or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Liberal Media Bias - Don Lemon is pissed edition
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Liberal Media Bias - Don Lemon is pissed edition - Page 2

post #41 of 76
How quickly everyone forgets the destruction the Republican Party left for the current administration between the years 2000 and 2008.

Didn't the Republican Party control the House and the Senate around this time? [citation needed]

Do you know who benefited MOST from Republican rule between 2000 and 2008?
RICH PEOPLE.

Well, except for those fools who invested with Made-Off and some stocks.

I guess I can thank the Republican Party for watching my annual raise drop from 4% to nothing between 2000 and 2008 enough that I couldn't invest and lose a ton of money.
post #42 of 76
the bloom is off the obama rose, he makes more gaffes than dan quayle
he is teleprompter dependent
when it breaks then he has to wait fumble bumble can't even remember his own speeches
i wish he would show what's in his heart, and fewer "code words" code language
we deserve less teleprompter
I APPLE THEREFORE I AM
Reply
I APPLE THEREFORE I AM
Reply
post #43 of 76
For all those who are outraged over these "disruptive" protests:

Analysis: Press Largely Ignored Incendiary Rhetoric at Bush Protest

Quote:
News outlets that are focusing on the incendiary rhetoric of conservatives outside President Obama's town hall meeting Tuesday ignored the incendiary rhetoric -- and even violence -- of liberals outside an appearance by former President George W. Bush in 2002.

When Bush visited Portland, Ore., for a fundraiser, protesters stalked his motorcade, assailed his limousine and stoned a car containing his advisers. Chanting "Bush is a terrorist!", the demonstrators bullied passers-by, including gay softball players and a wheelchair-bound grandfather with multiple sclerosis.

One protester even brandished a sign that seemed to advocate Bush's assassination. The man held a large photo of Bush that had been doctored to show a gun barrel pressed against his temple.

"BUSH: WANTED, DEAD OR ALIVE," read the placard, which had an X over the word "ALIVE."

Another poster showed Bush's face with the words: "F--- YOU, MOTHERF---ER!"

A third sign urged motorists to "HONK IF YOU HATE BUSH." A fourth declared: "CHRISTIAN FASCISM," with a swastika in place of the letter S in each word.

Although reporters from numerous national news organizations were traveling with Bush and witnessed the protest, none reported that protesters were shrieking at Republican donors epithets like "Slut!" "Whore!" and "Fascists!"

Frank Dulcich, president and CEO of Pacific Seafood Group, had a cup of liquid thrown into his face, and then was surrounded by a group of menacing protesters, including several who wore masks. Donald Tykeson, 75, who had multiple sclerosis and was confined to a wheelchair, was blocked by a thug who threatened him.

Protesters slashed the tires of several state patrol cruisers and leapt onto an occupied police car, slamming the hood and blocking the windshield with placards. A female police officer was knocked to the street by advancing protesters, badly injuring her wrist.

The angry protest grew so violent that the Secret Service was forced to take the highly unusual step of using a backup route for Bush's motorcade because the primary route had been compromised by protesters, one of whom pounded his fist on the president's moving limousine.

All the while, angry demonstrators brandished signs with incendiary rhetoric, such as "9/11 - YOU LET IT HAPPEN, SHRUB," and "BUSH: BASTARD CHILD OF THE SUPREME COURT." One sign read: "IMPEACH THE COURT-APPOINTED JUNTA AND THE FASCIST, EGOMANIACAL, BLOOD-SWILLING BEAST!"

Yet none of these signs were cited in the national media's coverage of the event. By contrast, the press focused extensively on over-the-top signs held by Obama critics at the president's town hall event held Tuesday in New Hampshire.

The lead story in Wednesday's Washington Post, for example, is headlined: "Obama Faces 'Scare Tactics' Head-On."

"As the president spoke, demonstrators outside held posters declaring him a socialist and dubbing him 'Obamahdinejad,' in reference to Iran's president," the Post reported. "People screamed into bullhorns to protest a bigger government role in health care. 'Nobama Deathcare!' one sign read. A young girl held up a sign that said: 'Obama Lies, Grandma Dies.' Images of a protester wearing what appeared to be a gun were shown on television."

On Sunday, The New York Times reported that a Democratic congressman discovered that "an opponent of health care reform hanged him in effigy" and was confronted by "200 angry conservatives." The article lamented "increasingly ugly scenes of partisan screaming matches, scuffles, threats and even arrests."

No such coverage was given to the Portland protest of Bush by The New York Times or the Washington Post, which witnessed the protest.

Were you outraged at the behavior of these protesters? Were you making assertions that this behavior was typical of all liberal Democrats?

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #44 of 76
jazzguru those were peace protestors that confronted Bush. They were merely expressing opposition to the Iraq war policy.

Ironically the news papers were doing what the democrats wanted and needed politically while the leftist were upset that they weren't getting enough coverage.
post #45 of 76
Thread Starter 
PowerlineBlog.com

I'm sure the complete lack of curiosity will of course be rationalized away now. Van Jones? Who is that?

The media isn't just biased for Obama. They are his propaganda department at this point. They are confounded why no one tunes in for the daily dish of fake news. They wonder why no one can tell the difference between a comedian reading the news and an actual anchor. The only confusion is why Katie Couric doesn't hire funnier writers.

Quote:
Jones also signifies the cooperation of the mainstream media in Obama's machinations. The nonfeasance of the mainstream media in the performance of their job has been virtually complete. They have left it to the likes of the indomitable Gateway Pundit to reveal what a man we have in Jones, and therewith the project in which the Obama administration is engaged. The mainstream media have Obama's back. Yesterday Byron York ran a Nexis search on Van Jones and posted the resutls:

Total words about the Van Jones controversy in the New York Times: 0.
Total words about the Van Jones controversy in the Washington Post: 0.
Total words about the Van Jones controversy on NBC Nightly News: 0.
Total words about the Van Jones controversy on ABC World News: 0.
Total words about the Van Jones controversy on CBS Evening News: 0.

As of today, I think York's calculation still obtains for the New York Times, but the Washington Post has contributed a few words on the White House's "tepid support" of Jones. A reader is more or less left to fend for himself in figuring the the substance of Jones's statements or views that have produced this "tepid support."

Why would they run an article about Van Jones and the issues that prompted him to resign? I'm sure there are more pressing issues like... how much it cost to reprint the stationary due to Palin resigning or perhaps we could get a clarification from Levi Johnston about whether he thought the amount of hot sauce packets the Palin's took from Taco Bell were appropriate for the amount of food ordered or actual theft.

Van who.... well... um.... look we'll report on him resigning, help Obama spin it positively and also remind everyone that all this only happened because Republicans are racist psychopaths who control everything even though they are extinct.

But the news... who the hell would be interested in that.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #46 of 76
They have run stories on Van Jones.

Shocking news: Powerlineblog is a partisan shithole.
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #47 of 76
Thread Starter 
The NY TImes doing what it does so well, creating propaganda out of the air.

Let's start with the title... Judges’ Frustration Grows With Mortgage Servicers for proof of this they cite, the views of one judge. The judge is a movement of one.

Now we move to this....

Quote:
Under cross-examination by Mrs. Giguere (who had a little assistance from Judge Haines), the bank’s defense withered.

The judge becomes the prosecutor and the bank has no defense. Is there a defense to a judge who is not acting impartially?

Quote:
The spectacle of a high-ranking banking executive being grilled by an ordinary homeowner was the result of an unusual decision by Judge Randolph J. Haines of the United States Bankruptcy Court to summon a senior executive from Wells Fargo to appear in Mrs. Giguere’s bankruptcy case.

At the hearing, Judge Haines made it clear that he was acting out of concerns about Wells Fargo’s mortgage modification practices generally.

“This is certainly not an isolated case,” he said. “The kind of story I hear from this debtor is one that I and other bankruptcy judges around the country are hearing over and over and over again.”

Wow that is some very interesting double-speak. Perhaps I need another round of re-education because I clearly see problems here. As proof it is not isolated we have the very judge that did it declaring that all the gossip says it happens often. Not a single number is presented to justify the claims. The gossip justifies the judge taking whatever "unusual" steps he feels are necessary.

Quote:
The hearing with Wells Fargo did not result in any sanctions against the bank for its failure to provide timely information to Mrs. Giguere about her mortgage modification application. But the bank did pledge to improve its communications with customers and to explore avenues for increasing the ease with which homeowners can seek loan modifications.

There wasn't really anything that could be done by the judge but we called the suits in and yelled at them for a few hours and they promised to help all the trainwreck people do better.

Quote:
Wells Fargo has been criticized for its slow pace in modifying mortgages under the Treasury Department’s foreclosure prevention initiative, which was begun in April.

Criticized by whom? Republicans, Democrats, or as is often the case, the criticisms come out of the ether so that the media can press the agenda. There are critics but we don't need to name them, talk to them or have numbers from them.

Quote:
Experts said the hearing in Phoenix reflected rising frustration by federal bankruptcy judges with mortgage servicers, which process payments for banks and the investors who own large pools of loans. In recent months, judges in Ohio and Pennsylvania have chastened mortgage servicers for failing to process payments properly and for errors in foreclosure filings, among other concerns.

Which experts from where? Again names and numbers are not needed. We have this nice compelling story about a sad, poor woman who needs help and that is more important.

BTW we will sleep some information in to this article at some point... right before the end when the reader might have already lost interest and quit reading.

Quote:
When her home shot up in value, she refinanced it several times, pulling out equity to pay off credit card debt and other expenses. She and her husband are divorcing, and he is no longer willing to help pay the mortgage. With little in savings, she has not made a full mortgage payment since November.

“I’m not perfect, I’ll be the first to admit that,” Mrs. Giguere said. “I’ve fallen behind.”

She isn't perfect. I mean everyone will need help when they can't afford their home, but can still afford french-tip manicured nails. Why anyone could have refinanced their home SEVERAL times and spent all the money, thus having nothing in savings even after not making a mortgage payment and having free housing since November of last year. That mean soon to be ex-husband of hers apparently doesn't want to take care of her either.

In the meantime you can go to her Facebook page
where we learn that she has two more children who are adults and not mentioned in the article. Why they won't help mom isn't explored at all. We can also see those nails continue to be done, the large tattoo she wants to share and the snarky t-shirt from her son that declares "All the good paying jobs start before I get up" to which she adds the comment that her son knows her so well.

Sorry, but I'm not compassionate for this woman. BTW in the NY Times this is in the "Business" section. People wonder why that newspaper needs a bailout. It would be hilarious if it wasn't so sad but true.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #48 of 76
Thread Starter 
When bringing up the many instances of the media ignoring Democratic scandals, the refrain comes out again, "Yes but it isn't really about scandals, it is about sex." Sex sells, scandals about sex sell. Things like not reporting assets and income while being a Democratic house leader, that doesn't sell.

So what happens when there is a scandal involvins some nice juicy sex? Well the same old stonewall treatment.

Newsbusters

Quote:
You would think videos exposing representatives of the controversial organization ACORN giving advice on how a couple can get a loan to set up a brothel would be BIG NEWS.

Such would seem especially the case if the proposed house of ill repute would be employing minors illegally smuggled across the border from Central America.

Yet, when Andrew Breitbart's new website Big Government published such videos Thursday morning, media normally fascinated with sex stories almost completely ignored it.

The boycott continued even after several ACORNers were fired as a result (sting videos embedded below the fold):
Story Continues Below Ad ↓

* ABC, CBS, NBC, and MSNBC have not aired one television report concerning this matter
* The New York Times has not published one article concerning this matter
* USA Today has not published one article concerning this matter
* The Boston Globe has not published one article concerning this matter
* The Los Angeles Times has not published one article concerning this matter
* The Chicago Tribune has not published one article concerning this matter

Sex sells as long as it is a married mother of five having it with her husband.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #49 of 76
Thread Starter 
Time for another edition of "What has salacious sex and other assorted afternoon talk show type details but is still being ignored by the media?"

The latest example was so bad that even Jon Stewart had to mock, I guess himself and the media in general for not attending to it.

I talking of course about ACORN and the round of videos that reveal employees showing how to keep your prostitutes from costing you big tax money while you hold them against their will after bringing them up illegally from El Salvador. Another ACORN employee can show you how to shoot your spouse without getting in too much trouble and of course the list goes on.

Only it really doesn't because major media aren't interested in reporting on this.



Quote:
You're telling me that two kids from the cast of "High School Musical III" can break this story with a video camera and their grandmother's chinchilla coat? And you got nothing? They did it for $3,000, and that's Blitzer's monthly beard Wetvac budget. It probably cost CNN that much to turn on their hologram machine.

I'm a fake journalist, and I'm embarrassed these guys scooped me. Let's get to work people.

Prepare to keep being embarassed Jon. Being a lackey of the Democratic Party and attacking and blasting critics rather than reporting news also embarrassing even for a fake journalist.

Speaking of embarrassing, ol' Wolf Blitzer needed a bailout of his own after going on celebrity Jeopardy.



No wonder the comedians get so much respect in this day and age. They appear to know a hell of a lot more than the reporters.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #50 of 76
I'll take "Talking To Themselves" for a thousand, Alex.
eye
bee
BEE
Reply
eye
bee
BEE
Reply
post #51 of 76
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by FormerLurker View Post

I'll take "Talking To Themselves" for a thousand, Alex.

And the question is...."What is preferable to talking to people who have no ideas and call everyone -isms and -ists."

That is correct.

Time Magazine has resorted, as has much of the Democratic party, to recycling the criticism they "investigate" that just magically appears out of the air and has no real source.

Newsbusters

Quote:
"Mad Man: Is Glenn Beck Bad for America?"



Quote:
"Is Rush Limbaugh Good for America?"



Meanwhile, Chris Matthews is really pissed that conservatives read books.


Quote:
"Theres so much right-wing crap on the best seller list these days. Its great to see a book that you might want to put on your shelf and let your respected friends see you actually reading."

Please go buy some liberal books so Chris can get the thrill back up his leg and also so you can be respected by him and his friends.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #52 of 76
Thread Starter 
Powerline - Sliming James O'Keefe: A case study

Quote:
More nefariously, the Post implies that O'Keefe and Giles worked with racist motivations:

Though O'Keefe described himself as a progressive radical, not a conservative, he said he targeted ACORN for the same reasons that the political right does: its massive voter registration drives that turn out poor African Americans and Latinos against Republicans.
"Politicians are getting elected single-handedly due to this organization," he said. "No one was holding this organization accountable. No one in the media is putting pressure on them. We wanted to do a stunt and see what we could find."

If O'Keefe had said something incendiary about a racial motivation for undertaking his investigation of ACORN, one can be sure that the Post reporters would have quoted it instead of simply larding the context with an imputation of racism. The Post certainly provides no supporting quote.

It appears to me that Post reporters Darryl Fears and Carol D. Leonnig are alone responsible for introducing race to the discussion.
Associated Press reporters Sharon Theimer and Pete Yost pick up where the Post left off in this story:

James O'Keefe, one of the two filmmakers, said he went after ACORN because it registers minorities likely to vote against Republicans: "Politicians are getting elected single-handedly due to this organization," O'Keefe told The Washington Post. "No one was holding this organization accountable."

But did O'Keefe say any such thing? The Washington Post reporters imply the existence of a statement that is nowhere quoted. The AP takes the cue and puts the words in O'Keefe's mouth. It's quite a racket they've got going here, and someone really should call them on it.

There it is folks. The clearest example of made up racism and using the race card to divert from reality. The man has various ACORN employees helping to commit all manner of fraud and crimes but that isn't the important thing. The important thing is to create a conservative caricature and then smear him with it by using an out of context quote that isn't related in any fashion.

I'm sure someone on SNL will soon have him seeing Russia from his backporch pretty quickly. Call Jon Stewart quick, someone need so be SLAMMED. Get Dave Letterman, someone needs a top 10 done on them.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #53 of 76
Thread Starter 

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #54 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by FormerLurker View Post

I'll take "Talking To Themselves" for a thousand, Alex.

And the answer is.... A DAILY DOUBLE!!
eye
bee
BEE
Reply
eye
bee
BEE
Reply
post #55 of 76
Thread Starter 
You could try to address, the content, but there is no answer for that. The media bias is disgusting and factual.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #56 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

You could try to address, the content, but there is no answer for that. The media bias is disgusting and factual.

That's because there is no content and you are obviously just an idiotic, Obama-hating racist for even pointing out this supposed "bias".
[/SARCASM]
post #57 of 76
That Time cover with Limbaugh actually seems fairly prescient given how much damage talk radio and demagoguery in general has done to our national political discourse.
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #58 of 76
Thread Starter 
A cute cartoon that illustrates who got what level of attention related to lies and lying.



Who got the rebuke?

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #59 of 76
Thread Starter 
WaPo to O'Keefe: Sorry We Called You Racist in ACORN Story

Quote:
The Washington Post today published on page A2 a correction to a September 18 article on James O'Keefe and Hannah Giles, the duo behind "The $1,300 Mission to Fell ACORN" (h/t NewsBusters tipster Sean O'Brien):

A Sept. 18 Page One article about the community organizing group ACORN incorrectly said that a conservative journalist targeted the organization for hidden-camera videos partly becase its voter-registration drives bring Latinos and African Americans to the polls. Although ACORN registers people mostly from those groups, the maker of the videos, James E. O'Keefe, did not specifically mention them.

In other words: sorry we tagged you as a racist by putting words in your mouth
.

Sorry we couldn't report reality because we were so busy smashing you into a caricature. Sorry we couldn't use your actual words and instead had to substitute what we thought you would say.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #60 of 76
Thread Starter 
Reporters Should Be Upfront About Political Beliefs

The highlights..........

Quote:
When I announced last week that I was leaving ABC for Fox, some readers complained about my "bias." I replied: "Every reporter has political beliefs. The difference is that I am upfront about mine."

Look at today's burning issue: President Obama's pledge to redesign 15 percent of the economy. Virtually every reporter calls his health care plan "reform." But dictionaries define reform as "improvement."
So before they present any evidence, reporters pronounce Obama's plan an improvement. Isn't that bias?

Yes it is bias.

Quote:
Most reporting on the "stimulus" package has the same flaw. Just to call it "stimulus" is to editorialize, since the idea that government spending can truly stimulate an economy is at best doubtful. Many good economists say it can't be done. After all, the money is taken from somewhere else. But the economists rarely are quoted.

Again bias....

Quote:
In addition, reporters seem to think they've done their job if they merely describe the intentions behind the proposed "reform." But the burden of proof should be on the sponsors of regulation and spending. They should have to make a convincing case that their new rules are superior to the free market. Who cares about intentions?

Who cares about intentions? Well liberals and Democrats of course who use them to ignore reality.

The rest is a great read as well.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #61 of 76
Thread Starter 
http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/checker.aspx?v=GdkUqGSU4z

A nice comparison of the "news" as generated now for President Obama as opposed to when the facts were the same under President Reagan. Since Gibson doesn't care to give follow up numbers all the numbers are worse for African-Americans, Men and most subgroups under Obama as well.

We also have this article from Business and Media.org

Quote:
Network Reports 13 Times More Negative Under Reagan than Under Obama: An overwhelming majority of stories mentioning the Reagan administration were negative 91 percent (20 out of 22) while only 7 percent (1 out of 15) of Obama administration mentions were negative. Additionally, Obama mentions were favorable 87 percent of the time, but there were zero positive mentions of Reagan.
Networks Connect Reagan White House to Negative Jobs Numbers Almost Twice as Often as Obama: Unemployment stories in 1982 mentioned the Reagan administration 71 percent of the time (22 out of 31), but 2009 stories mentioned the Obama administration only 40 percent of the time (14 out of 35).

Finally.............

Quote:
Under Obama reporters have gone to great lengths to spin rising unemployment by finding “positive trends” in the job losses, even focusing on as few as 25 jobs being “saved” by the economic stimulus package. But when Reagan was president journalists showed unemployed families living out of their cars under a bridge in Texas and quoted Democrats or union leaders’ attacks on the president’s “wicked” and “sadistic” fiscal policies.

ABC’s George Stephanopoulos looked on the bright side for Obama Sept. 4, 2009, telling viewers, “the unemployment rate nears 10 percent, but the numbers aren’t all bad.” Rewind to May 7, 1982, when unemployment hit 9.4 percent – three-tenths of a percentage point lower than it would be in August 2009. That night, NBC found people in Seattle in dire straights.
“The lines for free food at food banks are four times what they were six months ago,” NBC’s Don Oliver told “Nightly News” viewers. Oliver’s report focused on the “new poor” and the emotional effects of unemployment, including suicide and battering.

It will be very interesting to see when the liberal media members themselves join the unemployed due to generating propaganda instead of news. Maybe Charles Gibson would be interested in raking my yard and painting a few rooms at a rental home of mine.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #62 of 76
Funny, the BBC (and dozen of other citizen journalists and media outlets) say that 'over a million' people marched in Spain to protest abortion. There are corroborating photos and video.

But when the news crosses the pond and lands at the New York Times, the crowd has suddenly whittled down to 'tens of thousands'.

To cover themselves in what is clearly an attempt to distort the news, they add a one-sentence paragraph saying 'There was no independent assessment of the crowds size.' Of course, there's no photo accompanying the story.

This is precisely why newspapers are being gutted and viewers end up turning to outlets like Fox News.
People know when they're being lied to.
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #63 of 76
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Tom Maguire has the list of people who recently attended a 2-1/2 hour off-the-record briefing with President Obama at the White House:

# Eugene Robinson of the Washington Post.
# E.J. Dionne of the Washington Post.
# Ron Brownstein of Atlantic Media and formerly with the LA Times.
# John Dickerson of Slate Magazine.
# Rachel Maddow of MSNBC.
# Frank Rich of the New York Times.
# Jerry Seib of the Wall Street Journal.
# Maureen Dowd of the New York Times.
# Keith Olbermann of MSNBC.
# Bob Herbert of the New York Times.
# Gloria Borger of CNN.
# Gwen Ifill of PBS.

Once again it looks like the White House has time for its troops in the media but not our troops in Afghanistan.

Remember this when all these folks write about President Obama's talking points for him while likewise claiming those not invited are astroturfing.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #64 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post

Funny, the BBC (and dozen of other citizen journalists and media outlets) say that 'over a million' people marched in Spain to protest abortion. There are corroborating photos and video.

But when the news crosses the pond and lands at the New York Times, the crowd has suddenly whittled down to 'tens of thousands'.

To cover themselves in what is clearly an attempt to distort the news, they add a one-sentence paragraph saying 'There was no independent assessment of the crowd’s size.' Of course, there's no photo accompanying the story.

This is precisely why newspapers are being gutted and viewers end up turning to outlets like Fox News.
People know when they're being lied to.

Sigh!

From the same article :
Quote:
Police estimates put the crowd at 250,000, but the regional government said that over a million had turned out, with the organisers claiming a turnout of two million.

I guess they turn to FOX News because they haven't learned to read the entire article.


Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #65 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by NOFEER View Post

the bloom is off the obama rose, he makes more gaffes than dan quayle
he is teleprompter dependent
when it breaks then he has to wait fumble bumble can't even remember his own speeches
i wish he would show what's in his heart, and fewer "code words" code language
we deserve less teleprompter

Maybe 2028?
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #66 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Sigh!

From the same article :

I guess they turn to FOX News because they haven't learned to read the entire article.



Err, Jimmac. He was referring to the second article, not the first. His point was that the NYT changed the numbers from the original article to 10's of thousands. I read it, and he is correct. Did you?
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #67 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoahJ View Post

Err, Jimmac. He was referring to the second article, not the first. His point was that the NYT changed the numbers from the original article to 10's of thousands. I read it, and he is correct. Did you?

What the hell does it matter? Facts are facts and this just underscores how off the numbers can be based on the source. Effectively negating his argument. Also he provided the link for the first which was part of his argument. Trying to seperate the two now and wiggle out of it is just stupid. Surely he read it?
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #68 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

What the hell does it matter? Facts are facts and this just underscores how off the numbers can be based on the source. Effectively negating his argument. Also he provided the link for the first which was part of his argument. Trying to seperate the two now and wiggle out of it is just stupid. Surely he read it?

You are being intellectually dishonest here if you expect me to believe that.

Read his post.

BBC reported the numbers. Some of the sources said millions. other said hundreds of thousands. By the time the story got to NYT it was tens of thousands. Any way you slice it the New York Times revised the numbers down by a few hundred thousand or more. That was his point. The first link was to give the original source, the second was the contrast position. The separation is to show how they changed the numbers in the story. His argument was not negated, it was still proven. How does NYT come up with tens of thousands after:

Quote:
From the same article : \tQuote:
\t \t \t\t Police estimates put the crowd at 250,000, but the regional government said that over a million had turned out, with the organisers claiming a turnout of two million.

Even if you believe the lower estimate? You are not slipping into partisan blindness are you?
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #69 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoahJ View Post

You are being intellectually dishonest here if you expect me to believe that.

Read his post.

BBC reported the numbers. Some of the sources said millions. other said hundreds of thousands. By the time the story got to NYT it was tens of thousands. Any way you slice it the New York Times revised the numbers down by a few hundred thousand or more. That was his point. The first link was to give the original source, the second was the contrast position. The separation is to show how they changed the numbers in the story. His argument was not negated, it was still proven. How does NYT come up with tens of thousands after:



Even if you believe the lower estimate? You are not slipping into partisan blindness are you?

Quote:
You are being intellectually dishonest here if you expect me to believe that.

His argument was that the Times were the only ones who changed the number when the only estimate was 2 million ( it turns out this came from it's organizers what a surprise! ). But it turns out the officials like the regional goverment said " Over a million " and the police not connected to to the group only saw 250 thousand. And who knows? Maybe the real official estimate is only tens of thousands ( it's been pretty whittled from " Over million " down at 250,000 anyway ).

No. You're trying to twist the facts. Simple yes or no question bucko. Were both links part of his argument? Yes or no?

Did one link contain the information I quoted? Yes or no?

If the answer is yes then I'm right because he supplied the links but left that particular information out which changes the real portrayal of the story entirely and his argument entirely. It doesn't matter what I believe about the report ( albeit I'd be much more likely to believe officials instead of the group's organizers ).

Anything else is you being not just " intellectually dishonest " but just plain dishonest.

Once again an example of why conservatives aren't in power now. Until they drop this type of subterfuge ( it's really great when they interpret the news for us ) they'll stay right where they are. The voting public's on to you now and they don't want to hear it.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #70 of 76
Everyone exaggerates, some are just fucking retarded,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rTVmmn0FLyE
post #71 of 76
Thread Starter 
Time.com - Joe Klein

To be polite, Joe Klein here represents every allegation he claims. In addition his train has truly gone off the track. He has moved from merely a heavy partisan to completely disconnected from reality.

Not content to just use ad-homs, Klein opts for a complete alternate universe.

Quote:
Let me be precise here: Fox News peddles a fair amount of hateful crap. Some of it borders on sedition. Much of it is flat out untrue.

That's right folks, sedition. Fox News is trying to get you to overthrow the government. Fox News is a hate group peddling lies to overthrow the government. The proof is... well names are enough of course. Meanwhile the liberal media complex runs fake memos about Bush and isn't engaged in any of these actions. They pass on fake Limbaugh quotes and are the truth tellers.

Quote:
If the problem is that stories bloated far beyond their actual importance--ACORN's corruption, Van Jones's radical past--are in danger of leaching out of the Fox hothouse into the general media, then perhaps the Administration should be a bit more diligent about whom it hires and whom it funds.

Yes Time and others cover the truly important stories like.... is there some waitress we haven't talked to about how big a tip Sarah Palin leaves yet. In the meantime there is a real danger that all the stories we can't cover and ignore might tip public perception to the fact that the liberal media complex doesn't report news.

Quote:
If the problem is broader--that Fox News spreads seditious lies to its demographic sliver of an audience--the Administration should probably be stoic: the wingnuts will always be with us.

This is where the delusion gets truly grandious. Time is part of the group that owns CNN. Klein paints the audience as a sliver, implying that Fox News is catering to an extreme. "We all know" that organizations like his, CNN and of course others like MSNBC most cater to the broad moderate middle. Except of course the ratings for CNN and MSNBC together do not add up to the Fox audience. If the Fox audience is a sliver, then the CNN audience is a sliver of a sliver. If the Fox audience is an extreme, then the MSNBC audiene is the extreme within an extreme.

Quote:
The best antidote to their garbage is elegant, intelligent governance.

Yes but since we don't have that in reality, that means pieces like this must be written which are withering attacks full of ad-homs and outright lies.

Quote:
The problem with war is that it diverts attention from the actual news. The Administration has tried to pursue a sophisticated, difficult domestic and foreign policy.

Sophisticated in what fashion, but selling out Turkey and letting Iran get closer to destablizing the entire Middle East and possibly the word? It diverts attention from actual news like the non-stimulating stimulus, a 9.8% unemployment rate, a collapsing currency and move away from the dollar due to government debt and monitizing, health care entitlement proposals that will bankrupt the economy even faster than the current entitlements are on track to do, etc. Is it difficult to go around the world apologizing for the existance of the United States and claiming to make everyone "feel" better while not changing a single action related to their own countries actions? There isn't a single thing that has gotten better under President Obama.

Quote:
It doesn't offer the quick-fix irresponsibility of a tax cut or an invasion.

Yes because fixing something within the term in which you are elected would be wrong and proof of irresponsibility. Thanks for the double-speak there Joe.

Quote:
It needs space, time and patience to explain. This is an enervating, midstream moment. It's not certain that the President's efforts from health care to Afghanistan will succeed.

Yes, what we need is ever more Obama airtime and celebrity coverage. If that damn Fox weren't covering items like ACORN instead of covering say, Obama going after the Olympics, Obama's jump shot, Michelle's garden and biceps, the girl's new dresses, date nights, going for a burger with the VEEP, Beer Summit, BO the White House dog, and don't forget racism, racism, racism and finally racism, we could give Obama the time and patience to explain what he is doing. Sure he has held more press conferences, especially prime time press conferences, received more coverage almost universally positive than any president ever, but what we really need is even more time and coverage and of course no dissent.

Quote:
We'll know a lot more in a month, but I really hope the White House hasn't launched this attack to fill the public space while the other issues are being sorted out.

Look, this is tremendously complicated. It is sophisticated. It needs space, time, thought, and anything else I can think of that might be positive but vague. It also requires a lot of time to get done and you can't expect this to be done yet. We can't own it yet. It isn't time to stop blaming Bush even though we are coming up on the one year mark of the administration. That said if you could conveniently give us another month, say until that next election conveniently passes, then MAYBE, suddenly we can start spilling the beans.

See Joe, here is the real problem. The current polls are looking very bad for a number of Democratic candidates. The poll numbers are dropping fast for Democratic support. Magazines like your own and newspapers with your perspective are going bankrupt quickly. CNN and MSNBC have viewerships that are dropping while the opposite is true for the other political orientation. No amount of name calling or allegations can change this pattern or the present facts. Eventually labels and intentions have to match reality and no, this terrible column or conviently giving Dems another month to "explain" the lack of economic progress won't change that. It also won't alter a spending tragectory that already has 9 trillion MORE being added to the national debt in the next decade while negotiating to spend even more than that.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #72 of 76
I love it when conservatives interpret the news for us don't you? ( NOT! )
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #73 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

His argument was that the Times were the only ones who changed the number when the only estimate was 2 million ( it turns out this came from it's organizers what a surprise! ). But it turns out the officials like the regional goverment said " Over a million " and the police not connected to to the group only saw 250 thousand. And who knows? Maybe the real official estimate is only tens of thousands ( it's been pretty whittled from " Over million " down at 250,000 anyway ).

no he did no say that.
Funny, the BBC (and dozen of other citizen journalists and media outlets) say that 'over a million' people marched in Spain to protest abortion. There are corroborating photos and video.
Nowhere there does he say the only estimates were 2 million. He states who saidthe estimates were over a million. You see what you want to see. His point was and remains that the NYT revised the numbers down. As for the rest of your post. Being based on your faulty premise it gets no further attention.
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #74 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoahJ View Post

no he did no say that.
Funny, the BBC (and dozen of other citizen journalists and media outlets) say that 'over a million' people marched in Spain to protest abortion. There are corroborating photos and video.
Nowhere there does he say the only estimates were 2 million. He states who saidthe estimates were over a million. You see what you want to see. His point was and remains that the NYT revised the numbers down. As for the rest of your post. Being based on your faulty premise it gets no further attention.

Quote:
Nowhere there does he say the only estimates were 2 million.

Yes I guess he was arguing over a million vs tens of thousands but it still doesn't change the point of the argument.

Quote:
and dozen of other citizen journalists and media outlets

You have links to support this?



Quote:
no he did no say that.

Earlier from Frank 777 :
Quote:
But when the news crosses the pond and lands at the New York Times, the crowd has suddenly whittled down to 'tens of thousands'.

To cover themselves in what is clearly an attempt to distort the news, they add a one-sentence paragraph saying 'There was no independent assessment of the crowd’s size.' Of course, there's no photo accompanying the story.

This is precisely why newspapers are being gutted and viewers end up turning to outlets like Fox News.
People know when they're being lied to.

This is his conclusion NoahJ! Which was the point of the argument! He was portraying this as the official estimate was over a million and the only other number he mentions was the time's tens of thousands. Making it look like their number was the only ambiguity. Do you see a reference to anything or anyone else?

Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #75 of 76
I don't see the point in commenting on this further. Everyone can see what Jimmac is trying to do after being called on his initial lie.
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #76 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post

I don't see the point in commenting on this further. Everyone can see what Jimmac is trying to do after being called on his initial lie.

Sure Frank. Black is white. Sure I believe you.

Nice wiggling!
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Liberal Media Bias - Don Lemon is pissed edition