Home     Contact Us    
Main Board Job Seeker's Board Job Wanted Board Resume Bank Company Board Word Help Medquist New MTs Classifieds Offshore Concerns VR/Speech Recognition Tech Help Coding/Medical Billing
Gab Board Politics Comedy Stop Health Issues
ADVERTISEMENT




Serving Over 20,000 US Medical Transcriptionists

Thanks for an unbiased link. (nm)

Posted By: Marmann on 2009-05-20
In Reply to: Another good site... - Zville MT




Complete Discussion Below: marks the location of current message within thread

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu


Other related messages found in our database

I don't know that there is an unbiased
I don't watch a great deal of news anymore, but I do try to watch a variety of networks to get different takes on events. I also watch C-SPAN, especially for political speeches and events so I don't have to listen to commentators chatter.

Mostly, I do a lot of reading. I read international and national newspapers online, and I renew my subscription to The Economist every year for my birthday.
Uh...you got that FROM Air America. Not exactly unbiased I would say. nm

60 minutes is hardly unbiased....
I am sure the participants were screened, and anyone who had anything good to say about the war were not talked to or left on the cutting room floor. CBS is liberal media at its best. That is no secret. That being said, as I read in Brunson's post, yes I am sure there are a lot of soldiers who probably do not agree with what is going on....probably because the military was not allowed to fight the war LIKE a war (Viet Nam revisited). You know, if I believed liberals really wanted the soldiers home and safe because they wanted the soldiers home and safe, it would be different. But it is a political ploy...they really could care less about the soldiers. Otherwise they would not play directly into the enemy's hands by going public with the lack of will to carry on the fight. I find it really hard to listen to you crow about soldiers' dissatisfaction...you are actually happy when you hear we are losing. To me, that is as unpatriotic as it gets. THAT being said, let me say this: NO soldier WANTS war. War is sometimes necessary because, believe it or not, there are people out there who want to kill you and are not interested in peace with you, only with conquering you. That is a lesson none on the left have learned. I fear for our future if, God forbid, a liberal Democrat gets into the White House.

It cannot be heartening to any soldier on the battlefield to hear that a new man is in charge (confirmed unanimously by the Senate) and in the next breath have their funding threatened and a resolution from THEIR Congress that they are losing the war. No wonder they are depressed. And liberals fall all over each other wanting to drive that point home. And I think you should all be ashamed. But, that is just me.

And again...you said anti-war. Conservatices are not pro-war. No one in their right mind is pro-war. Conservatives just happen to have sense enough to realize that to give peace a chance the enemy has to also be interested in giving peace a chance. When was the last time you saw a Muslim carrying a sign to give peace a chance? When was the last time you saw a Muslim he/she could live beside a Christian in harmony? Or live beside a non-Muslim in harmony? They cannot even live next to each other in harmony.

As I have said before, my husband is certainly not pro-war. He is the gentlest person I know. But he also realizes the threat we face, has been lifelong military now retired and still serving as a civilian working for the Army. He started as an MP, then went into MI, then into force protection, etc. Believe me, he KNOWS the threat we face. And it breaks his heart to see the young soldiers damaged by the nonsupport from home. And whether you believe it or not, public backpedaling and spinelessness when the going gets tough is damaging to them. No wonder they want to come home. I can hardly blame them. Maybe this country, the way it has become, is NOT worth dying for anymore. And that is too profoundly sad to even think about.
"womenagainstsarahpalin", wow how unbiased
nm
Your opinion is about as unbiased as
.
I think your news isn't so unbiased either
This has NOT been about race, if anything, that is the one subject everyone has ignored. The only ones who bring up race is the Obama supporters who claim that's why the Republicans don't want him as president, forgetting the myriad other reasons why. Also, it seems that is why Obama is handled with kid gloves, rather than really anyone grilling him as to his plans. So, in that way, perhaps race HAS been a factor. In Obama's FAVOR.

Not exactly an unbiased source!
Charles Krauthammer isn't someone whose judgment I would trust. He's been 100% pro-war policy all the way. Not surprising at all that he'd opt for McCain. What we really see is a lot of former Bush policy supporters abandoning that destructive policy and endorsing Obama instead. Can anyone cite an instance of a well-known real Democrat opting for McCain over Obama? I've been keeping my eye out (fair is fair), but have yet to see one endorsement of that type.
Totally unfair. Fox is the only unbiased
nm
Wow - local news from NY - how unbiased.
nm
Obama wants a thorough and unbiased investigation and so he sm
has called for a special prosecutor.... you know Acorn is signing up dems and repubs...these repubs are so desperate that they are even turning off their long time followers.

Al Jazeera? Oh, get real. They have no unbiased
nm
As totally unbiased as the smear campaign on the CON board....?
And before casting aspersions on others?  
Unbiased opion? Oh, gourdpainter, you're my new hero.
I mean, I thought that Macaque Obama was full of sh it. But, lady, YOU take the cake. I mean, YOU make Macaque look downright HONEST by comparison.

Maybe you could work for his campaign. I hear he pays REAL well. (You don't mind changing your name to Chicago Joe's Kid Kamp or Chi-Town Youth Enrichment or something, do you? 'Cuz then he could throw you HEAPS of money and no one would ever figure it out.
Yeah, TOTALLY unbiased. whooeee... Can't stand this shrew!

Conservative outright spin and BS, spread on Fox by Gregg Jarrett, for the real whole unbiased story
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgif=/c/2009/101/02/ED151514UE.dtl, there was one slight recession in 1937-1938 because of spectacular growth when it took off, read the rest of the story. Pubs will say anything to rewrite history and try to save face. IMO
post the link only, not the whole article and the link. See rules for posting.
x
Okay, thanks, that's not what my link said. SM

Mine also said he failed to mention this case when being questioned.  Well, there's a thousand stories out there.  It really doesn't matter to me. It doesn't affect how I think of him one way or the other.


Link

Here is one link to it:


http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/05/02/eveningnews/main692497.shtml


But this is not where I originally saw it - I believe it was covered on PBS which is where I saw it.


here is the link

I didnt want to put the report here as there is some profanity that Bush has used to his staff but here is the link. 


http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artman/publish/article_7267.shtml


 


trying again with the link
http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artman/publish/article_7267.shtml
link
http://www.filmstripinternational.com/index.php?asshole
Link
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/21/AR2006032100452.html?referrer=email&referrer=email&referrer=email
If you can't see it try this link.sm
http://www.justcomments.com/funnycomments-images/oh_no.gif
- see link
sign the petition
Link
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/
Better link...sm
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-op-pett18jun18,0,3422826.story

Its the first cartoon on the right.
Link please. Thanks. nm

Here's the link.

By the way, that wasn't a good quote.  That was a GREAT quote.  In fact, your entire post was great.  Thanks very much for posting it.  You are so right and I couldn't agree with you more. 


http://www.infowars.com/articles/sept11/red_alert_for_staged_terror_attack.htm


The link says
it is a 'malformed video.'  Let me guess.  Bush lied.
See link below.nm
12
Thanks for the link.
This whole thing is so ironic.  Maybe Iraqi troops will be the next to come and participate in Bush's martial law.
No link..nm

The Link
The link to Bush Body Count is in the original post. Again, I don't believe a word of it, because I believe in innocent until PROVEN guilty.

See link

What's the deal guys?


You said you cannot get the whole link...
to come up without it being cut off.  It's too long?  So, you go to tinyurl, cut and paste your long link, and they will make the link shorter for you. 
How odd--try link below
   www.americanIssuesProject.org  That will take you to the same thing, including an article about Obama.
Link...
http://www.johnmccain.com//Informing/Issues/17671aa4-2fe8-4008-859f-0ef1468e96f4.htm
Link
Click the link below:
see link
http://www.mailtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071220/BIZ/712200327
See link

Good article - really talks about how nasty the media has been in this, and also more.- good read


http://www.gazette.net/stories/09122008/polilee181803_32478.shtml


 


 


Thanks for the link....sm
So true about the media, isn't it?

Also saw this on CNN last night, and was surprised that they allowed this viewpoint on their website.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/11/beck.palin/index.html
Thanks for the link
I've read it and can't tell if it is a more favorable article towards the republicans or democrats, so don't have anything to argue about that. However, the study only worked on 45 people? They are basing a study on just 45 people when the US is made up of 301,139,947 people (as of Jul 07). Like I say, I can't tell by the article which political group this benefits but it just seems to be an unreasonable basis to base the way a whole country votes on just 45 people (and all from the same region of the US) - again not sure if Nebraska is more liberal or conservative. Just seems like an invalid study to me.
here is another link about the same
see if this one comes through...

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=4476649n
I don't know if this will help at all, but try this link. sm
www.PatriotPost.US

It is a conservative newsletter that, IMO, tries to present an equally balanced view of what is going on. It is not always in easy to understand words, but you get an explanation that makes sense of what is going on.

Try it, you might just be surprised.
Link please sm

Ahmadinejad Feted at Obama Fundraiser’s Hotel


 


I went on the website you referenced and could not find this.  Please back it up with the actual link. 


see link
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/debate_fact_check
I would like the link too
so I can see for myself.  Thanks.
When you go to this link s/m
take the Match-O-Matic quiz at the right. It gives you quotes from each candidate and you have to choose which one you agree with the most and at the end, it matches you with the candidate you chose most often. Let's see how well we all know the candidates we are backing based only on what they have said.
link

I'm sorry that I didn't save the link to the video clip I mentioned.  I did a search for Obama messiah on Youtube just now and I didn't find the one I mentioned.  Much to my surprise there were tons of such videos with accusations.  What I did find was this:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2FyEZdy-Rag&feature=related  (Again, I don't know how to make a link but copy and paste in your browser.  It appears to be the real deal.  I didn't watch it all the way through as I am really, really busy today, so you can watch it and draw your own conclusions. 


If you go to youtube and search for Obama messiah you'll probably find the original one I was talking about which I believe to be a fake.  The above link, appears to me to be Obama himself in his own voice with his recognizable body language.


Try this link instead

what link would that have been?
x