so freedom to assemble and freedom of speech and freedom of expression is an attack on freedom? and yet the tea party was the epitome of freedom?
how can these people really look at themselves in the mirror? really~

I’ve no idea. I used to disagree with Republicans on a lot of policy issues but I also felt they had the best interests of our nation at heart. Honestly, now, it seems they have their own interests, the interests of the rich and of corporate America. They’ve abandoned everyone else. And THAT is what the Occupy protests are all about.

Fact: These are liberals and liberals are lazy so it will not last long!

How does this guy get elected? He is scary stupid!

This nonsense has Obama written all over it .

Somebody needs to let ‘The Occupiers know that Barack Obama gave $Trillions to American and European Banks as well as Wall Street. ‘The Occupiers need to ask themselves why there have been no ‘perp walks since Obama became, ahem, President.

Did everyone see their list of demands?

Looks like the reading list from the Communist Manifesto.

By the way, you are a corporation in the eyes of the law. What are you going to do? Outlaw yourself?

DO NOT confuse them with excellent questions.

They have Che flags to wave.

Haha yeah.  My favorite one was that ALL debt should be forgiven.  Now that sounds pretty good!

ps, Behead the rich!!

Hey James, would this be considered an attack on someones freedom:

— Several influential New York state lawmakers have received
threatening mails saying it is “time to kill the wealthy” if they don’t
renew the state’s tax surcharge on millionaires, according to reports.

“It’s time to tax the millionaires!” reads the email, according to WTEN in Albany. “If
you don’t, I’m going to pay a visit with my carbine to one of those
tech companies you are so proud of and shoot every spoiled Ivy League
[expletive] I can find.”

This guy is the enemy. He needs to be called out by his constituents and asked why he only serves the corporations. Ask him why he doesn’t fulfill his OATH of OFFICE.

Doc Braun has a smooth Georgia accent, like Doc Holliday. You can almost imagine him saying, “ Why, Barry. You’re no daisy at all.”

Well, that is better than the one guy calling to eat the rich.

I wonder what the culling point for eating the rich? If you make more than say $100,000/year does that make you ready for the Soylent line or does it depend if you are a rich liberal twit like Susan Surandon or say Michael Moore?

Come on leftists? What is the point of eating the rich begin? How much money can you make if you are a leftist twit? Do you get to have say $10 million net worth and not get eaten if you are a leftist?

What are the parameters?

Are those OFFICIAL OWS emails? No?

Then shut up.

Come on Michelle, we have seen from precedent in Wisconsin, you can threaten as many people as you like if you are a leftist. Just do not make national headlines and the prosecutors and police will do nothing.

When you’ve got this nut on your side …

“Pelosi on Occupy Wall Street Protesters: “God bless them”

“Pelosi did not comment on–and was not asked about–the law-breaking that occurred during the protest over the weekend. About 700 protesters were arrested by New York City police after the protesters “swarmed the Brooklyn Bridge and shut down a lane of traffic for several hours,” according to CBS News. 
When the Tea Party movement emerged in 2009, then-Speaker of the House Pelosi called them “astroturf” and “un-American” people who were “carrying swastikas.”

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/pelosi-occupy-wall-street-protesters-god-bless-them_595117.html

Unless you want us to pull up every crazy Tea party person’s email threat and racists emails to describe BAGGERS as a whole.

You should side with OWS; you know, since you don’t have a job and everything

Talk about inarticulate protesters, they can’t say communism..so they resort to some meaningless combination of words that means the same thing. Ironic, that all those left wing Ivy league types at Goldman and the rest of the street gave hundreds of millions to get Barry elected. 
So how did your investment turn out.

My favorite one was that ALL debt should be forgiven.

You must have loved it then when Wall Street asked for the same damn thing in the form of a bail out.

Damn hypocrite.

They haven’t put out an official list of demands.

Hey ‘Occupiers: You all know that Barack Obama’s BFF George Soros was convicted of insider trading. Do you guys even understand who’s pushing your buttons?

Um, I didn’t support the bail out, moron.

Own your crazies, buddy!

Has there been a tea party protest this year? In numerous cities across the country?

You DO know that this isn’t only happening in nyC, right?

Drove by hundreds in Seattle today. There are thousands marching in Portland today. Where/what was the tea party equivilant?

Yeah and the corrupt, liberal media is their willing accomplice.  It’s pathetic.

What, the OWS is a frelling official party or something? Come on, what do you mean official?

Have they elected their own personal Che now? What did Che do in that whole communist takeover in Cuba by the way? Wasn’t he the assassin for the regime and why do all of these protests have someone waving the Che flag? I mean, is it a Communist movement or what?

Didn’t Nancy call them brown shirts? 

Hi, my name is Peg the Pig and I want to tell you about my life. When I was just a piglet, roaming free and wild in the forest, my Dad told me not to eat the corn the farmer laid out on the ground for us. We piglets left it alone for a long time, but then when we went to the university we learned that our Dads were old fashioned and uninformed. They didn’t have the advantage of the same education we have so we know so much more about what is the right way to do this. We need to change the system because our world is different now then it was when they were growing up. We began to eat the corn and told others how good and easy it was. And then when the Dads tried to ruin it for us, we all got together and had this great rally to organize the community in support of the free grain. We held hands, sang songs, smoked some great dope, and everywhere there was love. After all, we all have a right to eat. We even talked about how we could help our Dads, even though they were so backward they don‘t know what is good for themselves. The farmer taught us that we deserved all this and more, so of course, we supported him when he began to improve our lives in other ways. He built a fence on one side of the field to keep the wolves out and we laughed as our stupid Dads continued to forage in the woods, while we continued to evolve. Then, the wolves got in on the other side and some of us got hurt. So the farmer is building the fence all around. We can’t be safe if we go into the forest anymore and it’s only right for the farmer to supply everything we need, after all we were born so we have a right to live and eat. This is a modern civilization, not the dark ages or something. Finally all of our struggles will be over and everything will be perfect. Even our stupid Dads are safe, too. The farmer came in a truck and took them someplace where he said they will be happy and cared for. When we get older the farmer says we can go there, too. Its called the slaughter house. It sounds great! I wonder if we’ll get some more of that great weed tonight after our free corn we so deserve.

Occupy Wall Street:

They still support The Cancer in the White House.

Join the New movement: #OccupyWhiteHouse2012

Your mother never told you that you died at birth, did she?

1. Attack on freedom? haha, i know politicians are theatrical but give me a break, stop being so dramatic, this wouldn’t surprise me in the least if this was the lefts response to the tea party, one side wears old corner hats telling people they don’t want the government hands on their medicare while the other side smokes pot and want to end the fed

aka why should i take this group seriously any more then the tea party?

“You should side with OWS…”

Only if I don’t bathe for a few months, lose my job, and support the Cancer in the White House.

Even then, I still wouldn’t join that group of leftist assholes.

Do you realize the people you’re defending begged for the bail out, moron?
Do you realize the people you’re defending outsource American jobs to China, Korea, India, and Mexico, moron?
Do you realize the people you’re defending pay a smaller tax rate than their secretaries, moron?
Are you starting to get the sense that your name is moron, moron?
Wanna bet the only question you’ll address is the one above this one, moron?

can I shave your wife’s taint?

whoislloydc@gmail.com

fact. you’re troll-sperm and worthless to america
whoislloydc@gmail.com

why do you hate freedom?

is it because your daddy touched you as a child?

whoislloydc@gmial.com

Those “demands” are a plant from a random source:
http://occupywallst.org/forum/proposed-list-of-demands-for-occupy-wall-st-moveme/

THERE ARE — STILL — NO DEMANDS.

only stupid people talk about communism instead of getting laid

..
whoislloydc@gmail:disqus .com

The Top 10 Demands of the Occupy Wall Street Protestors

10. Tons of deodorant. Then again, we’d rather stink. It’s in our nature!
9. Jobs. We want jobs. We don’t want to apply for them, or work at them, but we just want jobs. NOW!
8. Tax the rich. Who is rich? Who cares! Just tax them!
7. Bathrooms. We gotta pee!
6. Wanna see our nice shiny “Obama 2012” bumper stickers on our backsides?
5. Jon Stewart should have a show on all day. He is, like, well, he is a big news guy, right, like?
4. Unlimited belly button rings and tattoos!
3. Condoms so we can screw each other blind in the streets.
2. A personal visit from Joe Biden, because he’s like, well, he’s a cool old fart, and he knows stuff, y’know?

and the number one demand…

1. Free danish!

Are you the same Lloyd C that comments at the The Hill? Seems your name and wit is commensurate with your comments there. From Canada right?

Well there were a few interviews with people there. I suppose they did not make demands to eat the rich either right?

“They don’t know why they’re there, they’re just mad!”

That’s pretty much how most of America saw the tea party, too.

Where does the Republican party find these morons?

Lloyd, if you are going to comment to me, at least TRY to keep it above the belt. I know children have to talk like that but I quit talking like that some 30 years ago. Try to grow up.

By the way, you can have sex at the same time you talk, it is called multitasking.

I keep getting called God for some reason…………….Oh God, Oh God, Oh God………….oh yeah.

You took the words right out of my mouth.!!

Tea Party Street demonstration Good……..Wall St (99%ers) Street demonstration bad.  

Um, I do have a job.  But you’re right, if my only job was railing at The Man and demanding handouts, I’d be right there with them. 

Fact: Here is another lazy liberal wacko posting. I guess you wont be protesting long either?

The Tea Party wasn’t interrupting people’s lives and livelihoods though. 

You should take them more seriously than the Tea Party.

They are essentially “occupying” the chief financial district in the world.

The tea party contributed to a historic 2010 election where the GOP were +63 in the House and +6 in the Senate.  Do you remember that?

How much influence will the Occupy Wall Street losers have on the 2012 election?  I suspect these hilariously embarrassing protests will hurt the DNC more than anything, especially when their demands are better communicated throughout the voters. 

I urge you to keep fooling yourself though.

Bush made the first big bank bailout. So what are your thoughts about “W” when he bailed them out? I’m` not beinng a wise ass. I would like to know.

Broun is right. This is an attack on freedom:
1) the freedom of corporations to not pay taxes.
2) the freedom of corporations to not be regulated.
3) the freedom of corporations to pursue profit at the expense of all other considerations. 
4) the freedom of corporations like Enron to bilk people out of billions to line their CEO’s pockets.
and most importantly…
5) the freedom of corporations to be protected by conservatives who don’t seem to care that corporations would sell them out for a nickel if it meant a higher dividend.
Must I go on…

Michelle. Come on “the corrupt, liberal media”……………………… You listen to way too much am radio!

Free Danish! No one told me that! I’m going down there right now!

the south.  flyover country.  and a few fringe coasties.  but, the south.  i mean, most GA, TX, MS and AL Representatives are nutters.  there is also Virginia Foxx of NC (always crazy).  and FL. 

No,it was a suggestion.

is it posting here all.day.long? 

just curious as you seem to post here regularly throughout the day.

I didn’t approve of it.  Most Conservatives were very angry with Bush because he spent WAY too much.  As a person, I really like him, but I definately didn’t agree with him on some things. 

OMG George Soros!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yeah, the Bush’s bail out was called TARP and it was a loan.  Almost all of it was paid back…
http://blogs.wsj.com/deals/2010/10/01/tracking-which-banks-have-paid-back-tarp/

Does a stimulus plan that offers no return on its investment appeal to you or do you just like supporting the historically largest transfer of wealth from future generations to the current 0bama administration?

That’s free speech!

Wait if they dont know why they are there how can they be pro or anti anything let alone anti freedom?  Cant have it both ways.  Maybe we can invade ourselves with our military so we can be greeted in the streets as heros.

What a well thought out retort.  So rich in substance.  I think you may be the iconic conservative with this post.

Actually, you don’t have the freedom to indefinitely occupy a city street.

You don’t have the freedom to bring traffic to a crawl for days and to cause astronomical costs to the city.

You can they have a worthy cause in doing so, but no, they aren’t just exercising a “freedom”.

Sorry where did you learn to write.  Your pp is way too long to even merit a scan.

Wait Detailstx, are you telling me that Solyndra isn’t paying us back!?

Your messiah pushed for ALL the bailouts.

Hmmmm, beginning to understand that YOU sir are a moron?

 yea they are real commie bastards wanting their money back from the banks that stole it from them.

Probably because I work at home on the computer so I’m on it all day. 

Come on Volt, are you claiming there is no liberal bias in the media?

please do not feed the trolls…

Conviction on Insider Trading is OK when it’s Obama’s BFF, eh Obama-gargler?

Well, now, according to the occupiers it’s the people in New York, Chicago, Las Angeles, DC, that are the bane of our existence. 
 

You actually have to pay taxes to actually call it your money.

From what I know of Democrat demographics, not so much. As for the protesters, are they beginning to say that taxing labor is a form of slavery or indentured servitude? They may beginning to see my side of things.

aside from wanting to shave your wife, you might note how perverse it is when an individual is now considered and artificial individual (Corporation) – that is the kind of pretzel logic that should be outlawed not laws against real people…

Nice to know that Democrats all get their campaign money from saintly grandmas in Madison, Wisconsin… 

Obama is melting down .

“When demanding approval of so-called jobs bill, Mr. Obama essentially threatened Republicans: If they vote against the legislation, the president said, then they’ll have to “explain to me” why they voted against it. On several occasions the president returned to this theme: voting against Stimulus II will require Republicans to answer not only to their constituents but to The Great and Mighty Obama. Every Senator who even dares to entertain the thought of voting against what the president wants had better think “long and hard” about doing so. If not, after all, Mr. Obama may use their vote against them in 2012.

o which Republicans might respond: Is that a promise? Because the best route for a Republican sweep in 2012 is to have the president attack you for opposing him.

It’s all very odd. Mr. Obama is acting as if his approval ratings are in the mid-60s instead of the low 40s. He’s acting as if Republicans fear him instead of Democrats like Senator Claire McCaskill, who no longer want to be seen with him. The president is acting like his agenda is popular rather than radioactive. He’s acting as if the public still cares what he thinks rather than having tuned him out long ago. And he’s acting as if Republicans will feel compelled to justify their opposition to this singularly inept chief executive and his failing presidency.

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2011/10/06/obama-threats-congress/

@DavidKramer and the number of Wall Street welfare queens refusing to take the money was sooooooooo staggering!

MEDIAITE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.
 

GET  

THIS

  GARBAGE

OFF                     

              YOUR 
                                     WEBSITE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!.

Do you even understand law? I do not agree with a lot of the corporate personhood, mainly the removal of punishment for damages done to others, but corporate personhood serves a purpose.

For example, if a person is held liable for something a company does, it would be hard for large businesses to have been created. So, if you have a corporation say that has a million shareholders, should you throw all the shareholders in prison for the actions of the company?

As for me, you could get rid of 99.99% of all laws and just have one law for people.

Do no harm to another and do not infringe on their rights of Life, Liberty and Property. You then let the jury decide on the merits of each individual case. Of course that would require you have a knowledgeable citizenry in regards to Natural law and specifically Property Rights.

Kind of hard to do that with public education in the form it is.

You might like reading The Law by Frederic Bastiat- http://bastiat.org/en/the_law.html

Michelle…the past 2 years the media tilt has been on the side of the Tea Party!

Michelle needs to answer my questions. OWS isn’t about the leadership, it’s about the beggars who (1) took the money, and (2) Michelle keeps defending. Why do you keep defending bail out beggars, Michelle?

it’s wild how much you support the tea party for expressing themselves, yet when these protesters are reallying for something you’d probably agree with if you removed your own bias, you ridicule them…it will probably bite you in the but

Cecelia, you are talking with people that do not believe in Property Rights. They think it is fine to break the law when it gets a point across……….for their useful idiots.

But when people on the conservative side of the argument…………..not so much. Of course the conservatives break the laws they do not agree with, the leftists just break laws to harm or infringe on other people’s rights.

They actually want more laws to steal from others. Bizarre beliefs that these people believe.

Harry Reid tossed Obama’s job plan on the back burner inferring that the
Senate had more important issues to resolve. Senate Majority Whip Dick
Durbin (D-Ill.) yelled loud and clear that Obama’s jobs plan won’t pass
the Senate.

All you left-wing fruitcake got alot of explainin’ to ‘The Occupiers to do. Rick Santelli and The Tea Party told Barack (I’m too stupid to be President but I play one on TV) Obama not to waste $Trillions of dollars to payback Obama’s campaign contributors (You know: Wall Street, The Bankers). Now all that money that could’ve given ‘The Occupiers jobs is all gone thanks to this miserably failed President who continues to lie and lead America down the shitter. Is that iconic enough, eh Gargler?

Here we go. Just like how we had Democrat politicians whining at how evil the Teaparty was, we now have Republicans whining about protestors on the left. No surprise in the 2 sided idiot machine that we call politics.

Fact: You have to plan action with the Tea Party
because we are busy working and paying taxes so you guys can protest for more
handouts from our evil corporate bosses! Maybe you can attend one of the thousand or so Tea Party chapter meetings in your area.

So, these morons don’t know that Republicans and Independents are marching as well

What corporate tools

You DO realize that RelubliCONS and Independents are marching as well

What the hell do you think happened in 1968 Chicago?

When they say freedom they mean greed.

Freedom polls better than greed outside of their base.

No! It’s the Occupy Wall Street(OWS) showing their upset at the antics of the super-rich and Wall Street-ers who inexplicably reap benefits beyond the average man or woman. The corporate greed permeates through-out every mega firm who deals with “Derivatives” and other exclusive instruments just for banks or the super-rich! There is too much graft and under-the-table shenanigans in Washington and the corporate boardrooms!  Obama has had an uphill battle against this 112th Congress and no jobs legislation has been enacted! John Boehner must be doing drugs, because he’s forgotten the 112th Congress has done absolutely nothing to legislate jobs in America! Here he is trying to lay blame on Obama when his lame tactics scream prejudice and bigotry. The president is still governing with proposing the new Jobs act, still leading by authorizin­g the taking out of extremist like Osama Bin Ladin as well as authorizin­g assistance to the European Union to help remove Moammar Khaddafy while passing the great legislatio­n in last Congress. He’s done a magnificen­t job, especially since he has been constantly berated and criticized for everything he has done. The president authorized the number two leader of Al Qaeda, Atiyah abd al-Rahman, to be killed on August 22 in Pakistan, a senior U.S. official said. There have been 3 or 4 more high level hits authorized to cut the head off of this scourge to the Middle East! Leadership is the president’­s! Unmanned drones are used more often to exact retributio­n for the damages done to our country and service personnel! 

Perhaps if you go, Big Petty, he will follow.

Definition of Loan:
1.  money lent: an amount of money given to somebody
on the condition that it will be paid back later
2.  lending: the act of letting somebody use
something temporarily
3.  lend something: to allow somebody to borrow
something on the condition that it is returned

TARP was a loan and it’s almost completely paid back…that’s the difference. 

http://blogs.wsj.com/deals/2010/10/01/tracking-which-banks-have-paid-back-tarp/

Jefferson envisioned a revolutionary society. Whopper envisions a counter-revolutionary society. One is vibrant, dynamic, evolving. The other stagnant, inert, dead. I think I’ll go with Mr. Jefferson, if you please.

Which you have never read. Obviously.

I get that, but on the other hand, how effective is it to politely protest and cause no disruption at all. remember the protest zones set aside during the Bush years. Doesn’t that render protests somewhat meaningless?

Property rights?

Like throwing somebody’s tea in the harbor cuz you’re angry?

This nation was founded upon law-breaking, son!

Simply put, ‘might makes right,’ on Wall Street or with Operation Iraqi Freedom: those in power will make the rules.

And David, when you’re hanging from a thread, we all know that you would take a ‘bail-out’ just like like anybody else would.

“Creative destruction” is always for OTHER people, right? You never need help, right?

Right. The only debt which should be forgiven is corporate bankruptcy debt. Always sticking up for corporations and beating up on people, Michelle-in-Utah. Up With People, I say: “Up, Up, Up with People!”.

So you’re comparing this cause to the riots in Chicago after  MLK was shot?

Ignoring idiotic comparisons that are not only inaccurate and trivializing to history,  but also unflattering as to how the OWC have behaved for their particular cause, ,, you do not have the “freedom” to occupy a city street (or to riot),  but can call the cause worthwhile enough to take the law into your own hands (just don’t whine that breaking the law is somehow your “freedom” to act)

That’s not the issue, is it? You support the “people” who benefitted from the bail out whilst hating the people who paid for the bail out. You’re a corporate shill, and you know it.

I’m starting to get that.

Actually, I think I’m talking to people who wish to relive their glory days of at least 4 decades ago. 

Wicked, I say, “Wicked!!”.

Good luck with that. She lives on whines, not oxygen.

Actually, what Reid has done is to make an unprecedented move to block Republicans from forcing the president’s job bill to a vote in order to show that it doesn’t have the support of quite a few Democrats either.

Reid changed the rules of the senate in order to save the president some embarrassment!

Some of it was forced down their throat.
http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2008/11/25/banks-forced-to-take-bailout/

“Obama is melting down .”

Too bad this site doesn’t have an “ignore” feature to edit out the hopelessly deluded.

Her Sister Wives are getting pretty irritated with that.

I use and sorts of Media outlets to get my news. i just don’t listen to one channel/station. For instance i have ativo can record sevearl shows at the same time. I will watch Meet to Press,This Week, Fox sunday,The Chris Mattews show and Face the Nation all in one day!(.Yeah, I can sometimes be a polical junkee….LOL.) Do you watch any other news then Fox or am radio? Left or right? The truth really lie somewhere in the middle.News is all about the ratings. Stories to exaggerate.

Conservative Victimization Syndrome.

Why are you address that to ME, when guy just above me blamed conservatives for all corruption in the business community?

Well, in Jefferson’s case I doubt his enthusiasm for the dynamism would have only flowed the way you like– toward a bigger govt with greater governmental power.

If you pay her (or him, not sure) a little more, she/he will call you “stud muffin”.

Eddie, Lloyd C is very likely one of The Real Royal Emperor’s alter names.  He has a million of them and has been banned in the past on at least websites.

I hate to tell you this, my liberal friends, but this stirring up mob class envy won’t help your election prospects next year.   Nor will it help the country.  You could shut down all of Wall Street and get rid of every banker in the USA, and it would just destroy even more jobs — which is your specialty, isn’t it?   And the investment banking jobs wouldn’t even disappear — they would just move to London, Zurich, Singapore, etc. — along with billions in related jobs and ancillary wealth.   

By the way, watch the President’s approval numbers and the poll data, and see how most Americans respond to this shift on the Left.  If you thought they didn’t like liberal policies, wait until you see how they respond to angry liberal mobs.

what a crock

you mean yours

They go beyond mere protest and may be better described as cases of civil resistance or nonviolent resistance.In 1960 a small group of young people formed Students for a Democratic Society (SDS). By 1968 some 100,000 young people around the nation had joined this organization. The SDS gained strength from the Free Speech Movement that occurred at the University of California, Berkeley, in 1964.

DNC

When you got Palin and Bachmann on the Tea Party side, calling anyone else a nut is sooooo disingenuous.

excellent post … I could not have said it better myself

They gave it back because the poor babies didn’t like the rules attached to it. They sure didn’t have any problem begging for it when they thought it came with no strings attached, though. Why is that? Why didn’t they know better? Why does @f87f392c21a163710c43235454bfe5e9:disqus defend them?

Let’s get a little real here, there was no destruction of property by the Tea Party.

Nice to know though that you modern day Rosseaus think law breaking is just fine as long as you’re doing it.

Well, Volt, I understand how you miss your glory day, but the New Left turned out to be the same old duds of the old left.

Even Timothy Leary was informing on his bros to the FBI and Bill Ayers just sorta made it all go out with bang…

So you’re saying that she hates herself, because tax payers paid for the bailout. 

Too, it’s certainly convenient of you to frame everything via the simplistic scenes of agitprop, but there was a lot that govt did to facilitate the crash of the housing market too.

“there was no destruction of property by the Tea Party.”

The Boston Tea Party didn’t DESTROY the tea?

WOW!

I’m sorry, but calling it the “corporate media” and using the rhetoric of revolution, still makes you a whiny subversive.

Sorry, when does this shift on the Left happen?  I must have just shut my eyes for a moment…

Well, the people say “up yours” right back atya!

Sorry, Whopper, but I’m not so inclined. For example, my support for government health care is only because the existing system is not working and is fast imploding. I resent like H-E-double Hockey Sticks W’s Homeland Security Asministration and the Patriot Act. The real proponents of big government are the perverse, deviant social conservatives. Wrong again.

The hell you do resent it!  You only resent it when there’s Republican in office.

Now, you’re all for the president having the power to make decisions to target Americans overseas.  And you’re calling people “traitor” when they hold you down to your past statements.

You’ve toleranted Gitmo not being closed, continued NSA wiretapping, etc.  and all for a democrat.

There’s no turn about you won’t do.  ALL your principles are on ballbearings, that makes it easier for you to facilatate the one thing that is constant in your life.– a visceral hatred for the way American IS rather than the way you’d have it to be.

When this mob wakes up, comes to their senses (if they ever do) and turns on Obama he won’t be so sympathetic to their ’cause’.

 Oh, I can promise you something, just for having seen you in operation for many years now.   When the tumbrells come they’re coming for you too.  There’s no revolutionary in the world that won’t see that you’re just a bougie boy with control issues.

That’s probably because Pres. Obama is smart enough to know that they can’t use the rhetoric of revolution and then pass by the White House with their eyes downward like it isn’t there. 

Sooner or later these revolutionaries have to go to Versailles

I’m sure you know it by heart.

In the original Tea Party, actually people like Ben Franklin wanted to pay the corporation back for the damaged goods.

Hmmm, that Tea Party believed in Property Rights, kinda like the new one eh?

I would ask from my family and friends, which I have done.

I would not ask the government to force someone else to bail me out. Sorry, wrong assumption AGAIN!

The Tea Party managed it and they did it democratically via working within the system.

They took back congress and stand a good chance of getting the senate back.

This despite all the rhetoric from your side linking them with domestic terrorism.

Actually, you and Redleaf both make good points.  The GOP has and is 100% in the pocket of corporate American and Wall Street.  The Dems weren’t, but they were beholden to the labor unions instead.  35 years of Union Busting, and the Unions and their coffers are a fraction of the size they used to be.  So, starting in the mid-90s, the Dems pushed significantly right during Clinton (especially second term Clinton) to compete for the Corporate $$.   A true liberal demorcratic party would never have passed NAFTA, but the new democratic party would and did.

So, here we are – Two parties, one centrist and one right, both bought and paid for by Corporations.  There’s not too much mystery about what happened to the middle and working class in this country. They lost all representation.

By definition OCW, which is synonymous with Socialism, is an attack on freedom. Capitalism is about freedom; Socialism is about oppression and privilege.

Maybe you’re right.  Perhaps there is no shift on the Left.  The progressive movement has always been about mindless mob ranting.  Certainly if you judge policies in terms of achieving positive results, the Left hasn’t had any policies for a long, long, long, long time. 

Indeed – None of that bailout money was handed out by Hank Paulson under Bush or anything.  And of course none of it was rubber stamped by both democrats and republicans.

Maybe before you post again you’d like to review the stories of the meetings run by Staunch republican Secretary of the Treasury Henry Paulson that triggered TARP and tell me again how this connects to the bailouts being about Obama paying off his supporters: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/20/washington/19cnd-cong.html

Also, maybe you need to review exactly how we got to that point in 2008 again.  GOP sponsored and written legislation massively deregulating the financial sector in 2000.  Did Clinton sign it?  Absolutely, and eagerly, because neither party is clean handed in this mess.   

But your Rick Santelli and Obama story is pretty clueless on its face.

They weren’t our real demands so we took them down.
Luckily President Obama’s friend, the well respected William Ayers wrote a collective statement for us.

http://billayers.wordpress.com/2011/10/05/occupy-wall-street-collective-statement-of-the-protesters/

I can show you the connection of the Koch brothers directly to the Tea Party through their funding of American’s For Prosperity, along with Freedom Works (funded by Verizon, Exxon, etc…) AFP is one of the biggest funders of the Tea Party.

There were some Move On signs at the OWS today -  Please show me any connection beyond that to Soros.

bwahhahahahaha

Dude trying to frame it like the DOI. What a tool.

Well, since the broadcast media in this country is overwhelmingly controlled by 6 large conglomerates  (Comcast, Viacom, Disney, Time Warner, NewsCorp and Clear Channel) it actually is a corporate media.

Another reality to consider: each of these companies stands to reap Billions more under republican tax and regulatory climates than democratic (although the difference between them is shrinking as the dems go corporate) – Probably not a real likelihood that a liberal agenda, favoring more regulation and higher corporate taxation  is going to guide the news coverage by these corporate media outlets.

“Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference. ~Mark Twain”

“Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference. ~Mark Twain”

They won’t get the senate back and they would be lucky to hold onto the House especially with their terrorist actions.  You don’t hold old people’s social security checks hostage and expect them to forget.

Barak Obama didn’t bail Wall Street out. That was George W Bush.  Another case of the republicans not wanting to accept responsibility for their fiscal failures like the Savings & Loan Bailouts.

I accept your capitulation. 

Again, I accept your gracious capitulation.

The only problem with that logic is that the banks like BofA have just gone to the Fed window and borrow that money to pay back the TARP at infinitesimal  interest rates and none of the restrictions of the TARP.  And I’ll be the first to stipulate that Obama seems to be absolutely fine with this.  Just like Bush, his primary constituent is Wall Street and Corporate  America.  

Ah, but it does.  Otherwise, you guys wouldn’t be singling out FNC for so much opprobrium.

But let’s look at the actual numbers, I’ll think you’ll find your assumptions challenged:

Disney–  http://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/pacgot.php?cycle=2010&cmte=C00197749

Comcast– http://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/lookup2.php?strID=C00248716&cycle=2010

viacom–http://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/lookup2.php?strID=C00167759

TimeWarner–  http://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/lookup2.php?strID=C00355941

Clear channel- http://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/lookup2.php?strID=C00279216

NewsCorp–(News American Pac)   http://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/lookup2.php?strID=C00330019

Actually, if the Democratic Party has been bought by corporations then (by your definition) they aren’t “centrist”.  It would be Dems– right … Republicans — further right.

Fortunately, though, Democratic politicians actually recognize that corporations do employ Americans.  Banks do loan money to people to start businesses.  People do benefit from I-Phones and Windows software, and even the bowl of boxed macaroni and cheese…

They just pretend to you guys that this isn’t the case.  That’s the way they convince you that you need them over ANYTHING else.

Does the Westover house in Quincy ever have anything but Fox News on?  I love me some capitalism, but to function openly and not spill into monopoly and corporate plutocracy there has to be Federal regulation.  We’re already there.  Over the past 30 years the government – all three branches, and both political parties have been bought out by corporate money.  How exactly does a government – and I mean Dems and well as Republicans – that looks out for the interests of corporations and their profits at the expense of the middle and working class in any way equal freedom?

Corporate money flooding government bought off the vast majority of regulation of the financial sector in 1999 and 2000 allowing Wall Street to turn into a tax payer secured casino allowing massive leverage and risk, and led to the meltdown of the economy in 2008.  

Corporate money flooding government bought the Citizens United decision in 2010, allowing corporations the same rights as individuals except now corporations can give unlimited amounts to influence any election they want without having to disclose their donation or involvement.  

Corporate money flooding government bought the deficit ballooning tax cuts of 2001 and 2003 to corporations and the ultra wealthy and saddled the country with Trillions in addition debt.

Corporate money flooding government bought corporate welfare and tax loopholes that allow many multinational companies to pay no tax on billions and billions of profit.

If the type of unregulated capitalism you support is about Freedom, it’s about corporate freedom at the expense of individual freedom. 

Cecelia – I’m missing your point with the open secrets posts. I went through them all, and scanned all political years listed.  The trend was the the big media companies gave more to the party in power by a small margin pretty consistently.  2002, 2004 was steadily shading GOP, 2008 was shading Dem across the board.   Not sure how this shows liberal bias?

By definition OWS, which is synonymous with Socialism,

I got my copy or Teabagging for Dummies with my last donation to SaraPAC

Well she did bring down the economy

Hank Paulsen did have a plan that Herb Cain would have backed,
It was less that 3 pages

Notsofast?

Oh, you have a problem do you?  You’re so coy….

Since YOU are the one who made the point about corporate bias naturally being towards  Republicans,  then maybe you need to rephrase your first post about it being in the interests of corporations to give to them.

As it stands in 2008 and generally in 2010, it’s close…but no cigar…

Rephrase away…

Oh, you have a problem do you?  You’re so coy….

Since YOU are the one who made the point about corporate bias naturally being towards  Republicans,  then maybe you need to rephrase your first post about it being in the interests of corporations to give to them.

As it stands in 2008 and generally in 2010, it’s close…but no cigar…

Rephrase away…

Read that again, I called you a fool! LMFAO! heheheheheheheheheh!

3 pages that are obviously over your head.

Ahem – If you look over my post, I was endorsing the idea that the media is indeed a corporate media, being controlled by a very small group of large media conglomerates.  Also stressed that I didn’t see that a liberal agenda would guide their news coverage (take a minute, the original post is right there below…)

(Yawn, stretches…….)

Ok, you’re back now. See? No mention of a conservative bias either. Just saying they aren’t going to chop off their nose to spite their face by being liberal crusaders.  And your political donations posts show a very calculated balance to curry favor with the party in power.  Nothing coy about that.  I’d double down on exactly what I said.  

Oh my. I had no idea what you were doing there. And I was in no ways being sarcastic.  Oh Nancillarypeloslinton, I just can’t keep up with you and your sly rhetorical shenanigans. 

 A more pertinent point is, do you REALLY think all the news media…all the editors….all the reporters…are bought by corporations?

Do you really think that all the journalists at NBC, CBS, ABC, sell their souls day in and day out to Sumner Redstone telling them what they can and can’t talk about? 

If you do, you believe something far more complex, far more insidious, and far more pejorative to the industry than just the simple conservative plaint that journalism attracts liberals and liberal write for other liberals.

You believe something that lays waste to Bill Paley, Roone Arledge and others.

Most of all you prove the point that that the more power you give government over the lives and the businesses of others, the more you foment the need to influence govt. 

You address THAT fact by championing prohibitive regulations on who can give what and to whom and what sort of speech can stand at what particular time in the election cycle.  Thank goodness the SC found that crap unconstitutional.

I’m sorry but you’re far more cynical than any conservative ever thought about being.  You’re far more paranoid, controlling, and in a sense THEOCRATIC.

What’s more is that you’re far more likely to cop the entire system, including the people you vote for, as being corrupt too, if that will get your way.

Take your suicidal bomber tendencies elsewhere,  Not everything is expendable to your vision or to your bottomless need to control.

Of course they’re hedging their bets, but the nature of hedging your bets goes both ways. 

What other balance would you like to see exacted upon an entity that can tax them, regulate them, and put them out of business?

“(Yawn, stretches…….)”

You just announced that you’re uncomfortable.
 

“Well, since the broadcast media in this country is overwhelmingly
controlled by 6 large conglomerates  (Comcast, Viacom, Disney, Time
Warner, NewsCorp and Clear Channel) it actually is a corporate media.”

By the way, how do you square this argument to what you put forth about moveon.org,  George Sorros, and the Occupy Wall Street alignment?

If media outlets and all their employees are the intellectual slaves of their corporate overlords, isn’t anyone aligning with the money and the influence of George Sorros just the same?

Wow. That was some sorta straw man argument you set up for me in that last post Cecelia. Kudos!  In a few short paragraphs you whisked me from my repeated point (that I don’t think huge media conglomerates have rampantly liberal news divisions that would act regularly and steadily in a biased fashion in a way that would undercut the company’s bottom line) to some sort of combo unibomber/ Mussolini hybrid.  You do good work.

I’ll tell you what I think (and to some degree know, since I work in the national media) – Reporter seem to shade to the left, due to who knows: life experience, the job they do, liberal arts background feeding most naturally into reporting. Whatever. The polls of media seem to back that up, too.   BUT, management in media tend to skew slightly to the right, probably for the same range of reasons.  So at most major media outlets, you have reporters going after things assigned my editors and to some degree management all of whom have their own random biases, but those biases are usually somewhat cancelled out by the mix of influence by management and reporters, on air, etc… But ALL of that is DWARFED by the need to generate ratings and profit.  So if the choice of a story about zoning in New York has an angle about a Charter School for low income kids coming in, an angle about the property rights of the coop owners being trampled by the city or an angle that Jennifer Aniston lived in one of the buildings with her father from age 11-14, you better believe you’re gonna get 4 minutes on the potential demolition of a childhood home of one of our favorites from TV FRIENDS!   Tabloid, celebrity, controversy, anger, all take precedent over the political angles unless they are an avenue to controversy or anger. Hence all the coverage of Palin, the Tea Party and now OWS.   That’s what I think.

As for the rest of it, where you sorta conflate my thinking that the Supreme Court’s Citizens United ruling, giving corporations the right to secretly pour millions into any election without the need to disclose their contributions anywhere,  with my being a fascist or something — OK, but  you logically lost me there.  The fact that I think that transparency in campaign finance is vital somehow equals me being a control freak, a theocrat  or “suicide bomber” ?  Have we discussed religion once? I’m a liberal theocrat, who wants government subordinated to religion?   I’ll take your word for it, and maybe just a word of advise from this newly minted apocalyptic totalitarian madman:  love your avatar, but it’s probably time to put the gin away for the night.

Just so I can follow the logical martini you’re sloshing in, you write:

“If media outlets and all their employees are the intellectual slaves of
their corporate overlords, isn’t anyone aligning with the money and the
influence of George Sorros just the same?”

I think what I posted earlier about reporters and media managers should clear up what I think all of us in media are slaves to.  But even if I did have that viewpoint, is it your belief that every billionaire is a money around whom a media conglomerate spontaneously evolves, like planets and moons?  Therefore by the virtue of being rich, Soros will suddenly have his own newsroom, satellites and real estate on the nations cable systems?   Sweet concept! 

Oh, no, what you announced is originally is that these corporate interests have Republican at  heart, since Republicans don’t play your or them for a fool

 Since, then, you’ve had to admit that on the CORPORATE level THAT incentive is balanced, so you’ve move the goal posts to ratings being the major interest.

Well,  who disputed that, media member (appeal to authority) and Einstein?…

As to  the other drivel, see the my first paragraph.

Yawn….stretch…. fffffffphfffff…..

So you’d apply for job there tomorrow, huh?

Why are you asking me to defend what you’ve essentially claimed?

You SAID the media is largely geared to the corporate and that their bottomline is therefore geared to corporate loving Republicans.  THEN you had to admit that maybe an election every four years offset that crap, in way that having an liberal ethos in the news room does not…

Now you want ME to explain why you see corporate-political ambitions as overarching… but see Sorros as a mere indirect figurehead of an online POLIITiCAL organization that gets his money.

I’m sorry, I’m not going to do your work for you.    You’re going to have to abstract enough to offer up an explanation for that is compatible with your other dissembling.

  “But even if I did have that viewpoint, is it your belief that every
billionaire is a money around whom a media conglomerate spontaneously
evolves,”

You don’t think that?

“Another reality to consider: each of these companies stands to reap
Billions more under republican tax and regulatory climates than
democratic (although the difference between them is shrinking as the
dems go corporate) – Probably not a real likelihood that a liberal
agenda,”

News to me…

CC, (I think we’ve been at this long enough that I can call you CC by now) you drunken conservative lush you.  Just humor me one time in the wake of this statement you wrote:

“Oh, no, what you announced originally is that these corporate interests
have Republican interests at  heart, since Republicans don’t play your
or them for a fool.”

Just go ahead and cut and paste the part where I said that. You base so much of what you are accusing me of on that assertion, it would help if it existed.  If you can find anything other than me saying that they don’t skew liberal, I’ll buy you another jar of olives. You’ve gotta be out by now.

No, I base it on what you’ve said. 

You’ve had no trouble defining donor money as potentially corrupting and you’ve had no trouble declaring that the media isn’t geared to a liberal agenda because (despite a largely liberal news room)  its in the best interests of your corporate overlords to nip that in the bud.

Now, you’re asking ME to bail you out of a contradictory statement you’ve made about another billionaire that ain’t pernicious Uncle Sam….

I’m afraid that you’re left with issuing insults about my sobriety.  Be careful, because that means that even drunks can expose you as being a pompous cliche driven moron.

OK, just one more attempt to follow your blurry logic and words (I must be a masochist or REALLY procrastinating on my project at 1.30AM)  so here goes – For your latest opus, you type:

“Now you want ME to explain why you see corporate-political ambitions as
overarching… but see Sorros as a mere indirect figurehead of an online
POLIITiCAL organization that gets his money.

I’m sorry, I’m not
going to do your work for you.    You’re going to have to abstract
enough to offer up an explanation for that is compatible with your other
dissembling. ”

Last thing I knew we were talking about media bias.  Somehow, because he’s a rich bogeyman to the left, you are asserting that Soros is somehow a media mogul or involved in media?  I just don’t get it.  He’s a Hungarian Billionaire Financial.  We’re talking about the US media.  We’re not  even talking about the Koch brothers either.   What does MoveOn have to do with this either?  Are you saying that now MoveOn started the OWS ? I just can’t follow anything you are writing.  I’ll be happy to give you another crack at it tomorrow during the day, when you might be more in shape for this kind of thing.

Oh, yeah,,,gotcha…, you’re slumming it, sweetheart… yawn …stretch….

It’s astounding to me that you can see money… lots of money… as being able to influence the suits at media companies to the point where YOU said that they’re not predisposed to liberalism but to Republicans (despite what you admit to being a largely liberal news room) and yet act as though Sorros’ billions matter not a whit when it comes to the influence he might exact on moveon.org and whoever aligns with moveon.org.

Well, I may have a martini glass as an avatar, but you’re concrete as…well….your head, and I can always change avatars.

OK, since my replies always have to be to your earlier posts, here’s your current one”

” No, I base it on what you’ve said. 

You’ve had no trouble
defining donor money as potentially corrupting and you’ve had no trouble
declaring that the media isn’t geared to a liberal agenda because
(despite a largely liberal news room)  its in the best interests of your
corporate overlords to nip that in the bud.

Now, you’re asking
ME to bail you out of a contradictory statement you’ve made about
another billionaire that ain’t pernicious Wall Street.

I’m afraid
that you’re left with issuing insults about my sobriety.  Be careful,
because that means that even drunks can expose you as being a pompous
cliche driven moron.”

One more time – we were talking about media, and touched on the whether corporations now being able to fund elections with unlimited amounts and with total secrecy from disclosure was a bad thing.   Suddenly you started talking about George Soros without any set-up or context. 

Let me help you: Are you asking me if I think that it would be any better for George Soros to fund campaigns secretly?  Absolutely not.  I don’t think anyone left, right or center should be allowed to secretly pump unlimited funds into the political process.  Was that by any chance what you were trying to get at with Soros?  Because otherwise what you’re saying isn’t amounting to any coherent political argument or question. But it IS resulting in some fantastic frontier gibberish.  A few of my favorites so far:

           “Now, you’re asking ME to bail you out of a contradictory statement
you’ve made about another  
            billionaire that ain’t pernicious Wall Street.”

            “You’re going to have to abstract enough to offer up an explanation for that is compatible
              with your other dissembling. ”

Oh drunk CC, I heart you.

Well, I heart you right back.  You’re so precious when you’re playing dumb, but you really are dumb. 

It’s cute like skittles.

 What I did was to refer to a statement you made earlier about Sorros, moveon.org. and Occupy Wall Street.

However, these three items are now so unrelated that you can’t seem to remember any point you made earlier about them on this thread. Even though it’s about three inches up.

And what’s more…you can’t even relate the influence of campaign  money on media outlet with Sorros money on newly minted protesters aligned with moveon.org…. (yawn…stretch…duh….)

Indeed I may be dumb, because I still have no idea how we jumped from Corporations funding elections secretly to George Soros and MoveOn… MoveOn is an openly political organization just like The Heritage Foundation and its many Conservative patrons.   Both openly try to influence elections and policy.  I don’t have a problem with that.   And that isn’t remotely what we were debating.

Yes, the influence of money on entities was what we were debating.  You claimed that it far and away influenced media bigwigs to lockstep their little liberal peons to a  not liberal agenda…. then you had to admit that it pretty well balanced itself out according to the winds of change.

You’ve not answered how a largely liberal news room ever balances itself out.

Now, you’re pretending that none of this has any bearing on what you said earlier about Sorros money via moveon. org with OWS.

I totally recall what I said about Soros in another converation up-thread:  I said that the impact of the Koch Brothers on the Tea Party is direct and documented through their primary sponsorship of one of the main Tea Party funding arms, Americans for Prosperity.   Soros has absolutely contributed to MoveOn, but MoveOn wasn’t behind OWS, and from all reports, is a latecomer to the party.   By comparison, Americans For Prosperity is a tent-post of the Tea Party movement, along with Dick Armey’s Freedom Works and FoxNews.   That was the point I was making there.   But for better or worse, Americans for Prosperity and MoveOn are overtly partisan groups, and the Koch Brothers and Soros’ involvement with each is out in the open.

And still it doesn’t relate to whether or not corporate influence in the media or undisclosed & unlimited corporate financing of political campaigns is a dangerous thing.  Any progress in making that connection?  

Oh, yeah, there’s been progress.  In order to make a point about undisclosed corporate contributions you’ve now jettisoned the point you made earlier about Koch Brothers and the Tea Party.

Oh, we are fully in chasing our tail mode, and I’ll have to get back to work soon, because I need to get something done in time for start of business in New York.  But just because I care:

YOU SAY ” Yes, the influence of money on entities was what we were debating.  You
claimed that it far and away influenced media bigwigs to lockstep their
little liberal peons to a  not liberal agenda…. then you had to admit
that it pretty well balanced itself out according to the winds of
change.”
I SAY: Two separate things: the influence of money coming out of the corporation into politics and the impact of Politics within media corporations on their employees and by extension the presentation of stories.  On  the former issue, you sent the Open Secret tallies of how the media company’s gave to political parties, and it showed that they shaded toward the party in power in any given cycle.  By the way, after citizens united, much of that giving that is charted there will no longer be public like that.  I suspect that might impact the balances.   On the latter issue, of weather the potential impact on the bottom line could influence the reporting of a large media conglomerate’s new division.  It does. There are things in the business called carve outs – Stories that you know you are to avoid or approach carefully due to your employers financial interests.  A small town newspaper may not investigate a tip on reconditioned electronics being sold as new at a department store that is a major advertiser.   Extrapolate that up to a Viacom sized company and it gets subtler but more widespread.   I’m not saying there is overt republicanism being preached on the airwaves, but the concept that a liberal bias is being followed is not reality.  And yes, I again will stipulate that reporters tend to be slightly to the left.  And that is balanced by the management of these companies – as measured by the same studies and polls that cornfirm the reporters left shading — as being slightly to the right. That is how newsrooms balance out. Because editors and management have at least as much impact on the product that gets to the air.  And again, the bias that towers over any other is toward profit, ratings and sensationalism. 

YOU SAY “You’ve not answered how a largely liberal news room ever balances itself out.”
I SAY: I just did.

YOU SAY: “Now, you’re pretending that none of this has any bearing on what you said earlier about Sorros money via moveon. org with OWS.”
I SAY: Yup, and I’m saying it again here.  I totally see to connection between Soros and MoveOn, but I see no connection between MoveOn and OWS other than being one of many,many faces in the crowd.  By contrast, without Americans for Prosperity, Freedom Works and FoxNews, there would be no Tea Party.  

Help! I’m addicted to playing this game of my direct quote vs your mangled re-conception of it.  Last time for this:

YOU SAY: Oh, yeah, there’s been progress.  In order to make a point about
undisclosed corporate contributions you’ve now jettisoned the point you
made earlier about Koch Brothers and the Tea Party.

I SAY: Here is the exact post from so long ago, responding to someone asking if I knew that Soros was the one “pushing the buttons” at the OWS protests.

I SAID: “I can show you the connection of the Koch brothers directly to the Tea
Party through their funding of American’s For Prosperity, along with
Freedom Works (funded by Verizon, Exxon, etc…) AFP is one of the
biggest funders of the Tea Party.   There were some Move On signs at the OWS today -  Please show me any connection beyond that to Soros.”

I stand by what I wrote, and am not sure how I jettison that point in saying that secret corporate donations to politics will pervert democracy, and turn this country into sheer plutocracy.

I’m going to go back to work, but I’m sure you can bait me back into this with your next straw man argument. 

“No matter who wins in November, Wall Street will have a friend in the White House,” said Massie Ritsch of the Center for Responsive Politics, which crunched the data for The News.”

Records show that four out of Obama’s top five contributors are employees of financial industry giants – Goldman Sachs ($571,330), UBS AG ($364,806), JPMorgan Chase ($362,207) and Citigroup ($358,054).”

http://articles.nydailynews.com/2008-06-30/news/17902184_1_sen-obama-obama-spokesman-tommy-vietor-john-mccain

At least they’ve learned their lesson and won’t be donating so heavily to 0bama, this time around.

Well, here I was waiting on you to tell me the pernicious effects produced by people being able to give their money to whatever cause and entity that would promote their concerns and how Democrats are slighted on that, then you just go and tell me how some topics are off limits because reporters know that they are “off limits”.  That THIS is how the liberal news room is balanced out.

Well, I’m sure there aren’t one million ways to tell the story of campaign finance without mentioning particulars.  Just like there aren’t one million way to make a point about corporations ….banks, perhaps?… without mentioning the ends and outs of who is doing who (and we’ve already established THAT coupling as being fickle as to the winds of power).  We see that dilemma ALL over the news right now, don’t we?  Why, they’re just holding back on bad mouthing corporations …just bitng their tongues less they offend Mr. Vanderbilt…   

I’m sorry in an Eisner, Geffin, Jobs, Diller, Moynihan corporate culture it’s just not that world anymore.  They answer to YOU and how you spin things. 

And the rest of us are obliged to Fox and the internet.

“Another reality to consider: each of these companies stands to reap
Billions more under republican tax and regulatory climates than
democratic (although the difference between them is shrinking as the
dems go corporate) – Probably not a real likelihood that a liberal
agenda, favoring more regulation and higher corporate taxation  is going
to guide the news coverage by these corporate media outlets.”

Want to bet on that?  Why don’t you nexus how many stories in the media were pro-govt-regulation vs anti-govt-regulation.

Perhaps you’d care to wager a guess, based upon regulation of the ability of corporations to give to political campaigns or advocacy groups.

How many stories stories were pro-campaign regulation vs anti-regulation on CNN, CBS, ABC, NBC, MSNBC?

By the way, since we’re talking about campaign finance regulation, would you like to make a guess as to where CNN, CBS, ABC, NBC, MSNBC, might come down on the subject. 

More campaign finance regulation or less?

You’re doing parody now and I LOVE it.

YOU SAY: “We see that dilemma ALL over the news right now, don’t we?  Why, they’re
just holding back on bad mouthing corporations …just biting their
tongues less they offend Mr. Vanderbilt…    I’m sorry in an
Eisner, Geffin, Jobs, Diller, Moynihan corporate culture. it’s just not
that world anymore.  They answer to YOU and how you spin things.” 

I SAY: It’s actually a Murdoch, Ailes, Redstone, Roberts, Eisner, Parsons,Mays corporate culture.  And have you met them (I’ve met Eisner and Roberts for what its worth) – But they sure as hell don’t answer to me or anyone else other than the board of directors IF them.  

YOU SAY: “And the rest of us are obliged to Fox and the internet.”
I SAY: That about says it all.  I have never worked for FoxNews but I work currently with 3 alums and have worked with many more.  There has never in the history of news been an operation like Ailes Fox.  I could go on chapter and verse about the things that distinguish them from any journalistic organization, all of whom have their flaws (see: Cut outs) but by and large set out to present their best attempt at objective news gathering.   There is zero pretense of this at Fox.  Even Ailes admitted it in his interview last week with Newsweek and Howard Kurtz where he admitted outright that Fox had gone too hard to the right on Obama’s election and were moderating now.    To see how this is accomplished on a day to day scale, Google “Moody Memo.”   There is a morning memo that goes around to all reporters, editors, anchors and management every morning.  Until SVP  John Moody left in 2009, this came from him and was known as the Moody Memo.  I don’t know who does it now, but it’s the discussion of what stories will be prioritized throughout the day for both news and opinion shows, and the Fox/Ailes preferred POV on the story.  For example, when Eric Rudolph was on trial for the NC bombings, the memo urged that it be mentioned repeatedly that the target of the bombing was abortion clinics, and to be sure never to accidentally call them health clinics.   The release of the 9-11 report came with a Moddy Memo reminder “Not to blow this into Watergate.”    And so on.   Needless to say, Ailes worked for Nixon, was Bush 41′s media Czar and to this day is the king maker of national candidates for the GOP.   Bill Sammon, the Fox News Washington Bureau chief, is a hard core Bush 43 partisan.    Have a look at Sammon’s literary output before he took over as bureau chief: http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=Bill+Sammon&x=0&y=0     This is the man who shapes the political reporting of one of the 3 major 24 hour news nets.    

For what it’s worth, MSNBC doesn’t control it’s news that way, but I definitely feel like they are trying to come off as the left leaning partisan alternative to Fox, especially with their news shows.  I used to watch some (always hated Olbermann even when he was there, a pompous blow hard is a blow hard on either side of the aisle.)  But now that they are slanting, I don’t want my beliefs to be pandered to.  I don’t watch anymore.

That’s it – back to work.

Well, you rest up.

Your back must be tired from moving all prior goalposts.

Oh, good!  It’s back to work in the media…is it?  And You’re such a busy bee, you tell us!

Well, it’s been quite a haul from your initially saying  that it’s doubtful that media corporations would reflect a liberal view because Republicans are so much more lucrative to them, to your saying that the Robber Barons in the Big House balance out the left leaning reporters in the news room and it’s ALL good.

I mean why make a point  of telling us that it really is a corporate media and that they get their sustenance from Republicans (but that’s changing you said), if only to make a point that the lefty peons in the news rooms balance that out (even if they are afraid to do favorable stories on campaign finance reform, government regulation of corporations, and let’s see… maybe gun control…  ) 

Goodness knows those are stories we never see.

You’ve come along way, baby, in the space of several hours.

Now we hear that it’s only Fox who doesn’t put up any pretense.  Good.  You’re not one to shoot your own in the foot. Not when you’ve seen the donation pattern and have had to admit that it’s just as much in the interest of the media to placate whoever is in power as it is Republicans..

So who’s in power now?.  So who are the big boys and the news room grunts placating now?  Democrats or Republicans.  And what will they do to you?  Not give you money?  How would that be in the interest of either party or either partisan? 

Isn’t it more likely that any boss must walk a fine line themselves between a host of “lobbyist”, that include their own exacting “left leaning” reporters (some of those bosses used to be that) with a overwhelmngly left leaning cohort of powerful media critics and industry honchos of which you all comprise?

CC – You are a trooper to keep at it. I’m indeed working all night. Are you on a bender?

To be quick, a couple things that keep escaping you (or you are ignoring for the sake of your endless straw men)  – I’ve never said that the media situation is good. It’s not. There isn’t transparent reporting.  I’ve said beginning to end that we have a corporate media, which serves corporate ends. 

I definitely concede that reporters skew slightly left, but everything above them skews right.  

As I pointed out, political donations from media companies slightly favor the party in power.  That doesn’t reflect the political composition of the executive suite,which is to the right.  And it doesn’t affect the reality that giant corporations profit more under traditionally Republican tax and regulatory climates.   Your logic is pretty incoherent, but I think you’ve tried to make the case that because Wall Street gave more to Obama (as did much of Corporate American in 2008) that this somehow proves that Corporations are liberal?  Do you really want to stick with that one? 

The rest of your post doesn’t make any sense grammatically or logically.  Are you saying that Fox panders to Democrats too?  Shoot myself in the foot what?

For that matter, what does the entirety of this even mean: “So who’s in power now?.  So who are the big boys and the news room
grunts placating now?  Democrats or Republicans.  And what will they do
to you?  Not give you money?  How would that be in the interest of
either party or either partisan?” 

Not give me money? What am I, some Democratic Senator or something in your mind.  What who?

And lets wrap up with your last bowl of word soup:  “Isn’t it more likely that any boss must walk a fine line themselves
between a host of “lobbyist”, that include their own exacting “left
leaning” reporters (some of those bosses used to be that) with a
overwhelmngly left leaning cohort of powerful media critics and industry
honchos of which you all comprise? “               

What? How totally hammered are you? I’m giving you the assumption of booze, because I honestly don’t think you’re stupid – You just are borderline incoherent now.  But what little I get from that leads me to think that you somehow have it in your head that the men who are the chairmen of media conglomerates are somehow inherently liberal.   (You do realize that Hollywood liberals control movies and the entertainment divisions, but the main company and news divisions are out of New York, right?  David Geffen doesn’t leave his DreamWorks office and just wander into the NBC Newsroom…)

Good luck with all that.  Remember to drink water and take tylenol before you crash. Otherwise you may have a doozy hangover…

No, not hammered.  Just ate half an omelet  I made for my husband. 

I see that you’re still so enmeshed that you keep feigning nonchalance.

Let me let you off the hook here.  Go do your writing (which you do better than me, I’m just an omelet maker), or go get some sleep.

When you get up, then you can convince yourself anew that the only person you and your corporate CEO must appease is Mitch McConnell.

The nearest he’ll get to either of you is in an elevator.  And he’ll be very cordial when he hears your spiel.

You can hold me to that.  Nite.

Good night CC.  I’m not feigning nonchalance. I obviously enjoyed sparring with you, but I did and do still have work to do. Cranky east coast network people want their scripts to savage by first AM (and no, I’m not in News, so you can relax)

Have a good night.  When you think to, just clue me in to exactly who else beyond McConnell & Company I need to appease.  I honestly don’t know who you are alluding to. 

Wish I had an omelet, but my wife is sound asleep.

Video Exposing How ‘Occupy Wall Street’ Was
Organized From Day One by SEIU/ACORN Front – The Working Family Party,
and How They All Tie to the Obama Administration, DNC, Democratic
Socialists of America, Tides and George Soros

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/video-exposing-occupy-wall-street-was-organized-from-day-one-by-seiu-acorn-front-the-working-family-party-and-how-they-all-tie-to-the-obama-administration-dnc-democratic-socialists-of-america/

They, meaning the GOP?
I applaud and appreciate citizens getting involved and going out to make sure their voices are heard. I think the country needs it. However sincere a lot of people were and are, the Tea Party and the anti government sentiment was seriously hijacked and used by the GOP and outside corporate interests like the Koch brothers.
Originally one of the objections of the Tea Party was the corrupt banking arrangement between the government and the Mega banks. {See Ron Paul} Both parties contributed to our current economic crisis by cooperating with the mega banks.
The whole Tea Party = good and OWS =bad, is just more manipulation.

Grassroots movement!!  NOT!

Organizer admits to paying ‘Occupy DC’ protesters [VIDEO]

http://dailycaller.com/2011/10/06/organizer-admits-to-paying-occupy-dc-protesters-video/

How many times have you posted this today?  We get it Michelle. 

The Blaze is a great website for idiots.

An attack on freedom???  What a loser.  This idiot is just afraid for his phoney job.  He is simply another bought politician who is owned lock stock and barrell by wealthy special interest.  If / when the system ever gets fixed, it is losers like this, Cantor, Boehner and all repug right wingers and most democrats who will be out of a job and this fool knows it. 

He’s just another  puppet,  posturing to make it sound like there’s mad dogs out there, as his puppeteer has directed lots of “leaders” to state.
The  plan is to have this lead to “false flag” rioting and then Martial Law being declared.

Not my fault you can’t handle the truth about Socialism.

“I
love me some capitalism, but to function openly and not spill into
monopoly and corporate plutocracy there has to be Federal regulation.”

No, you don’t love capitalism. And no, there doesn’t have to be federal regulation. Market regulation is much more effective, fair, and protective.

The problem is that you like to vote for fascists/national socialists who pick industry leaders to craft Federal regulations that squeeze out their competition.

“If the type of unregulated capitalism you support is about Freedom, it’s
about corporate freedom at the expense of individual freedom.”

You continue to vote for fascism/national socialism, and you get what you asked for. I instead support capitalism and freedom.

Wow – You just went from zero to Nazi in no time.  You sure must’ve taken a lot of political science in your day, huh?  I’m guessing if you reach for the Nazi, you don’t really have much of a grasp on the issues and are pretty bad at making your case. 

Any chance you’d like a second chance, at take a shot at showing me how — once Glass Steagall was repealed in 2000 and the financial sector was largely deregulated– that “market regulation”  you speak so highly of worked to protect the consumer and the entire economy? 

Paul Broun is as smart as the closet TEA leaf! Both he and Cantor are crying about the ”Occupy Wall Street”(OWS) movement and decrying their attention! Top Taxation Eradication Anarchists(TEA), Eric Cantor seeing the writing in the streets is cry like a baby, while Republican Gov. Jan Brewer of Arizona said Thursday that despite opposition from legislators from within her own party, she’s seeking money from the federal government to implement a key part of the health care overhaul she opposes in order to prepare her state in case the law is upheld. Terrifying Errant Activist(TEA) party wailing about the ”Occupy Wall Street”(OWS) movement and decrying their attention! ”Class Warfare”, “Liberals” and multiple other accusations cloud the real issues of no jobs in America from this ”Do nothing” 112th  Congress! The Terrifying Errant Activist party is directly responsible for holding the American economy hostage in a Scorched Earth policy to guarantee president Obama troubles nationwide.

It’s not my fault that you support policies that the National Socialist Workers Party of Germany also supported. If you’re embarrassed by that, that’s your problem — not mine.

And claiming that financial sector was deregulated is incredibly hilarious. What, do you think Glass-Steagall — which I doubt you even know what that was — was the only regulation in the financial sector. What the hell do you think the SEC is, shit-for-brains?