Thursday, May 31, 2012


Watched Charlie Rose interview a couple of people this week.

One was a conservative Republican, the other a liberal Democrat.

Every statement made by the conservative was met with a furrowed brow and challenge by Rose.

Every statement made by the liberal was met with a smile and "clarification." None was challenged in the same way the conservative had been challenged.

See, media bias does not have to be something like Rose stating his position on a topic. It can be couched in the body language, phrasing and methods of the interviewer.

If Fox News is slanted toward conservatives and can freely admit it ("fair and balanced" and "we report, you decide" notwithstanding), then why can't the liberal media (CBS, NBC, ABC, MSNBC, CNN and AP, etc.) admit their bias?

We are all biased to one degree or another.

I have a conservative bias and am proud of it.

You can call me stupid, ignorant, one-sided or anything else you can think of. But you can't call me unbiased. I am biased and that's that.

I am biased about other things, too.

I am biased against being struck by lightning.

I have never tried it, but I can guarantee you I wouldn't like it.

I have tried liberalism and found it wanting and unlikable.

I find liberals by-and-large unlikable when pressed on their ideas.

That their ideas have never worked, do not now work and never will work does not sway them at all, because they earnestly believe their intellect is greater than the intellect of conservatives.

The opposite is really true.

No person with more than half a brain could possibly be a liberal.

It just is scientifically impossible.


How’s that Hopey-Changey Thing Working Out for Ya? said...

For the first time in my adult life I am ashamed to be an American.

Lisa said...

It's to prepare us for the presidential debate.

Ducky's here said...

Every statement was met with a furrowed brow ... subjective.
How about naming the two guests. Rose isn't known for being radical. But in the Joe world a subjective judgement passes for revealed truth.

Who were the guests, Joe? I'd love to know who you consider "liberal".

Xavier Onassis said...

Sadly for you, REALITY has a liberal bias.

The arrow of time moves forwards, not backwards.

Conservatism is firmly rooted in the prehistoric bedrock of nostalgia and a fetishistic obsession with an imaginary vision of America that never existed and never will.

Conservatives are THE MOST GULLIBLE RUBES to ever breath air.

Their problem begins with their faith. Once they start believing in things that don't exist (like gods) they can't stop. They'll believe ANYTHING.

Conservatives are the advertising industry's DREAM DEMOGRAPHIC! They are so easy!

"Wrap it in a flag, play some country music, run it on Fox. SOLD!"

Liberals are much more skeptical discerning and (yeah, I'll say it) smarter than conservatives.

That's why we furrow our brows when we hear B.S.

Pissed and Sick and tired of these idiots said...


Joe said...

XO: Liberals are people who do not believe that if you don't learn from the past you are bound to repeat it. They hate the past.

The past reveals them for who they have been in history, and they are embarrassed by it.

So much so, that they repeatedly revise it so they don't look so bad, not realizing that in so doing they look worse.

Think Senator Stephen Douglass, George Wallace, the KKK and so much more.

Xavier Onassis said...

"Pissed and Sick and tired of these idiots said..."

You should use FREAKIN' or FREAKING. Or the actual word that Joe doesn't allow on his blog.

"FREAKEN" isn't an actual word.

Oh, and blogs on the Internet aren't "BOARDS".

You are thinking of the 1980's when Reagan was president and people used their IBM 8086 PC's to connect to Bulletin Boards (or BBS's) over their copper telephone wires using 300 BAUD modems.

Thank you for helping me make my point.

Xavier Onassis said...

Joe - Liberals cherish the past and know the true lessons of history better than conservatives.

The past is a classroom of mistakes made and lessons learned.

Conservatives are so terrified of the changes that the future brings that they try to wrap themselves in the protective cloak of a mythological past and try to pass laws to keep the future from happening.

Conservatives are cowards, huddled in a fetal position, refusing to acknowledge the progress of human civilization.

Liberals are on the point, leading the way to the inevitable future full of hope, change and opportunity for all.

Maybe someday we will have the technology for you to download yourself into the fictional "Ozzie and Harriet" past that you so desperately wish actually existed.

Ducky's here said...

BBS dial up. Ah, I remember it well, XO.

Joe, who were the guests?
Was Joe Lieberman the liberal?

Joe said...

xo: "Liberals cherish the past and know the true lessons of history better than conservatives."

No, they don't.

Joe said...

See tomorrows post for a wonderful example of the progress made by liberals.

Xavier Onassis said...

Joe - "No, they don't."

What a BRILLIANT refutation of every point I made.

This is the other Fatal Flaw of Conservatism.

They believe that if a Conservative states something as fact, it must be true!

No evidence needed. They just take it on "faith".

Joe said...

XO: "What a BRILLIANT refutation of every point I have ever made on this blog.

This is the other Fatal Flaw of Liberalism.

They believe that if a Liberal states something as fact, it must be true!

Leticia said...

Well, it has been said that liberals is is a mental disorder? Because every time I get into a debate or argument with one, they lose control and start using profanities.

There might be a correlation, I would think.

I was called "biased" by a liberal friend because I don't like Obama, oh well, I can live with that assessment.

I am very biased against the camel cricket, though. I believe they should be eradicated!

Hope you are well, Joe.

Ducky's here said...

I can understand that you drive people to profanity, Leticia.

Does it happen before or after you start quoting Ronald Reagan?

Like Joe, you are biased because you can't bring any granularity to your world view.

Xavier Onassis said...

Joe - :: sigh :: I've come to expect better of you. You seem to be declining. You have stooped to the "I'm rubber, you're glue" level of debate.

Is that the best you can do? Seriously?

Lone Ranger said...

The real power of the media is in what they choose NOT to cover, such as the near total blackout of this weeks vote on a bill banning gendercide -- the abortion of girls. My own organization has still not yet done a single story on the GSA spending scandal. My emails protesting that were ignored.

There are no honest liberals. If they were honest -- especially to themselves -- they would be conservatives.

Anonymous said...

Xavier Onassis said...

"Pissed and Sick and tired of these idiots said..."

You should use FREAKIN' or FREAKING. Or the actual word that Joe doesn't allow on his blog.

"FREAKEN" isn't an actual word.


Xavier Onassis said...

Tonto's Catcher - the media isn't covering the "bill banning gendercide -- the abortion of girls" because it's just another case of Republicans passing laws to solve problems that don't actually exist. Selective abortion based on the gender of the child isn't even occuring in this country. It's nonsense.

And the GSA scandal was ALL OVER the news, It's been covered to death and everyone knows about it.

I bet your organization is used to ignoring emails from you. "Oh no. Here's another one from that nut job. We gotta find an excuse to fire that guy."

Joe said...

XO "I've come to expect better of you. You seem to be declining. You have stooped to the "I'm rubber, you're glue" level of debate."

just giving you a taste of your own medicine.

Think of the arguements Ricky and his brother used to have on that horrible show, "Ozzie and Harriet."

Joe said...

XO: Besides, you've never come to expect better of me about anything. Don't give me that stuff.

Glenn E. Chatfield said...

Liberal "progress":

Rampant sexual immorality
Destruction of marriage
Redefinition of marriage
Murder of children in the womb
Feminization of the military
Trickle-down poverty
Keeping blacks as slaves to the government
Economic failure
Union dictatorship
Apologies to the world for American "naughtiness"
Affirmative Action (PC for reverse discrimination)
Loss of employment
Giving the UN sovereign control over the US
Failed public education systems

Ducky's here said...

Failed public education systems

You must be talking to Joe in that conservative southern hell hole, Chatsworth.

Craig and I live in states that have world class public education.

Xo's state is doing above average in America so I think you want to take your complaint to the conservative states.

Te rest of your rant is just primarily dominionist clap trap from the American Taliban.

Glenn E. Chatfield said...

I will answer YOUR rant - that guy Chatsworh, whoever he is, may not read it.

Nationally the public education has failed. While there are exceptions in some better districts, overall it has failed.

Define “American Taliban” - Taliban refers to Muslims, and none of this is of concern to Muslims.

Define “dominionist.” None of this has anything to do with the theologically aberrant Christian dominionism.

So I guess your comment is pretty worthless.

Xavier Onassis said...

GEC - I don't want to put words in Ducky's mouth, but I think I can explain what he means when he refers to the "American Taliban" and Dominionism.

The Taliban movement is, as you know, an extremely radical Islamic movement that seeks to impose their strict and repressive interpretation of Islamic law over all aspects of human society and governance, removing any hint of secularism. Of particular concern is their brutal repression of women.

Now, replace the word "Taliban" with "Dominionist" and the word "Islamic" with "Christian" and you get a 100% accurate description of the radical Christian Right in America.

In both cases you have a group of radical religious fanatics who seek to impose their strict, narrow, repressive view of the world on everyone else.

So when he refers to you as being part of the American Taliban, he is saying (correct me if I'm wrong Ducky) is that like most of the other people who frequent this blog, you deplore secularism and think that YOUR vision of YOUR god's rules should be the Supreme Law of the Land and that folks like me and Ducky should be forced to submit to your radical (and delusional) idea of how society should be structured and how people should behave.

Is that pretty much the gist of it Ducky?

Glenn E. Chatfield said...

Sorry, the word “Taliban” is already taken by Islam and has a specific meaning. That’s the problem with liberals - always trying to redefine words and giving them nonsensical meanings.

There may be a very fringe element of so-called “Christians” who seek a virtual theocracy over the US and the world, however, that is not Christian teachings, nor do the majority of Christians want anything to do with that. So you have lied about Christians in general, and me in particular. Don’t they call that libel?

Nor have Christians repressed women, let alone “brutally” doing so.

Now, true Muslims who follow the Qur’an and the Hadiths do indeed want dominion over the world, as well as total repression of women to nothing more than sex toys, as they murder anyone who refuses to bow to Islam - and seek the total eradication of Jews for good measure!

Again, “Dominionist” has a specific meaning as members of a fringe group of those who seek to “Christianize” the world, and are considered heretics by true Christians.

Since I am not a member of any fringe “dominionist” group, and in fact expose their false teachings as a regular part of my apologetics ministry, to imply that I am of that belief system by labeling me a “Taliban” is again blatant libel.

Demonstrating what is true marriage has nothing to do with imposing beliefs on anyone (although those who are demanding same-sex fake marriage are certainly imposing their beliefs on the majority of the population). Nor do I ever advocate any of my religious beliefs as being the supreme law of the land. More blatant libel again.

Our beliefs of how society IS structured and has been for thousands of years is neither radical nor delusional. It is a fact of history.

Xavier Onassis said...

GEC - "Sorry, the word “Taliban” is already taken by Islam and has a specific meaning."

::sigh:: You really have no idea how words work.

First of all, the word "Taliban" isn't "already taken by Islam" because it's not an Islamic word! It's an English translation of the TRULY Islamic word "طالبان".

"That’s the problem with liberals - always trying to redefine words and giving them nonsensical meanings."

Apparently you have no idea how the English language works either.

Read "The Story of English in 100 Words" by David Crystal.

The English language is the preiminent promiscuous slut of all languages. We borrow this and that from every culture English has ever encountered. We redefine words all the time!

"Nor have Christians repressed women, let alone “brutally” doing so."

Oh, PUHLEEZE!!!! This is what Christians do best! You want to control every aspect of women's lives! What they do in the bedroom, how they choose to reproduce or not reproduce, what choices they have in the event of an unwanted pregnancy, their divinely ordained submissiveness to men, seeing as how they were created from a man's rib and all. The Catholic prohibition on women becoming preists.

Christianity is ALL ABOUT conrolling women and keeping them submissive to men.

"Muslims who follow the Qur’an and the Hadiths do indeed want dominion over the world, as well as total repression of women to nothing more than sex toys..."

OK, you just proved that you have never read the Qur’an and have no idea what you are talking about.

Sex Toys?!?! Really? Because dressing them in black from head to foot with nothing visible but their eyes is SO HOT! Are you insane? (rhetorical question...yes, you are).

"Demonstrating what is true marriage has nothing to do with imposing beliefs on anyone..."

Yes, it does! Because you are assuming that your definition of "true marriage" is definitive. IT'S NOT!

Most major biblical characters had multiple wives and concubines, many of who were their own slaves, relatives, daughters and even sons.

The bible is full of relationships sanctioned by god that even modern hedonistic swinger clubs would say "Yeah we don't allow that here because that's just sick".

"Our beliefs of how society IS structured and has been for thousands of years is neither radical nor delusional. It is a fact of history"

You are just completely wrong about that, There is no softer, kinder way of saying it.

Delusion: "A delusion is a belief held with strong conviction despite superior evidence to the contrary.["

Everything you believe to be true is a delusion.

I honestly feel sorry for you. I can't imagine what it is like to be so detached from reality.

Ducky's here said...

Thanks XO, I'm not sure I would have had the patience to explain it.

The far right is so literal you risk being misunderstood if you use even the simplest literary devices.

Xavier Onassis said...

Ducky - Lone Ranger, Darth Bacon, Jarhead, Glen E. Chatfield, and, I'm afraid, even Jo Joe himself are all clinically insane.

They live in a completely delusional world that has no basis in reality.

If they didn't have the internet they would be wearing sandwich signs proclaiming "THE END IS NIGH" and screaming at people on street corners.

Glenn E. Chatfield said...


“Taliban” still has a specific meaning. Of course it is a translation - DUH! But it has a specific meaning about a particular sect of Muslims.

Yes, I know how English works. It is a “promiscuous” language because of liberals always redefining what words mean, so that English becomes one off the most difficult languages to learn! When there is no set meaning to a word, then all we have is confusion, and people like you add to it daily by redefining words to either force your personal agenda (“marriage” meaning joining of queers) or to demonize your opponent (“taliban”)

And just how do Christians want to control a woman’s life? OH my, by saying she should not murder her baby!?!?!? Yeah, I can see how we control murderers all the time, the same way we want to control thieves and kidnappers, etc. And just how do we want to control what ANYONE does in their bedroom? We certainly don’t trying to control whether they reproduce - that choice is made by the woman when she has sex. If a woman doesn’t want to be a mother, then don’t have sex. If you have sex and a pregnancy results, well don’t say you were ignorant of biology!

No you are really funny. Catholics don’t allow women to be priests, but any non-apostate non-Catholic church also doesn’t permit women in church leadership roles. And this represses women how? They are allowed to do virtually anything in ministry but be in a leadership role. That is SOOOOOOO oppressive! And, yes, wives (not women) are to submissive to their husbands (not to other men), but that is something you non-believers have misunderstood and misrepresented. Is it oppressive for a sergeant to be submissive to his commanding officer? Is it oppressive for an employee to be submissive to his boss? Any functioning organization, including a family unit, must have a hierarchy where someone is ultimately responsible. Submissiveness of a wife (contrary to the teachings of aberrational “patriarchy” groups) is as to a leader. But the husband does not use that to put himself in a dictatorial position. The husband and wife work together, and only when a conflict arrises does someone have to make final decisions, for which he is responsible to God. But too often people like you forget the rest of that passage - Husbands are to love their wives as Christ loved the Church and be willing to give his life for her. It is not a master/slave relationship, nor is the wife a doormat as liberals try to paint it. Never was.

I have indeed read the Qur’an and have thoroughly studied Islam over the past 12 years. I have a library shelf full of books on the subject. Islam is a dangerous belief system which is religious and political at the same time (unlike Christianity) and women are nothing but sex toys to be totally repressed and abused. Try reading a bit about their sexual rules, and instant “marriages” for sex followed by instant “divorces.” You have bought into the liberal lie about what a wonderful, peaceful religion Islam is.

Oh, so if we say the true definition of marriage is what it has been since eternity past - i.e., the union of opposite sex people - that is imposing our beliefs. But if 2% of the population wants to redefine it to include perversion and use the force of the government to punish those who disagree, that ISN’T imposing beliefs?

The Bible, especially the O.T. which liberals love to take out of context, reports a lot of history - things as they were - but does not mean everything was approved of by God. You, and the rest of your ilk, love to twist the Scriptures to puff yourselves up but you have no clue as to what they mean.

Oh, so the family unit has not been historically the foundation of society?!?! Talk about delusional!!! You are the one who is detached from reality.

The clinically insane are the liberals.

Ducky's here said...

@Chatsworth Osborne Jr. -- And this represses women how? They are allowed to do virtually anything in ministry but be in a leadership role.


Trained seals, XO. They're like trained seals.

Glenn E. Chatfield said...

And Duck's droppings is a trained ass

Ducky's here said...

I have a library shelf full of books on the subject.

Mind naming a couple?

Ducky's here said...

Glenn why are the fringe right so irony challenged?

Xavier Onassis said...

Ducky - Folks like G.E.T. like to come across as scholars, but they can't site a single scolarly text they have read that can back up any or their idiotic claims.

Glenn E. Chatfield said...

Hey X.O.,

Is the Qur'an scholarly enough for you?

Neither you nor duckass are worthy of me proving anything to. If you want to be happy in your delusion that Islam is all fun and games, more power to you. You will die in your ignorance.

Ducky's here said...

Glenn, do you agree that Hodgson's The Venture of Islam is obsolete.

Since you're a scholar surely you;ve read it.

Glenn E. Chatfield said...

Never read that book, nor heard of it before. However, perusing the reviews demonstrates that the focus of the study had little or nothing to do with the religious beliefs.

It is a fact of history that Muslims execute those who do not submit to Islam. It is a fact that every government headed by Muslims oppresses their populace. It is a fact that in every Islamic nation Christians and Jews are persecuted severely and executed for such simple crimes as "blasphemy." It is a fact that a goal of Islam is to eradicate Jews and remove Israel from the face of the earth. It is a fact that the majority of terrorists worldwide are Muslims. It is a fact that Islam is arguably the most repressive society for women to be in.

But, hey, liberals never let facts stand in their way.

Ducky's here said...

In other words, you're hardly a scholar or even acquainted with Islam's history.

If you haven't read something as basic as Hodgson I can only imagine what must be on your bookshelf. Some Hal Lindsey special?

Glenn E. Chatfield said...


Firstly, I never claimed to be a scholar.

But your book isn't the only one about the history of Islam, and I am very acquainted with the history of Islam.

And no, I don't care for Hal Lindsey

Ducky's here said...

Now this religion happens to prevail,
Until by that religion overthrown -
Because man dare not live with man alone,
But always another fairy tale.

--- The Diwan of Abu'l-Ala

Is that work in your library, Glenn

Glenn E. Chatfield said...


I told you already - you are not worthy enough for me to delineate all my books.

You appear to think Islam is a true belief system, that it is a peaceful system, etc. You want to remain deceived.

Hey, I have a nice "short" one for you:
"The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades)" by Robert Spencer

It's a pretty good summation of Islam, including the history of it. It is all the average Joe needs to know to protect himself from the media propaganda.

But I'm going to also give you some of my favorite links with some truth about Islam:!

Ducky's here said...

Glenn are you familiar with Prof. Wasserstein of Vanderbilt University?

His work records the decline of the Israelites and their revitalization under Islam.
Yo should check it out if it isn't already in your library.

Glenn E. Chatfield said...

"Islam Saved Jewry"

Yes, he's pro-Islam. Revisionist history. Islam has persecuted Jews since the beginning and continues to try to wipe them off the map.