Posted on 05/12/2005 6:37:47 PM PDT by InvisibleChurch
Landru misses nothing to do with our Liberal-Socialist quislings, my friend.
Thanks anyway. ;^)
"May yield some interesting results???"
Think so??
Well let's have a look.
I've C&P'd a few clues which tell me that probably won't be the case.
Have a look for yourself, again.
"Reps. David Obey [D-WI] and John Dingell [D-MI] have asked for..."
~eh???
'Rat's favorite MO.
March-out one or a couple of their miscreants who'll bring to everyones attention a specific issue.
That's always been a signal for the beginning of a massive assault they feel is worth their time & resources, every time.
"...CPB board chairman Kenneth Y. Tomlinson, a Republican..."
Let's look back at the political affiliation(s) of every CPB honcho over the past 30 years, shall we? {Nawwww.}
"The New York Times reported last week that the consultant kept track of 'anti-Bush,' 'anti-business' and 'anti-Tom DeLay' guests on the show."
HA!!!
Uh-huh, good ol' unbiased NYSlimes.
The Slimes has been *watching* -- "They report, you decide", right?
Ever-vigilant, the Slimes. ;^)
"CPB Inspector General Kenneth A. Konz told The Associated Press."
Alright, now we've a party!!
The Liberal-Socialist quislings from The Associated Quislings show up.
Their mission if they should choose to accept it?
Too to further *buttress* the seriousness of the charges.
"Moyers was on vacation Thursday and unavailable for comment..."
Oy vey.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
~eh?
"He [Moyers] is scheduled to address the issue Sunday in a speech to the National Conference for Media Reform in St. Louis. "
There we go.
Right on que & *not* an instant, before.
*Timing's* everything, as you know.
The *timing* of our Liberal-Socialist crap's a virtual *science*.
"In their letter to Konz on Wednesday, Obey, D-Wis., and Dingell, D-Mich., said Tomlinson's actions may have violated the Public Broadcasting Act of 1967, which bans interference by federal officials over public programming."
I sure don't know who *authored* the PBAct of 1967, but could guess.
Care to take a stab at which side penned this *legislation*?
"The CPB, a private, nonprofit corporation funded by Congress, provides funds for PBS. 'Congress intended that the CPB serve as a shield rather than a source of political interference into public broadcasting,' they wrote."
:o)
Oh geshhhh.
Here we are in the year 2005 and *someone* noticed the ol' pot of water's [been] boiling.
How do you like your frog legs, FGS?
OK then, that my friend looks like a stacked deck, if I ever saw one.
The Liberal-Socialists have fired the opening salvo, marshaling their [immense] forces to the defense of this all-too-important propaganda organ they've relied so heavily upon for many a decade, without question all these years from anyone on the right.
Means one thing insofar the Pitiful Bullshit Source's future is concerned.
PBS'll be around for a long time to come.
And OBTW, off-topic here but how about SeeBS completely MISquoting Judge Starr a few days, ago?
The Viacom quislings really learned their *lesson* with "Rathergate", didn't they.
Yet somehow, someway SeeBS appears to be right back at their old Liberal-Socialist tricks.
Methinks there's a very good likelihood we'll be treated to a 60 Minutes *investigation* into the "PBS scandal"!!!
Yeaaaa!!
Right?
...the situation's damned close to hopeless.
Broiled; thank you very much. Which reminds me, I haven't had a really good batch of frog legs since my last trip to Matamoros some years ago. Way past time for another trip to the (Rio Grande)valley, but it's quite a trek from these piney woods just for some good frog legs ;^)
OK then, that my friend looks like a stacked deck, if I ever saw one.
To be sure, and the radical CPB board chairman Kenneth Y. Tomlinson, a Republican, apparent attempt to bring some balance to PBS will have his hands full fending off the purse swinging from girleymen Obey and Dingell(berry). Taking on the Ministry of Information is not for the faint of heart, eh?
OBTW, off-topic here but how about SeeBS completely MISquoting Judge Starr a few days, ago?
Well, after retrieving my jaw from the floor at the unmitigated gall of these Goebbelists, I found some comfort in the notion that desperation has all but eliminated any subtlety these utopian dreamers used in the past. That may be a good thang. Outright lies are going to be much easier to find and document. Question is, to what effect. Who exactly will be influenced by the revelation of a lying media. And more importantly, what, if anything, will their sponsors/readers/viewers do about it??? THAT leaves me scratching my head.
Methinks there's a very good likelihood we'll be treated to a 60 Minutes *investigation* into the "PBS scandal"!!!
Good one! Which leads me to another point; try as I might, I could not find a single MSM piece on this Starr episode. For cbs to be caught in yet another bald faced lie should send shock waves throughout the MSM, but alas...
...the situation's damned close to hopeless.
Ain't lookin good for the home team is it?
FGS
Then broiled it is.
It'll make it somewhat more difficult illustrating the modus operandi our Liberal-Socialist friends like using to seduce so many of the unwashed masses so efficiently, but what the hell.
Bon appe'tit, my friend. {g}
"Which reminds me, I haven't had a really good batch of frog legs since my last trip to Matamoros some years ago. Way past time for another trip to the (Rio Grande)valley, but it's quite a trek from these piney woods just for some good frog legs ;^)"
HA!!
Are you saying you've no restaurants in or around the Piny Woods who'll serve you a mess of frog legs??
Nonsense!
Even in Hillbilly Heaven (a.ka southern IN) there're places one can get a platter of fried amphibian pins.
>OK then, that my friend looks like a stacked deck, if I ever saw one.
"To be sure, and the radical CPB board chairman Kenneth Y. Tomlinson, a Republican, apparent attempt to bring some balance to PBS will have his hands full fending off the purse swinging from girleymen Obey and Dingell(berry)."
Yup.
The mere attempt to bring balance to PBS will be met with fierce resistance.
The two quisling-slugs mentioned in the article must've drawn straws, lost, and now find themselves spearheading the opposition.
"Taking on the Ministry of Information is not for the faint of heart, eh?"
Nope.
But peel away the layers & methinks most people would be shocked to learn the *names* of those who'll be actively supporting PBS will be many of the eastern seaboard's oldest and wealthiest famlies.
Oh yea those names will near, but not *at* the top of the list & always just out of *sight*.
The formula looks like this: Power=money=anonymity=SOP.
Ain't America great, FGS? ;^)
>OBTW, off-topic here but how about SeeBS completely MISquoting Judge Starr a few days, ago?
"Well, after retrieving my jaw from the floor at the unmitigated gall of these Goebbelists..."
Superb choice of verbiage, as usual.
"I found some comfort in the notion that desperation has all but eliminated any subtlety these utopian dreamers used in the past. That may be a good thang. Outright lies are going to be much easier to find and document."
Think so, my friend?
Maybe.
All I see is the same ol' shtick with the same ol' results.
The Utopian dreamers -- apparently -- aren't nearly ready to abandon the old adage they all-too-often employ to such perfection, "Tell a BIG lie enough..."
"Question is, to what effect."
To an immense effect, I'm afraid.
"Who exactly will be influenced by the revelation of a lying media."
Ummmm that *army* [of dopes] they've been amassing I should think, that's who.
The "Shoot first, ask questions later" type?
Both sides of the ideological divide have plenty of this kind, except they're trying to create a helloa lot more of 'em on the left so they'll be at a decided advantage when the fecal matter [finally] hits the impeller.
The left's simply "Playing to the room" with this kind of outrageous crap, is all.
"And more importantly, what, if anything, will their sponsors/readers/viewers do about it??? THAT leaves me scratching my head."
Shouldn't.
One at a time:
Sponsors: Nothing. They're *selling*.
Readers: Nothing. The *see* what they want to see.
Viewers: Nothing. They're *consuming*.
Nothing new here, move on.
I said -- a long time ago -- at the CCRM website this leftist shit could never get off square-one without first being blessed by corporate America.
A corporate America, mind you, who're thought by virtually everyone "is" the American right.
I'm convinced corporate America uses that mistaken association for all they can get in the propaganda *&* social wars, & why not.
Does anyone really think corporate America gives a rat's ass about what it *means* to be American?
If they do, I hate to tell 'em they're delusional. :o)
>Methinks there's a very good likelihood we'll be treated to a 60 Minutes *investigation* into the "PBS scandal"!!!
"Good one!"
Good one hell, it'd be a guaranteed 20-share for the SeeBS sewer rats & their Viacom whore-handlers.
"Which leads me to another point; try as I might, I could not find a single MSM piece on this Starr episode."
Yea well blame the loudmouth Limbaugh for that.
There's an axiom here, which goes something like this: Whatever any member of the political right has to say, about anything, it'll automatically be ignored by the whole of the quisling Liberal-Socialist infested media.
*That's* what this PBS fight's all about.
Hell's bells FGS, didn'tcha ever hear of the Vast Leftwing Conspiracy?
If not I'll tell ya all about it, sometime. {g}
"For cbs to be caught in yet another bald faced lie should send shock waves throughout the MSM, but alas..."
HA!!
"Caught" by who?
By those who're *looking*; and, we already realize there aren't too many *watchers* left, anymore.
Too busy *digesting* the high drama of "American Housewives" et al, I'd guess.
Who knows. :o)
>...the situation's damned close to hopeless.
"Ain't lookin good for the home team is it?"
Never has.
But that doesn't mean some of us are going to cease watching the Liberal-Socialist quisling mediot suckers, either.
...~eh? ;^)
Altogether possible. Corporate America's(International's?) job is to survive if not prosper. They will adjust to the prevailing winds, eh? The corporate - government "partnerships" are becoming more noticable every day. Coincidentally, our government is becoming less accountable to the very people they are charged with representing. Maybe our masters will be a benevolent lot???
But that doesn't mean some of us are going to cease watching the Liberal-Socialist quisling mediot suckers, either.
...~eh? ;^)
Til my dying day my friend; til my dying day. I'm still convinced the ministry of truth is the conservative's most formidable enemy. The Goebbelist's slight-of-hand is a powerful tool when used against the unwary - the less vigilant. BUT, the truth is, we are gaining on 'em. Will time run out on us before we're able to finish 'em off? By the end of this decade(if not sooner) I 'spect we'll have a lot better idea of the outcome.
Cheers ;^)
FGS
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.