One cable channel's surge is another channel's tight race
Join the discussion below, or Read more at TwinCities.com.
#1 Nov 2, 2008
There has never been as much obvious biase in the media in the past as there is today. There was a time when journalistic excellence included objectivity. That said, perhaps it is better to look at blatant biase for what it is rather than trying to decifer subtle biase.
The National media (not just Fox & MSNBC) have admitted a definite biase toward Obama. 62% of their reports have been favorable to Obama. It is amazing to me that Obama's associations have had such little attention. I am one who initially blew these associations off as overblown. However, Obama's failure to answer the questions is alarming to me. If I ask myself on the way to the polls,"Who would Bill Ayers vote for? or "Who would the PLO support?" I would definitely vote against that candidate for having very definite Anti American Associations!
Chris Matthews is a gifted interviewer and does editorial so he needn't pretend to be objective. His shameless plea, however, to "Give a guy (Sen. Obama) a break" rings hollow when one considers the favor with which the media has treated his candidate.
Chris Matthews' attack on Sen. Bachman also rings hollow when one considers his obvious biase. Ask yourself on the way to the poll "Who would Bill Ayers vote for?
#2 Nov 2, 2008
Olbermann is the absolute worst thing to come down our way in a long time. He is arrogant, condescending and frankly not all that bright. He reminds me of a more suave version of Al Franken.
Incidently, Obama is wrong on Social Security (it will be destroyed unless we look at completely revamping it; something liberals can't bare), he's definitely wrong on taxation, foreign affairs and will have a utterly unfavorable view toward capitalism. His side-kick Biden hasn't done anything but play make-believe (politician) his entire adult life; there is zero private sector experience or understanding between the two of them. How can this be good for America; two guys who view the world only through political eyes? Why do you think the vast majority of small business people and those who have followed these guys for years has great concerns about them being in the White House. Doesn't it bother you that their biggest supporters are either public unions, teachers unions or people who contribute nothing in taxes? The more you get to know the ticket, the more you won't want anything to do with them. I'd suggest that many of you step away from here and actually research how little time Obama has spent crafting/voting for legislation, who he has associated with over the years and how liberal this Congress could be with leftists like Pelosi, Reid, Schumer, Barney Frank and the rest of the far-left, fringe socialists. Get to know the real Al Franken and tell me how his idea of the world melds with yours. I think most of you will find that there is very little you have in common with these 1960s retreads
Since: Oct 08
#3 Nov 3, 2008
Jim Rutenberg writes that article like Fox and MSNBC balance each other out. However, there is no balance when one takes into account all the television news media, as well as print media. And Jim Rutenberg writes for the New York Times, for crying out loud, which is a very partisan paper.
#4 Nov 3, 2008
It's as though none of you are concerned about the faults of McCain and Palin. The republicans are a terrible choice this year. If I need to explain this to you, you haven't been doing your homework. You don't get an "A" in voting when researching the faults of only one party, you gotta do both.
wake up people, we need some help here in the middle class.
#5 Nov 3, 2008
Olbermann is the perfect example of why left-wing media fails miserably. They are loud, abusive, use specious logic, and can never, ever compliment anyone on the right even when it is well deserved. They are Loooooooooooosers!
#6 Nov 3, 2008
Yes, flaws in this argument:
FOX is for McCain. MSNBC is for Obama.
These associates aren't dangerous to the United States. Being different doesn't make you dangerous. Additionally, spending time in a room with someone doesn't make you them.(Otherwise John McCain's last name would be Keating). Ayers, not an important professor. ACORN, not an important registeration service unless you're poor. Khali not an important professor. The economy: important. Rolling back taxes to the 90's: important. Not feeding into bull shit: important
I'm sorry to be so abrasive, I just can't believe some people believe this bull shit. "Ask yourself on the way to the poll Who would Bill Ayers vote for?"; are you being paid by McCain to get him into office? because the amount of bull shit you're shoveling definately deserves a wage.
#7 Nov 3, 2008
Curtis Lowe, I think the republicans are the loudest ones out there this year. Palin has a loud voice, even if it's typically incorrect.
#8 Nov 3, 2008
Shouldn't you be home smoking pot with your kids? Liberal freak!
#9 Nov 3, 2008
To discount Obama's associations is simply closing your eyes and hoping them to not be true. My main concern here is not that Obama is a whetherman, but that he shares similar values. He has not addressed this and has impeded media from showing footage of him toasting the PLO leader. He seems to have something to hide.
#10 Nov 3, 2008
Awwww......The righty-tighties are whinning because msnbc has steped up to the plate to challange fox's "Fair and Balanced??" with their own tatics and words. Oh, poor babies. As long as we are throwing out speices arguements here's one no reporter has dug into; John McCain has lived off of or recevied a government check his Entire life. From the day he was born to the present day. I wonder what the running total might be? My guess is quite a lot.
#11 Nov 3, 2008
Scenario:- WHICH ONE IS FOR TO BE?
Obama gets presidency and so;
1. He is succesfull to persuade the terrorist groups to stop attacks to USA and friends
2. Convinces Iran and North Korea the continuation of nuclear weapons programs.
3. Convinces Russia to stop agression to weaker nations ( like Georgia, Estonia, Ukrania,
etc,....in other words ,...to be a good neighbour.
4. Convinces Hugo chavez to a better understanding for Latin America and stop military
practices in the Caribean area with Russia
5.'Spread the wealth aproach' provide for all americans get all the money they need, for
'patriotic taxes and redistribution plans' are well taken by wealthy people, industrialists,
and certainly people without any monetary income ( for now they are receiving a check
from the government).
Should this goes as stated, all will be just great!, UNLESS, we all discovered that the 'spread the wealth aproach' brings as result to go deeper in our reserves/savings from the taxpayers, leaving an even weaker economy.
Furthermore, the unemployment will boost-up for the industries will continue sending jobs outside the country for TAXES OF ALL KIND are HIGHER.
In addition, with government expansion and extra-expending, the services are to be so over-bureaucratisized, and so, the complexity to the public is excruciating.
Also, as result for inexperience ,Obama open our COUNTRY very VULNERABLE for enemies ( abroad with 'fifth columnists - spies' inside domestic positions) with a WEAKER DEFENSE ARMY.
Not to mention that the TONE of the socio-dinamics conducted by Obama are to be oriented toward interests of MINORITIES WITH DISCOMFORT FOR SO MANY YEARS OF OPRESSION , and HATE-INFUSED INFLUENCES about America ;-(Jeremiah Wright style, and backed-up by similar influences : Lewis Farakkan, Alinsky, Ayers, and others)
SO, OUR BELOVED COUNTRY GETS DESTROYED FROM WITHIN BY A 'TROJAN HORSE'- OBAMA!
SO FINALLY WE DISCOVER THE HORRIBLE TRUTH : OBAMA IS ANTI-AMERICAN / ENEMY OF THE STATE!
But this only just for starters , since much, much more could be said
Let so say,.... that is not the case, but if by any chance IS THE CASE , we cannot go back in time to undo what is done, for at this point we are at POINT OF NO RETURN!
Think about this one, if you will.
Sincerely, with all due courtesy,
#12 Nov 3, 2008
The good old NY Times....report on a slanted news media with a slanted report. The Pew Research report showed that Fox had an even percentage of reports positive/negative for both candidates (40/40). MSNBC (Air America's TV arm) was 77% positive for Obama, 14% positive for Mc Cain. Hardly. "slightly above the average media outlet", which, of course, was also liberal to begin with. To piggy-back on an earlier commentors query, "What newspaper do you think Bill Ayers probably reads?"
Add your comments below
|Curtis Gallagher||Feb 3||Kammy88||1|
|black jeep liberty at chiefs||Feb 1||Tim||3|
|defiance full of snitches lets all reveal them ... (Jan '15)||Jan 31||The Neighborhood ...||31|
|Review: Defiance Dance Studio||Jan 26||cnoevil||10|
|Barb... class of 72?||Jan 24||cowface||1|
|Correction for letter summitd last week||Jan 24||Charol Stechschulte||1|
|Putnam County value the hard work Travis Jerwer...||Jan 17||Charol Stechschulte||1|
Find what you want!
Search Defiance Forum Now
Copyright © 2016 Topix LLC