because british people are all faggot america-hating commies

dude its like europe and shit, their right-wing groups are less conservative than democrats

>Publicly-founded network

Yeah funny how just reporting the facts sounds liberal.

>>4210565
There's spin, but it's way more subtle than fuck BILL O'REILY etc..

Most British lol hard at your pathetic excuse for television news.

>>4210565
I lol'd

But also - I don't think they have that many torries anyways. So they're bound to be left-wing.

Reporting all the news without bias is liberal :3

That really ought to clue you in about the truth surrounding American media

but such an obvious thing has gone right past you

>>4210546
Everything appears left-wing to a fascist redneck retard.

British Beatnik Communists

They're pretty central as far as Europe is concerned.
It's just that America is so rightwing that even the democrats are more rightwing that the most rightwing parties we have.

damn that BBC and it's unbiased reporting, those left-wing, right-wing, center hating bastards!

Ian Hislop is more Conservative than 99% of Neo-Conservatives

>>4210958
pretty much this

American left-wing would have more in common with the right-wing in European politics; your country is an extreme in regards to politics.

reality has a liberal bias

>>4210546

Because it's a network for intelligent people.

The BBC isn't completely unbiased, it can be quite subtle at time, but it is there. All news will be to some extent though, being entirely objective in news reports is almost impossible.

Although not exactly political, my favourite one the BBC does is where if you have a Scottish sportsman competing in any sort of event, he's British while he winning, and then Scottish again as soon as he loses.

Lol enjoy your fox news.

Journalism 101:
*Be objective
*Give context

You may choose ONE.

It's because what you call Left and Right in the USA are just two slightly different forms of Right. You are, at heart, a fascist, conservative country, established on progressive values...too bad those values were progressive 300 years ago.

Reality has a strong liberal bias. As someone from the faith based community you should avoid any news source that takes it information from actual events and trust Fox. They know what kind of news you expect.

>>4211059
>You may choose ONE.

Not true because you are objective by giving context to all sides of an issue, but every news organization has left that behind for advocacy journalism, and that is bad for the media in general, and basically the death of real journalism as we've historically known it

It's possible, completely possible to be objective while giving context by not excluding one sides' context in favor of anothers, but thats what ALL news agencies do, and it's an entirely optional part of their job.

There is no liberal bais in reality, you colossal faggots. Damn Americunts.

>>4211301
>Reality has a strong liberal bias

I love this ignorant statement, yes the very fabric of reality skews left wing. Why, the very way cells divide and atoms form is powered entirely by left wing big government nanny state politics based solely on the European and American left wing experience.

Do you need a crowbar and some extra hands to pry your head from that deep up in your own ass, you fucking moran?

You might as well BE a religious person with that kind of thinking.

Whats funnier is that you more than likely think you are the most open minded person you know.

I think most of the time when people say that it's because anything that tries to be unbiased will have a certain kind of arsehole crying LIBERAL FAGGOTRY. Simply because it doesn't include religion, nationalism, racism etc.

>>4211333
>fucking moran

I think you'll find the point of the statement is that right wing commentators have little regard for actual facts or events.

Case in point: Evolution.

>>4211367
Straw man argument is straw man

I could say every left wing commentator relies solely on creating stereotypes with which to push an agenda and it would be saying the same thing you've said, it's a complete straw man argument.

Fact is that there are core spending issues and national defense issues that are the vast majority of right wing commentators issues with the government and have been for the better part of the past decade, and there are core perceived human rights issues that drive the left wing commentators, things like national health care for the masses, national volunteer movements, energy reform, etc.

Stick to issues bro, don't try to make everyone opposite you a demon to try and win an argument, it doesn't work any more.

>>4211367

I think you'll find that there are places outside of America.

>>4211367
/thread right there

BBC is far from being unbiased. You will find that the people who call it unbiased are liberals who enjoy having their views reinforced, and therefor see this as a news source that "tells it like it is." This is the same kind of relationship between Fox News and its right-wing audience, they see Fox News the same way, as the only source of news that is "unbiased" because it tells them exactly what they want to hear.

>>4211381
National defense issues in the US?

Who the fuck is going to invade the US? At worst you're looking at minor incidents carried out by small groups of terrorists, who over the past decade have killed less people than toasters.

>>4211395
Gotta love that logic

By that logic I guess I shouldn't have car insurance, health insurance, home, fire, flood insurance. I guess by that logic, I should never buy a gun, I mean, the most a robber can do is break in my home, steal my stuff, and maybe rape and murder me, whats the big deal with that?

I'm pretty sure the primary imperative of every nation first and foremost is it's national defense.

I'm also pretty sure you need to go read some stuff on politics, the military, how national defense and the military is the purest expression of foreign policy and national policy that exists, etc.

>>4211389
This is absurd and the sort of thought process that devalues any news service that isn't Fox. Just because they don't give a fuck about facts doesn't mean that everyone who disagrees with them doesn't.

If you think all news sources have the same regard for facts that Fox does then your perceptions will of course be skewed.

>>4211406
>I guess by that logic, I should never buy a gun, I mean, the most a robber can do is break in my home, steal my stuff, and maybe rape and murder me, whats the big deal with that?

hahaha, paranoid much?
people in civilised countries get by without guns just fine

Unbiased is a word people use that means a certian thing fits in with their agenda. Some think FOX News is unbiased, while others disagree. Some think MSNBC is unbiased, and vice versa.

>>4211413
>people in civilised countries get by without guns just fine

I can't double and triple facepalm enough, arrogant, condescending moron.

Yes, it's really paranoid to protect ones' self.

And of course, in your country, crimes never occur, people NEVER break into other people's homes to take things.

Your very post stinks of intentional self delusion and ignorance. Emphasis on intentional.

>>4211406
I think you need to realise that the entire US warmachine exists primarily to benefit the military industrial complex.

A system that was warned against by that pinky commie liberal faggot Dwight D Eisenhower. But he didn't have America's best interests at heart like Dick Cheney eh?

>>4211412
I never said anything like that. I was speaking of the relationship between the news source and the perception of integrity and bias by its audience.

>>4211426
>
I think you need to realise that the entire US warmachine exists primarily to benefit the military industrial complex.


Really? You mean the military exists to buy weapons from companies that make them? Holy shit, why I think we have our own version of Chomsky up in heres.

What led you to this insightful logic? Was it your teacher in university? Or just the local editorialist?

What's your next major enlightenment for us, oh Swami of the Mountain so high? Gonna let us in on how the beef industry exists solely to sell beef to McDonald's for profit?

>>4211417
So if I say it's not raining outside and my brother says it is raining we just have seperate biases?

There is such a thing as actual events, this may be confusing to someone who goes around thinking the world is 6000 years old and controlled by a beard in the sky, but facts do exist and can be verified.

>>4211423
Of course they do but the fact is the average crime rate is exactly the same or even lower in those countries while murders are barely a fraction of a % compared to the US.

>>4211437
>his may be confusing to someone who goes around thinking the world is 6000 years old and controlled by a beard in the sky

More strawmanning

Is that really the only way you can try to win an argument?

Oh someone disagrees with me on this point or that issue, they must believe the Earth is 6000 years old and god is a bearded old man in the sky!

Why can't people like you realize that you just lost the argument without anyone even needing to actually respond to you on any point you've made. Congratulations you might as well have just responded with NIGGER NIGGER NIGGER NIGGER NIGGER NIGGER NIGGER because that's about how much your point stands now

Oh, and, there are facts that are undeniable, and there are issues that are more than open to debate, excepting when people like you close your mind and refuse to accept that an issue is still open for debate.

Global warming/climate change for instance.
Universal health care for another
The effects of stimulus spending that mostly just props up broken state budgets and doesn't actually create jobs for yet another

>>4211436
Because the US really needs more fighter jets now right?

That's what's been holding back victory in Afghanistan, too few air superiory ordinance vectors.

The US has a defense budget that outstrips the next 10 countries in the world combined. Over 45% of global defense expenditure is US. Do you really think that national security depends on spending that much money?

These are resources that US could spend to guarantee excellent health care and education to everyone on the fucking planet. We could have bases on Mars by now. We could have intercontinental high speed rail. But instead we're building fighter jets that will never do anything except shoot down Airliners in nationally embarrasing fuckups.

>>4211442
And that is because of what again?

oh thats right, the much more diverse population, crammed into large metropolitan areas.

Stop trying to compare nations who are almost exclusively one race of people who have lived together for thousands of years collectively to a country that is essentially a giant mash up of every other culture, all crammed into giant super cities where people live everywhere from the level of rats to the level of kings in the course of a few short miles.

You guys have had your problems in the past, and as more immigration from the East and Mid East and Africa filters into your nations, you're going to (and have been seeing) crime sky rocket.

Stop trying to blame inanimate objects like guns for the world's problems and accept the truth that people are the world's problems, and choosing to protect yourself in your home from the potential of someone attempting to harm you and your family is neither paranoid, crazy, nor wrong, but rather is the only logical, adult decision to make in the world we live in.

Which is not a world of fairy tale gumdrops and lemon cookies, like you seem to think it is.

>>4211453
Are you talking about the F 22s or whatever?

yeah that shit needs to be cut because it's obsolete, has nothing to do with the war machine or any of that crap

F 22s haven't flown a real mission in years, only reason they're still around is nostalgia, but I'm pretty sure that spending got cut thanks to uh... is it Gates, the guy Bush put in charge of the military that Obama kept on, think he went up to Congress and got them to cut it or something, saw something about that on the news briefly.

Of Course there are actual events, and when it comes to raining or weather unless you're blind people can all agree what's happening, but when it comes to subjective things like global warming, gun control, etc people will always think their views are right and the others wrong.

lol and anyway I believe in evolution and I know the earth isn't 6000 years old, and I'm Agnostic.

>>4211447
The only people saying global warming is still up for debate is the oil and coal industry. Who suggest that evil scientists are making it up to get funding.

Universal health care, as every other western nation has results in better care all round for far less money spent. Again, the people who stand to lose here are big insurance and big pharma.

As for the stimulus that's more of a Smith/Keynes argument, but surely deregulation and more faith in the free market hasn't worked out that well over the past 30 years.

>>4211453
>These are resources that US could spend to guarantee excellent health care and education to everyone on the fucking planet

Yeah that's really our responsibility. Hey hows' about you guys chip in some too, you know?

>The US has a defense budget that outstrips the next 10 countries in the world combined.

Look man, this is true, the other truth you conveniently leave out is that we use that military to protect far more than 10 nations around the globe constantly.

You can't argue it. Now you can argue that maybe we shouldnt' be extending our protection to that nations since the Cold War ended, and I might even agree, but the fact that our military spending isn't going to just defend us, but rather to help defend our allies which frees them up to spend that money on other things.

I mean, if you REALLY want Great Britain to have to up it's military spending by several hundred percents to make up for the loss of protection that would come from America removing her umbrella of protection from around the globe, then by all means.

But I think we all know you're going down a road you can't win, because you're about to put yourself in a corner you can't fight your way out of by stereotyping America as just the big mean rich bully that hates poor people and wants them all to die of AIDS or whatever.

Americans have no fucking idea the propaganda they're steeped in from cradle to grave.

>>4211447
I am actually unable to understand people opposed to universal healthcare, in effect you are saying a rich asshole with a trust fund deserves healthcare more than an honest hard working poor person.

>>4211478
Who the fuck are you protecting people from?

You may not have noticed but the cold war is over. Neither the Russians nor the Chinese have any interest in invading Europe or the US when they can just sit back and get rich selling oil, gas and tube socks to us.

The entire Muslim terrorist scare is a problem, but not one that's effectively dealth with by carriers and stealth bombers.

>>4211473
>The only people saying global warming is still up for debate is the oil and coal industry

Not true, but you are going to deny it because you are completely sold, and therefore the debate for you is over. That's fine.

>Universal health care, as every other western nation has results in better care all round for far less money spen

Not true, but again, because you've closed your mind to any counter facts, you will argue the debate is over. This leads to you straw manning everyone who disagrees with you into being believers in 6000 year old Earth and all that crap.

We have the best health care in the world. No one is turned away. No one is leaving America to go to Canada, Britain, or anywhere else for major medical care except sex change operations and obscure, possibly illegal cosmetic sculpting proceedures.

Other western nations have to ration their health care, they get to judge whether your life is worth continuing or not based on cost cutting measures in order to keep the system from collapsing from so much more demand than the supply can give.

It drives doctors and nurses out by cutting their pay massively, so there is no incentive to be a doctor, or a nurse, it doesn't work in other nations, it's bankrupt and going more bankrupt in Canada and GB just for instance.

Now, I'm not against CATASTROPHIC health care being covered by the state, as in, you get in a car accident, you get cancer, whatever, the state helps cover that shit and guarantees you health coverage. I"m fine with that. But keeping the preventative care system private will keep the public options from going broke.

continued

>>4211406
>>By that logic I guess I shouldn't have car insurance, health insurance, home, fire, flood insurance. I guess by that logic, I should never buy a gun, I mean, the most a robber can do is break in my home, steal my stuff, and maybe rape and murder me, whats the big deal with that?
>>I guess by that logic, I should never buy a gun,
>>gun
Hello threaad derailment.

I can't believe how many people think the BBC isn't left wing. I'm quite a liberal person myself and even I think the BBC is almost comically left wing.
Also before a thousand 14 year olds pipe up "LOL DUMB REDNECK AMERICUNT!" I'm an Ausfag.
Our ABC is left wing, but not half as bad as the BBC, at least it has one program (Q&A) that's normally nice and balanced.

>>4211488
>implying we have to constantly watch over israel and other neighboring countries so they don't go completely ape shit on each other

>>4211473
continued

As it stands the only reason the left wants Health care is so they can nanny state us down to the very details of our medical record, and charge us more or refuse us care based on our habits aka having control over every thing we do in our lives by holding our health care over our heads.

You cannot argue a simple fact: Any right that can be taken away by the state is not a right. It's a gift from the state. By nationalizing the entire health care system, forcing private providers out of business by forcing them to compete with a provider that doesn't have to make a profit to survive, the state will have the right to deny you health care based on their view of you as a person.

As Obama himself said, maybe that 100 year old woman would be better taking pain pills and dying without suffering rather than getting a pace maker at the cost from the state when those resources could go to save some 20 year old that is still profitable to the State.

>>4211485
>I am actually unable to understand people opposed to universal healthcare, in effect you are saying a rich asshole with a trust fund deserves healthcare more than an honest hard working poor person.

No, I'm not, but it's nice to see even more straw manning because you literally cannot make an arguement against what I"ve just posted.

>>4211498
NO ONE IS TURNED AWAY?

THAT'S SERIOUSLY WHAT YOU BELIEVE?

Then you have the audacity to say to others that they're minds are closed?

No one has actually pointed out any left wing bias from the BBC in the entire thread.

>>4211502
>As it stands the only reason the left wants Health care is so they can nanny state us down to the very details of our medical record, and charge us more or refuse us care based on our habits aka having control over every thing we do in our lives by holding our health care over our heads.

are you being serious? I have yet to meet a left wing person who thinks nanny states are a good idea, in fact all the liberals I know support personal freedom more than any conservative I have met. Also private providers are not forced out of business by free healthcare, here we have private hospitals that are usually better than public ones with lower waiting times for people who can afford it.

>>4211488
>Who the fuck are you protecting people from?

It's a simple fact if America steps down from the role it took during the Cold War that you're going to have a world wide power vacuum. What will fill that vacuum?

It could be China or Russia, but you know, it could just devolve, you could have a situation where multiple nations have to set up massive defense agreements similar to Europe prior to WW1, and we all know how that will end. You could have little nations world wide just fighting it out over terrain, Israel would of course be one of the first to go, not that any of you care about that, but I do for the simple fact I don't want the Middle East to turn into a blood bath of those kinds of proportions no matter the religious affiliations of those involved, but look at Eastern Europe, look at the region of Asia south of Russia, the former USSR states. There is so many places that could erupt into conflicts and the American military presence creates STABILITY.

And when you have stability for extended periods of time, you have people like you pop up, who don't understand, don't see that situation for what it is, you take it for granted, you blow it off, oh it doesn't matter, what the fuck does America have to defend itself for? What does the WORLD have to defend themselves for? CIVILIZED countries don't have WARS, and their citizens don't commit crimes, right?

It's ignorant, man. For obvious reason. The world isn't civilized. Never was. Never will be. Because PEOPLE aren't civilized. And where there is a vacuum, there will be conflict, competition to fill that void.

So sure, America could jsut stop spending that money, but then, what will fill that void? Until you can answer that with "Another nation or group of nations with the same commitment to personal liberty and democracy as the United States has had for the past 75 years", then it's not time for the US to stop spending that cash and forming that military.

>>4211514
Either the state is so good at it that private companies can't compete, or it's so bad at it that everyone will die.

Pick an arguement and stick to it Big Insurance.

>>4211519
you did not read my post, the government provides health care but some people prefer to pay more so they can get lower waiting times and from what I hear nicer hospitals.

>>4211508
>NO ONE IS TURNED AWAY?

Son, it is the LAW in America that if you arrive in the emergency room, you are TREATED. Period. End of story.
No on is turned away in an emergency for inability to pay. It's a fact. You are the close minded one who doesn't even know the actual FACTS of what you are addressing.

>>4211519
>Either the state is so good at it that private companies can't compete

That's not the point. The government does not have to run at a profit (and looking at the USA budget defecit, they won't), they can eat the costs while a private insurance company cannot. The government can charge less than the care costs at the expense of the taxpayer and we all know that a country 13 trillion dollars in debt with another 7 trillion projected over the next 7 years can afford it!

>>4211514
>I have yet to meet a left wing person who thinks nanny states are a good idea

Yes I'm serious and it's you who just haven't seen enough, apparently. Yes, the left really loves them some liberty, and freedom, right?

That's why they want you to have to give your medical records to some group in Washington who will then determine if you are worth healing if you are sick based on how much it will cost the system versus how many more productive years of life you have before you.

Man, you really need to educate yourself, both parties take away personal liberties every chance they get. The liberals take away your right to drive the cars you want, to eat the food you want to eat, and the right takes away your right to talk on the telephone to your mommy without having someone listen in if she lives in Belize.

>Also private providers are not forced out of business by free healthcare

Again, man, educate yourself. What happens when you force profit driven companies to compete with an entity that doesn't have to make a profit?

Do you understand market forces? Do you realize there are clauses in the health care bill in Congress right now that will prevent companies from giving out new health care policies? That will force their prices up while the government will be there, handing out "free" health care to anyone who asks, but no, of course that won't drive private companies out.

I could go deeper into these clauses but whats the point? You are the only close minded person here, so sold on the left wing without even really understanding the deeper issues at hand here and reacting to everything emotionally "hurr if you don't want socialized health care, you want working men to die in the gutter while trust fund babies live forever thanks to the power of SCIENCE!"

>>4211517
This would be the personal liberty of detainment without trial and warrantless wiretaps on citizens?

The US has been the cause of numerous conflicts across the world over the past century.

Iran in the 50s, overthrowing Allende in Chile, the Contras, propping up Saddam before he got uppity, funding the Mujahedeen in Afghanistan, bombing Laos. The list goes on.

America is just as nasty as any other country that's dominated throughout history. Besides, the US would still be massively dominant without spending such a ludicrous amount of money, an amount it spends badly considering that your soldiers don't even have body armour to protect them from IEDs

>>4211545
I am British and like I said the private healthcare companies have not been forced out of business

>>4211541
You don't get turned away for a broken leg. You do get turned away with lung cancer. Have a pain killer and go home and die.

>>4211545
>
That's why they want you to have to give your medical records to some group in Washington who will then determine if you are worth healing if you are sick based on how much it will cost the system versus how many more productive years of life you have before you.

This is what americans actually believe.

Still no evidence of left wing bias from the BBC.

>>4211519
There is no contradiction in these statements

The fact that you see one is a flaw in your ability to comprehend the issue at hand.

The bill in Congress right now forces private providers costs way up, which causes them to raise rates, which drives people to the government plan. This will lead to the government plan being overrun with demand, and with limited supply and infinite demand, you get what children?

Rationing. How does rationing work in national health care? Well just look to Canada and Britain for your examples of women being told they can't treat Breast Cancer any more , it's too expensive. Waiting 6 months for an MRI that you NEED to determine if you have a tumor or other major ailment, being denied things like pacemakers because you are too old, etc.

So the government health care is shit, because of the amount of demand it receives, because it drives, not the big insurance guys, but the little private insurers, and to top that all off, the companies who provide health care at a cost to themselves now, ditch that in favor of the government plan for their employees.

Insurance companies go bust, except the massive ones who actually WANT national health care in the short term so they can unload costly patients and keep only the healthy paying ones, and that leaves nothing but the government to offer health care.

You can also tack on the cost of building hospitals. You do realize most hospitals now are built entirely with private funding and donations, and the government will have to pick upa huge part of that tab as well.

How come British hospitals are full of old people if they're not productive any more then?

>>4211545
There's this magical little nation called Great Britain where this apparently impossible system is working just fine.
We have free good quality healthcare available to those who need it (NHS) and private for those who have the means to pay for a quicker more personal service.
It works fine, both sides are thriving.

>>4211561
That is ACTUALLY WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN, bro.

For fucks' sake you literally DON"T KNOW anything about the bill, how the system will be set up, nothing, then you come and condescend to me, pretending that I"ve said something that is untrue.

It's a necessary truth that the entire medical records system will become electronic and there will be a giant database in Washington and yes, all major health decisions will come down from there, just like they ALREADY DO with Medicare and Medicaid, etc.

Goddamnit you're so fucking ignorant I wish I could smack you through the internet.

OP, don't say that around here. There are Eurofaggots and Libtards in here and you'll spoil their dream.