Author Topic: Americans receive only limited and biased news  (Read 2245 times)

Offline Frogm4n

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2371
Americans receive only limited and biased news
« Reply #60 on: April 21, 2003, 03:29:14 AM »
have restrictions on how many they own like we used to. When you have only 3-4 sources controlling all the news its never a good thing. It isnt bad in america yet but if they keep allowing these mergers.........

Offline Martlet

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4390
Americans receive only limited and biased news
« Reply #61 on: April 21, 2003, 04:23:27 AM »
You're both right, and you're just arguing details, now.

PR is part of America, but when people refer to America, they are rarely including PR.

If they hadn't shut down the Black Angus, I would be all for making it a state.

Hopefully they still have Papa Joes.

Offline Fatty

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3885
      • http://www.fatdrunkbastards.com
Americans receive only limited and biased news
« Reply #62 on: April 21, 2003, 05:27:23 AM »
You also used to only have 3-4 stations total, Frog.  Once XM/Sirrus catch up it will be more like cable, with american networks plus npr/bbc/cspan/NWI.

As to whether US citizens are Americans, well that's redikulis.

Offline X2Lee

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1074
Americans receive only limited and biased news
« Reply #63 on: April 21, 2003, 09:35:53 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Animal
Have any data to back this statement? Really, I'd like to see it.

 Sure its a no brainer...

  No Statehood for Caribbean Dogpatch

by Don Feder
Boston Herald
11/30/98

On Dec. 13, Puerto Ricans will cast their ballots for statehood, independence or a continuation of commonwealth status. The referendum implicitly acknowledges their right to self-determination.

But don't Americans have the same right - the right not to be saddled with an impoverished, crime-ridden island of non-English speakers as our 51st state?

An advertisement statehood proponents are running on television in San Juan assures voters that, with admission to the Union, ``we will not become blue-eyed blondes . . . Nor will we change our language and culture. With statehood, we will remain as we are.''

True enough. With statehood, Puerto Rico will still have an annual per-capita income of $8,509 - one-third the U.S. average and less than half that of Mississippi, our poorest state. The murder rate will remain 25 per 100,000, more than twice New York City's.

However, there will be some changes. Puerto Rico will send two senators and five or six representatives to Congress, to vote in lockstep with Ted Kennedy and Richard Gephardt on everything from affirmative action to taxes.

Current caps will come off federal welfare spending for the island. The average Puerto Rican family won't pay a penny in federal income taxes but could receive an Earned Income Tax Credit of $2,713 annually. Statehood will cost us an additional $3 billion a year in welfare payments alone.

Carlos Romero-Barcelo, Puerto Rico's non-voting (God be praised) delegate in the House of Representatives, candidly titled his pro-statehood book, ``Statehood Is for the Poor.''

With Puerto Rico incorporated, America would be well on its way to becoming a bilingual nation. Ask the Canadians how splendidly that works.

According to a New York Times story of May 19, 1997, ``Fully 90 percent of the island's 650,000 public school students lack basic English skills by the time they graduate.'' When the commonwealth proposed increasing the amount of English instruction, Puerto Rican teachers rioted.

Romero-Barcelo doesn't pull his punches, ``Yes, we want statehood [My comment: For purely pecuniary reasons], but neither our language nor our culture are negotiable.''

Apparently, America's language and culture are negotiable. With Puerto Rican statehood, to the problem of unassimilable immigrants we would add an unassimilable state.

Earlier this year, by a single vote, the House passed a bill fast-tracking Puerto Rican statehood. The legislation provided that if a plurality of the island's voters ever opt for statehood, Congress must vote on its admission to the Union every two years, for a decade, until it passes.

Passage came after a perfunctory debate. In the Senate, the bill died in committee.

Hot for Hispanic support, the GOP leadership, including its neutered speaker, pushed the plan - as if Mexicans in California and Cubans in Florida really give a hill of frijoles for Puerto Rican statehood.

Despite their leadership's position, better than three-quarters of House Republicans opposed the measure. Unlike his predecessor, incoming Speaker Bob Livingston is an energetic opponent of statehood.

Whatever the outcome of the referendum, Americans have a right to insist that their representatives act exclusively in the interests of the United States.

We need more non-English speakers in this country like we need more welfare recipients, higher crime rates and an alien culture - all of which we'll get with Puerto Rican statehood.

The issue is such a no-brainer that only a multiculturalist, a welfare-state Democrat or a pandering Republican could possibly support Puerto Rican statehood. That's why the island's government had to spend $200 million this year lobbying for the same.

English First, a 150,000-member organization that promotes official English, is leading the opposition to this multicultural madness. Executive Director Jim Boulet Jr. sardonically notes, ``Puerto Rico is as proud of its language and culture as the United States used to be of ours.''

In June, Puerto Ricans in New York City staged impassioned protests when a character on the sitcom ``Seinfeld'' accidentally burned a Puerto Rican flag. They had every right to be outraged.

But, let me ask you a question: If someone singed your state's flag, would you be bent out of shape? However they vote in the referendum, Puerto Ricans have a national consciousness that's incompatible with statehood.

It's hard to imagine a worse candidate for admission to the Union than this Caribbean Dogpatch.

Offline Animal

  • Parolee
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5027
Americans receive only limited and biased news
« Reply #64 on: April 21, 2003, 10:33:21 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by X2Lee
No Statehood for Caribbean Dogpatch

by Don Feder
Boston Herald
11/30/98

On Dec. 13, Puerto Ricans will cast their ballots for statehood, independence or a continuation of commonwealth status. The referendum implicitly acknowledges their right to self-determination.

But don't Americans have the same right - the right not to be saddled with an impoverished, crime-ridden island of non-English speakers as our 51st state?

An advertisement statehood proponents are running on television in San Juan assures voters that, with admission to the Union, ``we will not become blue-eyed blondes . . . Nor will we change our language and culture. With statehood, we will remain as we are.''

True enough. With statehood, Puerto Rico will still have an annual per-capita income of $8,509 - one-third the U.S. average and less than half that of Mississippi, our poorest state. The murder rate will remain 25 per 100,000, more than twice New York City's.

However, there will be some changes. Puerto Rico will send two senators and five or six representatives to Congress, to vote in lockstep with Ted Kennedy and Richard Gephardt on everything from affirmative action to taxes.

Current caps will come off federal welfare spending for the island. The average Puerto Rican family won't pay a penny in federal income taxes but could receive an Earned Income Tax Credit of $2,713 annually. Statehood will cost us an additional $3 billion a year in welfare payments alone.

Carlos Romero-Barcelo, Puerto Rico's non-voting (God be praised) delegate in the House of Representatives, candidly titled his pro-statehood book, ``Statehood Is for the Poor.''

With Puerto Rico incorporated, America would be well on its way to becoming a bilingual nation. Ask the Canadians how splendidly that works.

According to a New York Times story of May 19, 1997, ``Fully 90 percent of the island's 650,000 public school students lack basic English skills by the time they graduate.'' When the commonwealth proposed increasing the amount of English instruction, Puerto Rican teachers rioted.

Romero-Barcelo doesn't pull his punches, ``Yes, we want statehood [My comment: For purely pecuniary reasons], but neither our language nor our culture are negotiable.''

Apparently, America's language and culture are negotiable. With Puerto Rican statehood, to the problem of unassimilable immigrants we would add an unassimilable state.

Earlier this year, by a single vote, the House passed a bill fast-tracking Puerto Rican statehood. The legislation provided that if a plurality of the island's voters ever opt for statehood, Congress must vote on its admission to the Union every two years, for a decade, until it passes.

Passage came after a perfunctory debate. In the Senate, the bill died in committee.

Hot for Hispanic support, the GOP leadership, including its neutered speaker, pushed the plan - as if Mexicans in California and Cubans in Florida really give a hill of frijoles for Puerto Rican statehood.

Despite their leadership's position, better than three-quarters of House Republicans opposed the measure. Unlike his predecessor, incoming Speaker Bob Livingston is an energetic opponent of statehood.

Whatever the outcome of the referendum, Americans have a right to insist that their representatives act exclusively in the interests of the United States.

We need more non-English speakers in this country like we need more welfare recipients, higher crime rates and an alien culture - all of which we'll get with Puerto Rican statehood.

The issue is such a no-brainer that only a multiculturalist, a welfare-state Democrat or a pandering Republican could possibly support Puerto Rican statehood. That's why the island's government had to spend $200 million this year lobbying for the same.

English First, a 150,000-member organization that promotes official English, is leading the opposition to this multicultural madness. Executive Director Jim Boulet Jr. sardonically notes, ``Puerto Rico is as proud of its language and culture as the United States used to be of ours.''

In June, Puerto Ricans in New York City staged impassioned protests when a character on the sitcom ``Seinfeld'' accidentally burned a Puerto Rican flag. They had every right to be outraged.

But, let me ask you a question: If someone singed your state's flag, would you be bent out of shape? However they vote in the referendum, Puerto Ricans have a national consciousness that's incompatible with statehood.

It's hard to imagine a worse candidate for admission to the Union than this Caribbean Dogpatch.



LOL!!!

Offline JimBear

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 677
Americans receive only limited and biased news
« Reply #65 on: April 21, 2003, 10:41:04 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Animal

Thankfully I dont create an image of the typical American just by reading the tripe some of you post in this BBS.


Could have fooled me.

Offline rshubert

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1462
My two cents
« Reply #66 on: April 21, 2003, 10:50:41 AM »
How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?  That is the level of this discusssion about Puerto Ricans and their citizenship status.

  One of the earlier posters had it right--Puerto Ricans have all the rights of citizens.  They don't vote for the president because of where they live, not who they are.  Puerto Ricans living in a state can vote for president.  Until a few years ago, people living in the District of Columbia couldn't vote for president, either.  A law fixed that.

  They choose to remain a commonwealth because of some financial advantages of that status, and their pride in their identity as Puerto Ricans.  At heart, I think most of them would like to be independent, but most realize that the resources aren't there to support a fully independant economy.  But that's my opinion, and I am not Puerto Rican.

  They don't pay federal income tax, but the commonwealth income tax is about the same rate, or it was when I lived there.

  Puerto Ricans are some of the finest people you will meet.  They are friendly, generous, and generally open-minded.  They do have a right to their pride in their island, and you need to understand they are proud both of their identity as Puerto Ricans and their status as United States citizens.  Get off their backs!

Offline Pongo

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6701
Americans receive only limited and biased news
« Reply #67 on: April 21, 2003, 11:13:36 AM »
Puke
You are correct. you have access to it wich is your point.
That book will try to prove to you that about many important issues the US media only really shows one viewpoint. That of the state department.
But like you said. Its a free country and your free to ignore or denounce that opinion.
Pretty compelling reading though.

Offline Drunky

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2017
The Whole Truth and Nothing But The Truth
« Reply #68 on: April 21, 2003, 12:00:27 PM »
When I want accurate information I look to Pravda and Thrawn as both are excellent sources without bias :D
« Last Edit: April 21, 2003, 12:06:47 PM by Drunky »
Drunky | SubGenius
Fat Drunk Bastards
B.A.A.H. - Black Association of Aces High

Offline X2Lee

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1074
Americans receive only limited and biased news
« Reply #69 on: April 21, 2003, 02:08:30 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Animal
LOL!!!



good comeback!

Boulet also noted that Puerto Rico has about half the wealth of the nation's poorest state, and that half the people in Puerto Rico are currently on welfare. He pointed out that statehood for Puerto Rico could, according to the General Accounting office, mean an additional annual transfer of $4 billion annually from the U.S. Treasury to Puerto Rico.

http://www.nationalcenter.org/Scoop184.html

Who needs another dependant?

Offline Puke

  • Parolee
  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 759
      • http://members.cox.net/barking.pig/puke.htm
Americans receive only limited and biased news
« Reply #70 on: April 21, 2003, 04:10:34 PM »
Quote
That book will try to prove to you that about many important issues the US media only really shows one viewpoint. That of the state department.   - Pongo

I saw lots of clips of the Iraqi Foreign Minister lately providing his view of the war.  Also, I saw lots of Al Jezera (sp?).  And I saw many dissenting viewpoints about the war and administration lately.    
I'm not going to read anything that includes that author.  And my common sense tells me the State Department does not hold control over the media.  Nor do the owners of the news organizations hold control over their editors and journalists.  These are reporters, the minute they get wind of any such monolithic conspiracy of media owners, they have a story on their hands and Pulitzer Prize.  In fact, there is a story going around right now about how the NY Times asked a big-wig to write some article with a purposeful negative slant on the current administration and he's singing about it.  But I've seen enough of Chomsky to know just what kind of garbage that book will be and I'll pass.  My time is too valuable.

Offline Animal

  • Parolee
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5027
Americans receive only limited and biased news
« Reply #71 on: April 21, 2003, 05:34:38 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by X2Lee
good comeback!

Boulet also noted that Puerto Rico has about half the wealth of the nation's poorest state, and that half the people in Puerto Rico are currently on welfare.


Thanks for the info! I now realize that all my studies were redikulous lies.

Boulet is a genious, and so are you.

And remember guys, if you find it on the internet its got to be true.

Offline Drunky

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2017
Americans receive only limited and biased news
« Reply #72 on: April 21, 2003, 05:40:59 PM »
Come on guys...let's make this a 100+ post thread.

You can do it :D
Drunky | SubGenius
Fat Drunk Bastards
B.A.A.H. - Black Association of Aces High

Offline Wlfgng

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5252
      • http://www.nick-tucker.com
Americans receive only limited and biased news
« Reply #73 on: April 21, 2003, 05:45:46 PM »
anyone who doesn't belive our (the U.S.'s) media isn't biased is fooling themselves.

simply turn off the TV (I realize this is hard for some)...
and surf other nations' news websites...

problem is that a majority of Americans don't like what other nations news people have to say and debunk the reports as quickly as they read them... with no proof one way or the other.
A lot of the stuff is crap, but not all.


then again, all of the media reports are biased in one way or another... :)  

that's what makes it so difficult to discern the truth
« Last Edit: April 21, 2003, 05:47:50 PM by Wlfgng »

Offline Drunky

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2017
Americans receive only limited and biased news
« Reply #74 on: April 21, 2003, 06:03:22 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Wlfgng
problem is that a majority of Americans don't like what other nations news people have to say and debunk the reports as quickly as they read them... with no proof one way or the other.
A lot of the stuff is crap, but not all.


Again...this is why I only read what Pravda, Thrawn and SLO have to say.  They are all three excellent sources of information that are completely unbiased. :D
Drunky | SubGenius
Fat Drunk Bastards
B.A.A.H. - Black Association of Aces High