Jump to content


First lady gets booed

HSKR

By HSKR,
in Politics & Religion

Recommended Posts

formercactusboy Walk-On

formercactusboy

Posted
Posted
i don't mind someone saying hannity is extremely biased and that its evident in his commentating...it is.

 

but that dude Madow is no different

 

Unfortunately, not everyone is tolerant of people who are different.

 

Fortunately the Klan has lost most of its influence in America.

 

what does the KKK have to do with Mr. Madow?

 

The KKK is made up of people who judge others based on a race, religion, etc.

 

Your posts indicate that you have the same metality.

 

metality?

 

saying someone looks like a dude is comparable to the KKK? you're a bit out there sub, that's for sure.

Link to comment

formercactusboy Walk-On

formercactusboy

Posted
Posted
i don't mind someone saying hannity is extremely biased and that its evident in his commentating...it is.

 

but that dude Madow is no different

 

Unfortunately, not everyone is tolerant of people who are different.

 

Fortunately the Klan has lost most of its influence in America.

 

what does the KKK have to do with Mr. Madow?

 

The KKK is made up of people who judge others based on a race, religion, etc.

 

Your posts indicate that you have the same metality.

 

Wow, I wish I could say I was surprised. Stay classy Sub, stay classy.

 

he's the king of personal insults. saying a poster has the same mentality as the KKK...wow! i didn't mean to hit a nerve by calling Madow a dude but apparently I did.

Link to comment
HSKR Scout Team

HSKR

Posted
  • Author
Posted
i don't mind someone saying hannity is extremely biased and that its evident in his commentating...it is.

 

but that dude Madow is no different

 

Unfortunately, not everyone is tolerant of people who are different.

 

Fortunately the Klan has lost most of its influence in America.

 

what does the KKK have to do with Mr. Madow?

 

The KKK is made up of people who judge others based on a race, religion, etc.

 

Your posts indicate that you have the same metality.

 

metality?

 

saying someone looks like a dude is comparable to the KKK? you're a bit out there sub, that's for sure.

200px-Itispat.jpg

 

I'm guessing sub isn't a big SNL fan then. :)

Link to comment
JJ Husker Head Coach

JJ Husker

Posted
Posted

 

Did you actually go through those?

 

Is that the best you can do since she was on MSNBC since 2008?

 

NewsBusters, LiberalFail and NationalReview are far right wing sites that make accusations, some very minute, then do very little to provide facts to back their claims up.

Out of curiosity, where are your examples of Hannity being as untruthful as Maddow was in the provided links?

I believe you stated "Rachel Maddow takes facts and creates a story around it." and "Sean Hannity makes distortions and creates a story around it." After all, what's good for the goose should be good for the gander. In your words "If you can't do that, then stop with the ankle biting."

 

I am not naive enough to believe Hannity doesn't have an agenda and doesn't slant his opinions but I also believe the same about Maddow. You seem to be saying that isn't the case, so where is your proof? The proof you asked for was provided. It's kind of chickensh#t to acknowledge that by asking "is that the best you can do..?" Where is your attempt?

Link to comment

carlfense Defensive Coordinator

carlfense

Posted
Posted

 

Did you actually go through those?

 

Is that the best you can do since she was on MSNBC since 2008?

 

NewsBusters, LiberalFail and NationalReview are far right wing sites that make accusations, some very minute, then do very little to provide facts to back their claims up.

Out of curiosity, where are your examples of Hannity being as untruthful as Maddow was in the provided links?

I believe you stated "Rachel Maddow takes facts and creates a story around it." and "Sean Hannity makes distortions and creates a story around it." After all, what's good for the goose should be good for the gander. In your words "If you can't do that, then stop with the ankle biting."

 

I am not naive enough to believe Hannity doesn't have an agenda and doesn't slant his opinions but I also believe the same about Maddow. You seem to be saying that isn't the case, so where is your proof? The proof you asked for was provided. It's kind of chickensh#t to acknowledge that by asking "is that the best you can do..?" Where is your attempt?

I'm not Sub-Husker . . . but if you really care here is a quick run down of his lies ONLY from 2008.

http://mediamatters....ch/200812170007

 

That wasn't too hard to find. You can probably find the same number of lies from any other year since Hannity first got his own show. Do you think you can find that same total number of lies from Maddow? I rather doubt it.

 

I hope you don't complain about the source being media matters . . . after all you cited newsbusters and liberalfail.

Link to comment
JJ Husker Head Coach

JJ Husker

Posted
Posted

 

Did you actually go through those?

 

Is that the best you can do since she was on MSNBC since 2008?

 

NewsBusters, LiberalFail and NationalReview are far right wing sites that make accusations, some very minute, then do very little to provide facts to back their claims up.

Out of curiosity, where are your examples of Hannity being as untruthful as Maddow was in the provided links?

I believe you stated "Rachel Maddow takes facts and creates a story around it." and "Sean Hannity makes distortions and creates a story around it." After all, what's good for the goose should be good for the gander. In your words "If you can't do that, then stop with the ankle biting."

 

I am not naive enough to believe Hannity doesn't have an agenda and doesn't slant his opinions but I also believe the same about Maddow. You seem to be saying that isn't the case, so where is your proof? The proof you asked for was provided. It's kind of chickensh#t to acknowledge that by asking "is that the best you can do..?" Where is your attempt?

I'm not Sub-Husker . . . but if you really care here is a quick run down of his lies ONLY from 2008.

http://mediamatters....ch/200812170007

 

That wasn't too hard to find. You can probably find the same number of lies from any other year since Hannity first got his own show. Do you think you can find that same total number of lies from Maddow? I rather doubt it.

 

I hope you don't complain about the source being media matters . . . after all you cited newsbusters and liberalfail.

I did not cite any source. Another did. My point was that both sides slant the story to serve their own interests. Saying one is more credible than the other is just being naive. Your link simply proves my point. The liberal source you provided was simply a narrative spin on how Hannity spins his stories. There are few direct quotes of Hannity in your link and there is no evidence of outright bald-faced lies being told by him. They both (and most all political commentators) simply take a shred of truth or a situation and begin immediately to make it fit their point of view. You and Sub only think Maddow is better than Hannity because it fits your view of the world better. Personally I do not like to watch either of them because I already know in what direction they will head. I like Hannity better because I tend to agree with him more but I realize he tends to be more inflammatory (like Rush) and is in the bag and predisposed to be anti-democrat, anti-liberal. Anyone who thinks Maddow is not the opposite of him is only fooling themselves.

Link to comment
Sub-Husker Scout Team

Sub-Husker

Posted
Posted
Out of curiosity, where are your examples of Hannity being as untruthful as Maddow was in the provided links?

 

I believe you stated "Rachel Maddow takes facts and creates a story around it." and "Sean Hannity makes distortions and creates a story around it." After all, what's good for the goose should be good for the gander. In your words "If you can't do that, then stop with the ankle biting."

 

I am not naive enough to believe Hannity doesn't have an agenda and doesn't slant his opinions but I also believe the same about Maddow. You seem to be saying that isn't the case, so where is your proof? The proof you asked for was provided. It's kind of chickensh#t to acknowledge that by asking "is that the best you can do..?" Where is your attempt?

 

I never said that Maddow never does that, but that she is the most factual presenter. I can't do a Hannity search from work, but his work should be very simple to find.

 

I did not cite any source. Another did. My point was that both sides slant the story to serve their own interests. Saying one is more credible than the other is just being naive. Your link simply proves my point. The liberal source you provided was simply a narrative spin on how Hannity spins his stories. There are few direct quotes of Hannity in your link and there is no evidence of outright bald-faced lies being told by him. They both (and most all political commentators) simply take a shred of truth or a situation and begin immediately to make it fit their point of view. You and Sub only think Maddow is better than Hannity because it fits your view of the world better. Personally I do not like to watch either of them because I already know in what direction they will head. I like Hannity better because I tend to agree with him more but I realize he tends to be more inflammatory (like Rush) and is in the bag and predisposed to be anti-democrat, anti-liberal. Anyone who thinks Maddow is not the opposite of him is only fooling themselves.

 

Saying/implying that all news presenters misinform equally is like saying that since Congress sucks, all congresscritters suck equally.

 

Serious question... do you ever watch both, then compare what is presented with reality?

 

You seem to like to play the part of the high horse moderate and poke both sides as being equally wrong. That depends what you believe is right and what you believe is wrong. If you like fascism, then the Republican/Fox presentation is right for you. And the opposite of that is not the Democrat Party or MSNBC.

Link to comment
carlfense Defensive Coordinator

carlfense

Posted
Posted

 

Did you actually go through those?

 

Is that the best you can do since she was on MSNBC since 2008?

 

NewsBusters, LiberalFail and NationalReview are far right wing sites that make accusations, some very minute, then do very little to provide facts to back their claims up.

Out of curiosity, where are your examples of Hannity being as untruthful as Maddow was in the provided links?

I believe you stated "Rachel Maddow takes facts and creates a story around it." and "Sean Hannity makes distortions and creates a story around it." After all, what's good for the goose should be good for the gander. In your words "If you can't do that, then stop with the ankle biting."

 

I am not naive enough to believe Hannity doesn't have an agenda and doesn't slant his opinions but I also believe the same about Maddow. You seem to be saying that isn't the case, so where is your proof? The proof you asked for was provided. It's kind of chickensh#t to acknowledge that by asking "is that the best you can do..?" Where is your attempt?

I'm not Sub-Husker . . . but if you really care here is a quick run down of his lies ONLY from 2008.

http://mediamatters....ch/200812170007

 

That wasn't too hard to find. You can probably find the same number of lies from any other year since Hannity first got his own show. Do you think you can find that same total number of lies from Maddow? I rather doubt it.

 

I hope you don't complain about the source being media matters . . . after all you cited newsbusters and liberalfail.

I did not cite any source. Another did. My point was that both sides slant the story to serve their own interests. Saying one is more credible than the other is just being naive. Your link simply proves my point. The liberal source you provided was simply a narrative spin on how Hannity spins his stories. There are few direct quotes of Hannity in your link and there is no evidence of outright bald-faced lies being told by him. They both (and most all political commentators) simply take a shred of truth or a situation and begin immediately to make it fit their point of view. You and Sub only think Maddow is better than Hannity because it fits your view of the world better. Personally I do not like to watch either of them because I already know in what direction they will head. I like Hannity better because I tend to agree with him more but I realize he tends to be more inflammatory (like Rush) and is in the bag and predisposed to be anti-democrat, anti-liberal. Anyone who thinks Maddow is not the opposite of him is only fooling themselves.

My mistake regarding the sources.

 

Those blue text items on the media matters page are links to direct quotes. Feel free to click on them if you are so inclined.

 

Could you link to where I said Maddow was better than Hannity in this thread? I know you're speaking in generalities but I'm having a little trouble finding it.

Link to comment

JJ Husker Head Coach

JJ Husker

Posted
Posted
Could you link to where I said Maddow was better than Hannity in this thread? I know you're speaking in generalities but I'm having a little trouble finding it.

 

I said that.

Yep. JJ thinks that I also said it.

Actually I didn't think you said that. I guess that's what happens when you cut in to a response intended for Sub. But, if you'll check your immediately previous post you did say "Do you think you can find that same total number of lies from Maddow? I rather doubt it." So, you did not say Madcow is better than Hannity but you implied she lies less. Do with it what you will.

Link to comment
carlfense Defensive Coordinator

carlfense

Posted
Posted
Could you link to where I said Maddow was better than Hannity in this thread? I know you're speaking in generalities but I'm having a little trouble finding it.

 

I said that.

Yep. JJ thinks that I also said it.

Actually I didn't think you said that. I guess that's what happens when you cut in to a response intended for Sub. But, if you'll check your immediately previous post you did say "Do you think you can find that same total number of lies from Maddow? I rather doubt it." So, you did not say Madcow is better than Hannity but you implied she lies less. Do with it what you will.

I can quote it for you. You replied to me (carlfense) and said:

You and Sub only think Maddow is better than Hannity because it fits your view of the world better.

 

If you're still having a little selective amnesia I will even give you a direct link to the post.

http://www.huskerboard.com/index.php?/topic/56403-first-lady-gets-booed/page__view__findpost__p__907706

 

Cheers.

Link to comment
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

Visit the Sports Illustrated Husker site



×
×
  • Create New...