NorthSideSox72 Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 QUOTE(kapkomet @ Feb 15, 2006 -> 08:28 AM) You're twisting my point, as usual. The media is a bunch of lazy bastards who have vendettas against people who 'wrong' them. I don't care who, what party affiliation, what the circumstances are, it's true. Kap, you sound just like the conspiracy theorists you are complaining about going after Cheney. Columnists and talking heads tend to enflame - that I grant you. Its their role. But "the media" is not what you say they are. The media delivers what sells, pure and simple. Otherwise, no one would watch or read them. There are all sorts of news outlets nowadays, so if one were to start acting irrationally and not deliver what people wanted to see/read/hear, they'd be extinct pretty quick. And further, knowing a number of people in the press (a few very well), I think that reporters are akin in persona to defense attornies. No one likes watching them do their job, and people yell and scream about "how can they be so slimy and manipulative?" They can and do because that is how they HAVE to be for free society to function. Defense attornies need to defend the worst of criminals to the greatest extent possible, or else the justice system loses itself. Reporters have to dig, poke and prod, so that we have true freedom of speech and access to information. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 15, 2006 -> 03:17 PM) Kap, you sound just like the conspiracy theorists you are complaining about going after Cheney. Columnists and talking heads tend to enflame - that I grant you. Its their role. Stop there. That's it. That's my point. They are there to enflame, and basically be a hemmoroid. Nothing more, nothing less. And when the big boys got 'scooped', now they're going to get EVEN with this 'BASTARD'. It's wrong, despicable, idiotic, whatever lame metaphor you want to use. We have a former VP basically committing treason (well, that might be a little strong, but his words in such a speech were CALCULATED) in another country, and we have a hunting accident in this country. Which is the bigger story? Oh gee, I wonder why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 QUOTE(kapkomet @ Feb 15, 2006 -> 11:04 AM) Stop there. That's it. That's my point. They are there to enflame, and basically be a hemmoroid. Nothing more, nothing less. And when the big boys got 'scooped', now they're going to get EVEN with this 'BASTARD'. It's wrong, despicable, idiotic, whatever lame metaphor you want to use. We have a former VP basically committing treason (well, that might be a little strong, but his words in such a speech were CALCULATED) in another country, and we have a hunting accident in this country. Which is the bigger story? Oh gee, I wonder why? I was trying to point out to you - these talking heads are not the same as "the media". News is reported by reporters, and they aren't always out to get even with people. And I guess I don't see where you are getting this big conspiracy thing. Do I think that the Vice President shooting someone is a bigger story than a former VP giving a questionable speech? Of course I do! And so do most Americans, as is made clear by how often people are clicking those links on CNN and MSNBC and what not. This is not some vast liberal conspiracy. There are undoubtedly some people who dislike Cheney, but taking his name out of the picture, this is still a pretty big story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 15, 2006 -> 04:30 PM) I was trying to point out to you - these talking heads are not the same as "the media". News is reported by reporters, and they aren't always out to get even with people. And I guess I don't see where you are getting this big conspiracy thing. Do I think that the Vice President shooting someone is a bigger story than a former VP giving a questionable speech? Of course I do! And so do most Americans, as is made clear by how often people are clicking those links on CNN and MSNBC and what not. This is not some vast liberal conspiracy. There are undoubtedly some people who dislike Cheney, but taking his name out of the picture, this is still a pretty big story. No it's not. It's been MADE INTO a big story. If I shot you in the face for a hunting accident, it wouldn't get written on the back of toilet paper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 QUOTE(kapkomet @ Feb 15, 2006 -> 09:21 AM) No it's not. It's been MADE INTO a big story. If I shot you in the face for a hunting accident, it wouldn't get written on the back of toilet paper. Are you the Vice President of the United States? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Feb 15, 2006 -> 05:23 PM) Are you the Vice President of the United States? It doesn't matter. According to you liberals, what is done on PERSONAL time, shouldn't matter. Hmmmmmm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxy Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 QUOTE(kapkomet @ Feb 15, 2006 -> 01:25 PM) It doesn't matter. According to you liberals, what is done on PERSONAL time, shouldn't matter. Hmmmmmm. As long as its consensual I agree with that (but what do I know, I'm just a liberal. . .). If a CRIME is committed on personal time of course it matters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 QUOTE(kapkomet @ Feb 15, 2006 -> 09:25 AM) It doesn't matter. According to you liberals, what is done on PERSONAL time, shouldn't matter. Hmmmmmm. Do me 1 favor...don't clump me in with whatever group you're opposing there. To this day I still think Clinton should have resigned in '98, based entirely on what he did during his "Personal" time, if you can call it that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 QUOTE(Soxy @ Feb 15, 2006 -> 05:28 PM) As long as its consensual I agree with that (but what do I know, I'm just a liberal. . .). If a CRIME is committed on personal time of course it matters. And no crime was committed (oh, he didn't have a 'stamp' - a law that went into effect 5 months ago and most hunters around here didn't even know about it and i live here). So what's the story again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Feb 15, 2006 -> 05:29 PM) Do me 1 favor...don't clump me in with whatever group you're opposing there. To this day I still think Clinton should have resigned in '98, based entirely on what he did during his "Personal" time, if you can call it that. I didn't mean YOU personally, my bad, but the thinking in general. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mreye Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Feb 15, 2006 -> 11:29 AM) Do me 1 favor...don't clump me in with whatever group you're opposing there. To this day I still think Clinton should have resigned in '98, based entirely on what he did during his "Personal" time, if you can call it that. No room fro free -thinkers in here, Balta! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AbeFroman Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 QUOTE(kapkomet @ Feb 15, 2006 -> 11:21 AM) No it's not. It's been MADE INTO a big story. If I shot you in the face for a hunting accident, it wouldn't get written on the back of toilet paper. What has made this a big story is the cover-up. Whether you like it or not, many americans (dare I say the majority?) feel that this government is not always forthcoming to the public about its business. Now you can insist that they have always told the truth, but the preponderence of evidence suggests that they have lied about at least some of the issues they have faced during this presidency (plame, wmd, etc.) I also find it interesting that the local sheriff was not allowed to interview Cheney until the following day. Cheney is already not the hallmark of a forthright politician... the whole situation reeks... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxy Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 QUOTE(kapkomet @ Feb 15, 2006 -> 01:29 PM) And no crime was committed (oh, he didn't have a 'stamp' - a law that went into effect 5 months ago and most hunters around here didn't even know about it and i live here). So what's the story again? He shot someone in the face. That's worthy of an investigation. I don't care if it's Jesus Christ or Muhummad or the VP of the US that pulled the trigger, that deserves an investigation. And, I personally, believe that if you're going to go hunting you should thoroughly check out local laws and rules. Of course, some of that should fall on the ranch owner, but Cheney is a big boy and perfectly capable to make sure he's in the clear to shoot those vicious pen raised birds. . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxy Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 QUOTE(mreye @ Feb 15, 2006 -> 01:31 PM) No room fro free -thinkers in here, Balta! Lol, you mean it isn't as simple as liberal and conservative? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 QUOTE(Soxy @ Feb 15, 2006 -> 05:33 PM) He shot someone in the face. That's worthy of an investigation. I don't care if it's Jesus Christ or Muhummad or the VP of the US that pulled the trigger, that deserves an investigation. And, I personally, believe that if you're going to go hunting you should thoroughly check out local laws and rules. Of course, some of that should fall on the ranch owner, but Cheney is a big boy and perfectly capable to make sure he's in the clear to shoot those vicious pen raised birds. . . Those vicious pen raised birds are wild. They're only fattened up so that they may be eaten after they're shot. Supposedly. My contention is that it WAS investigated. The sheriff's department was called VERY shortly after the accident. The MEDIA wasn't notified, and that is why all the BS coverage ever since. More of the media crap is 'why the coverup' (when there really wasn't one) then the actual shooting itself now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 He never thought he’d say it, but Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) no longer thinks it’s such a big deal that Vice President Cheney told him to go you-know-what himself on the Senate floor last year. Considering what happened to poor Harry Whittington (who remained in stable condition yesterday) this past weekend, Cheney’s shot at Leahy could have been a lot worse. “In retrospect it looks like I got off easy,” Leahy joked, referring to Cheney’s accidental shooting of his buddy and campaign contributor. Roll Call Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WilliamTell Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 QUOTE(Texsox @ Feb 14, 2006 -> 10:20 PM) LMAO. Let's look at two events Bill Clinton accepts a blow job, and we invest hundreds of millions of dollars and a special prosecutor, and hold impeachment proceedings. Vince Fosters name comes up. The Veep shoots a man, and the press should STFU No need to investigate, trust the government on this one. Nothing here, look the other way. Nothing serious. gotta love us Americans. Clinton also lied about it. But probably the most important reason and I'll admit it being a Republican, we had the power in congress then and we still have the power now, it's a great feeling. You guys would know since you had for the better part of the 20th Century. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 QUOTE(AbeFroman @ Feb 15, 2006 -> 05:32 PM) What has made this a big story is the cover-up. Whether you like it or not, many americans (dare I say the majority?) feel that this government is not always forthcoming to the public about its business. Now you can insist that they have always told the truth, but the preponderence of evidence suggests that they have lied about at least some of the issues they have faced during this presidency (plame, wmd, etc.) I also find it interesting that the local sheriff was not allowed to interview Cheney until the following day. Cheney is already not the hallmark of a forthright politician... the whole situation reeks... From what I understand (and this may be wrong) but I think the sheriff's department was ok with interviewing him the next morning because all parties were trying to get the guy (first) stabilized by the medical staff of the VP and then to the hospital. They knew of the facts and basically consented to discuss it the next morning. Again, I don't think there's a story here, no matter how much of one that wants to be made up. That's my point, and the 'media' won't let it go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxy Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 QUOTE(kapkomet @ Feb 15, 2006 -> 01:38 PM) Those vicious pen raised birds are wild. They're only fattened up so that they may be eaten after they're shot. Supposedly. My contention is that it WAS investigated. The sheriff's department was called VERY shortly after the accident. The MEDIA wasn't notified, and that is why all the BS coverage ever since. More of the media crap is 'why the coverup' (when there really wasn't one) then the actual shooting itself now. I understand that point, and I think it's a good one. I don't think there was anything sinister about not reporting it to the press, but I think it was naive, at best, to think that it wouldn't get picked up. And more than slightly short sighted to think it wouldn't be a big deal when they didn't find out right away. Heck, they could have made some statement up when they did talk about it and say, we didn't release the information out of respect to the victim's family. I would have bought that. Maybe I should get a PR job and quit this grad school nonsense. . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 QUOTE(Soxy @ Feb 15, 2006 -> 05:41 PM) I understand that point, and I think it's a good one. I don't think there was anything sinister about not reporting it to the press, but I think it was naive, at best, to think that it wouldn't get picked up. And more than slightly short sighted to think it wouldn't be a big deal when they didn't find out right away. Heck, they could have made some statement up when they did talk about it and say, we didn't release the information out of respect to the victim's family. I would have bought that. Maybe I should get a PR job and quit this grad school nonsense. . . See? We agree! You know they coulda said HIPPA! HIPPA LAWS prevent us from talking about the medical condition of our patient. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flash Tizzle Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 Exclusive Interview with Cheney coming up on Fox News. Yeah, don't expect any tough questions. Atleast we may get some reaction and insight from Cheney. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 QUOTE(kapkomet @ Feb 15, 2006 -> 12:21 PM) No it's not. It's been MADE INTO a big story. If I shot you in the face for a hunting accident, it wouldn't get written on the back of toilet paper. If you shot me in a hunting accident... 1. I'd wonder why you brought a gun into a bar, because thats the only place I do any hunting. 2. Looking at some of the arguments we have had in this forum, people would likely suspect that it may not have been an "accident". 3. Anyway, I think the American public has made it a big deal, not the media. The media is just a device. People read what interests them. Obviously, this interests them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlaSoxxJim Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 15, 2006 -> 06:08 PM) Anyway, I think the American public has made it a big deal, not the media. The media is just a device. People read what interests them. Obviously, this interests them. Who controls what stories the people hear? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlaSoxxJim Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 QUOTE(kapkomet @ Feb 15, 2006 -> 01:17 PM) Who controls what stories the people hear? The White House when they can, for one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts