagrees with her that makes her completely false.
No, but the accusation was that she would be fine if it wasn't for the Repulbican or conservative attack machine. If I agree with that, then it follows that all her friends and family must be a part of that.
 

cnredd

Major General Big Lug
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 5, 2005
Messages
8,682
Reaction score
262
Location
Philadelphia,PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
vergiss said:
It's cute, how the Right can't stand the sight of someone with different views to their own - they feel they have to demonise them as being rabid psychos with bombs practically strapped to their chest. A tad threatened by any form of dissent, perhaps?
That's a wonderful exaggeration...

Batman, AlqeOwl, MiamiFlorida & I have posted opposings views...Could you please point out where we "can't stand" your post? Has anyone said, "YOU can't write that!"? Has anyone said it's "stupid" or "ignorant"?

I can name EXACTLY where you have "demonized" though this post...
conservative attack machine ...that could very well be construed as offensive and demonizing...

Now that I've pointed out where YOU have done it, please state your claim.

Point out EXACTLY where those mentioned above have "demonized" anyone.
 

cnredd

Major General Big Lug
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 5, 2005
Messages
8,682
Reaction score
262
Location
Philadelphia,PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Batman said:
That's good.:lol:
Sad to say it's not an original...I heard it on TV yesterday and I hit the floor laughing.:2wave:
 

ban.the.electoral.college

Progressive, Green
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 11, 2005
Messages
998
Reaction score
0
Location
Maryland, U.S.A.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
It's a shame when we sit here and allow the war in Iraq continue, while criticizing the only person standing up against it. I've never seen such idle craven banter. The time is ticking, and Bush is still sitting on his high horse...
 

GPS_Flex

DP Veteran
Joined
May 20, 2005
Messages
2,726
Reaction score
648
Location
California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
You’re making too sound an argument AlbqOwl. Didn’t you get the ultra secret conservative propaganda memo that detailed how you are supposed to hate Cindy and bash her at every opportunity?
 

26 X World Champs

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 6, 2005
Messages
7,536
Reaction score
429
Location
Upper West Side of Manhattan (10024)
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
ban.the.electoral.college said:
It's a shame when we sit here and allow the war in Iraq continue, while criticizing the only person standing up against it. I've never seen such idle craven banter. The time is ticking, and Bush is still sitting on his high horse...
I agree! It seems to me that some people who oppose her have trouble understanding that because her son was killed in a war that America is against she should not be allowed to speak her mind, and to speak it as often as she wants to so long as it is within the legal limits of the law.

What's stopping opposing points of view from starting a "Camp War" in Crawford that supports the damn war? Nothing!

How many posts have you read in this community that end with "Cindy, GO HOME"? Cindy's put a face on the grief of many Americans who have lost loved ones AND oppose this damn war. A STRONG MAJORITY of AMERICANS oppose the Iraq war too.

Maybe instead of attacking the messsenger it's time we attack the guys who got us into this nightmare?

Do we have to do another poll proving that we all feel less safe since we decided to attack a country that had nothing to do with our enemy? You remember our enemy, TERRORISM? I can't remember the last time an Iraqi attacked the USA, can you?
 

AlbqOwl

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 12, 2005
Messages
22,769
Reaction score
11,834
Location
New Mexico
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent
Here's the 2005 Rasmussen poll asking just that question:

Suppose we had not fought the War in Iraq and Saddam Hussein was still in power.

U.S. Safer 15%
U.S. More Dangerous 49%
About the Same 29%
RasmussenReports.com

July 5, 2005--Just 15% of voters believe the U.S. would be safer today if we had avoided the War with Iraq and left Saddam Hussein in power. A Rasmussen Reports survey found that 49% take the opposite view and say that such a strategy would have made life in the U.S. more dangerous. Twenty-nine-percent (29%) think it would be about the same either way.

Those figures are little changed from a year ago.

Republicans, by a 77% to 5% margin, believe the U.S. would be more dangerous if our nation had not fought the war that toppled Hussein.

Democrats are divided on this question. A plurality, 43%, says that things would be about the same. Twenty-eight percent (28%) believe the U.S. would be more dangerous today if we had not fought the War with Iraq. Twenty percent (20%) of Howard Dean's party believe that avoiding the War would have made the U.S. safer today.

Those not affiliated with either party believe, by a 2-to-1 margin, that avoiding the War would have made the U.S. a more dangerous place.
 

Batman

Active member
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
407
Reaction score
7
Location
Fulton, KY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
ban.the.electoral.college said:
It's a shame when we sit here and allow the war in Iraq continue, while criticizing the only person standing up against it..
The ONLY person standing up against it? I guess that's why she's getting so much press coverage - she's the first and ONLY person to stand up against the Iraq war.:shock:

I guess you missed that whole 2004 Election thing, eh?
 

26 X World Champs

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 6, 2005
Messages
7,536
Reaction score
429
Location
Upper West Side of Manhattan (10024)
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
AlbqOwl said:
Here's the 2005 Rasmussen poll asking just that question:
Sorry, that poll did NOT ask the right question. I wrote what would a poll today reflect, are we safer TODAY than we were BEFORE the war. Your poll asked a totally different question....
 

AlbqOwl

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 12, 2005
Messages
22,769
Reaction score
11,834
Location
New Mexico
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent
26 X World Champs said:
Sorry, that poll did NOT ask the right question. I wrote what would a poll today reflect, are we safer TODAY than we were BEFORE the war. Your poll asked a totally different question....
Hmm, I'm not convinced I agree with that, but I'll think on it.
 

AlbqOwl

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 12, 2005
Messages
22,769
Reaction score
11,834
Location
New Mexico
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent
GPS_Flex said:
You’re making too sound an argument AlbqOwl. Didn’t you get the ultra secret conservative propaganda memo that detailed how you are supposed to hate Cindy and bash her at every opportunity?
Oh I can bash with the best of them. But rather than just reciting the same tiresome committee-issued mantras, I find it much more entertaining when the bashing is with real facts, logic, reason, and verifiable conclusions are used. Folks can say "Bush lied" without backing it up with anything just so many times without it becoming pretty meaningless I think. Cindy Sheehan has done that, has contradicted herself and made herself look thoroughly foolish to all but those who have to believe her to keep their drummer drumming. It isn't her that I have the problem with, however. It's the media hacks and opportunistic politicos who are exploiting her for what I think are disingenuous, dishonest, and destructive purposes.
 

cnredd

Major General Big Lug
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 5, 2005
Messages
8,682
Reaction score
262
Location
Philadelphia,PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
26 X World Champs said:
I agree! It seems to me that some people who oppose her have trouble understanding that because her son was killed in a war that America is against she should not be allowed to speak her mind, and to speak it as often as she wants to so long as it is within the legal limits of the law.
What's stopping opposing points of view from starting a "Camp War" in Crawford that supports the damn war? Nothing!

How many posts have you read in this community that end with "Cindy, GO HOME"? Cindy's put a face on the grief of many Americans who have lost loved ones AND oppose this damn war. A STRONG MAJORITY of AMERICANS oppose the Iraq war too.

Maybe instead of attacking the messsenger it's time we attack the guys who got us into this nightmare?

Do we have to do another poll proving that we all feel less safe since we decided to attack a country that had nothing to do with our enemy? You remember our enemy, TERRORISM? I can't remember the last time an Iraqi attacked the USA, can you?
Name one time someone on this forum said she should be arrested or she is NOT ALLOWED to speak her mind....One....

No one has said that....NO ONE!...N-O O-N-E...nada...zip...zero....zilch....

We(some?many?) think she SHOULD shut up(opinion)...No one said she HAS TO(breaking a law)....Voltaire is still in effect...

BTW - as pertaining to this part..."so long as it is within the legal limits of the law."....When would something NOT be? Maybe "inciting a riot", but I can't think of anything else...
 

26 X World Champs

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 6, 2005
Messages
7,536
Reaction score
429
Location
Upper West Side of Manhattan (10024)
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
cnredd said:
Name one time someone on this forum said she should be arrested or she is NOT ALLOWED to speak her mind....One....

No one has said that....NO ONE!...N-O O-N-E...nada...zip...zero....zilch....

We(some?many?) think she SHOULD shut up(opinion)...No one said she HAS TO(breaking a law)....Voltaire is still in effect...
Reading comprehension issues are part of your profile?
LaMidRighter said:
Once again, she is annoying, nothing more nothing less, personally, I'd like to see her get arrested along with all of the other protesters on harassment charges, which would have happened had this been a private citizen and not the president.
http://www.debatepolitics.com/showpost.php?p=63348&postcount=272

You were saying?
cnredd said:
BTW - as pertaining to this part..."so long as it is within the legal limits of the law."....When would something NOT be? Maybe "inciting a riot", but I can't think of anything else...
BTW - I never said ANYONE in this forum asked for her to be arrested. I wrote:
Originally Posted by 26 X World Champs
I agree! It seems to me that some people who oppose her have trouble understanding that because her son was killed in a war that America is against she should not be allowed to speak her mind, and to speak it as often as she wants to so long as it is within the legal limits of the law.
What's stopping opposing points of view from starting a "Camp War" in Crawford that supports the damn war? Nothing!

How many posts have you read in this community that end with "Cindy, GO HOME"?
Notice what I highlighted in bold dear boy?

Either you purposely twisted the truth or you got it wrong, which one is it?
 

GPS_Flex

DP Veteran
Joined
May 20, 2005
Messages
2,726
Reaction score
648
Location
California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
It’s untrue that “America is against this war” Champs.

Oh, Cindy went home already.
 

cnredd

Major General Big Lug
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 5, 2005
Messages
8,682
Reaction score
262
Location
Philadelphia,PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
To 26 X World Champs..(I didn't feel like going back and forth with the quotes...not necessary here).

Your response to my question...using LdMidRighter's comment...is weak and expected of you...read it again...I'd like to see her get arrested along with all of the other protesters on harassment charges...the part that you "bolded"...

Does the part about "harassment" fly over your dome?...He doesn't mention anything about the first amendment or being "not allowed to speak her mind".
He is equating this to a jilted lover who stalks her(his?) object...He sounds like a "restraining order" should be in place....

Although I don't agree with this, I do see how his "angle" is conceivable...You can't be that immature to believe that Cindy Al-Sheehani's motive does not include harassing the President. That is the major reason she gets media coverage...If she did it quietly, and just for personal reasons, there wouldn't be a story...Right?

I will repost this...your quote...

26 X World Champs said:
I agree! It seems to me that some people who oppose her have trouble understanding that because her son was killed in a war that America is against she should not be allowed to speak her mind, and to speak it as often as she wants to so long as it is within the legal limits of the law.
My argument still stands...and on solid ground....No one has said she should not have the freedom to speak her mind...

As long as they don't trample on other's property, and they do it in an orderly fashion as per the local laws, she could hang out there 'til she's blue in the face...that is not what dissenting views oppose her for...

As pertaining to this quote...

How many posts have you read in this community that end with "Cindy, GO HOME"?

I have read many...and I expect to see it more...The last time I checked, no one has FORCED her to go home....You are opposed to people that have an OPINION...There is no one who said "Cindy, go home" that has the authority to make that happen...Therefore, the ones who say that are expressing their thoughts and feelings; not as one who could actually make it happen...

As for me twisting the truth, I have two points...

1)You believe LdMidRighter's comment could be a quality source to prove my assertation that no one has said she should be forced to stop her protest...I disagree...That is debatable.

2)Your pointing out one person does not refute my claim that you couldn't find...as your words say..."some people who oppose her have trouble understanding that because her son was killed in a war that America is against she should not be allowed to speak her mind, and to speak it as often as she wants to so long as it is within the legal limits of the law."

That is mostly my fault...I shouldn't have asked you to find "one" source...I should have asked to find "some"...as your post suggests...I unintentionaly let you off the hook.

This is still unanswered...and is an open question to any member of the forum...it is a general question and does not necessarily pertain to Cindy's protest...

BTW - as pertaining to this part..."so long as it is within the legal limits of the law."....When would something NOT be? Maybe "inciting a riot", but I can't think of anything else...
 

vergiss

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
2,356
Reaction score
1
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
AlbqOwl said:
Kinda sorta like your post does?
Erm. Yes, of course...

OMG! DIFFERENT OPINIONS! YOU TERRORIST-LOVING TRAITOR! :roll:

cnredd said:
That's a wonderful exaggeration...

Batman, AlqeOwl, MiamiFlorida & I have posted opposings views...Could you please point out where we "can't stand" your post? Has anyone said, "YOU can't write that!"? Has anyone said it's "stupid" or "ignorant"?

I can name EXACTLY where you have "demonized" though this post...
conservative attack machine ...that could very well be construed as offensive and demonizing...

Now that I've pointed out where YOU have done it, please state your claim.

Point out EXACTLY where those mentioned above have "demonized" anyone.
Hate to have to point out the obvious, but it's not my article, therefore "conservative attack machine" aren't my words. Nor am I talking about you being unable to stand my views - rather, her views.

How did you demonise her? How about "Cindi Al-Sheehani"?
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom