Man, people love to slam Hillary for completely, utterly ridiculous reasons. I guess if you can't find any shit just make some up.

First, "did something to determine who was going to win" does not equal "rigging an election", exactly. Influencing an election, yes, but that does not necessarily mean "rigging". That's using the most extreme word possible to describe it, which may or may not be accurate.

Second, she was talking about what we "should have done", and 10 years ago, in a pissant little part of the world's most unstable region. And it's really no different than American policy has been in the Middle East for decades. Who do you think chose who was going to rule Iraq this time around? Or the last time around? For that matter, who do you think created the country of Israel? This is "business as usual" for the US. This is Middle Eastern foreign policy. Hillary Clinton did not create this, it's a continuation of what we've been doing since WWII ended and we wanted to make sure Russia didn't gain too much world influence.

Third, this in no way diminishes a foreign government, an enemy of ours since WWII ended, influencing OUR election.

People always try to show this double standard and, irritatingly, they do it with a double standard. If Hillary did it then it's automatically a thousand times worse than when we were doing the EXACT SAME THING before she did it. I don't care if you dig up some real shit on her. There's a lot not to like. But don't just make it up or pretend that something she's doing is in some way so fucking bad, even though it's the EXACT SAME THING we've been doing all along. That just irritates me, not because I have any love for Hillary, but because I really, really like reality.

The "Cable News Truth" panel is hilariously wrong, IMO. Trump was reamed up one side and down the other on just about every cable station, and even Fox News was dumping shit all over his head during the early parts of the primaries when everyone was pretty sure he was a bad joke and would flame out quickly. The problem isn't that they ignored him or didn't rip him enough, it's that they made no effort to draw out his views on policy positions and instead split their time between broadcasting his stump speeches and making jokes. Fox finally got on the bandwagon after he won the nomination. Taking Trump less seriously than they took Sarah Palin might have seemed funny at the time, but now you've got President Trump (and who knows if he'll find Palin a spot in his cabinet... she'd be perfect as secretary of education).

(December 20, 2016 at 4:01 pm)Crossless1 Wrote:

(December 20, 2016 at 3:48 pm)CanOfMountainDew Wrote: Huffpo and NYT are the lefts equivalent to FOX. Anyone who watches mainstream media uncritically is simply a useful idiot for the left.

You are aware that there is more to the New York Times than the op-ed page, right? Have you ever bothered to read it?

Not skim it. Read it. Consistently.

To compare that to the Huffington Post or to suggest that it's the leftist equivalent of Fox News is the height of moronic.

For the record, I read the Times and the WSJ daily. What they do is called journalism. You should try reading some.

Sure, it's not as bad ass huffpo, but it's blatant propaganda for anyone not indoctrinated in leftism.

(December 20, 2016 at 4:54 pm)Tonus Wrote: The "Cable News Truth" panel is hilariously wrong, IMO.  Trump was reamed up one side and down the other on just about every cable station, and even Fox News was dumping shit all over his head during the early parts of the primaries when everyone was pretty sure he was a bad joke and would flame out quickly.  The problem isn't that they ignored him or didn't rip him enough, it's that they made no effort to draw out his views on policy positions and instead split their time between broadcasting his stump speeches and making jokes.  Fox finally got on the bandwagon after he won the nomination.  Taking Trump less seriously than they took Sarah Palin might have seemed funny at the time, but now you've got President Trump (and who knows if he'll find Palin a spot in his cabinet... she'd be perfect as secretary of education).

Ugh, that made me shudder.  At least as Secretary of Education the worst thing she would probably do is to teach kids that if something is hard, just quit.  Why bother being great when dumfucks will pay you to tell them you're great?

(December 20, 2016 at 8:21 pm)CanOfMountainDew Wrote:

(December 20, 2016 at 4:01 pm)Crossless1 Wrote: You are aware that there is more to the New York Times than the op-ed page, right? Have you ever bothered to read it?

Not skim it. Read it. Consistently.

To compare that to the Huffington Post or to suggest that it's the leftist equivalent of Fox News is the height of moronic.

For the record, I read the Times and the WSJ daily. What they do is called journalism. You should try reading some.

Sure, it's not as bad ass huffpo, but it's blatant propaganda for anyone not indoctrinated in leftism.

insert eye roll

(December 20, 2016 at 8:21 pm)CanOfMountainDew Wrote:

(December 20, 2016 at 4:01 pm)Crossless1 Wrote: You are aware that there is more to the New York Times than the op-ed page, right? Have you ever bothered to read it?

Not skim it. Read it. Consistently.

To compare that to the Huffington Post or to suggest that it's the leftist equivalent of Fox News is the height of moronic.

For the record, I read the Times and the WSJ daily. What they do is called journalism. You should try reading some.

Sure, it's not as bad ass huffpo, but it's blatant propaganda for anyone not indoctrinated in leftism.

*sigh*

Another American who wouldn't know real leftist propaganda if he was force fed it in a gulag.

There is no actual left worth mentioning in this country, and conservatives' efforts to redefine the term is, itself, propaganda -- propaganda you apparently have fallen for. The suggestion that anyone slightly more progressive than Reagan or '60's-era Goldwater is a "leftist" does not become true just because millions of dolts uncritically parrot their masters' talking points.

And for your information, the NYT is slightly center-left but very much a bastion of the establishment. Leftist, my ass! 

(December 21, 2016 at 6:09 pm)Crossless1 Wrote:

(December 20, 2016 at 8:21 pm)CanOfMountainDew Wrote: Sure, it's not as bad ass huffpo, but it's blatant propaganda for anyone not indoctrinated in leftism.

*sigh*

Another American who wouldn't know real leftist propaganda if he was force fed it in a gulag.

There is no actual left worth mentioning in this country, and conservatives' efforts to redefine the term is, itself, propaganda -- propaganda you apparently have fallen for. The suggestion that anyone slightly more progressive than Reagan or '60's-era Goldwater is a "leftist" does not become true just because millions of dolts uncritically parrot their masters' talking points.

And for your information, the NYT is slightly center-left but very much a bastion of the establishment. Leftist, my ass! 

Being a bastion of the establishment - which NYT is - has nothing to do with whether or not something is leftist.

(December 21, 2016 at 6:15 pm)CanOfMountainDew Wrote:

(December 21, 2016 at 6:09 pm)Crossless1 Wrote: *sigh*

Another American who wouldn't know real leftist propaganda if he was force fed it in a gulag.

There is no actual left worth mentioning in this country, and conservatives' efforts to redefine the term is, itself, propaganda -- propaganda you apparently have fallen for. The suggestion that anyone slightly more progressive than Reagan or '60's-era Goldwater is a "leftist" does not become true just because millions of dolts uncritically parrot their masters' talking points.

And for your information, the NYT is slightly center-left but very much a bastion of the establishment. Leftist, my ass! 

Being a bastion of the establishment - which NYT is - has nothing to do with whether or not something is leftist.

Then you haven't the slightest idea about the oppositional stance real leftists take toward "the establishment".

(December 21, 2016 at 6:21 pm)Crossless1 Wrote:

(December 21, 2016 at 6:15 pm)CanOfMountainDew Wrote: Being a bastion of the establishment - which NYT is - has nothing to do with whether or not something is leftist.

Then you haven't the slightest idea about the oppositional stance real leftists take toward "the establishment".

Rather you have no idea what leftism is.

If I could roll my eyes back and all the way around, they would have looped at least five times during all the moronic posts by COMW. Holy crap, that's a lot of brainwashed delusions right there. I can't even