>> ^NetRunner:
^ I think your heart's in the right place, but I think you're missing the forest for the trees.

Oh I don't know, the view is fine from here. Sure they aren't in your way though?

The strikes weren't my objection, the fact that at one point they raised everyone and later all they could do was point out what they did for our grandparents was. It started there and it ended there, the rest was just filler to point out that if they inflict a cost on non-members (and they do) then they have to offer some value back to make up for it if they want their support and they forgot that part for a while there.

It's possible that I could have made that more clear but I'm not sure how without writing a book on it.

>> ^quantumushroom:
...80 cents of that redistributed dollar will be burned up feeding the bureaucracy that took it in the first place.


You pull shit out of your ass every time you open your mouth.

Your political views are bankrupt because you have to resort to lies every single time you set out to justify them.

Compare Medicare to any private insurance company and tell me which one spends less on overhead.

It's Medicare and you damn well know it.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'cheney, iran, real news' to 'cheney, iran, real news, trn, lawrence wilkerson' - edited by kronosposeidon

>> ^omnistegan:
[...] Let's not be irrationally afraid.


Yeah I think it's waaaay too late for that, considering that the american people have been scared into two wars and major limitations to their freedom.

I sure don't get it either. I mean here in Europe people are afraid of terrorist attacks, too. But we try to deal with it the same way we deal with traffic accidents. Sure people are afraid of dying in a car crash, but that shouldn't stop you from driving. It's the risk you take for the freedom you get in return.

Every year more than 40,000 people die in the US due to traffic accidents. How many people in the US died from terrorist attacks in the last 5 years?

Tags for this video have been changed from 'the real news, trn, Robert Parry' to 'the real news, trn, Robert Parry, neocon, reagan, cia, propaganda, media' - edited by winkler1

Tags for this video have been changed from 'the real news, Robert Parry' to 'the real news, trn, Robert Parry' - edited by kronosposeidon

I'm not so sure they're liberal edged, they take Obama to task pretty hard at times, though they do somewhat buy into the "neocons are crazy warmongers" thing, but IMO that's just the truth.

The guy they're interviewing for this series on US/Russia relations is actually from the American Conservative magazine, which sounds like a funny name for a liberal rag to me. They say he's one of their big donors, too.

TRN is entirely funded by donations, BTW.

In reply to this comment by GeeSussFreeK:
In reply to this comment by NetRunner:
^ It's web only. http://www.therealnews.com/


Ahh thanks. They seem to always have kinda a liberal edge, and im more a libritarian. But I remembering watching an interview on BBC and liked the idea of it being non-big business funded. Makes me wonder where they money is coming from though.

http://www.videosift.com/video/Whos-to-blame-for-the-Russian-Georgian-conflict

I'd trust TRN over normal media in the US. So now it isn't a sole source anymore, is it?

>> ^chilaxe:
>> ^Irishman:
>> ^chilaxe:
That's fine to sift propaganda, but let us know in the description that it's not real news.

I agree entirely, and I look forward to America mainstream news reports about Iraq, Iran, Israel and Palestine being labelled as such.

Yeah, that's fair to question any media source, but mainstream intellectualism draws a line between sources controlled by their government and sources that are allowed to criticize their government.
If Russia ranks 144th out of 169 countries in the World Press Freedom Index, it wouldn't be wise to use its media as your sole source of information on any issue.

>> ^ObsidianStorm:
I just don't get it. But you know, when things don't make sense, something else is going on...
All I can think of is that the Bush administration has shit on a critical mass of the Democratic leadership or some other "nuclear option" that's holding them in check...


Nader claims the latter.

>> ^bcglorf:
'Investigative historian', Garreth Porter says the following, twice: "This is clearly an Israeli initiative." And with no explanation what so ever, just a bland statement of fact. Viewer be warned.


Agreed, that definitely falls under the category of speculation.

However, the bit about the resolution permitting a blockade of Iran, and that a blockade would be considered an act of war is accurate, and has not been widely reported.

Citizens be warned.

http://www.mahalo.com/ - 8hrs a day...sometimes more building wikis like this
http://www.youtube.com - I quicklist my subscriptions and hours of new video stream while I work, I subscribe to feeds like NYT, AL Jazeera, AP, The Real News, MSNBC, TYT, TRN...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ - More News
http://www.reddit.com/ - Actually, I just quit them this week, not liking their new setup much and
http://www.propeller.com/ as I have a few editorial duties there

good song/vid about that kind of stuff - http://www.videosift.com/video/Your-God

In reply to this comment by NetRunner:
Ok, am I not watching the same vid as the rest of you guys?

Evangelicals coming to the realization that Christianity's influence on politics shouldn't be entirely about abortion and gays is good news to LiberalSifters.

I'm not particularly religious, but I've always been puzzled by the mere existence of a "right-wing Christian". What I've always understood Christianity to be about is realizing that God loves everyone, and that we should engage in charitable behavior to help those in need.

How that coincides with a political party that screams in horror of a "welfare state" boggles my mind.

Democrats espouse a generally Christian mindset, of helping the poor, the sick, and the needy, by holding firm that everyone is created equal, and that we should be good stewards of the Earth.

I don't think Democrats should pander to their agenda, but disunity within the Evangelicals would certainly make it hard for Republicans to win a Presidential election.

Because it is a self link.

Who ever is posting for TRN, you don't have to worry about this community seeing your videos - we post them all on our own.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'The Real News, TRN, Defence Spending, Military Industrial Complex' to 'The Real News, TRN, Defence Spending, Military Industrial Complex, Defense spending' - edited by kronosposeidon

Tags for this video have been changed from 'The Real News, Defence Spending, Military Industrial Complex' to 'The Real News, TRN, Defence Spending, Military Industrial Complex' - edited by kronosposeidon