Originally Posted by sneddog

It just amazes me how anyone in todays world where the MSM is so liberally biased (favoring liberal causes and candidates) that anyone could see it another way.

I mean the evidence is overwhelming, but still some refuse to take off their blinders. There has to be some psychiatric term to diagnose and describe such willful ignorance.

Originally Posted by sneddog

It just amazes me how anyone in todays world where the MSM is so liberally biased (favoring liberal causes and candidates) that anyone could see it another way.

I mean the evidence is overwhelming, but still some refuse to take off their blinders. There has to be some psychiatric term to diagnose and describe such willful ignorance.

Originally Posted by Captain Trips

A very disliked by liberals person named Michael Savage, tells us what this problem is. He even wrote a book on this subject called "Liberalism is a Mental disorder."

It very clearly IS a mental disorder. There's certainly no shortage of evidence right in front of our faces.

Originally Posted by Norrin Radd

While I have my problems with liberals and their positions on issues, I don't think calling it a mental disorder is fair.

Most liberals I know have good hearts. They wish to help others, wish to end suffering, but they are so emotionally tied to issues they often times have trouble looking at an issue logically.

Some conservatives have trouble looking logically at issues as well, a good example is the war on drugs.

Regan once said, "the role of government is to protect us from each other, not from ourselves".

He was talking about the seat belt law, yet under his administration, the war on drugs heated up and became much more tyrannical.

While he could see how the seat belt law was wrong, he was unable to use the same logic towards the drug issue.

If government's role does not include protecting us from ourselves, then all drugs should be legal.

It is not just liberals that have trouble using logic and reason.

Originally Posted by Captain Trips

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What you say is true.

However, lets look closely at some of your key sentences;

Most liberals I know have good hearts. They wish to help others, wish to end suffering, but they are so emotionally tied to issues they often times have trouble looking at an issue logically.

and

Some conservatives have trouble looking logically at issues as well, a good example is the war on drugs.

We can see, there is a difference between "most" and "some."

Of COURSE there are conservatives that use no logic and reason to apply what they beleive we should do about one issue or another.

That liberalisms main positions are based on EMOTION and NO logic or reason and they tend to reject, out of willful ignorance, anything but their own ideas points to some sort of, at least MILD, deranged thinking.

You say:

I don't think calling it a mental disorder is fair.

And I have to ask;

What about any of this is fair ? Liberals will lie, manipulate and dismiss anything that doesn't support their strange beleifs. If we play "fair" with them, according to liberalism rules of political correctness, we'll be unwilling to stand up and call liberalism what it IS.

And we'll have no one to blame but ourselves for not pointing out the disordered thinking and ideas liberals have. If no one is willing or able to speak against their extreme foolishness, their extreme foolishness is what we will GET.

To examine both points from another perspective, we could just as easily say that it's a mental disorder to NOT stand squarely against the usually bizarre perspectives of liberals

Originally Posted by Norrin Radd

In my opinion, you are judging all liberals by the loudest liberals.

This is not right.

I have met numerous liberals who are able to admit that both parties have sold out the American people.

Most of these liberals I have spoken with in real life, not the internet.

On the net, it seems that most of the liberals you meet are the ones who are loud and brash.

It is not fair to judge an entire group by the actions of a few.

I believe that is what you are doing.

Originally Posted by gaijinalways

Except conservatives do these things too, so you're not really saying much at all. getting a littel more on topic, yes there is a problem with the concentration of media in control of a few companies. Conspiracy? No, just old boys doing business as usual. Is that good thing? No it's not.

I do believe more people do question the news as reading newspapers and/or watching TV and not questioning the statements falls out of favor. Maybe not everyone makes it their mission in life to worry about it everyday. Not everyone makes it a point to expose themselves to very few media reports, such as C David Neely reports doing. But what he is doing is not necessarily wrong, it's like everyone to some degree; dealing with an information overload. The Internet has unleashed a lot of information, some true, some useful, and some both. Deciding what and when that is the case is difficult and as Norrin Radd points, not everyone has the time nor the inclination to research much of what they read.

People make priorities and decide what battles they feel are important to deal with. Making a living is one of them that puts a constraint on most people's time.

Originally Posted by gaijinalways

Don't worry, I'm one who hasn't found your posts too long. You must remember that a lot of people do have a shorter attention span nowadays.

I'm happy to read links on this website and others when I have time. Certain times of the year I have more time (due to my job), and I certainly enjoy reading and discussing certain issues.

The power of the media to shape opinion has always been around, though recently the media war being waged is quite different as bloggers 'report' and mix it up with the professional journalists, sometimes scooping them.

Originally Posted by Norrin Radd

I couldn't even count the hours I have spent sifting through the news.

I know very few people have the time that I have and fewer still have the desire to know the truth.

I don't expect everyone to believe everything I post, I know some of what I post is very difficult to believe and I can admit I might be wrong on some things, but what is very rare, is for people to actually OFFER EVIDENCE which shows me why I am wrong.

I have posted hundreds and hundreds of links at this forum. I always try to offer evidence to support my opinion, yet what do I get for spending a half hour to an hour looking for evidence to support my opinion? I get criticized for my posts being too long.

Originally Posted by Norrin Radd

Instead of just posting the links, I actually take the time to go through them and paste the most important parts in my posts, but reading a few paragraphs is still too much work for most people.

These people don't even seem to understand that it will take them far less time to read my post, then it did for me to compose it.

Originally Posted by Norrin Radd

Oh well, it is good therapy for me to get this out of my system and I am grateful to have a place to go and share my views, no matter how unpopular they happen to be.

Originally Posted by Captain Trips

Here's an item we're not hearing about in the Mainstream media:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

VICTORY IN IRAQ

while things were going terribly and it looked like America was losing, news coverage was constant – and unrelentingly negative. Bad news – IED attacks, political setbacks, accusations of atrocities on the part of U.S. soldiers, statements by Democrat leaders condemning the "failed" Iraq war – led the evening news night after night.

But recently, Americans haven't heard very much about Iraq. Reason: The news is good. In fact, as "VICTORY IN IRAQ!" dramatically documents, the U.S. is winning – big-time.


Ryan Crocker, U.S. ambassador to Iraq, says, "Very clearly, the insurgency is in no position to overthrow the government or, really, even to challenge it.


A rare Associated Press story on America's success in Iraq reveals: "In Baghdad, parks are filled every weekend with families playing and picnicking with their children. That was unthinkable only a year ago, when the first, barely visible signs of a turnaround emerged.


Army Col. Tom James, a brigade commander on his third combat tour in Iraq, says: "We've put out the forest fire. Now we're dealing with pop-up fires.


Gen. David Petraeus' says, "Attacks in Iraq hit a four-year low in mid-May and … Iraqi forces were finally taking the lead in combat and on multiple fronts at once – something that was inconceivable a year ago.


Independent embedded journalist and former Green Beret Michael Yon, reporting from the front lines, says, "By my estimation, the Iraq War is over. We won. Which means the Iraqi people won."


Iraqi citizens who formerly were intimidated by al-Qaida atrocities into joining and protecting the terror group now take up arms and shoot al-Qaida terrorists in their midst, saying they're sick and tired of the terror and are not going to take it anymore.


Don't hold your breath. You won't see such headlines in American newspapers or leading network news broadcasts – even though, believe it or not, by all credible accounts America has indeed won the war in Iraq!

You see, the "mainstream press" isn't really too excited about America winning the war right now. Why? It's just bad timing: Success in Iraq doesn't fit the media's overriding agenda for the next couple months, which is to further discredit George W. Bush and Republicans, and to assure that Barack ("We must end this failed war") Obama is elected president and as many Democrats as possible are installed in Congress, legislatures and statehouses nationwide.

VICTORY IN IRAQ!

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[i][b] If we were still having a bad time over there, the mainstream media would be bending over backwards to show us how this war was doomed to failure and how we absolutely MUST elect Barack Hussein Obama who told us "We must end this failed war."

Yet we're supposed to beleive the mainstream media isn't biased