georgerussia

Unless she's fat. Then it's still indecent exposure :) * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

In Netherlands, the wind never dies. (and so does the rain) * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

Most like it cannot react on just Ctrl key, and needs a combination of keys (like ctrl+z) * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

It's hard what is considered "paying your bills" here. If you are in the position to vote, and everyone but you voted for a new spending project, which at the end bankrupted the corporation, how much should you pay at the end? You're part of the corporation, and you were in position to vote, so you must pay, right? No, I'm saying that your statement that Bush signed this bill because he was stupid, and not just because he was a Republican president, needs to be proven by facts. Then it's a question why the whole party wanted so much to elect a stupid president, and whether we could trust them in future at all? * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

So basically you're saying that "personal responsibility" means "when the things go south, and you feel like it's not your fault, leave"? You're making a strong statement; now I'd like to see the facts. Especially for the part that "Bush signed out of stupidity". * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

The main problem so far I see is that "doing it right" would likely require 3,000-pages bill - and people already have problem with a 1,000 bill. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

I though you, following the nice tradition set up by Fox News, gonna now tell us GWB was Democrat. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

Sp what if you vote for the right thing, but the company still loses because your vote is overturned by majority, or just because someone in the company middle management did some major fuck-up? You supposed to still lose, as the company loses, correct? So much for personal responsibility. Left? Isn't it exactly what GWB started? I'll be even more specific: wasn't it GWB administration which gave $85B to AIG (whose executives also got some nice bonuses around the time)? * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

Yes, it does. Likely not percentage wise, but it does represent it. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

Just looking on the forum here I see exactly the opposite picture - a lot of "a very little crazy", and only few reasonable. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

Because it is true. (this is a good example why I consider such talk shows bullshit) * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

That's pretty funny logic. So if you own any stock - which makes you an owner of the part of the company - you think it's fine to have your wealth taken to cover the bad choice the company made? Or it's ok just to take someone else's wealth, but not yours? * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

Like "what would Jesus do with those gay people who dare to get married"? Then I'd definitely not like it. A sign at my front door says "Jesus-free home", almost a year there. Would probably make a good story as well. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

The equal NUMBER of stories is not the same as equal coverage. Look on two headlines: "Californians say they will not vote for McCain" "New facts revealed - Obama is not a natural born citizen, the lawsuit is pending". Both those stories would count as negative to McCain and to Obama respectively, but nobody in their mind would consider them "equal coverage". * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

What you're saying is that they ARE biased, but since you're biased in the same direction too, it's much better for you than any real, unbiased news. Not really different from what the administration people said though. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

This would require me spending a few hours reading foxnews.com - which does not belong into the list of desired activities. Very unlikely - you'd rather disagree with my research. A typical example of such presentation is above - and, as you see, it's not about lying - it's just "sharing the opinion". * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

Yes, you can answer any way you like. Then it's up to news station whether to report what your answer was, or just to tell their auditory that "you preferred to avoid giving straight yes/no answer as asked, and while we do not want to push any agenda, you my dear conservatives might think what is the real reason that your elected representative cannot answer a simple question with a single word answer? Of course we're not saying he has something to hide, but you all are smart people and agree there should be a reason for avoiding such a simple question. We all agree that it's quite dangerous when the supposedly open government avoids answering questions, isn't it?". And so on. Sure, no problem. Will you pay hourly for the research? * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

You were told to answer "yes" or "no". See? You cannot answer a single question using a single word! * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

Have you stopped beating your wife? Just answer yes or no! What?! Are you afraid to answer a single tough question? Wow! * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

And what's your point? * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

It depends on how much news reported are really opinions. If 80% reported is news, and 20% is opinions which is also clearly marked so, it is still real news network. If 50% "reported" is opinion, somehow disguised under news, this is not news network. Relax, you're arguing with yourself. Why not? If combining different words spoken by different people into a phrase is fine with you, you should definitely be ok if I combine a phrase from different words from your different posts, right? Which is also fine - why should administration deal spend their time with the "news" network which goal is to misrepresent everything said to follow the main agenda, which is anti-administration? It's not like they want to close it - it's just they do not want to waste time on them. There are legitimate news organizations around who cover real news, not just pushing agenda. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

Who decided what is negative story, and what is not? I personally know a few people who would consider Obama's promise to not to raise taxes to anyone below 250k (and raise it for everyone else) negative, and for some people this would be positive. Also the stories matter - is it poll report saying that Obama ratings falled 90% during last week in Buttfuck, KY, or yet another conspiracy theory saying Obama is not citizen? * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

With whom? You know, "news" is something that just happens, and the job of the "real news organization" is to REPORT news, not to agree or disagree with them. So much for "real news". Good. So fuck them. No, the administration does not want to make such a point - most likely MSNBC and the other opinion shows are not considered "real news organizations" (talk shows are, in my opinion, the worst and crappiest brainwasher - all of them - but only mentally disabled would consider talk shows "real news", so it's even less the issue here). Good, now I see it - you basically combined words spoken by two different persons, and that's how you made up the phrase you mentioned above. Good try. Note that nobody said it's not news organization at all - just comparing to others, who are providing some real news. That's exactly what you said up there. Same message - it's not as much news organization, and its main goal is to push an agenda. This is something you didn't disagree as well - you just said they are against it because they do not like the agenda pushed. Correct? * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

According to Pew Research it was fair. It has nothing to do with my opinion. And what "fair" means for Pew Research? * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

as does yours, and, apparently, everybody else here Of course, and that's why his statement above is completely irrelevant. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *