A staffer for John Kerry tore up a pro-life sign

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Leo Hubbard, Aug 4, 2004.

  1. Leo Hubbard macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2004
    #1
    Bush people tear up tickets of protestors to keep them from interupting his rally inside, so they could have a civil rally. Elsewhere, and yes elsewhen, Kerry's people destroy anti-abortion signs for what reason?

    I would've posted this in Zim's post about bush's op/ed piece but I dont' want to be accused of hijacking his thread.
     
  2. Leo Hubbard thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2004
  3. pseudobrit macrumors 68040

    pseudobrit

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Location:
    Jobs' Spare Liver Jar
  4. Leo Hubbard thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2004
    #4
    Old news perhaps, but I hope you aren't saying that if it isn't contained on a left wing biased news site then it is invalid?
     
  5. amnesiac1984 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2002
    Location:
    Europe
    #5
    Fair enough, but was it not her choice to have one?
     
  6. RacerX macrumors 65832

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2004
    #6
    I'd like to see it on a non-bias news site actually.

    You're (general you, not a specific person) in pretty bad shape if you are getting your information from propaganda sites of either the left or the right.

    But to each their own. :rolleyes:
     
  7. toontra macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2003
    Location:
    London UK
    #7
    How about any relatively "mainstream" site (agreed by both sides), rather than your rabid right-wing one. To be honest, links to sites like that are worthless, and clutter this forum up with spurious junk. Not worth the screen space or viewing time they occupy.

    Mind you, thanks for exposing me to worldnetdaily. On a brief inspection I can see where cranks get their info from. It would be hilarious if it wasn't for the fact that some people take this stuff seriously - I sincerely hope you are not amongst them!
     
  8. Taft macrumors 65816

    Taft

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2002
    Location:
    Chicago
    #8
    The same EXACT reason Bush keeps protesters away from his rallies and PR moments: it's bad press to have protesters in the spotlight with the candidate. Both parties and cadidates do this, and it is very old news.

    BTW, how many people were arrested at the Kerry rally for speaking their mind? (Hint: a few less than the number arrested at the Bush rally.)

    Taft
     
  9. Leo Hubbard thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2004
    #9
    no such place.
     
  10. toontra macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2003
    Location:
    London UK
    #10
    So let's get this clear. You are suggesting that all news sources are equally partisan, biased and consequentially unreliable?

    If this is the case then you inhabit a place more deeply cynical than any I have yet encountered.

    If not, what is the point of your post?
     
  11. Leo Hubbard thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2004
    #11
    I wouldn't use the words "equally", or necessarily "unreliable" just because a place is biased doesn't mean it is a place that is full of liars. Web space cost money and people don't put things up on the web simply because they wanted to be a neutral place to do things, everyone has a platform they want to push, that doesn't necessarily make them all equal or even unreliable.
     
  12. TreeHugger macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2004
    #12
    So what?
     
  13. toontra macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2003
    Location:
    London UK
    #13
    We had this debate (at great length) last year with a member called macfan. He would say that all news contains a bias of some sort, and none is truly objective.

    We're all reasoning beings here. We know this. It's a question of degrees. The (only) site that you used as the basis of this thread is, in almost everyone's estimation (I hope), unashamedly far-right, anti-Kerry and un-balanced. There is no attempt at balance, as I think even you would admit there is in other, let's say more reliable, news sources.

    As such, to stand an argument on this kind of source is ludicrous, as I think you know very well!
     
  14. mischief macrumors 68030

    mischief

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2001
    Location:
    Santa Cruz Ca
    #14
    Hmmm.....

    I have many questions about things like this.

    But rather than get into symantics I'll come right out and say it:

    What's your problem Leo?

    You seem bent on coming as close to trolling as is possible without getting banned.

    You seem to have an obsession with the "left wing" biased media.

    Here's a news flash for you: They're not so much left wing as greedy. If it sells papers or gets you to watch the news at eleven, they'll run it. The diffference is in how the "news" comes to light.

    Generally speaking, the media has learned that they don't have to go digging for anti-democrat stuff: the Rebs do it fairly reliably for them. On the other hand, the Dems generally don't actively go after such things so if the media want to "even the field" they have to do it themselves. As a result, even in an equally bloodthirsty year in the press the Rebs claim a "liberal media bias" because the press actually has to do the work themselves.
     
  15. Leo Hubbard thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2004
    #15
    oh I'm sorry the problem is with worldnetdaily. Ok there are other sources to this one story.
    http://www.catholicsagainstkerry.com/articles_RipItJohn.aspx
    http://www.nysrighttolife.org/news/03192004/John Kerry Campaign Won.htm
    http://www.talonnews.com/news/2004/july/0705_kerry_abortion.shtml
    http://www.google.com/search?q=kerry+tore+up+abortion+sign&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&start=10&sa=N
    Yes I don't see any USA Today, NYT, Washington Post, etc stories on this, why is that? Maybe their biased?
     
  16. TreeHugger macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2004
    #16
    And what about FOX NEWS? They put a whole new definition on biased....
    USA TODAY NYT and the Washington Post don't cover stories like this, not because they are biased but because they are just not worth covering. Stories like this you see in the latest gossip mags at the supermarket or in the tabloids but not in a serious newspaper with serious journalism.
    To me it is no suprise why catholicsagainstkerry cover this story... It fits their agenda!
     
  17. mischief macrumors 68030

    mischief

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2001
    Location:
    Santa Cruz Ca
    #17
    So you're saying that any news agency that has any significant distribution or readership is liberally biased?

    Since News is a product like any other, doesn't that imply that the vast majority o the US populace is similarly Liberal-biased?

    Just food for thought Leo....
     
  18. toontra macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2003
    Location:
    London UK
    #18
    skunk did this search for you at the start of this thread!! All rabidly anti-Kerry sites. Your argument doesn't hold, and you are within a hair's breadth of trolling.
     
  19. Leo Hubbard thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2004
    #19
    I only came up with the left wing bias news sources angle of this topic because people like to discount my sources, they claim are right wing biased news sources. Even if it is true, and not in all cases it is, that doesn't mean they are lieing. I'm simply defending myself from those who seem to only want me to post from left wing news sources, and that is hypocritcal.

    without this post
    or this post
    I would have never went off on the left wing biased crap.
    See the problem is there is no "mainstream" site (agreed by both sides).
     
  20. toontra macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2003
    Location:
    London UK
    #20
    I can't remember the last time anyone here posted a link to an extreme "left-wing" news source and expected it to be taken seriously. If you know otherwise please share.
     
  21. Leo Hubbard thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2004
    #21
    Joan Collins is one from the post http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=82992
    I'm not disputting the story itself but this post uses the LAtimes as a source, clearly left wing biased paper. http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=80684
    Richard Clark is deffinitely biased and while this clearly points out it is an op-ed piece it is still used a source for this post http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=81301

    People use biased sources in their discussions here all the time.

    Mac Clelland is clearly biased yet a news story quotting him as their primary source was used as a source for this thread http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=80495

    Last one since someone has replied to this thread and I wouldn't want to be accused of editing it too much after people started to post. http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=77067 Farenheit and Michael Moore, columbine, etc has been used as sources for a large number of threads.

    So what is wrong with a little bit of counter balance?
     
  22. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #22
    Shouldn't the WSJ have run this story if it was important? They're obviously a right wing news organization.
     
  23. Leo Hubbard thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2004
    #23
    I wouldn't call them an obvious right wing news organization, they are more of an obvious financial news organization. They tend to stick to financial news, and yes I realize nothing is 100%.
     
  24. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #24
    Oh get off it. Have you ever actually read the WSJ's OpEd page? 'Cause that's what you're relying on to discredit the LA Times, aren't you? Not their news coverage, but their editorial bias, right?
     
  25. Lyle macrumors 68000

    Lyle

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2003
    Location:
    Madison, Alabama
    #25
    Possible Verification

    I don't have a dog in this fight, but out of curiosity I went to the Tampa Tribune's web site to see if I could find anything in their archives about it. The incident allegedly occurred in Tampa in March, 2004. If I search for the keywords "rebecca porter", and search stories from 2004, it does turn up what sounds like a story about this lady. The story is titled "Trying To Resolve Abortion's Trials" and appeared in the paper on April 4, 2004, about a month after the alleged incident. Can't tell from the abstract whether it gets into the alleged sign-ripping incident.

    I'm not from Tampa, and don't know anything about the Tribune. I'm not going to pay $1.95 for the full article text, because it's all a moot point to me personally. But I thought I'd share the info for anyone who cares.
     

Share This Page