Is this being covered by the mainstream media???

[NorthoftheBorder]

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/penny-starr/black-pastors-impeach-holder#

 

[bullets13]

how much money did you donate to this "news site" at the bottom of the article, NOTB?

[77]

http://www.westernjournalism.com/declassified-fbi-docs-reveal-presence-jihadist-training-camps-texas/

[NorthoftheBorder]

how much money did you donate to this "news site" at the bottom of the article, NOTB?

I did not donate.  Pulled this from Drudge.  Asking if this is being reported elsewhere?  Just because CNN or even Fox isn't covering does not in and of itself mean that it is bogus.  I take everything from every news source with a grain of salt. 

[LumRaiderFan]

how much money did you donate to this "news site" at the bottom of the article, NOTB?

That's your comment on the article? He is asking states to ignore their own laws and you have no problem with it?

I was waiting to see what comments would be made on this move and am amazed by the lack of concern.

[5GallonBucket]

thats what happens when ignorant people vote,

thats what happens when "do i get anything out of this" vote

thats what happens when 18 to 30 year olds vote based on color.....same as ignorant vote from above

 

there's no personal responisbility in those that voted for him to see what his platform was before voting for him.

 

Im not surprised the least by the lack of morals by this administration nor the lack of leadership.

This administration has divided this country in so many ways..... more than any other past administration.

religiously, state vs federal, immigrants, etc.

[bullets13]

 

That's your comment on the article? He is asking states to ignore their own laws and you have no problem with it?

I was waiting to see what comments would be made on this move and am amazed by the lack of concern.

 
How concerned would you be if i started posting issues brought up on liberal websites? and i'm not talking about cnn and the like, i mean liberal blog-type websites ran by random lefties on the internet. if you want me to be concerned, at least post a fox article. they're clearly biased conservative, but they're a legitimate news source.

[bullets13]

it reads like a bogus propaganda article, it's definitely on a bogus propaganda site, and it's on a topic that many people really aren't that worried about these days anyway. at some point you guys are going to realize that no matter how many of these articles you guys post and high five each other about, nobody else takes them seriously.

[LumRaiderFan]

How concerned would you be if i started posting issues brought up on liberal websites? and i'm not talking about cnn and the like, i mean liberal blog-type websites ran by random lefties on the internet. if you want me to be concerned, at least post a fox article. they're clearly biased conservative, but they're a legitimate news source.

We all know this has happened so let me ask you...

Does it concern you that Holder would suggest states ignore their own laws?

It was odd to me that you didn't comment on that but on the source NOTB used.

I have heard this being referred to as promoting sedition, and I am inclined to agree.

[westend1]

No.  It is not a concern.  The State AGs will do whatever they choose.  It is not some kind of command.  And frankly, they would probably be better off if they don't try to enforce what usually turns out to be some unconstitutional law.   JMO

[stevenash]

No.  It is not a concern.  The State AGs will do whatever they choose.  It is not some kind of command.  And frankly, they would probably be better off if they don't try to enforce what usually turns out to be some unconstitutional law.   JMO

Am I understanding you correctly, then, that you feel the only laws that should be enforced are those that the "enforcers" believe are constitutional?

[westend1]

Kind of.  I think if the legislature passes a law which the "enforcer"  ultimately believes will be struck down as unconstitutional, then he should place his priorities elsewhere.

[LumRaiderFan]

it reads like a bogus propaganda article, it's definitely on a bogus propaganda site, and it's on a topic that many people really aren't that worried about these days anyway. at some point you guys are going to realize that no matter how many of these articles you guys post and high five each other about, nobody else takes them seriously.

OK, we're done high fiving (goofy statement) and the link is to Fox news...can you finally give an opinion on Holder's actions?

 

My point is not about homosexual marriage, I am talking about Holder suggesting state AGs be dismissive of their own laws.

 

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/02/25/holder-gives-nod-to-state-ags-to-drop-defense-gay-marriage-bans-amid-court/?intcmp=latestnews

[bullets13]

OK, we're done high fiving (goofy statement) and the link is to Fox news...can you finally give an opinion on Holder's actions?

My point is not about homosexual marriage, I am talking about Holder suggesting state AGs be dismissive of their own laws.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/02/25/holder-gives-nod-to-state-ags-to-drop-defense-gay-marriage-bans-amid-court/?intcmp=latestnews

Sorry, just getting back on here... I'll just refer you to westend's response. I don't think I can word my opinion any better than that.

[bullets13]

But I do appreciate you providing a link to a real news source.

[LumRaiderFan]

Is you are dismissing non-credible news sources, I guess you better put CBS and NBC on the list as well.

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A24633-2004Sep15.html

 

http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/06/us/florida-zimmerman-nbc-lawsuit/

 

My point is take the time to check out a story when it is posted rather than blast the source...even the National Enquirer gets it right sometimes.

[stevenash]

Kind of.  I think if the legislature passes a law which the "enforcer"  ultimately believes will be struck down as unconstitutional, then he should place his priorities elsewhere.

Would that mean, then, that if the Texas "enforcer" believes that one of Mr. Obamas executive orders will be struck down as unconstitutional, he should not pursue violators of same?

[bullets13]

Is you are dismissing non-credible news sources, I guess you better put CBS and NBC on the list as well.
 
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A24633-2004Sep15.html
 
http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/06/us/florida-zimmerman-nbc-lawsuit/
 
My point is take the time to check out a story when it is posted rather than blast the source...even the National Enquirer gets it right sometimes.

Forgive me for not taking the time to read the National Enquirer (or CNS, or western journalism for that matter) on the off chance they get it right.  Even when they bring up a legitimate argument, they're so skewed to the right that they can't present the story accurately or objectively.  and that's if you can find a semi-accurate story amidst all of the lies and propoganda. the same holds true for websites of the far left.  while there is an occasional mistake from the real news sources, and while different news sources lean different ways, their stories are generally fairly objective, fairly accurate, and fairly legitimate. 

[westend1]

Would that mean, then, that if the Texas "enforcer" believes that one of Mr. Obamas executive orders will be struck down as unconstitutional, he should not pursue violators of same?

Sure.  He should do what he thinks is right.  Now he might risk losing fed funding somewhere down the line, but that is his choice.    Did you have any particular one in mind?   Might help the discussion somewhat.

[LumRaiderFan]

Forgive me for not taking the time to read the National Enquirer (or CNS, or western journalism for that matter) on the off chance they get it right.  Even when they bring up a legitimate argument, they're so skewed to the right that they can't present the story accurately or objectively.  and that's if you can find a semi-accurate story amidst all of the lies and propoganda. the same holds true for websites of the far left.  while there is an occasional mistake from the real news sources, and while different news sources lean different ways, their stories are generally fairly objective, fairly accurate, and fairly legitimate. 

 

Couldn't disagree more...for example, the coverage that this President and Bush received are light years apart...if the left media couldn't tweak it their way they would not report on it or, in some cases, lie!

 

Take the latest example, you think if John Ashcroft would have "suggested" that state AGs ignore their own laws that the Bush administration disagreed with, the media would not have blown up on it...you know they would have.

 

Why don't you start disproving these articles you simply blow off (if you can) and that may carry a little weight to your argument.

 

You guys could sure use another falconfanatic!

[westend1]

http://www.democracynow.org/2006/1/6/an_imperial_president_bush_claims_right

 

Was this reported on all the major networks?

[LumRaiderFan]

http://www.democracynow.org/2006/1/6/an_imperial_president_bush_claims_right

 

Was this reported on all the major networks?

Don't know...I have no doubt a few exceptions for anything can be found but for the most part, do you think Bush and Obama receive/have received equal coverage/scrutiny by the mainstream media outlets?

[westend1]

Don't know...I have no doubt a few exceptions for anything can be found but for the most part, do you think Bush and Obama receive/have received equal coverage/scrutiny by the mainstream media outlets?

No.  I think FOX has been more critical of Obama and MSNBC was more critical of Bush.   And. I'll never understand your definition of mainstream.  To me, it is the largest, most watched or read, media, whether left, right or center. 

 

A few exceptions? Please.  I found you an article saying Bush was ignoring laws and this is your only response?  

[LumRaiderFan]

No.  I think FOX has been more critical of Obama and MSNBC was more critical of Bush.   And. I'll never understand your definition of mainstream.  To me, it is the largest, most watched or read, media, whether left, right or center. 

 

A few exceptions? Please.  I found you an article saying Bush was ignoring laws and this is your only response?  

Yep...that's my only response because if we were to start cherry-picking articles like this that showed whether Bush or Obama was treated fairly, you would lose that BIG TIME, and it would be a useless practice!

 

And the fact that you think Fox and MSNBC are equal in their critic and the other major news outlets (CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC) offer somewhat neutral coverage is laughable.

[bullets13]

Couldn't disagree more...for example, the coverage that this President and Bush received are light years apart...if the left media couldn't tweak it their way they would not report on it or, in some cases, lie!

 

Take the latest example, you think if John Ashcroft would have "suggested" that state AGs ignore their own laws that the Bush administration disagreed with, the media would not have blown up on it...you know they would have.

 

Why don't you start disproving these articles you simply blow off (if you can) and that may carry a little weight to your argument.

 

You guys could sure use another falconfanatic!

I call BS.  You guys post whatever you want from fake, biased news sites, and it's MY responsibility to prove it false?  That's ridiculous.  It's your (i know you didn't post it, but you're supporting it) article, and your issue, and the responsibility falls on you guys to post it from a responsible, verifiable news source.  Do that, and add a little weight to YOUR argument.