HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Why are Cheney or any of ...

Wed Aug 26, 2015, 11:49 AM

 

Why are Cheney or any of the same idiots still on TV like they have credibility on Iraq & now Iran?


What do we have to do to get through to Republicans and the media?

Maybe lower ourselves to their level and bash them over the head with it over and over like they do with Benghazi ?

You lied! You are LIARS! You are still lying!!

You supported murder of millions of Innocent Iraqis! That is not 'pro-life'

You supported the mindless deaths and maiming of US troops (including national guard) for a war of choice based on lies for profit

- that is not 'supporting the troops'

You supported wasting trillions on wars, yet complain about taxes- that is not conservative, that is hypocrisy.

You lied-millions of people died- Everyone knows it- you have no credibility.


If we just keep repeating this to their faces, to the corporate media....how many times will it take until they get it?

I don't like being mean or "I told you so" to people just because they do stupid, greedy, evil things....but maybe that's what we need to do....

...over and over and over....like Republicans would....because they actually deserve and need to hear it.

The fact that these people are still on TV, still accepted as 'experts' is outrageous and proves we have not been vocal enough.

6 replies, 753 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 6 replies Author Time Post
Reply Why are Cheney or any of the same idiots still on TV like they have credibility on Iraq & now Iran? (Original post)
J_J_ Aug 2015 OP
ebbie15644 Aug 2015 #1
Proud Liberal Dem Aug 2015 #2
tech3149 Aug 2015 #3
Octafish Aug 2015 #4
valerief Aug 2015 #5
gratuitous Aug 2015 #6

Response to J_J_ (Original post)

Wed Aug 26, 2015, 11:56 AM

1. Because the media doesn't do it's job

If they were challenged with the facts of the chaos they caused, and deemed unacceptable they wouldn't be considered "credible". The media no longer thinks they are responsible to inform and educate the public, they like their role in divisive politics.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to J_J_ (Original post)

Wed Aug 26, 2015, 12:02 PM

2. They have credibility

because the media gives it to people like Cheney, Palin, Romney, et. al.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to J_J_ (Original post)

Wed Aug 26, 2015, 12:11 PM

3. I'd like to say that turning off th TV is a good first step but

That is only the first step. I'm sure you've heard the term lowest common denominator. Broadcast media is the lowest common denominator. How much of the population only gets it s information from broadcast news?
Those friends that are willing to listen, I tell them to turn off the TV, throw away the paper (unless you are wiling to read dozens of papers every day) and most of those John Prine fans will agree with me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to J_J_ (Original post)

Wed Aug 26, 2015, 12:21 PM

4. Because CIA controls the media.

At least the important parts and stories.



Correspondence and collusion between the New York Times and the CIA

Mark Mazzetti's emails with the CIA expose the degradation of journalism that has lost the imperative to be a check to power

Glenn Greenwald
guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 29 August 2012 14.58 EDT

EXCERPT...

But what is news in this disclosure are the newly released emails between Mark Mazzetti, the New York Times's national security and intelligence reporter, and CIA spokeswoman Marie Harf. The CIA had evidently heard that Maureen Dowd was planning to write a column on the CIA's role in pumping the film-makers with information about the Bin Laden raid in order to boost Obama's re-election chances, and was apparently worried about how Dowd's column would reflect on them. On 5 August 2011 (a Friday night), Harf wrote an email to Mazzetti with the subject line: "Any word??", suggesting, obviously, that she and Mazzetti had already discussed Dowd's impending column and she was expecting an update from the NYT reporter.

SNIP...

Even more amazing is the reaction of the newspaper's managing editor, Dean Baquet, to these revelations, as reported by Politico's Dylan Byers:

"New York Times Managing Editor Dean Baquet called POLITICO to explain the situation, but provided little clarity, saying he could not go into detail on the issue because it was an intelligence matter.

CONTINUED with LINKS...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/aug/29/correspondence-collusion-new-york-times-cia



OP: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021255207

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to J_J_ (Original post)

Wed Aug 26, 2015, 01:09 PM

5. Because the same people who own Cheneys and their ilk also own the "public" airwaves. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to J_J_ (Original post)

Wed Aug 26, 2015, 01:49 PM

6. One more thing

The present situation is a direct result of the failed policies and actions of these blood-gargling psychopaths. Are you appalled by the recent reports of ISIS cutting off the hands and feet of boys who refuse to join them? That can be laid directly at the feet of Vice President Cheney and his cronies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread