Do you think the mainstream media is racist ???

[mapuc]

I haven't read every post in this thread.

However the title of this thread made me remember an issue on the Danish channel TV2

Here's they confessed that they "removed" fat, ugly and other people that didn't fit into a social-like program

And it was not just that channel but also other channel in Denmark did the same.

I don't know if it have anything to do with racism

Markus

[Subnuts]

The Aryan Nation, Council of Conservative Citizens, the Nation of Islam, the Hammerskins, the Christian Identity movement, the Jewish Defense League, Stormfront, the League of the South, the American Nazi Party, the American Third Position, the True Invisible Empire Traditionalist American Knights of the Ku Klux Klan (seriously?), and Blood and Honour, are all going to be very pleased to hear they aren't "real" racists because very few to none of them actually consider themselves liberals.

[soopaman2]

Originally Posted by Subnuts

The Aryan Nation, Council of Conservative Citizens, the Nation of Islam, the Hammerskins, the Christian Identity movement, the Jewish Defense League, Stormfront, the League of the South, the American Nazi Party, the American Third Position, the True Invisible Empire Traditionalist American Knights of the Ku Klux Klan (seriously?), and Blood and Honour, are all going to be very pleased to hear they aren't "real" racists because very few to none of them actually consider themselves liberals.

Liberals are always to blame, I appreciate you trying to diffuse the dripping rhetoric with common sense, but you cannot change "these people" (see it works both ways Bubbles)

You know, the white rascist moonshine drinkers who choose to forget the civil war is over and they lost.

I can't wait until our first Arab-American president, maybe all these conservatives will move to France and Canada, then maybe we can get out of the 1950s in our racial tolerance beliefs.

[August]

Originally Posted by soopaman2

I can't wait until our first Arab-American president, maybe all these conservatives will move to France and Canada, then maybe we can get out of the 1950s in our racial tolerance beliefs.

I don't want a hyphenated-American president. Just an American one.

Remember your Teddy Roosevelt:

There is no room in this country for hyphenated Americanism. When I refer to hyphenated Americans, I do not refer to naturalized Americans. Some of the very best Americans I have ever known were naturalized Americans, Americans born abroad. But a hyphenated American is not an American at all...

The one absolutely certain way of bringing this nation to ruin, of preventing all possibility of its continuing to be a nation at all, would be to permit it to become a tangle of squabbling nationalities, an intricate knot of German-Americans, Irish-Americans, English-Americans, French-Americans, Scandinavian-Americans or Italian-Americans, each preserving its separate nationality, each at heart feeling more sympathy with Europeans of that nationality, than with the other citizens of the American Republic...

There is no such thing as a hyphenated American who is a good American. The only man who is a good American is the man who is an American and nothing else.

[soopaman2]

Originally Posted by August

I don't want a hyphenated-American president. Just an American one.

Remember your Teddy Roosevelt:

So Obama isn't American, Donald Trump? (bad joke, not troll-bait sorry )

The only people making an issue of his race are the people that hate him.

If Marco Rubio, the republican were to run, he would portray himself as cuban American in order to get the hispanic vote.

Or is hyphenating only bad for libs?

Grats on your pats, I thought they were done early.

I get your point August. Truly I do. But the malice towards our president before he even raised his hand to take the oath disgusted me.

[August]

Originally Posted by soopaman2

I get your point August. Truly I do. But the malice towards our president before he even raised his hand to take the oath disgusted me.

It's ok to be disgusted but show me the president that didn't have malice towards him before during or after he took office. Every leader has enemies, it goes with the job.

But a president is elected to represent the American people, all of us, and I have my doubts that any person who self identifies as a hyphenated American can do that effectively. Our president should not have conflicting loyalties.

[soopaman2]

Originally Posted by August

It's ok to be disgusted but show me the president that didn't have malice towards him before during or after he took office. Every leader has enemies, it goes with the job.

But a president is elected to represent the American people, all of us, and I have my doubts that any person who self identifies as a hyphenated American can do that effectively. Our president should not have conflicting loyalties.

My arab-American reference is what you're poking at, and you are right. Not so much Obama.

It kinda hit me after I typed the post. Ya got me, ya scoundrel! (falls over in a dramatic death scene)

But a president is elected to represent the American people, all of us, and I have my doubts that any person who self identifies as a hyphenated American can do that effectively. Our president should not have conflicting loyalties.

So does that mean any American who self identifies as a Christian-American cannot be effective?
That is a question that has so many angles and so many historical examples I wonder if anyone is prepared to actually think on it.
There are no shortage of people here on this forum who have made comments in that vein.
Plus of course it does tie in nicely with Augusts example.

[yubba]

http://www.businessinsider.com/jon-s...-video-2012-10 talk about hitting the nail on the head...

[Oberon]

“Well, two things apparently have become clear,” Stewart said. “The attack on our embassy was planned and coordinated. The response to it — not so much.”

Well, isn't that true of most large organisations? Left hand doesn't know what the right is doing? Ah, c'est la vie.

[mookiemookie]

"The president can do no wrong in the eyes of the media." But yet there's 100 articles a day slamming the President on Drudge, Fox, The Blaze, Pajamas Media, Michelle Malkin, Ann Coulter, Hannity, Morning Joe, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Wall Street Journal, NY Post, Red State, World Net Daily, Newsmax, and Free Republic.

But no, he can do no wrong in the eyes of the media.

[August]

Originally Posted by mookiemookie

"The president can do no wrong in the eyes of the media." But yet there's 100 articles a day slamming the President on Drudge, Fox, The Blaze, Pajamas Media, Michelle Malkin, Ann Coulter, Hannity, Morning Joe, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Wall Street Journal, NY Post, Red State, World Net Daily, Newsmax, and Free Republic.

But no, he can do no wrong in the eyes of the media.

None of those would be considered Main Stream except maybe Fox. In fact you yourself have more than once said they are on the radical fringe so now when it suits your point they suddenly become valid news sources?

ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN. Those are what is considered to be "mainstream" and those are the ones that are conspicuously absent from your list.

None of those would be considered Main Stream except maybe Fox.

So the newspaper with the highest readership in the states is not mainstream and the big tv news is only a maybe

[yubba]

Originally Posted by August

None of those would be considered Main Stream except maybe Fox. In fact you yourself have more than once said they are on the radical fringe so now when it suits your point they suddenly become valid news sources?

ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN. Those are what is considered to be "mainstream" and those are the ones that are conspicuously absent from your list.

and too add to that poor folk can't afford cable so guess what they only get, abc nbc cbs and if the weathers bad at my moms with this new digital crap we don't get cbs and if all the star are alined just right we might get fox..thank god for the internet something else poor folk don't have either that's why I'm bent about the lamestream media.

[AVGWarhawk]

Originally Posted by mookiemookie

"The president can do no wrong in the eyes of the media." But yet there's 100 articles a day slamming the President on Drudge, Fox, The Blaze, Pajamas Media, Michelle Malkin, Ann Coulter, Hannity, Morning Joe, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Wall Street Journal, NY Post, Red State, World Net Daily, Newsmax, and Free Republic.

But no, he can do no wrong in the eyes of the media.

This same nonsense played out in 2008. What's your point?