|
Post by soothsayer on Jun 15, 2009 13:52:16 GMT -5
"Liberal media". Good one.
Right now, this is what we have:
Organizations actually engaging in journalism (fewer and fewer of these) Main stream media (with the attention span of a moth -- flash a bright light and they are there) Right wing media (Fox et al -- the pure propagandists, the tools of the Right Wing) Media responding to the right wing media
Yes, there is progressive media out there, but not nearly on the scale of Fox, and not nearly as untrustworthy.
Biden is not incompetent. Give me a break. He tends to speak off the cuff. Wow. How awful!
|
|
|
Post by soothsayer on Jun 15, 2009 13:54:31 GMT -5
By the way, it's a shame that organizations actually engaging in journalism is what most people refer to as "liberal media". Yep, people actually trying to get at the truth, the facts. Those damned liberals!
|
|
|
Post by BearClause on Jun 15, 2009 14:01:23 GMT -5
What's really odd about Sarah Palin talking about "statutory rape" is that theoretically Levi Johnston could have been charged for said crime since he was 18 at the time he was getting it on with Bristol Palin.
|
|
|
Post by hammer on Jun 15, 2009 15:26:44 GMT -5
"Liberal media". Good one. Right now, this is what we have: Organizations actually engaging in journalism (fewer and fewer of these) Main stream media (with the attention span of a moth -- flash a bright light and they are there) Right wing media (Fox et al -- the pure propagandists, the tools of the Right Wing) Media responding to the right wing media Yes, there is progressive media out there, but not nearly on the scale of Fox, and not nearly as untrustworthy. Biden is not incompetent. Give me a break. He tends to speak off the cuff. Wow. How awful! Yes, you have hit the nail on the hammer there and identified the real problem. In fact you see the Bush and Obama administrations attempting to do an end-around on the few media left that ask the tough questions. Good investigative (approximately neutral) reporting is not seen on a regular or wide basis and appears to be the exception to the rule. It is only Biden's competence relative to Obama's that I am calling out. In the patheon of VP's he probably isn't any worse than (say) an Al Gore or a Dan Quayle. I do enjoy Biden's candor though and he seems like the kind of a guy who you wouldn't mind having a drink with and discussing things "off the record."
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Jun 15, 2009 15:34:36 GMT -5
What's really odd about Sarah Palin talking about "statutory rape" is that theoretically Levi Johnston could have been charged for said crime since he was 18 at the time he was getting it on with Bristol Palin. Depends on state law, but typically there is a criterion stating that it's legal if the people are within a certain distance of ages, even if one is above and the other below the age of consent. There are some odd laws, though. Our society is extremely concerned about controlling the sexual activity of teenagers.
|
|
|
Post by BearClause on Jun 15, 2009 15:49:14 GMT -5
What's really odd about Sarah Palin talking about "statutory rape" is that theoretically Levi Johnston could have been charged for said crime since he was 18 at the time he was getting it on with Bristol Palin. Depends on state law, but typically there is a criterion stating that it's legal if the people are within a certain distance of ages, even if one is above and the other below the age of consent. There are some odd laws, though. Our society is extremely concerned about controlling the sexual activity of teenagers. I did think about it (the so-called "Romeo and Juliet exceptions written into statutory rape laws). I didn't look it up, but I thought that maybe there wasn't such an exception. Now that I see it, the age of consent in Alaska is 16, and for under that the age difference has to be more than three years. There was the case where that kid in Georgia was convicted of the crime when he himself was under 18 and the "victim" was about 18 months younger. As for Levi Johnston, I guess Palin could have just pardoned him if it were illegal.
|
|
|
Post by bunnywailer on Jun 15, 2009 22:54:42 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by azvb on Jun 16, 2009 10:08:47 GMT -5
I went to the David Letterman show last year. What a jerk. No interaction with the audience during commercials (unlike Regis and Kelly, Conan, etc), took off his coat and threw it on the floor expecting a staffer to pick it up and put it on him before the commercial was over, rude to his staff, no "Thanks for coming" when the show was over, etc. Haven't watched him since.
Sarah Palin - She protected her child like any a mama bear (Alaskan bear) would, but it's over. Get your kids out of the spotlight. Same advice I'd give to Kate Gosselin.
You know who is quietly doing her job? Hillary Clinton. Can't stand the woman, but she's playing her cards right, and will probably win in 2012.
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Jun 16, 2009 10:34:34 GMT -5
You know who is quietly doing her job? Hillary Clinton. Can't stand the woman, but she's playing her cards right, and will probably win in 2012. You think Obama won't run? Because if he does, there is no way Clinton would run against him.
|
|
|
Post by azvb on Jun 16, 2009 11:16:58 GMT -5
You know who is quietly doing her job? Hillary Clinton. Can't stand the woman, but she's playing her cards right, and will probably win in 2012. You think Obama won't run? Because if he does, there is no way Clinton would run against him. You're right, if Obama runs, she won't run. Guess we'll just see how the next 31/2 years go for him. He's a smooth talker - I'll give him that.
|
|
|
Post by hammer on Jun 16, 2009 12:20:47 GMT -5
You think Obama won't run? Because if he does, there is no way Clinton would run against him. You're right, if Obama runs, she won't run. Guess we'll just see how the next 31/2 years go for him. He's a smooth talker - I'll give him that. Very rare for a first term president not to get his party's nomination for a second term provided they want it. I'm not sure if it has ever happened -- maybe back in the 1800's. But probably only way it could happen is if the economy/employment numbers continue their southward journey. Hillary has been staying in the background pretty much quite possibly trying to distance herself from all the economic issues.
|
|
|
Post by lonewolf on Jun 16, 2009 12:30:40 GMT -5
Depends on state law, but typically there is a criterion stating that it's legal if the people are within a certain distance of ages, even if one is above and the other below the age of consent. There are some odd laws, though. Our society is extremely concerned about controlling the sexual activity of teenagers. I did think about it (the so-called "Romeo and Juliet exceptions written into statutory rape laws). I didn't look it up, but I thought that maybe there wasn't such an exception. Now that I see it, the age of consent in Alaska is 16, and for under that the age difference has to be more than three years. There was the case where that kid in Georgia was convicted of the crime when he himself was under 18 and the "victim" was about 18 months younger. As for Levi Johnston, I guess Palin could have just pardoned him if it were illegal. The laws vary greatly from state to state and change semi-often. Unfortunately there have been cases where men (within a year of age of the female) who have been convicted of statutory rape due to some parents insistence, or sudden denial that there was consent from the female member (ending in actual rape charges). Of course, as long as we keep these laws up...teenage sex will be eliminated We should of course bring back the stocks with the sign that says "For Unlawful Carnal Knowledge"
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Jun 16, 2009 14:30:04 GMT -5
Unfortunately there have been cases where men (within a year of age of the female) who have been convicted of statutory rape due [...] sudden denial that there was consent from the female member. Note: that's not "statutory" rape. That's just rape.
|
|
|
Post by lonewolf on Jun 16, 2009 16:23:31 GMT -5
Unfortunately there have been cases where men (within a year of age of the female) who have been convicted of statutory rape due [...] sudden denial that there was consent from the female member. Note: that's not "statutory" rape. That's just rape. Ooops...left the computer to take care of something, came back and submitted...I thought I'd put that in the end.
|
|
|
Post by goGopherBill on Jun 16, 2009 21:30:33 GMT -5
Hillarys doing her job quietly...
GIGGLE.....
Bill goes to Haiti?
Pufffff...
NK still builds nukes... IRAN is in beginning revolution.....no HILLARY.
she is not qualified...
without BILL.
I bet a zillion pizzas..Palin will be the first woman president.
|
|