Dare I say it?  CNN sucks!

I find Santorum’s own words much more offensive.

We wouldn’t expect any better from you, Tina. You’ve only got one setting: phony outrage.

Santorum is bad but I hate it when I step in a hot, steaming pile of regnery.

HA!

Awwww, couldn’t take a joke?

“Does “secure our border” mean “keep America white”"by CNN
I found this article on CNN extra on Dish and had to read it. It seems to be a very snarky  piece with no author about the upcoming Arizona GOP debate. After the catchy headline it goes on to explain to us what the GOP candidates really mean when they talk about the issues in america. It doesn’t answer the question in the headline and I dont really understand what CNN is trying to say. What does CNN think “secure our border means”? Is it a rhetorical question meant to imply that any GOP candidate who wants to secure our border is a racisst? Is it meant to mean that CNN and/or the author don’t like white people? It then goes on to translate other GOP catchphrases.
According to CNN when a candidate says “job creator” he actually means “rich people” and “the guy bankrolling my super pac” Now I have to agree that most job creators are rich and some donate to super pacs, Does the author mean Newt doesn’t does’nt want to create jobs? Trying to say job creators are bad? Can CNN actually be against job creators? For the record I like job creators, and I also like rich guys who donate to the right superpacs.
After that is “family values” which is said to translate to be “a reminder to the audience that I dont like gay people.” I don’t understand what CNN means by this either. Are family values bad? As a single man family values are not a political issue to me but I always thought they could mean different things to different people. Are all family values bad? Is CNN implying that all of the GOP candidates are homophobes? “Religious Freedom” is said to mean “christianity”, well thats not what it means to me, but I wish CNN would just come out and say what they mean. Are they against “religious freedom”? Are “christians” bad?
Lastly the article says that the GOP candidates will talk about “liberal media”. Politifact will give this a “mostly true” rating because I do believe this will be mentioned in Arizona.
I suggest that everyone watch the debate in Arizona and decide for yourself what the candidates say. You can then decide for yourself what they actually meanI could be much snarkier than this on every line in the article but I really want to give a fair and balanced critique. I will say that when I hear “CNN: your most trusted source for news” it translates to me as “A mutibillion dollar corporation that doesn’t like white people, rich people, or christians.
Since this was posted in the news section I don’t think its unfair to ask who wrote this, and their union affiliation. I also want to ask CNN directly what they think “secure our border”,”job creator”,”family values” and “religious freedom” actually mean.
I am a straight white male who hasn’t been to church in thirty years and has never read the bible. Recently I have come to believe there is a god. I don’t know if I am a christian but I know he exists and he loves us. He sent Glenn Beck to show us the truth, but we have to open our eyes. Pray with me now. “Please God let America see through this bullsht before its too late. Take care of Agent Terry and if I die before November don’t let me vote for Barack Obama.”I am actually crying as I type this. CNN, you should be ashamed.
Romney/West
UPDATE: AUTHOR IDENTIFIED AS LZ GRANDERSON

What idiots lol

CNN’s a joke, their ratings are competitive with Currents.  

I paused the DVR and pointed this out. My special lady friend laughed a bit. The coverage vindicates my notice. Thank God for sweet sweet vindication.

What can I say, we “little people” are telling ourselves that we’re “not paranoid when they’re really out to get us”, meanwhile the professional media is toasting their own moxie and morality as they throw darts at our pictures…

Get used to it.

It’s not phony outrage, it’s deeply felt.  You may not feel that the media is liberal because Noam Chomsky isn’t the host of the Today show, but in the past the media was not so distant from conservatism that they despised them.

One of the things that turned me off to conservatism over the last decade and a half was this perpetual sense of victimhood that was constantly — and somewhat hysterically — being expressed by people like Tina. They’d shriek about how the liberal media was undermining them and when they’d point to all this supposed “evidence” of bias, I just had to shrug my shoulders. Most of the time I found it amazingly unconvincing and I was starting to detect more than a little paranoia in the complaints.

It really crystallized for me in 2008 when people were screaming about “gotcha” questions when Palin was asked some pretty basic things. That made it as clear for me as anything that the whole “lamestream media” narrative was a crock and conservatives were just playing the victim card to try and explain their own failures.

I watched the debate and did not notice this at all. Of course, I don’t really pay attention when they are breaking away to commercials.

If it was the Democrats going through this primary process I truly believe CNN would show such a sign against a Dem.. What? Did you expect the camera man not zoom in on a controversial sign?

Above 5 million tuned in to watch that CNN debate last night. Or about twice what O’Reilly got, and about 5x what Hannity got. 

Whether this was a good thing or not for the Republicans is debatable itself, however.

Hi, How have you been?

Morality is changing and evolving quickly.
BTW -”Just because you’re not paranoid. It does’t mean they are not out to get you ” is from the book & movie Catch-22. Very funny.

It’s very human not to identify with people who are different from you, but you must try to make the effort.

I understand who leftists feel that the media is not left enough whenever I hear Noam Chomsky or Michael Moore go into spasms of love for Fidel Castro or Hugo Chavez. I understand that it’s democratic socialism that these two are tingling over, but I understand too how their brethren in the media understand how that is too touch a sell…

Try to think of the last time you heard anyone in the media push a liberal interviewee to the right. Push them AGAINST gun control. Push them AGAINST gay marriage. Push them FOR lower taxes. Push them FOR school vouchers. Push them AGAINST nationalized health care. Push them FOR tax credits to individuals for insurance premiums.

You get the picture…

Are you kidding?  CNN had an agreement with Saddam Hussein that they’d pull punches in order to have access to his press releases.

I’m great, thank you!

Yes, I read that book in college. Funny and horrifying in the way that life often can be.

“Noam Chomsky,  Michael Moore, Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez, Saddam Hussein.”

Let me guess, you listen to a lot of right wingnut talk radio…

am i rite?

Oh, shut up.

 I know something that you might be into, you seem to be a bit out dated on your boogeyman name drops.

http://www.gbtv.com

Beware, your head might explode.

Right… that wire from Limbaugh’s mouth into my ear isn’t grounded…

Speaking of boogeymen… sheesh…

Fox, every freakin’ day.

What? You only pick up one channel?

Where is Mr. Froth when we need him!!!

Can we talk about the actual sign for a moment? Getting that sign into the middle of that ragin’ full-on right wing crowd is an incredibly brave and subversive accomplishment alone. Getting that sign on CNN’s airwaves puts every BabaBooey bombing to shame.

What is CNN’s justification for censoring the sign out of the re-broadcast?

You realize their are a lot of “right wingers” who don’t like Santorum.  It’s not a monolithic crowd like Democratic debates.

@Nacho_II:disqus 

“saul alinski”

“george soros”

“barack obama”

Thanx for pointing at GBTV

Glenn Beck is the Messiah, sent to save us and the nation of Israel.

There are many Importance Point in the Debate .
 http://adolfodgre.wordpress.com/

The name FROTHY comes from a song parody of Frosty the Snowman. The song was created by a guy familar to THE STEPHANIE MILLER SHOW as MIKE IN RALIEGH. The sign was held up by one of STEPHANIE’S fans named Nate Ocean.  Mad F**king props to all.  To STEPHANIE MILLER who has the best radio show on the air, to Mike in Raliegh who is super clever and highly prolific for writing “Frothy Santorum” to the tune of Frosty,and of course to Nate for making the sign and getting down on the floor.  Additional props to CNN’s cameraman I bet he’s a STEPHHEAD. 

That audience shot was the best moment of the entire debate.

Who says the person holding that sign doesn’t think of him or herself as a “conservative”? Can YOU say that? You don’t know at all, & you have no better idea on this than I do. Maybe the person with that sign is a Log Cabin Republican. Maybe the person with that sign believes Santorum is a phony, just like RoPaul says. You don’t need to be liberal to hold that sign, & you don’t need to despite conservatives or conservatism to hold that sign.

There you are exGOPman: Cecelia gets your response & gives back a perfect representation of what you describe – all while being blissfully unaware of having done so.

You’d fire the camera guy who failed to grab that shot. It’s up to the floor director or show director to decide whether to show it to us. It was a good call. Savage’s message clearly has worked, and in places one might not expect it to. The times she are a-changing.

Frothy Santorum Was a tortured Catholic soul With a horsehair shirt & a busybody nose And two eyes made out of coal Frothy Santorum Is a fairy hater they say Yet the stuff he’s made from Is the same as them When they both became life one day Now there must have been some woo woo In that God-bothering book he read  For when he put it near his boo boo It left him a pointed head Thumpety thump thump Thumpety thump thump Look at Frothy bang on Thumpety thump thump Thumpety thump thump That poor defenseless Gideon.

 Not only was it 5 mill, but because it was CNN, it comprised a lot of viewers who are not aligned with FOX.  So the message reached more people in the mid-spectrum than it ever could on FOX.  This is where general elections are won or lost.
Again, whether that is good or bad for the Republicans, remains to be seen.

Who argued that?

What in my response indicates to exDOPman that I am “blissfully unaware” that he will likely use my explanation of why conservatives feel resentful to bolster his argument that we play the victim?

What is it in my response that signals that I’m not fully aware of THAT sort of circular argument?

And then you went from being a Republican to being a doctrinaire Marxist. Riiiight.

“Noam Chomsky,  Michael Moore, Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez, Saddam Hussein.”

These are a few of your favorite things!

America needs to talk about buttseks!

Maybe the person with the sign is a degenerate, like Dan Savage!

 Brave? Really?

My, how the concept of bravery has fallen.

Keep it classy gays. 

The media’s job is not to “push” anyone to one side or another. JOURNALISTS (i.e., not the puppets on Fox “News”) are tasked with helping We The People get to know the people they are interviewing. The very idea that you think news is meant to “push” people to one way of thinking over another is quite telling.

The media is CORPORATE and therefore RIGHT. It is a simple fact that doesn’t fit the right wing meme of Sarah (quitter) Plain’s ‘lame stream media) but, alas, it is fact.

Because only degenerates fight back when attacked by the Christian Taliban?

Straights have anal sex too and are just as likely to experience santorum as anyone else. All my straight male friends really dig girls who like back door action. You poor republicans. So repressed!

I remember Obama being repeatedly pushed for why he wasn’t wearing a friggin’ flag pin, for chrissakes. And Reverend Wright and Bill Ayers became household names in 2008, but who ever heard about Palin’s crazy pastor that said God was going to “strike out against America”?

Members of the MM may skew personally liberal, but by and large — with exceptions, of course — their real interest is in creating controversy that gets ratings. That drives them much more than an urge to set a liberal agenda.

If they know they can frame a story that will make that night’s headlines and be watercooler buzz the next morning, that’s what they’re interested in, above all else.

The fact is that while there’s a slight leftward tilt to the media — I’ll concede that — it’s nowhere near as robust or menacing as people like Tina would love to believe.

Even if right wingers don’t like him, they’ll get extra defensive of him if you refer to him as “froth” or “frothy”.

It’s a frothy definition but what can you do?

Haha that was awesom!

Meanwhile a New Mexico hair dresser has refused to cut the hair of the Governor until gays can marry, a judge somewhere else has decided to refuse to marry straight couples until gay couple can marry…  I wonder if the next steps will be:

I refuse to pay taxes until gays can marry
I refuse to stop at stop lights until gays can marry
I refuse to bathe until gays can marry
I refuse to respect your private property until gays can marry
I refuse to pay for my meals at restaurants until gays can marry
I refuse to wear clothes in public until gays can marry

To me its almost like a car that is stuck in first gear and refuses to just give up and move to 2nd gear.    If they want the same rights as married couples then demand civil unions be given the same rights – why stay stuck on insisting marriage be defined the way they want it defined but most voters do not?   Start with the rights so you can get what you need, then in another decade or whatever get the title of marriage if the title is also what you want. By then the voters may be used to same-rights civil unions enough they’d agree with gay marriage. Trying to inflict their view on a public who disagrees isn’t a winning strategy.

For all we know, that sign could’ve been pro-Santorum. Didn’t Rick Santorum himself pos on Mediaite and refer to himself as Froth or something?

Cecilia, I somewhat sympathize with conservatives being alienated and treated like 2nd class citizens in the eyes of the media, but this is how Republicans treat women, African Americans, Hispanics, homosexuals, non-Christians, liberal Christians, the poor, and the middle class. Now the media is showing Republicans what it feels like.

 Just what difference would it make to you — you can make your own decisions based on what is right for you.  You should not be making decision on what you think is right for someone else.  Would this really affect you one way or the other — you may not know this but there is an analog in the realm of staight sex for eveything in gay sex. 

The only one trying to “inflict thier view” is you!

That’s the point.  This movement is trying to force their views on a public who doesn’t support it.  Its fine to advocate for something wanted, I question whether its fine to try to force an unwilling public to accommodate what a relatively small group wants.

Dan Savage is one of the liberals favorite degenerates.
He’s likable,open,intelligent and friendly when interviewed or when he is on a panel of pundits.
And you got to admit it didn’t take long for Dan to make Santorum a household…..er.. Wikipedia name.
Clever and funny (in a sick sort of way -LMAO)

I wish you posted that before Christmas. I could have made that my warm up song.

No that is not the point — I am old enough to have lived through a time when the same argument was put forward about “coloreds” sharing the schools or lunch rooms or riding in the front of the bus.  If the  majority of the people want to treat this group of people differently that is okee dokee.  And before the civil rights movement there were a whole bunch of people felt that way.  My father was one of them – he was very very wrong, and I am ashamed of him for that.

The blacks were a relatively small group – approximately 15% it wasn’t right to tell that group of people that they were condemned to be second class citizens because that is the way god made them.  It is not right to condemn gays or anyone to 2nd class status because of the way they were born.  There are countries that do that — but not this one.  Your opinion – it holds no water sorry.

Can I hear an amen?

That probably not a bad thing.

Well, Rick doesn’t believe in abortion or birth control.He must produce a lot of himself in bed with his wife.Otherwise he would have a dozen children or more.

“Its fine to advocate for something wanted”

Really? So the only things worth fighting for are the easy things?

Really?

By the way, the public is moving away from archaic, prehistoric, Leviticus based thinking on the topic.

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/04/20/gay-marriage-opponents-now-in-minority/

Well, thanks for that assumption and meme laden answer.

You’ve unintentionally made the media look reasonable my comparison.

You may think Noam Chomsky is an all purpose devil to bring up, just as many righties think fascism is an all purpose pejorative (or socialism, communism, etc).
But for people who deal in facts, Chomsky was a community organizer and activist.  Nothing to do with media.  N-o-t-h-i-n-g.
Here’s a clue:  if you’ve never read any of a person’s work, nor even any serious (again, serious) critical essays on his or her work, then discussing the person in relation to their work will make you look like a fool.

Of course an interviewer should challenge the positions and the assumptions of a public figure by playing devil’s advocate.

That’s not an unheard of technique… I assure you…even thought the media only push both liberal and conservative pols in one direction. To the left.

Funny, last I saw Chomsky was denouncing Hugo Chavez.  Pesky facts

Okay Cecelia, Republicans are victims of the drive bye lamestream gotcha elitist liberal media. Are you happier with that response?

When have Noam Chomsky or Michael Moore EVER gone on air to declare their love for Fidel Castro or Hugo Chavez?

I see this is one of those comment sections where fever-dreams are reality.

Darn liberal professional media!
Well, except for the highest rated cable news channel, and 90% of talk radio, and the Wall Street Journal, and the Washington Times, and a whole slew of right wing web sites, and Cafferty on CNN, and Scarborough on MSNBC, and the likes of Tucker Carlson and similar Cato institute types that are always popping up as guests on those darn liberal shows.  But apart from that, its a monolith of lefties. Oh, the huge manatees!

You have a deep abiding friendship with straw men…

There is nothing that I stated that would logically suggest that I meant that the president was completely unchallenged by the media.

It’s interesting to me that it’s now easily admitted that the media is largely liberal, but that NO assumptions can be made from their ideological alliances, unless a media member is conservative.

Otherwise, can’t ask the sort of questions that are naturally inspired by the dynamic of a largely liberal media.

Yes, apart for the fact that conservatives exist within the media, journalists are by in large politically liberal.

I’m afraid that’s not some preposterous statement no matter how many exclamation marks you use in satirizing it.

Why would I be happy with sarcasm?

Both Moore and Chomsky have praised Fidel Castro on nationalized health care as well unemployment subsidies.

Moore has most certainly praised Hugo Chavez.

I specifically stated that I understand that what both men are truly praising is the concept of democratic socialism as found in Europe.

Try ascertaining what someone has argued before claiming that you have all the facts.

Amen!

Conservative Victim Hood is a nationally recognized disease. One of the many symptoms is instant wailing of “unfair, liberal media bias” when their short comings are outed, usually by the conservative in question.

You just can’t win with some people.

Why not just let gays marry?

 No, because only degenerates say things like “Christian Taliban”.

Dare i say it, who cares? At this point everyone knows what a Santorum is

Another example of those classy, tolerant liberals. You should be so proud!

Except the people that make the news (editors, owners of these media outlets) are by and large conservative…

I’m largely indifferent.  I don’t like some of the lacking legal rights a gay couple has, but I’m also not agreeable to being extorted or bullied into voting for something I may or may not want to vote for.  Why not seek whatever protections are necessary but otherwise let the voters decide?  Why must a bully get their way just because they threaten others?  Isn’t that giving them “more rights” than the rest of the population?

I think the equivalency of gays having a marriage license (versus a civil union being made legally the same thing) is a false argument.  Racism not only caused injury but also prevented access to (a whole lot), being “married” versus something else that is of the same legal status is a legal argument, with no injury other than they can’t do exactly what some others can – just like I as a man can’t access some services or legal classifications that a woman can or since I don’t have diplomatic immunity I can’t get out of speeding or parking tickets.

Thank you Mr. Savage! I find it very interesting how the bigots and the homophobes are crying foul now that The Gays have started standing up to the bullies and defending ourselves. They’re all “those mean homosexuals (careful not to call us gay because surveys of their base found that the word homosexual sounds more threatening) are attacking us for expressing our beliefs, as Christians, about homosexuality.”
The bible does talk about homosexuals but the words homosexual and homosexuality didn’t exist in the original text and didn’t actually show up in later translations of the bible until very recently. Thus, the homosexual acts frowned upon in the bible have nothing to do with loving, caring same relationships that exist today. The bible does condemn “some homosexual acts” as an abomination, bit it also days that lying, being prideful and wearing clothes of the opposite sex are an abomination as well. Any of you ladies wear pants? Ooops. You’re an ABOMINATION!

Yeah, the fact they took the sign out does suck. They’re supposed to report the news, not craft it.

I doubt that’s true anymore. And even if it were, to suggest that they spiking the news on behalf of their corporate overlords is suggesting that they are far more corrupt than I’ve charged.

Christian Taliban is the perfect descriptor for the radical, evangelical, extremist Christians who would impose their arcane freedom and liberty killing beliefs on the USA by use of force and unconstitutional legislation.

the common definition of marriage is –
a (1) :
the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or
wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law (2) : the state of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage b : the mutual relation of married persons : wedlock c : the institution whereby individuals are joined in a marriage
 
So what is a civil union that is different.  You may say it is the blessing of the church — I was married by a judge — no church — still married.   Tradition marriage was really to bond assets or power, and assure linage.  Not so important these days.

The Jim Crow laws tried to legitimize separate but equal that is exactly what you want here, it didn’t work for mister Crow and it won’t work now — in the United States you can not set laws against people for being different.  Again this is something that won’t affect you or your life one bit, unless one of your kids is gay and wants to get married,  you might support it then.

Really it makes no difference to me how you feel you are on the back sid of the curve Maryland just accepted gay marriage — eventually all states will. Because it is the right thing to do, and anyone who says it isn’t is just wrong.  Plain and simple wrong.  Plain and simple not fair. Plain and simple the right thing. I am totally completely not understanding how anyone could think differently about this. 

I actually agree that gays should have the right to marry, but trying to attach that issue to black civil rights is a tricky thing. Many blacks either don’t support gay marriage or are uncomfortable with gays using the black civil rights movement as a benchmark for their own attempts at equal rights. Also, there are instances of people who used to be gay, but I have never met anyone who used to be black. Gays should stick to their own arguments and let it stand on its own. 

Well yeah ─ everyone, that is, but the ‘ring of brown slime’ himself!

I understand what you’re saying. People should find resolutions to conflicts without being so aggressive about it. At the same time, do you consider this to be bullying? This is the same method practiced by Gandhi & MLK: passive resistance. Even if we do consider it to be bullying or extortion, very few members of the GLBT community have took part in such protests. Is it really fair to punish them all for the actions of a few? Lastly, I don’t see how this is about special rights when they’re only asking for equal rights.

The credit for the Frothy Santorum sign goes to Stephanie Miller fans.

Now that is absolutely hilarious!!!  Being from Arizona, I can only laugh at this because all these GOP idtiots are a bunch of losers who exists only to serve at the pleasure of their wealthy handlers and keepers in corporate America.  There is nothing conservative about being a republican and being a republican in no way makes one a conservative.  In fact, there is absolutely nothing conservative about republican voters or their political candidates and politicians.

@ChuckSacramento:disqus : “I think the equivalency of gays having a marriage license (versus a
civil union being made legally the same thing) is a false argument.”
That is precisely the problem with your argument. It’s not legally the same thing, not by any stretch of the imagination. Same sex couples do not receive the same tax benefits, for one. Same sex couples do not have the same rights of inheritance. Same sex couples cannot adopt children in some states (Virginia, for one) so their families do not have equal status in cases of custody disputes, etc. Imagine if a biological parent were to die, and his same sex partner lost custody of his children due to homophobic grandparents, or bigoted judges. This is not speculative, it happens.
Separate But Equal is anything but equal. Civil unions are not the same thing as marriage and to say, “Let’s just make them the same as marriage,” is just an excuse to do nothing but keep discrimination as the status quo.

You’ve never read a single thing by Noam Chomsky, have you?

no… we just think you sound like children when you do. grow up.

First Amendment.  Sometimes it still works.

What’s the problem with calling it marriage?

But “Obozo” & “Moochelle” are alright?

Don’t forget “ObaMao!”  You know, like Mao Tse-Tung.  Because it’s funny to call the President a communist.  Herp-derp.

Either that, or he’s shooting blanks the majority of the time.

Obammunist

When doesn’t it 2wolves Farker? After all, you claim to be a genius.

 Yelling “Fire” in a theater for one. 

Now to address your bushwa;  Show where I’ve made that claim. 

I’ll wait.

I don’t have to lie to make my point.  

We’re not tolerant of fascists like Santorum. We never will be.

Given how prone to violence the wingnuts are…

Grrrrrrrrrrr, this make Froth ANGRY!!!!!!!!!!!!