100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Petition submitted to deport Piers Morgan | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
http://dailycaller.com/2012/12/04/does-piers-morgans-bodyguard-carry-a-gun/ You might not know who Piers Morgan is, because he’s on CNN. (If you don’t know what CNN is, Google it.) He’s a British guy who hosts a show on American cable news because Larry King finally realized he was 150 years old and retired, and CNN had absolutely no idea what to do with his time slot. So far, the experiment has been a miserable ratings failure, but I’m sure Jeff Zucker doesn’t mind. Anyway, Morgan is really excited about that football player killing his girlfriend and then himself, because it’s an excuse for Morgan to tell all us stupid Americans how backwards and pointless our Second Amendment is. Quite incredible that Bob Costas makes an impassioned plea for less handguns, and Americans go crazy with indignation. He’s 100% right. — Piers Morgan (@piersmorgan) December 3, 2012 Now getting bombarded with furious tweets informing me that MORE handguns in America would mean FEWER gun murders. They mean it, too. — Piers Morgan (@piersmorgan) December 3, 2012 The 2nd amendment was devised with muskets in mind, not high-powered handguns & assault rifles. Fact. — Piers Morgan (@piersmorgan) December 3, 2012 I know their sole purpose is to kill > RT @beth_c97: Seriously, @piersmorgan you know probably nothing about guns. — Piers Morgan (@piersmorgan) December 4, 2012 So, I ask again: Does Piers Morgan’s bodyguard carry a gun? If so, why? I hereby call on Mr. Morgan to publicly announce that at no point in his day is he guarded by anyone with a gun. And if he’s serious about this, he needs to pressure everyone else at CNN to make the same pledge. If he wants to get rid of guns, he needs to set an example for all of us dumb Yanks. Or does the Second Amendment apply only to him? No matter what Piers Morgan says about the Second Amendment, he is still engaging in political speech, which the First Amendment protects. So we should just allow any foreigner who wants to spit on our constitutional rights and has a media vehicle to do so, stand behind the very document they are ridiculing without some kind of protest on our part? You have lost it! if they are here legally, we allow them whatever right we allow any other legal citizen,,,, protest is also a right, have at it,, but I doubt immigration is gonna deport someone because they have an unpopular opinion,,, Thankfully, no, though depending on how unpopular the opinion is in the Whitehouse, it could get one whacked by a killer drone. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Even the people who got up the petition probably knew that they couldn't democratically vote away somebody else's rights, and I'm quite positive they had no intention of doing so; they just wanted to use Morgan's own poison against him, which is what makes this all the funnier & ironic. Morgan spends much of his time advocating the denial of everyone's second amendment right to bear arms. How deliciously funny it is, that the petition advocates the denial of Morgan's 1st amendment right. The shoe is on the other foot now, eh Piers? 
So, the petition against Morgan is a case of giving him a taste of his own medicine. Got it. Dodo remember, you too are an alien. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brits Petition Government: We Don’t Want Piers Morgan Back! 
http://www.infowars.com/brits-petition-government-we-dont-want-piers-morgan-back/ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I figure if they still let the prez of Iran in the US... Piers ain't so bad
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Just another silly stunt that will go nowhere fast.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At 39,000 signatures and counting, (well above the required 25,000 threshold) Obama is forced by law to make a comment about it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Sojourning_Soul
on
Wed 12/26/12 04:57 PM
|
|
Just another silly stunt that will go nowhere fast. Isn't that the whole point? Morgan as a "jounalist" ( ) should have brought in an advocate from both sides and stayed away from personal opinion... he chose not to, he made that bed, now he must sleep in it.
I think his ratings will tank on this one, even tho he won't ever be deported, he may find himself unemployed soon and have to return home to mommy. The thing is, by doing so he diminished the whole issue to one of hilarity over the repercussions of his actions, and away from any point he was trying to make..... Why journalists shouldn't state an opinion even if they have one. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At 39,000 signatures and counting, (well above the required 25,000 threshold) Obama is forced by law to make a comment about it. He may address the petition without addressing the issue which is probably what will happen.... and is expected I believe. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At 39,000 signatures and counting, (well above the required 25,000 threshold) Obama is forced by law to make a comment about it. He may address the petition without addressing the issue which is probably what will happen.... and is expected I believe. Just the same, it will be funny to hear Obama defending Morgan's constitutional right... to advocate treason against the constitution. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Just another silly stunt that will go nowhere fast. Isn't that the whole point?
... even tho he won't ever be deported. Exactly, that's why I mentioned it. he may find himself unemployed soon and have to return home to mommy.
I doubt it. Journalists like Piers who create divisive and contentious points sell papers and get ratings. Why journalists shouldn't state an opinion even if they have one. Everyone is entitled to an opinion no matter how much you may disagree with it. You, yourself have stated this often enough. The whole point of journalistic bias is to create discussion within the populace in order to sell papers, or gain listeners and viewers, thus enlisting further advertisers owing to popularity. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Sojourning_Soul
on
Wed 12/26/12 05:57 PM
|
|
Just another silly stunt that will go nowhere fast. Isn't that the whole point?
... even tho he won't ever be deported. Exactly, that's why I mentioned it. he may find himself unemployed soon and have to return home to mommy.
I doubt it. Journalists like Piers who create divisive and contentious points sell papers and get ratings. Why journalists shouldn't state an opinion even if they have one. Everyone is entitled to an opinion no matter how much you may disagree with it. You, yourself have stated this often enough. The whole point of journalistic bias is to create discussion within the populace in order to sell papers, or gain listeners and viewers, thus enlisting further advertisers owing to popularity. I'm willing to concede to the 1st 2 points as shared opinion, the last one I'm not. A journalist should present the news, not be the news. They have a right to an opinion and in many cases a passion to one side or the other that styles their presentation. However, if someone disagrees with your opinion (as often happens here ) you have less of a tendency to follow or give credence to their opinion. In journalism that can be murder for your ratings, most definatly on hot button issues!
Most prime time journalists will swear they are neutral and unbiased when in truth they are, but they never directly confront by attack, they always bring in a "pro" talking head to rebutt that their viewers show favor too, always giving them the "last" word... still biased, but not thier bias, so it saves face for them. Only hacks like O'Bully and Hamitup Hannity, now Morgan feel that need for their own ego. People watch them like Jerry Springer.... just to see what's next! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
HotRodDeluxe
on
Wed 12/26/12 05:53 PM
|
|
Just another silly stunt that will go nowhere fast. Isn't that the whole point?
... even tho he won't ever be deported. Exactly, that's why I mentioned it. he may find himself unemployed soon and have to return home to mommy.
I doubt it. Journalists like Piers who create divisive and contentious points sell papers and get ratings. Why journalists shouldn't state an opinion even if they have one. Everyone is entitled to an opinion no matter how much you may disagree with it. You, yourself have stated this often enough. The whole point of journalistic bias is to create discussion within the populace in order to sell papers, or gain listeners and viewers, thus enlisting further advertisers owing to popularity. I'm willing to concede to the 1st 2 points as shared opinion, the last one I'm not.
A journalist should present the news, not be the news. There has always been editorial comment within the media. They have a right to an opinion and in many cases a passion to one side or the other that styles their presentation.
Exactly. And if one has half a brain, it is easy to discern this bias. However, if someone disagrees with your opinion (as often happens here ) you have less of a tendency to follow or give credence to their opinion. I can see you're trying to introduce a (not so) subtle form of ad hominem here. Let me put it this way, if one builds a toilet, one shouldn't be surprised when people crap in it. 
In journalism that can be murder for your ratings, most definatly on hot button issues!
It oftens boosts ratings as even those who hate the guy will watch, just to exercise their hatred. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Sojourning_Soul
on
Wed 12/26/12 06:22 PM
|
|
Just another silly stunt that will go nowhere fast. Isn't that the whole point?
... even tho he won't ever be deported. Exactly, that's why I mentioned it. he may find himself unemployed soon and have to return home to mommy.
I doubt it. Journalists like Piers who create divisive and contentious points sell papers and get ratings. Why journalists shouldn't state an opinion even if they have one. Everyone is entitled to an opinion no matter how much you may disagree with it. You, yourself have stated this often enough. The whole point of journalistic bias is to create discussion within the populace in order to sell papers, or gain listeners and viewers, thus enlisting further advertisers owing to popularity. I'm willing to concede to the 1st 2 points as shared opinion, the last one I'm not.
A journalist should present the news, not be the news. There has always been editorial comment within the media. They have a right to an opinion and in many cases a passion to one side or the other that styles their presentation.
Exactly. And if one has half a brain, it is easy to discern this bias. However, if someone disagrees with your opinion (as often happens here ) you have less of a tendency to follow or give credence to their opinion. I can see you're trying to introduce a (not so) subtle form of ad hominem here. Let me put it this way, if one builds a toilet, one shouldn't be surprised when people crap in it.
In journalism that can be murder for your ratings, most definatly on hot button issues!
It oftens boosts ratings as even those who hate the guy will watch, just to exercise their hatred. I think we both said the same thing at the same time...to a degree.
An editorial however, is not done with a guest present that you are interviewing, so it is a bit different. Andy Rooney did editorials because he couldn't maintain in any interview he ever did due to his bias and lack of control. NBC honored his contract with a spot on 60 minutes (even gave him credit for coming up with it) giving him 5 minutes for his rants, then in Oct 2011 they cut him lose. It proved too much for Andy and the following month he died at age 92. RIP Andy. You insulted some of the biggest and best! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
can I now start a petition to make Rush Limbaugh keep his promise to move to Costa Rica if healthcare reform passed,,,
rush limbaugh drives me absolutely insane - after 2 words from him - no more - I need a stiff drink or a darvon SOoooo I would sign that petition in a heartbeat especially if there was a clause where he promises to stay of the air waves!!!
|
|
|
|
|
