Hi! Your blog is really good. I'm from Portugal and I've found your blog by chance, surfing on the net. Perhaps you can't understand the language used in my blog, but I would like that you visit it. Sorry about my english...

Sinclair's unprecedented move once again raises questions about the effects of rampant media consolidation, the deregulation that allows a small number of large conglomerates to own so many outlets, let alone use them to advance an obvious political agenda. The controversy over "Stolen Honor" has also thrust little-known Sinclair before the klieg lights, drawing attention to its news department, whose public spokesman has no experience whatsoever in journalism. And it reveals a publicly held corporation, operating on the public airwaves, run by a hypocritical chief executive, preaching conservatives values by which he himself has been unable to live.

Nice little piece there, Jack Spratt (Could Eat No Fat)

I suggest you look at the US Bill of Rights, (specifically,that little bit about freedom of speech) because that is the Law of this Land, not Chairman Mao's "little red book".

Hate to break this to you, but corporations have a right to free speech too. They gave Kerry the opportunity to rebut this program; he refused. You don't even have to watch it if you don't want to.

In the meantime, reconsider putting fat back in your diet. I hear that it's good for brain neurons.

Wow spratt! You really are a commie! You and Kim Jung Il would get along great.

Crank up the newsspeak Jack. It's not safe to have the sheep know anything the liberals don't want them to know. Then they might be able to form rational judgements based on the facts and that endangers the Democratic elitist aristocracy.

Steve really is quite the fucking moron isnt he? I dont even know where to start shoveling his shit.

I dont even know where to start shoveling his shit.

A good start would be between the otherwise vacuum between your inbred ears. That would stop the raging windtunnel in your empty skull.

Realizing the not only do we need to have Stolen Honor played, we need to have Dick Morris's FahrenHype 911 played as well. Last night Frontline's Choice 2004 was a blatant pro-Kerry docufiction. It was a recruiting film of the first magnitude. Then, later, Nightline attemptes to disredit the SwiftboatVets organization by, of all things, going to Vietnam, Interviewing the VC that we theoretically there the day that Kerry won a Silver Star, and then confronting the Swiftvets with their "misrepresentations" of the truth. The SwiftVets spokesman immediately showed Ted Koeppel the passages in Kerry's autobiography that proved ABC was sucked in by the VC, and also the Boston Globe's well researched bio of Kerry also confirmed ABC as being taken to the cleaners.

"We have Freedom of Speech in this country. Just as long as you agree with us." --any DemocRAT!

Somebody call a doctor because Radical Redneck just dropkicked UY into next week. Way to go! You now officially own that little sniveling twit so feel free to spank him as needed.

Um Yeah RE #6:If you can't do any better than than for an argument, piss off.

How can they be Socialist and be in favor of a Elitist Aristocracy at the same time you twit.

Re 12:

You just don't get it, do you? ALL socialists are elitists. Haven't you read Animal Farm? "All pigs are equal, but some are more equal than others." (paraphrased from memory).

That's the beauty of being a socialist. You idolize "the people," but you make sure you control them and you never, ever have to touch them. (They're icky and stupid, you know.)

Do you know who wrote Animal Farm?! Ill give you hint, he was a Socialist.

Re 14

Yes, George Orwell wrote it. And, at the time, he was a DISILLUSIONED socialist. The book is a brilliant allegorical satire of Stalinism, wherein the Trotsky figure (Snowball) is ignominiously betrayed by the strongman (Napolean, read as Stalin).

Perhaps you saw the movie. They changed the movie to have a socialist viewpoint (the good system corrupted by bad individuals), but the original intent of the author was to critique Stalinism.

I own the book. The point of both the book and the movie was to critique Stalinism and more importantly totalitarianism. BTW he died a Socialist. Almost everybody including Socialists and many Communists hated Stalinism for what it was same shit different asshole.

"The Spanish war and other events in 1936-37 turned the scale and thereafter I knew where I stood. Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism, as I understand it." – From the essay "Why I Write

Socialism is just Communism that didn't try hard enough.

Socialism is just Communism that didn’t try hard enough.

Well since Orwell was Democratic Socialist he wasnt radical enough to believe in a violent take over. And you have a Doctorate?

Re 19:

What makes you think you have to advocate violence to be a radical?

The point is that Orwell wrote about his impressions of Stalinism. He just didn't realize that socialism LEADS TO Stalinism. Like all academic socialists, he entertains the silly notion that the "white magic" of socialism is somehow not connected to the "black magic" of Comunism. Communism=bad; socialism=good.

Historically, however (and Marx was fundamentally a historian), socialism hasn't resisted the tendency toward totalitarianism, a fact Orwell understood by the time he wrote 1984 while hanging around an island off the coast of Scotland (hint: only elitists have the luxury of wasting their lives doing nothing and telling the rest of us what to do. Most everybody else is busy trying to "make the world go round.")

It really is funny how the academic socialists admmire their "great thinkers" who were mostly parasitical philosophers that would faint if they ever got in a real fight.

Re 16:

BZZT. Another historical inaccuracy from the keyboard of UY. One of the most egregious failings of the American left is its blindness to the terror reign of one Joseph Stalin. They NEVER, while he was alive, admitted to what was going on over there. Not until the release of the Verona Documents did they even approach an admission of guilt, and most of them who can face a tiny bit of the truth now still maintain that the system is good; it's just that there were some mistakes made.

A BAD system is a BAD system. Only American academics can't seem to figure that out.

...Why do you think socialist academics were never Sovietologists? All the Sovietologists were as close to conservative as you're allowed to get in the academic world. The socialists study Cuba, because they think it's paradise, but they wouldn't spend five seconds studying the Soviet system during the Cold War. They just pretended that "Communism" was something else.

Scratch a socialist, you find Communist paint.

Any system can go bad. Which is one of the reasons Its a good thing to be for the seperation of churchand state. Conservatism is Fascism lite.

Hi! Your blog is really good. I'm from Portugal and I've found your blog by chance, surfing on the net. Perhaps you can't understand the language used in my blog, but I would like that you visit it. Sorry about my english...

Sinclair's unprecedented move once again raises questions about the effects of rampant media consolidation, the deregulation that allows a small number of large conglomerates to own so many outlets, let alone use them to advance an obvious political agenda. The controversy over "Stolen Honor" has also thrust little-known Sinclair before the klieg lights, drawing attention to its news department, whose public spokesman has no experience whatsoever in journalism. And it reveals a publicly held corporation, operating on the public airwaves, run by a hypocritical chief executive, preaching conservatives values by which he himself has been unable to live.

Nice little piece there, Jack Spratt (Could Eat No Fat)

I suggest you look at the US Bill of Rights, (specifically,that little bit about freedom of speech) because that is the Law of this Land, not Chairman Mao's "little red book".

Hate to break this to you, but corporations have a right to free speech too. They gave Kerry the opportunity to rebut this program; he refused. You don't even have to watch it if you don't want to.

In the meantime, reconsider putting fat back in your diet. I hear that it's good for brain neurons.

Wow spratt! You really are a commie! You and Kim Jung Il would get along great.

Crank up the newsspeak Jack. It's not safe to have the sheep know anything the liberals don't want them to know. Then they might be able to form rational judgements based on the facts and that endangers the Democratic elitist aristocracy.

Steve really is quite the fucking moron isnt he? I dont even know where to start shoveling his shit.

I dont even know where to start shoveling his shit.

A good start would be between the otherwise vacuum between your inbred ears. That would stop the raging windtunnel in your empty skull.

Realizing the not only do we need to have Stolen Honor played, we need to have Dick Morris's FahrenHype 911 played as well. Last night Frontline's Choice 2004 was a blatant pro-Kerry docufiction. It was a recruiting film of the first magnitude. Then, later, Nightline attemptes to disredit the SwiftboatVets organization by, of all things, going to Vietnam, Interviewing the VC that we theoretically there the day that Kerry won a Silver Star, and then confronting the Swiftvets with their "misrepresentations" of the truth. The SwiftVets spokesman immediately showed Ted Koeppel the passages in Kerry's autobiography that proved ABC was sucked in by the VC, and also the Boston Globe's well researched bio of Kerry also confirmed ABC as being taken to the cleaners.

"We have Freedom of Speech in this country. Just as long as you agree with us." --any DemocRAT!

Somebody call a doctor because Radical Redneck just dropkicked UY into next week. Way to go! You now officially own that little sniveling twit so feel free to spank him as needed.

Um Yeah RE #6:If you can't do any better than than for an argument, piss off.

How can they be Socialist and be in favor of a Elitist Aristocracy at the same time you twit.

Re 12:

You just don't get it, do you? ALL socialists are elitists. Haven't you read Animal Farm? "All pigs are equal, but some are more equal than others." (paraphrased from memory).

That's the beauty of being a socialist. You idolize "the people," but you make sure you control them and you never, ever have to touch them. (They're icky and stupid, you know.)

Do you know who wrote Animal Farm?! Ill give you hint, he was a Socialist.

Re 14

Yes, George Orwell wrote it. And, at the time, he was a DISILLUSIONED socialist. The book is a brilliant allegorical satire of Stalinism, wherein the Trotsky figure (Snowball) is ignominiously betrayed by the strongman (Napolean, read as Stalin).

Perhaps you saw the movie. They changed the movie to have a socialist viewpoint (the good system corrupted by bad individuals), but the original intent of the author was to critique Stalinism.

I own the book. The point of both the book and the movie was to critique Stalinism and more importantly totalitarianism. BTW he died a Socialist. Almost everybody including Socialists and many Communists hated Stalinism for what it was same shit different asshole.

"The Spanish war and other events in 1936-37 turned the scale and thereafter I knew where I stood. Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism, as I understand it." – From the essay "Why I Write

Socialism is just Communism that didn't try hard enough.

Socialism is just Communism that didn’t try hard enough.

Well since Orwell was Democratic Socialist he wasnt radical enough to believe in a violent take over. And you have a Doctorate?

Re 19:

What makes you think you have to advocate violence to be a radical?

The point is that Orwell wrote about his impressions of Stalinism. He just didn't realize that socialism LEADS TO Stalinism. Like all academic socialists, he entertains the silly notion that the "white magic" of socialism is somehow not connected to the "black magic" of Comunism. Communism=bad; socialism=good.

Historically, however (and Marx was fundamentally a historian), socialism hasn't resisted the tendency toward totalitarianism, a fact Orwell understood by the time he wrote 1984 while hanging around an island off the coast of Scotland (hint: only elitists have the luxury of wasting their lives doing nothing and telling the rest of us what to do. Most everybody else is busy trying to "make the world go round.")

It really is funny how the academic socialists admmire their "great thinkers" who were mostly parasitical philosophers that would faint if they ever got in a real fight.

Re 16:

BZZT. Another historical inaccuracy from the keyboard of UY. One of the most egregious failings of the American left is its blindness to the terror reign of one Joseph Stalin. They NEVER, while he was alive, admitted to what was going on over there. Not until the release of the Verona Documents did they even approach an admission of guilt, and most of them who can face a tiny bit of the truth now still maintain that the system is good; it's just that there were some mistakes made.

A BAD system is a BAD system. Only American academics can't seem to figure that out.

...Why do you think socialist academics were never Sovietologists? All the Sovietologists were as close to conservative as you're allowed to get in the academic world. The socialists study Cuba, because they think it's paradise, but they wouldn't spend five seconds studying the Soviet system during the Cold War. They just pretended that "Communism" was something else.

Scratch a socialist, you find Communist paint.

Any system can go bad. Which is one of the reasons Its a good thing to be for the seperation of churchand state. Conservatism is Fascism lite.

Hi! Your blog is really good. I'm from Portugal and I've found your blog by chance, surfing on the net. Perhaps you can't understand the language used in my blog, but I would like that you visit it. Sorry about my english...

Sinclair's unprecedented move once again raises questions about the effects of rampant media consolidation, the deregulation that allows a small number of large conglomerates to own so many outlets, let alone use them to advance an obvious political agenda. The controversy over "Stolen Honor" has also thrust little-known Sinclair before the klieg lights, drawing attention to its news department, whose public spokesman has no experience whatsoever in journalism. And it reveals a publicly held corporation, operating on the public airwaves, run by a hypocritical chief executive, preaching conservatives values by which he himself has been unable to live.

Nice little piece there, Jack Spratt (Could Eat No Fat)

I suggest you look at the US Bill of Rights, (specifically,that little bit about freedom of speech) because that is the Law of this Land, not Chairman Mao's "little red book".

Hate to break this to you, but corporations have a right to free speech too. They gave Kerry the opportunity to rebut this program; he refused. You don't even have to watch it if you don't want to.

In the meantime, reconsider putting fat back in your diet. I hear that it's good for brain neurons.

Wow spratt! You really are a commie! You and Kim Jung Il would get along great.

Crank up the newsspeak Jack. It's not safe to have the sheep know anything the liberals don't want them to know. Then they might be able to form rational judgements based on the facts and that endangers the Democratic elitist aristocracy.

Steve really is quite the fucking moron isnt he? I dont even know where to start shoveling his shit.

I dont even know where to start shoveling his shit.

A good start would be between the otherwise vacuum between your inbred ears. That would stop the raging windtunnel in your empty skull.

Realizing the not only do we need to have Stolen Honor played, we need to have Dick Morris's FahrenHype 911 played as well. Last night Frontline's Choice 2004 was a blatant pro-Kerry docufiction. It was a recruiting film of the first magnitude. Then, later, Nightline attemptes to disredit the SwiftboatVets organization by, of all things, going to Vietnam, Interviewing the VC that we theoretically there the day that Kerry won a Silver Star, and then confronting the Swiftvets with their "misrepresentations" of the truth. The SwiftVets spokesman immediately showed Ted Koeppel the passages in Kerry's autobiography that proved ABC was sucked in by the VC, and also the Boston Globe's well researched bio of Kerry also confirmed ABC as being taken to the cleaners.

"We have Freedom of Speech in this country. Just as long as you agree with us." --any DemocRAT!

Somebody call a doctor because Radical Redneck just dropkicked UY into next week. Way to go! You now officially own that little sniveling twit so feel free to spank him as needed.

Um Yeah RE #6:If you can't do any better than than for an argument, piss off.

How can they be Socialist and be in favor of a Elitist Aristocracy at the same time you twit.

Re 12:

You just don't get it, do you? ALL socialists are elitists. Haven't you read Animal Farm? "All pigs are equal, but some are more equal than others." (paraphrased from memory).

That's the beauty of being a socialist. You idolize "the people," but you make sure you control them and you never, ever have to touch them. (They're icky and stupid, you know.)

Do you know who wrote Animal Farm?! Ill give you hint, he was a Socialist.

Re 14

Yes, George Orwell wrote it. And, at the time, he was a DISILLUSIONED socialist. The book is a brilliant allegorical satire of Stalinism, wherein the Trotsky figure (Snowball) is ignominiously betrayed by the strongman (Napolean, read as Stalin).

Perhaps you saw the movie. They changed the movie to have a socialist viewpoint (the good system corrupted by bad individuals), but the original intent of the author was to critique Stalinism.

I own the book. The point of both the book and the movie was to critique Stalinism and more importantly totalitarianism. BTW he died a Socialist. Almost everybody including Socialists and many Communists hated Stalinism for what it was same shit different asshole.

"The Spanish war and other events in 1936-37 turned the scale and thereafter I knew where I stood. Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism, as I understand it." – From the essay "Why I Write

Socialism is just Communism that didn't try hard enough.

Socialism is just Communism that didn’t try hard enough.

Well since Orwell was Democratic Socialist he wasnt radical enough to believe in a violent take over. And you have a Doctorate?

Re 19:

What makes you think you have to advocate violence to be a radical?

The point is that Orwell wrote about his impressions of Stalinism. He just didn't realize that socialism LEADS TO Stalinism. Like all academic socialists, he entertains the silly notion that the "white magic" of socialism is somehow not connected to the "black magic" of Comunism. Communism=bad; socialism=good.

Historically, however (and Marx was fundamentally a historian), socialism hasn't resisted the tendency toward totalitarianism, a fact Orwell understood by the time he wrote 1984 while hanging around an island off the coast of Scotland (hint: only elitists have the luxury of wasting their lives doing nothing and telling the rest of us what to do. Most everybody else is busy trying to "make the world go round.")

It really is funny how the academic socialists admmire their "great thinkers" who were mostly parasitical philosophers that would faint if they ever got in a real fight.

Re 16:

BZZT. Another historical inaccuracy from the keyboard of UY. One of the most egregious failings of the American left is its blindness to the terror reign of one Joseph Stalin. They NEVER, while he was alive, admitted to what was going on over there. Not until the release of the Verona Documents did they even approach an admission of guilt, and most of them who can face a tiny bit of the truth now still maintain that the system is good; it's just that there were some mistakes made.

A BAD system is a BAD system. Only American academics can't seem to figure that out.

...Why do you think socialist academics were never Sovietologists? All the Sovietologists were as close to conservative as you're allowed to get in the academic world. The socialists study Cuba, because they think it's paradise, but they wouldn't spend five seconds studying the Soviet system during the Cold War. They just pretended that "Communism" was something else.

Scratch a socialist, you find Communist paint.

Any system can go bad. Which is one of the reasons Its a good thing to be for the seperation of churchand state. Conservatism is Fascism lite.