CNN year-end review pieces used to prop up their lies against Kerry and

their propping up of the incompetent dictatortot.

Instead of being a NEWS organization that investigates and scrutinizes the charges Roveboys made, CNN merely REPEATS them ad nauseum and CONTINUES to do so. They are the CRAPPIEST NEWS NETWORK, since they PRETEND to be a REAL news network, unlike FOX which wears its bias for fascism with creepy pride.

They will continue to spread BushInc lies until only fascism exists in this nation.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Republicans voted AGAINST the bill when Kerry voted FOR it. Bush was even going to VETO the bill Kerry was for that called for ACCOUNTABILITY of the 87 billion, especially on the money being used for armor. Bush and the GOP didn't want the accountability, so they went on record AGAINST that version. Kerry went against the bill for 87 billion that had NO ACCOUNTABILITY for BushInc in how the money was spent, thus we have the no armor problem while billions of dollars are now missing.

Where is CNN's responsibility to reporting the FACTS, instead of the spin?

We need to find PR people that can distill our message into simple 6 word answers that appeal to Bush-like thinkers.

I will especially stay away from any news today/tonight/tomorrow.

Actually I haven't watched any cable news since 11/2 - feels great.

Aren't you surprised at how much crap you were watching? I was shocked, and ashamed of my own lack of discipline and lapse in good taste and judgment.

The books are piled up all around me now, and I'm working my way through them, just really content.

Ask yourself when was the last time that you ever saw a 60 Minutes type hard hitting piece on CNN? Investigative journalism is nonexistent there. Instead we get a regular diet of Candy Crowley and Bob Novak.

Full employment for fascists and the whores who will service them every step of the way.

I dont recall their beginnings, but I thought that at one time they were progressive leaning. Did the initial success of Crossfire get them going down the wrong road? I didnt get cable until 1991, so I dont have the full history of the channel. Regardless, its a big disappointment watching an outfit squander all that potential.

In the early days it was progressive and had a reach that helped to open up the Iron and Bamboo curtains. I wonder if Ted would have sold it if he knew then that it would ultimately become a tool of the Republican Party?

Here's an eye opening article from Turner:

My Beef with Big Media by Ted Turner

Its effect on bringing down the Iron Curtain is underestimated and in many ways unacknowledged. People around the world could finally see each other and hear their stories without the usual govt. spin.

BushInc infiltrated CNN long ago and engineered Steve Case's AOL buyout using cooked books ala Enron. AOL received a mere slap on the wrist for their deceptions.

http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib.asp?CID=N00000245&cycle=2002

I'll bet he regrets accepting that bit of corporate cash now.

Of course, he accepted $279k from Time Warner this cycle:

http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib.asp?CID=N00000245&cycle=2004

You'd think he'd learn that the media doesn't really like him!

I agree with your OP, btw - he does get an unfair shake on some issues. Not a fan of his, but credit where it's due.

as AOL-Time if they donated to Kerry.

Kerry has NEVER accepted corporate PAC money throughout his time in the Senate.

I'm not disagreeing with you, I just don't know how you reached that conclusion.

(By the way, Steve Case is an AOL employee, of course.)

give any money to any Dem is for the same reason Rupert Murdoch would, to claim they are impartial.

Kerry has never taken corporate pac money. It's a fact.


For Immediate Release
February 3, 2004
 
 
John Kerry Ranks 92nd out of the 100 Senators in Contributions from Special Interest PACS and Lobbyists
Bush Raised More Lobbyist Funds in 2003 than Kerry Raised in Career
 
Spokane, WA– While Senator John Kerry has run and won four Senate races over the past 20 years, he ranks about the bottom of the list of current Senators in contributions from PACs and lobbyists.
 
“George Bush accepted more money last year from lobbyists than John Kerry has in his career,” said Kerry campaign Senior Advisor Michael Meehan.  “John Kerry’s vote is not for sale, period.  He is the only current Senator to run four campaigns without taking a dime of special interest PAC money.”
 
“John Kerry is one of the most successful Democrats over the past two decades and one of the party’s top fundraisers,” Meehan added.  “Therefore it is understandable that Kerry, who has raised over $45 million from individuals in 20 years, would lead any particular sub-grouping of individual contributors.
 
“What is stunning is that despite his successful long service in the Senate, 91 other Senators beat Kerry in contributions from PACs and Lobbyists.”
 
 
-30-
 
 
Facts on John Kerry and Special Interests
 
JOHN KERRY'S MONEY: NO ONE BUYS JOHN KERRY’S VOTE
 
PAC FREE: John Kerry has not taken a dime of PAC money during his four Senate elections or during his presidential race.  PACs contribute a huge chunk of the money given to politics. Corporate PACs have given $1.2 billion to campaigns and parties since 1990.  Not one dime has gone to John Kerry.
 
RANKS 92nd IN SENATE: Because Kerry does not take PAC money, he has actually taken LESS special interest money than practically every member of Congress.  In fact when contributions from PACs and lobbyists are combined, Kerry ranks 92nd of 100 sitting Senators.

 
BANS LOBBYISTS: John Kerry has proposed a ban on anyone leaving government office from becoming a lobbyist for five years and would require that every meeting between a federal official and a lobbyist be a matter of public record.  He’s sponsored the strongest campaign finance reform measures ever to come before the Senate and gone above and beyond public disclosure requirements every year he has been in the Senate.
 
FACTS ON OPPONENTS CHARGES
BY 3 to 1, GEORGE BUSH the presidential candidates who has received the most lobbyist funds.  To be clear, John Kerry has NOT taken the most money from lobbyists.  In fact, George Bush has taken more than three times as much money from lobbyists in the past year alone as Kerry has, and managed to reward them handsomely for it too -- at the expense of the environment, our economy and the middle class. 
 
BUSH took more money from lobbyists in 2003, than John Kerry has in his entire career. If you add up all the money John Kerry’s opponents say he has taken from lobbyists over his career, it amounts to just barely more than one percent of his total contributions.
 

Again: how do you know, from the link I provided, that the contributions were from individual employees? I don't see how you got that from Open Secrets, so if you can show me how you know I can apply that newfound knowledge to others and thus discuss their contributions correctly.

Also, can you provide a link for your c&p? I'd like to read more.

And it was one of the reasons I always supported Kerry - and since he has been an advocate for public financing of campaigns since 1985.

When you know how the lists are compiled, donations by profession and company worked for, it's not hard to figure. The corporate PAC money donations are made by those looking out for the corporation's interest, and Kerry would never take that dough.

However, I'll let that pass for a more important consideration: help a dumbass like me understand the following:

When you know how the lists are compiled, donations by profession and company worked for, it's not hard to figure.

Okay - how do you know these things? In other words, where did you get your information to understand how lists are compiled, etc? I'd like to expand my knowledge base, so any tips you'd like to share would be appreciated.

profession or your employer?

And if you think John Kerry is lying about never taking any corporate pac money during his Senate career, then challenge him.

Not Kerry, not you, not that rug over there...

I donated some money during the primaries, but did not donate to Kerry (couldn't donate because I was helping two unemployed friends for a while).

Again, never said Kerry was lying - just mentioned that a press release from his website is hardly the most independent evidence. I wouldn't accept it as unbiased evidence of anything b*sh said, and I don't accept it as unbiased evidence of anything Kerry has said.

That's not at all unreasonable.

was that it ended my CNN watching forever.

I couldn't agree more with your post. They are propaganda masquerading as news.

because CNN is seen as unbiased,objective,fair etc by many people including loyal democrats.

Fox is seen as right wing by most including right wingers. the non partisans know if Fox is critical of democrats then it could just be part of their right wing agenda. but if cnn does it they see it as being most likely true.

the same goes for things like the washington post which whores for bush and they give the stupid election year democratic endorsement just to keep their democratic subscribers. but i would rather have them just report the facts and do real reporting on issues that matter and NOT endorse democrats than do crappy reporting and endorse democrats.

Fox is blatant. They claim to be "fair and balanced" but nobody buys it. CNN is seen as objective when it's really not.

Funny. I thought they were just the corporate front for the Republican National Committee.

:shrug:

.

Does anybody who has read Unfit For Command want to help write negative reviews at Amazon? I know it is kind of after the fact since the election is over, but it annoys me that so many of the reviewer's believe everything they read in it. You are only allowed to post one review per product now. So it is frustrating that I feel like I can't continue to give rebutals. They do allow you to edit. So you can change your review if you learn knew things. The website dailyhowler has good info to help you. I am sure other people know other good sources. I probably will not post here alot because I prefer posting at conservative sites where I can attempt to change minds.

What did he cover re: Kerry, and/or Election Fraud?

And it was what America needed to hear and yet, CNN said it was "Bush-bashing." Puhleeze! :puke:

.....I cannot view American News Organizations anymore without a jaundiced eye.....btw, oh nevermind!!!....Happy New Yr!!!