more signs of the coming apocalypse...

[FlashInVegas]

off the reuters news wire:

May 6, 2003
Walmart has pulled Maxim, Stuff and FHM magazines from their shelves, saying some customers were uncomfortable with their covers.

here we go again...didnt we have Mr. Morality himself taken down yesterday for his gambling habit? how many for affronts from the right-wingers can we take?????

Walmart, the same company thats infamous for its use of chinese slave labor to manufacture its products, has once again shown its true colors. they wont carry CD's with warning labels and men's magazines, but they see nothing wrong with using 12 old girls to make their second-rate products.

Bill Bennett, founder of "enpower america", a group on the front lines of the anti-gambling movement, has a $500,000.00 a pop gambling habit. big surprise...all these guys are scumbags making a quick buck off of peoples fears by playing the morality game.

a few more examples of the rat-infested conservative movement in the US.

god help us all

 

[S-Love]

Has there ever been a time like these where the liberals have been put so far down the food chain?

Ahhh- what a golden era of conservatism

 

[djv]

Just happens there excuse is not so good. They are leaving other books that are worse. So why these three. Sounds like they may have had some articals that did not agree with Bush. Will be some interesting talk if thats true. Then we know our country is going wrong direction. Hell they be burning library books next. What the hell has happen to freedom and just for all.

 

[Blazer]

Do they have COSMO?
:shrug:

 

[StevieD]

They have clothes made by 3rd world slave children and they put signs on the rack saying USA and the bleeding heart conservative humanatarians figure its ok because it's cheap and it does say USA. And we think some uneducated Iraqies will be able to handle freedom!

 

[djv]

Oh Stevie they are clever. If it's American Company they can strech the truth. Just like politicians do. These companies They will tell you it's the American workers fault. American workers ask for to much money and bennies. The back bone of this great country. The american worker. Not politicians. Not lawyers. The last two are the ones that worked these great deals to screw so many Americans.

 

[taoist]

Not politicians. Not lawyers. The last two are the ones that worked these great deals to screw so many Americans.

...hey, dave, i "resemble" that remark!?!$%&* :SIB


(...uhhh, i meant "resent"!!!)


:nono:

 

[ferdville]

Now I have heard it all - Walmart part of a vast right wing conspiracy! Walmart is king of all retailers - they don't have to bow to any politicians. If conspirators need to spend their time worrying about what magazines Walmart sells, we are really in trouble. I'll be first in line to admit that there are unstable conservatives out there and many bleeding heart liberals. If either group chooses to spend their energy revising the available reading material one can purchase at Walmart, I am not too concerned. Not trying to sound elitist, but in Southern California the average Walmart customer would be hard pressed to read a magazine, much less understand an underlying political philosophy. While this chain with admittedly superior value may be all that elsewhere, in Southern California it doesn't serve the type of population that could spell Republican or Democrat. If people are that concerned about Walmart, why not show some indignation over Walmart's main rival in these parts - COSTCO. For those of you who don't know, COSTCO stand for the Chinese Overseas Trading Company. Something tells me that there is no right wing conspiracy going on within the bowels of COSTCO.

 

[taoist]

...in Southern California the average Walmart customer would be hard pressed to read a magazine, much less understand an underlying political philosophy. While this chain with admittedly superior value may be all that elsewhere, in Southern California it doesn't serve the type of population that could spell Republican or Democrat.

...LMFAO!!!


...yeah, but I bet that they can spell "TAX CUT"!!! :yup

 

[FlashInVegas]

question...

question...

ferdville, which side is scarier?

personally, i fear a world of bleeding-heart liberals a lot less than a world controlled by today's version of conservative religious right-wingers. if you examine their respective agendas, i think the liberal approach is much more acceptable, and a helluva lot less hostile.

libs: its doesnt matter what religion you follow. worship what you will, its a personal choice...
conservs: christianity is the end-all, be-all religion in the US, as a result it should dictate our agenda in schools, government and just about every other aspect of our life.

libs: help your neighbor, we are judged by the lowest/weakest member of a group, therefore, do our best to elevate them to an productive/equitable level by whatever means possible.
conservs: dont bother me, its every man for himself...taxation/regulation etc. are an infringement on MY ability to succeed. ignoring the benefits they might bring to us as a whole.

the following may look like a contradiction to the above but its strangely not.

libs: exercise your right to choose to do with your body as you will, its our constitutional right...
conservs: you body isnt yours, it belongs to the state. you are committing murder by disposing of a fetus. you cannot commit "murder" on an unborn fetus, but you can put them to death after they learn to walk.

interesting bumper sticker regarding the last statement:
"we murder people who murder people to show its wrong to murder people" ...yikes

thats just a few stances that make it clear which side has the better arguments.

 

[SixFive]

Interesting points, Flash, I don't agree with them, but interesting. I would disagree with the help you neighbor bit. Personally, I think it's great to give to those who are less fortunate, and I think I'm called to do that. However, I detest things my tax dollars go to, and I would rather give as I see fit. I think the liberal philosophy calls for too much of an entitlement for those who feel like they don't have enough. I think it's ok to give a helping hand, but the person needs to grab that hand and then work. If they don't work, they shouldn't just keep getting that hand up.

The USA was founded on religious freedoms, namely Christianity, and I see nothing wrong with that. We as Americans, like you say, have the right to worship anything as we please, that's a freedom. I don't see that conservatives are against that. How does Christianity dictate schools when corporate prayer is deemed not legal? If it dictated every aspect of our life, everybody would be in church and we know that's not the case. I see nothing wrong with the death penalty personally, but I also don't think that is a conservative/liberal position. I think many on both sides are for and against it.

 

[buddy]

Celery - North Versailles Super Wal-Mart ... $1.14

Celery - Beulah Road Foodland ... $1.79

 

[djv]

Buddy you got it. That higher price one the American worker caused that. To many wait to long to speak up. Look at the steel industry in your state. Where the hell it all go. They blam it all on the American worker. SOB.

 

[AR182]

i personally believe that it's equally bad to have a world full of libs or conserv. extremism on either side will not make you feel better, flash. it may sound good to on paper to have a world full of libs, but i believe it will be disasterious. for one with a this style of gov't. we will probably be taxed into oblivion because of all the social programs that would be implemented. there would also be a lawless society because of the lenient approach to law & order that the liberals take. for examples of liberal leadership I suggest you look at the carter & the david dinkins (nyc mayor) administrations.
flash, when you say conservative, i take it you mean the religious right. if that is what you are referring to, then i agree with you on some aspects. btw it is impossible to have a world with this type of thinking. one reason is because the world is made up of many different religions & the religious right do want the world to have the same religious beliefs as them. that is why there are missionarys in so many different countries, they are "selling" there way of believing. they also cannot accept a different way of life as their's, ie. homosexuals. if they ruled the world what will happen to the homosexuals. there are more examples but time will not permit me to go on.

I will just say that we need the moderates to keep an eye on both extremists to make sure that there is a balanced world.

 

[StevieD]

Ar182 once again you are correct that extremists on either side are not what is needed. But extremists are needed on both sides to keep everyone honest. The trouble comes when they get into power. As they may be now. The control of the media is the scariest thing to me. There are only a few companies now controlling the media. And the Right Wing has them no matter what they say.

 

[AR182]

stevie ,

i don't know i may be missing something, but i do not see this administration controlling the media. i know this topic has been discussed here many times. but the only tv network, that i see who slants to the administration is fox. there are many stories about how cnn is geared to the liberal audience as well as cbs & abc, & sometimes nbc. while i admit that there are well known conservatives on radio(rush, hannity), there are also liberals on radio(colmes) & npr. i am sure there are other liberal radio personalities, but i only listen to sports or music on radio so i don't know others. i think that the right leaning people are more well known because of the larger audience they attract. as far as the print media is concern, i think there are more well known papers & magazines that lean to the left ( ny times, la times, wash. post, boston globe, newsweek) than to the right ( ny post, wash. times, national review).but as long as i am aware of each media's agenda of slanting the news to their point of view, which i think is wrong, doesn't bother me. i decipher the news on my own, which i am sure that you are more than capable of doing also.

 

[StevieD]

AR, the fact that we are talking about a Liberal Media is fact enough to prove my point. Study after study has been done that proves there is a slant to the right as far as the media is concerned. But we keep hearing about the Liberal Media this or Liberal Media that from...the Conservative Media!
In a free society we only know what we can read or what we hear. We hear time and again how celebrities should not be allowed to give their views but who are the people on Right Wing Radio or their "news" shows. They are entertainers thats all. Rush has no special connection to the President. At least I hope not. So why does he get to open his idiot mouth when the Dixie Chick can't?
Some in the Arab world believed Iragi Bob because that is all they heard. We are in danger of the same thing.
Fox is not the only one who slants, how about MSNBC with Scarborough and ABC with that excremint Savage.

i am not saying they are not out there but off the top of my head I cannot think of one national Liberal talk show host.

"Thank God for Savage and Scarborough. With them, who besides, Rush,
O'Reilly, Buchanan, Novak, Kristol, Roger Ailes, Hannity, Barnes,
Hume, Will, the Wall Street Journal, The Washington Times, The New
York Post, the Weekly Standard, American Spectator, The New York Sun,
all of Fox, most of MSNBC cable, much of CNN, ABC, National Review,
Drudge, Andy, Ann Coulter, Bernard Goldberg, etc, would have the guts
to take on The liberal media?"

--Eric Alterman, Altercation

 

[TORONTO-VIGILANTE]

I think it's ok to give a helping hand, but the person needs to grab that hand and then work. If they don't work, they shouldn't just keep getting that hand up.

:yup

 

[AR182]

stevie,

even former news people who worked for cnn has called cnn liberal. i guess calling a news network liberal is in the eye of the beholder.


stevie wrote: "Rush has no special connection to the President. At least I hope not. So why does he get to open his idiot mouth when the Dixie Chick can't?"

the difference is that someone is willing to pay rush for his opinion, while the chicks are paid to sing, & not for their opinion. abc radio had hired mario cuomo to do talk radio, but it failed. msnbc hired phil donahue for a talk show on tv, but it failed. it seems that the american public are not interested in hearing liberal views any longer. i haven't listened to rush in quite some time & i watched savage recently on mnbc, & don't care for either.

the only thing that i can tell you is that there is still npr.