Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Some Guy)   Right wing myths exposed   (webpan.com ) divider line
    More: Obvious  
•       •       •

5926 clicks; posted to Main » on 15 Feb 2002 at 9:47 PM (14 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



116 Comments     (+0 »)
 


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2002-02-15 09:48:49 PM  
And that, my folks, is that
 
2002-02-15 09:48:59 PM  
New Funny pictures up at The Filter
 
2002-02-15 09:49:38 PM  
Oh yeah, www.rightwingers.com can still be farked with.
 
2002-02-15 09:49:41 PM  
republicans are stupid
 
2002-02-15 09:49:57 PM  
Let me be the first to say "this site is clearly liberally biased."

Ha, bet you to the lying game!
 
2002-02-15 09:54:18 PM  
[image from driveintheater.com too old to be available]
 
2002-02-15 09:55:39 PM  
And this is funny/useful/FARKworthy because....
 
2002-02-15 09:58:33 PM  
Gore won the election allright. THIS is an accurate map, by county:

[image from images.usatoday.com too old to be available]
 
2002-02-15 09:58:56 PM  
This link sucks. I hate to whine, but geez.
 
2002-02-15 10:01:33 PM  
Sore/Loserman

He won, technicality or not he won. Gore conceded, and himself verified the results of the election in the Electoral College. If you don't like it, don't vote for him next time around.

What people do not understand is that we do not live in a democracy, we live in a democratic republic.

Personally, I think we should make the electoral college cleaner by dividing it up so that every congressional district directly correlates to one elector. It's done that way in Maine, and I think Nebraska. That would mean that Gore would have had to fight for Wyoming just as hard as California.

But he still would have lost.
 
2002-02-15 10:01:46 PM  
WTF? ok,now my eyes are burning I have a massive headache and I'm still confused...Is being in a purple state good or bad? That's all I want to know.
 
2002-02-15 10:06:10 PM  
Whilst I agree with the guy whole-heartedly on the whole thing, there is no reason to put it on Fark, unless it is intended as flamebait. Of course, we Farkers are much too mature to resort to petty insults, caps lock, and poor grammar. Much too mature...
 
2002-02-15 10:07:17 PM  
The purple states are someone's feeble attempt to claim Gore won and the Republicans are evil. You can't have purple. It's either blue or red, how the districts themselves voted.
 
2002-02-15 10:08:10 PM  
Thank you for proving my point, Pericles...
 
2002-02-15 10:09:59 PM  
I couldn't care less about the election results at this point but I thought he brought up good points about the so-called "left wing media". The "media is left wing" stuff is one of those things that sound like truth if you repeat it enough.
 
2002-02-15 10:12:32 PM  
Read Thomas Sowell's The Vision of the Anointed for analzying liberal myths.

The media's biggest fault isn't deliberate left or right bias. It's oversimplifying things. That can favor either side. Every story has to be cast in terms the public can understand-good vs. evil, and so on. Serious debate on issues is avoided-and both sides argue that hurts them most.

And mistakes were made for political reasons that helped spread aids. The initial reaction of public health officials and politicians was to side with the diseased party-keep the disease private when it was found out, prevent employers or anyone else from treating it as a safety concern, and medical procedures were unneccessarily lax, as it was assumed it could not be transmitted through "casual contact". The odds of catching aids from a blood transfusion, was one in twenty five in high exposure areas like San Fransisco.

Yes, you can't test everyone who is giving blood to see if they have aids 100% perfectly. But we've discovered since then that it's neccessary.

This link really was pretty pointless. A liberal backslapper, a poor flamebait/debate thread, and a waste of bandwidth.
 
2002-02-15 10:14:51 PM  
Oh, I forgot ad hominem attacks! Silly me!
 
2002-02-15 10:14:52 PM  
Too...many...words...

Need...boobies....

Can't...read...without...boobies...
 
2002-02-15 10:14:56 PM  
What? Did I miss something? Are they still counting in Florida?

Bush won. Gore lost. Get over it.
 
2002-02-15 10:16:55 PM  
Obviously, this guy has an axe to grind. It is typical, though. Instead of relying on fact and logic, he resorts to name calling and personal swipes. I'm not saying that there is no merit in this piece, but there are enough exaggerations and obfuscations to render the material virtually useless to the author's cause. The right has the same sort site going.
http://www.mediaresearch.org/
Perhaps there needs to be balance instead of talking heads pretending to be "objective journalists".
 
2002-02-15 10:16:55 PM  
All of 'em suck, Pericles.
 
2002-02-15 10:17:10 PM  
Wow, two opposing flamewars in the same night! Weeeee! *grabs popcorn*
 
2002-02-15 10:17:15 PM  
Pericles: So do pictures that make me have to scroll to read the thread.
 
2002-02-15 10:17:51 PM  
So, Pericles, how do you really feel about this?

I just have one comment: The media is neither left nor right biased. The media is owned by companies that wish to make a profit, and they will put up whatever flamebait makes people tune in. That is all.

OK, I have one more comment. The far right and the far left are both equally stupid in not realizing that the best answer is usually somewhere in-between.
 
2002-02-15 10:18:25 PM  
[image from quirked.com too old to be available]
 
2002-02-15 10:19:49 PM  
Bmr68: yay! A pileated woodpecker! I love those wacky birds!
 
2002-02-15 10:21:00 PM  
Wait a second... That picture is implying that Gore is an old-growth forest! Hooray for context, or lack therof!
 
2002-02-15 10:21:23 PM  
Pericles: your map (nice one, btw) suggests that Bush won by number of counties and strict popular vote - 143 million to 127 million. But we know that's not true, because Gore had the popular vote and would have won a direct election (ie, one not involving electors).

The conclusion I draw is that the Gore counties must have had wider margins than the Bush counties, meaning (sort of) that in urban areas (because look at what counties are blue), Gore was favored strongly, while in more rural or suburban areas, Bush was favored narrowly. Draw whatever conclusion you want. But it's not so cleancut as "look, the whole damn country is red!"
 
2002-02-15 10:21:58 PM  
Oh my god, Pericles!

Your well-founded and highly-intelligent argument against the left wing has entirely convinced me to defect! Thank you, for helping me to see the light. I only wish I were as wise as you.
 
2002-02-15 10:22:36 PM  
I could not even make it through the whole article, when are the dumbocrats going to get over it .... 2008? I am come on people it happened over a year and a half ago. Quit biatching, maybe you will get Dashel in the oval office....yeah and Gore really won the election. Did Clinton inhale???
 
2002-02-15 10:24:15 PM  
let me link you to some more stuff.

#1

I guess Nixon beat Kennedy

#2

I guess Ford beat Carter.

#3

I guess Bush beat Clinton. Bush won 1611 counties, Clinton won 1527 (and Perot won 18 counties)

#4

I guess the South loved that segragation stuff in 1968. :) (totals were 1860 for Nixon, 693 for HHH and 578 for Wallace. Proving that the South has alot of counties)

Bush won those countries where 4,000 people live. Big deal.

Bush won 2478 counties, 20,361 votes a county out of his total.

Gore won 675 counties, 75,555 votes a county for him.

Big deal, he won more counties, he didn't win the bragging rights of all of this. :)

Anyways, the Conservative views on the Liberal media are half-true and half-meant to cover for their own problems. :) I recall that McCarthy blamed his woes on the 'Communist-inspired media' and not his lack of proof.

RF
 
2002-02-15 10:24:25 PM  
I guess Pericles forgets that less than 50% of americans vote in national elections (With canidates like Bush and Gore, why should they.) And that's even less in the rural podunk towns that bush swept. Why does the right mindlessly defend Bush. Ultra-leftists love to bash Clinton(Cockburn, Hitchens, Moore) Read some Norman Soloman to learn the lies about Liberal bias.
 
2002-02-15 10:25:23 PM  
"The purple states are someone's feeble attempt to claim Gore won and the Republicans are evil. You can't have purple. It's either blue or red, how the districts themselves voted."

Umm, no. Read the damn article. He was rebutting the people who try to say Gore was only supported by the people on the coast and Bush had the complete backing of the "good old heartland" types. The map was pointing out the fact that most states were fairly evenly split. There were very few states that were a decisive victory for either party.

And to the rest of you, this had absolutely nothing to do with the validity of the election, etc. It's not a "Gore won/Bush won" thread.
 
2002-02-15 10:26:03 PM  
oh yeah..

the 1996 county totals:

Dole- 1620
Clinton- 1534

Dole wins!

RF
 
2002-02-15 10:26:17 PM  
Stile4aly Thank you! finnaly someone makes sense.
 
2002-02-15 10:29:58 PM  
yeah and Gore really won the election
Though intended as sarcasm, he really did. Though he would not have won had the partial recount he had requested, a total recount showed that Gore had more votes than Bush in Florida. If you consider that there were many illegal votes for Bush, and that many Democratic voters (especially black people) were illegally kept from voting, a fair election would have had Gore as the clear victor. But I digress. Time for sea-slugs!
[image from siolibrary.ucsd.edu too old to be available]
 
2002-02-15 10:31:15 PM  
Ah, thank you Pericles. Never before had I thought that the geographical area of a constituency was important. I mean, look at that! Only half a million square miles voted for Gore, whereas two and a half million voted for Bush. Is this what they term a 'landslide' election?

Bejaysus, if you need a stat like that to tell you that rural people vote 'conservative' and urban people vote 'liberal', then you really shouldn't be allowed to vote at all.

How about giving us more information on the people?
 
2002-02-15 10:32:24 PM  
Pericles,
As if a county-by-county breakdown is any more meaningful than the number of square miles that voted! In Los Angeles County, it was 1,710,505 for Gore, 871,930 for Bush, while in Wirt County, West Virginia, it was 1,518 for Bush, 818 for Gore. That's more than a 1000-fold difference.
 
2002-02-15 10:32:45 PM  
Bush Country?

Just had to add this.
 
2002-02-15 10:36:21 PM  
From Nelson County, VA
1968

George Wallace- 1,163
Richard Nixon- 1,130
Hubert Humphrey- 1,120

Wallace wins!

RF
 
2002-02-15 10:40:11 PM  
It shows the Civil War never ended.

The liberal media has had some competition lately and people are voting with their feet. The Hollywood Media has lost ground. Rather, Brokaw, Jennings and Turner are left, no doubt. Until fairly recently, the big three was all there was. I do believe the Worm Has Turned. Amen
 
2002-02-15 10:40:38 PM  
I likes the pic of the slug, Squid. Didnt know slugs could be that attractive.
 
2002-02-15 10:41:11 PM  
RobbieFal I guess the South loved that segragation stuff in 1968. :) (totals were 1860 for Nixon, 693 for HHH and 578 for Wallace. Proving that the South has alot of counties)

That's true in Georgia at least. It has the most counties of any state in the nation. The Atlanta metro area has like 20 counties whereas most metro areas have like 4. Plus, the counties have a lot of power and can't agree with each other which is why nothing gets done in Georgia.
 
2002-02-15 10:42:46 PM  
What the heck are you people arguing about?
Square miles won? Who cares.

Number of counties won? Again who cares.

The only thing that mattered was electoral votes and Bush had more.

So again I say Bush won, Gore lost get over it.
 
2002-02-15 10:43:39 PM  
Andychrist420: The purple states are someone's feeble attempt to claim Gore won and the Republicans are evil.

Huh? Did you read the article? The purple states were an attempt to claim that there was no nationwide (or regionwide) consensus in the 2000 election.
 
2002-02-15 10:44:04 PM  
Affinity: wait till you see the worms!
 
2002-02-15 10:44:36 PM  
gotta run! I've got vast acres of America that must be staked and claimed for the democrats in 2004! C'mon, hoss, now that we're counting elections by the square mile instead of by votes, we've got a lot of work to do! Yeehah!
 
2002-02-15 10:49:47 PM  
Abyssal Squid: "many Democratic voters (especially black people) were illegally kept from voting"

This is a lie perpetrated by Mary Frances Berry, chair of the US Civil Rights Commission. In all of the hearings held by the Commission, the NAACP, and the ACLU, ad nauseum, not one single black person ever testified that he, or any other black voter, was ever kept from voting, and no one has ever offered any evidence that this actually happened. This is purely a figment of the imagination of the Democrats with absolutely no evidence to support it.
 
2002-02-15 10:51:28 PM  
Benway: are you gonna claim those counties with the flag of Fernindad and Isabella?

Tuttle: at least 159 counties in Georgia.

and 254 in Texas.

Nebraska and Kansas have alot of counties also.
 
2002-02-15 10:52:59 PM  
Jabbo: regardless, it goes without saying that this worm has a prettier face than any of the presidential candidates:
[image from ucmp.berkeley.edu too old to be available]
 
Displayed 50 of 116 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter








In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report