Skip to comments.
Bob Schieffer's Left Wing Diatribe On Imus
Imus In The Morning
| 5/4/05
Posted on 05/04/2005 5:37:16 AM PDT by Williams
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-32 next last
1
posted on
05/04/2005 5:37:16 AM PDT
by
Williams
To: Williams
His ratings are even lower than Rather. I didn't think that was possible. Most of them are from the Geritol generation and dwindling daily.
2
posted on
05/04/2005 5:39:18 AM PDT
by
Ron in Acreage
(Democrat or Communist? Is there a difference?)
To: Williams
Imus looks like a talking scrotum.
3
posted on
05/04/2005 5:39:59 AM PDT
by
Ron in Acreage
(Democrat or Communist? Is there a difference?)
To: Ron in Acreage
I bet Imus called Diedre this morning to see how he should feel about today's issues.
4
posted on
05/04/2005 5:40:27 AM PDT
by
AppyPappy
(If You're Not A Part Of The Solution, There's Good Money To Be Made In Prolonging The Problem.)
To: Williams
but now there is no justification for the warYeah, Saddam's breaking of ultimately 18 UN Resolutions was no justification at all. Why didn't we try REALLY stern language, first?
5
posted on
05/04/2005 5:41:21 AM PDT
by
Puppage
(You may disagree with what I have to say, but I shall defend to your death my right to say it.)
To: Williams
I heard that this morning too and just rolled my eyes and changed the station. I'm so sick of these liberals being divorced from reality.
My favorite part was when Schieffer was talking about Social Security and how it wasn't catching on with the American public. Well, it's kinda hard for an idea to catch on widely when virtually the entire mainstream media is coming out against it. And I love how Schieffer and other liberals keep saying "the private accounts won't work, the private accounts won't work", but I never see anyone offering any other suggestions. I guess they just want to maintain the status quo and when we start running out of Social Security money, start taxing the rich. Typical.
6
posted on
05/04/2005 5:43:32 AM PDT
by
cwiz24
(I worked very hard on this tagline.)
To: Williams
He has never had any other thoughts in his head than the usual liberal/socialist crap. He just (usually) keeps his mouth shut more than the other idjyots...
7
posted on
05/04/2005 5:43:33 AM PDT
by
Pharmboy
("Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God")
To: Williams
The right to detonate IED's and slaughter thousands. Lifted right out of the EU constitution.
8
posted on
05/04/2005 5:44:22 AM PDT
by
Calusa
(it’s a mere fig leaf of fairness.)
To: Calusa
Went on about the Iraqis' inability to protect "minority rights" (the Sunnis)The right to detonate IED's and slaughter thousands of civilians.Lifted right out of the EU constitution. (/Sarcasm Off.
9
posted on
05/04/2005 5:49:16 AM PDT
by
Calusa
(it’s a mere fig leaf of fairness.)
To: Williams
Schieffer may be as much of a leftist as Dan Blather, but he at least doesn't seem to parade his ego around the set of the CBS Evening News like his absurd predecessor. Having said that, Schieffer is a product of his environment, and a product of the liberal media bias that energized the Communist fifth column during the Vietnam War. That isn't an excuse for Schieffer, just an observation that he (like many reporters) embraced the anti-U.S./pro-Communist mindset because it was the path of least resistance. It would have taken a REAL man and a man of true conscience to have stood up against the 'Rat traitors and their affiliates and say "We must stay the course in Vietnam until Hanoi surrenders unconditionally. Any other decision will ultimately result in a bloodbath for the citizens of South Vietnam, and their absorption into godless Communism." (exactly what DID happen, thanks to the 'Rat Congress of '75 and Gerald Ford).
Imagine what the reaction would have been if say, the late Frank Reynolds at ABC had made such a statement? Or any of the major network news anchor/correspondents?
Schieffer's main advantage on the CBS Evening News is that he is NOT Dan Rather, and yet that is hardly enough of a difference to gain any substantial viewers.
To: Ron in Acreage
A talking scrotum, who refuses to let facts get in the way of his slanderous and uninformed opinions.
As for the rest of his crew, when he refers to them as stooges, crooks and morons, that at least seems to be spot on.
To: Mad Mammoth; Williams
Imagine how I feel...both men are TEXANS! But you are right; it is generational journalism and all of them are cut from the same piece of cloth. They know of no other way to think or speak. Literally, they would become mute if they were forced to either speak differently or shut up.
To: cwiz24
THe anchor for one of the big 3 broadcast news sources goes on a radio show and says that privatization just won't work, and yet we are supposed to believe that when CBS covers the SS debate they will provide all the facts about privatization?
Of course, the use of the word privatization is already a biased presentation of the facts.
Privatization means having a private company take over a function of the government.
The president is pushing "private accounts" (or "personal accounts"), not "privatization".
13
posted on
05/04/2005 6:03:32 AM PDT
by
CharlesWayneCT
(http://spaces.msn.com/members/criticallythinking)
To: txrangerette
"both men are TEXANS!"
No matter, EVEN in Texas--Half the people you meet are BELOW average.
14
posted on
05/04/2005 6:04:49 AM PDT
by
litehaus
To: Ron in Acreage
Schieffer and Imus both gloated over a Gallup poll showing support for the war at "an all time low."Their gloating may end soon because the support for both of their tv shows is also at an all time low.
To: Williams
"will cause a 9 trillion dollar deficit in social security"
It's not going to CAUSE a 9 trillion dollar deficit in social security. There already is a 9 trillion dollar deficit in social security.
To: Williams
He should have kept his mouth shut, IMO.
Like many other people, I always viewed Schieffer as one of the more "unbiased" journalists around.
To: Williams
To anyone that spouts off that "private accounts won't work", I would like to ask the following:
Do you have a 401(k)? If so, would you be happy if the government took over your 401(k) and in return guaranteed you a 1% rate of return on you contributions (assuming you live long enough after you retire)? Or would you rather keep your "private account" 401(k) and control the investments?
To: Williams
"Decrepit" talking to "warmed-over death". How exciting. Makes me want to go out, join AARP and buy my first box of Depends.
To: Mad Mammoth
He won't and they won't. CBS News is clinically dead.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-32 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson