You know it's bad when your Presidential campaign starts relying on your wife's lawyer to do the dirty work.

Hillary Clinton said that Fox was covering the campaigns more level-handedly than anyone.

/wonder if Olbermann will beat off on tv during Barack's swearing in.

Nemo's Brother: Hillary Clinton said that Fox was covering the campaigns more level-handedly than anyone.

And?

? More like or

Nemo's Brother: Hillary Clinton said that Fox was covering the campaigns more level-handedly than anyone.

She said this while dodging heavy sniper fire.

lets all just bash Fox news and forget about the point raised in the story.

Obama and his friendds have gotten a free pass from the NYT and dozens of other media outlets while 'joe the plumber' has a media rectal exam.

and since when is Cindy running for president anyway?

inebriated brain: lets all just bash Fox news and forget about the point raised in the story.

Obama and his friendds have gotten a free pass from the NYT and dozens of other media outlets while 'joe the plumber' has a media rectal exam.

and since when is Cindy running for president anyway?

If you think Obama has gotten a free pass then you have the attention span of a gnat. You know who has gotten a free pass? Palin who has never held even one press conference. EVERY Republican talking point about Obama has been dutifully transmitted by the media, most of the time without any fact-checking whatsoever. Go cry somewhere else.

inebriated brain: Obama and his friendds have gotten a free pass from the NYT and dozens of other media outlets while 'joe the plumber' has a media rectal exam.

Stop lying, liar. The media scrutinized Obama and gave tons of press to his opponents and detractors for over a year before Joe Douchebag came onto the scene. Or did I just imagine weeks of discussion over some jerkass named Reverend Wright?

Nemo's Brother: /wonder if Olbermann will beat off on tv during Barack's swearing in.

During the 2000 and 2004 campaigns, Carl Cameron was having sex with someone from the Bush campaign.

/his wife, but still

inebriated brain: lets all just bash Fox news and forget about the point raised in the story.

There is no point to the story. It's just a lot of huffing and puffing.

Obama and his friendds have gotten a free pass from the NYT and dozens of other media outlets while 'joe the plumber' has a media rectal exam.

And except for all the stories in the media there are about his shortcomings, faults, and problems, you'd be right.

and since when is Cindy running for president anyway?

She'd be the First Lady. And, contrary to what a lot of opponents of Hillary Clinton had suggested during her run for Democratic candidate, the First Lady is involved in politics at a high level. Her past is semi-relevant, though you're right in that Cindy shouldn't be a primary concern, unless she was still addicted to drugs, or turning tricks in a back alley, or selling guns on the black market, or something.

kronicfeld: Stop lying, liar. The media scrutinized Obama and gave tons of press to his opponents and detractors for over a year before Joe Douchebag came onto the scene. Or did I just imagine weeks of discussion over some jerkass named Reverend Wright?

The point is the MSM did not bring these things to light without the untraditional media forcing them. You honestly think CNN or any of them would have even brought up Rev. Wright had his words not been brought to light by Sean Hannity?

inebriated brain: Obama and his friendds have gotten a free pass from the NYT and dozens of other media outlets while 'joe the plumber' has a media rectal exam.

Right. You realize they supported Hillary in the Primaries, right?

Personally, I hope you are right. About time to balance out 8 years of the media gleefully letting the Right Wing do whatever the hell it wants no questions asked.

Must REALLY suck to be a Republican these days, huh?

The system of news is going to have to change, and I think its pretty easy to see how its going to happen. It used to be you had a newspaper which hired people who's job it was to find out the information, and then the paper would publish it. The model of "gathering facts" and "dispersing facts" were combined into one unit. That's gonna have to change, and the role of the "old media" is going to morph more into a "gathering facts" role. How this will work economically...who the hell knows.

inebriated brain: The point is the MSM did not bring these things to light without the untraditional media forcing them. You honestly think CNN or any of them would have even brought up Rev. Wright had his words not been brought to light by Sean Hannity?

So now Sean Hannity is some obscure figure? From what I have seen, the media (mainstream or not) has investigated everything the McCain campaign has claimed about Obama. Just because it's been subsequently discovered that pretty much everything is either a lie or a non-issue does not mean he's been given a "free pass."

inebriated brain: The point is the MSM did not bring these things to light without the untraditional media forcing them.

Yea, the MSM had to be dragged into playing those Rev. Wright clips over and over and over again. The MSM really resisted hinting that Obama might be Muslim.

You honestly think CNN or any of them would have even brought up Rev. Wright had his words not been brought to light by Sean Hannity?

Wait... you think Fox News counts as untraditional media? Well, no wonder you're a moron.

PC LOAD LETTER: inebriated brain: Obama and his friendds have gotten a free pass from the NYT and dozens of other media outlets while 'joe the plumber' has a media rectal exam.

Right. You realize they supported Hillary in the Primaries, right?

Personally, I hope you are right. About time to balance out 8 years of the media gleefully letting the Right Wing do whatever the hell it wants no questions asked.

Must REALLY suck to be a Republican these days, huh?

Actually it really sucks to be either Republican or Democrat these days. Did anyone see a president in that debate last Wednesday? I saw two grown men dodging questions left and right. It's really sad that it's come down to these two to be the leaders of the free world.

The comforting thing about it is that we've survived the mediocrity in the past, from Carter to Bush, we've always come through in the end. Maybe not unscathed, but we've survived. And we'll survive this time regardless of who wins.

Gaboo: So now Sean Hannity is some obscure figure?

No but his on the evil fox news, and he does talk hate radio. So obscure, no. Traditional, no.

From what I have seen, the media (mainstream or not) has investigated everything the McCain campaign has claimed about Obama.

Bill Ayers. Community organizing. Obama drug use. campaign contributions. The list goes on and on about what they won't investigate. And when i say investigate, I mean actually find out facts, not just take the word of the Obama campaign.

I don't get this PITA thing. Fox News is obviously the butt of the joke -- why would this get rated as "fascist"?

No reasonable person would consider Fox News more credible than the New York Times.

superdolfan1: Actually it really sucks to be either Republican or Democrat these days. Did anyone see a president in that debate last Wednesday? I saw two grown men dodging questions left and right. It's really sad that it's come down to these two to be the leaders of the free world.

The comforting thing about it is that we've survived the mediocrity in the past, from Carter to Bush, we've always come through in the end. Maybe not unscathed, but we've survived. And we'll survive this time regardless of who wins.

What question did Obama duck? I'm not saying he didn't, but if you're going to make an accusation, make it specific.

inebriated brain: kronicfeld: Stop lying, liar. The media scrutinized Obama and gave tons of press to his opponents and detractors for over a year before Joe Douchebag came onto the scene. Or did I just imagine weeks of discussion over some jerkass named Reverend Wright?

The point is the MSM did not bring these things to light without the untraditional media forcing them. You honestly think CNN or any of them would have even brought up Rev. Wright had his words not been brought to light by Sean Hannity?

Uhh, ABC was the one who broke that story, my friends. And as mentioned before, the NYT endorsed Senator Clinton and had driven the Kossacks to a mouth-frothing frenzy this spring. So, if anyone's gotten a free pass from the media, it's Senator McCain, hands down. Sorry to shatter your fragile view of the world- though I doubt I've actually shattered it; I imagine your capacity for changing course intellectually based on new evidence ranks up there with a brick wall.

You've got to admit, she does look like a crackhead.

inebriated brain:

Bill Ayers.

You're joking, right? They've been talking about this 24/7, and the general consensus is "non-issue." If McCain wants to keep bringing it up, fine... it just makes him look more and more desperate.

inebriated brain: Community organizing.

This is a bad thing how?

inebriated brain: Obama drug use.

Come on, It's 2008. I couldn't possibly care less if somebody smoked a few joints or did a couple lines in college. I don't want to toss out the old line "Everybody does it," but don't try to tell me McCain never touched anything illegal in his life. Proof may not exist, but quite frankly, who cares?

inebriated brain: campaign contributions.

This is news to me, but I can assure you when it comes to campaign contributions there's likely an equal amount of shady crap on both sides.

"Why Paris Hilton is a slut, by Lindsay Lohan"

superdolfan1: Did anyone see a president in that debate last Wednesday?

Charles Krauthammer did, and it wasn't McCain. ^{(^)}

Decorative glazed porcelein pot that sits high on the shelf except on special occasions, meet kettle, fresh from the wood-burning fireplace.

inebriated brain: lets all just bash Fox news and forget about the point raised in the story.

Obama and his friendds have gotten a free pass from the NYT and dozens of other media outlets while 'joe the plumber' has a media rectal exam.

and since when is Cindy running for president anyway?

Right, I don't remember the media ever demanding for Obama's birth certificate 60 times, or this fellow named Rev Wright, or how Obama is elitist because he can say arugula or something Obama and flag pins. Nope, never saw those stories before ever. Damn liberal media.

And since when was Michelle Obama running for president when they kept harping on her by saying how she was never proud of America?

Heres the thing. They did stories about the wives of both candidates. And although the story of Cindy McCain isn't exactly a picturesque one, it is her story. They aren't stooping to any low... they're just telling the story.

That being said... I've never liked whiners or people who "play the victim". That doesn't mean I have a problem with people who have legitimate gripes or anything of the sort. In this instance I think they are "play the victim" in the sense that they Cindy McCain isn't really a victim of media bias, but they pretend she is.

We all know when people run for presidency, LOTS of information about them and their families comes out. We, as voters, need all the information we can get if we're going to make informed and good choices for who will run our country. That includes information about Cindy McCain and Michelle Obama. But... when the McCain stance is to play the victim... well... hmmm Let's just say I didn't form a poor opinion of Cindy McCain because she has had a drug problem or because of her problems with having a child. But when she sends her lawyer to play her up as some kind of victim, that looks bad to me and lowers my opinion of her. Originally I just had a low opinion of her because she slept with a married man (John McCain) and contributed to his infidelity (something I feel strongly about).

So that's the deal... with me at least.

inebriated brain: Gaboo: So now Sean Hannity is some obscure figure?

No but his on the evil fox news, and he does talk hate radio. So obscure, no. Traditional, no.

From what I have seen, the media (mainstream or not) has investigated everything the McCain campaign has claimed about Obama.

Bill Ayers. Community organizing. Obama drug use. campaign contributions. The list goes on and on about what they won't investigate. And when i say investigate, I mean actually find out facts, not just take the word of the Obama campaign.

What exact facts are you looking for? Whether or not Obama used drugs in his youth? He admitted that in his book. Is there something erratic in his behavior that suggests that he is using them now?

Or is it whether or not Ayres and Obama have planned terrorist incidents together recently?

Or is it whether or not Obama got illegal campaign contributions that they did not report? What exactly has not been investigated about this?

Or is it just that your candidate has run one of the absolute worst campaigns by a nominee of a major party in American history?

bronyaur1: Or is it just that your candidate has run one of the absolute worst campaigns by a nominee of a major party in American history?

FTW

Well before this really gets going, let me say that earlier this summer I happened to find an issue of Harper's Bazaar (yes, the fashion mag) from summer 2007. A full year old, sitting in recycling (I was eating alone for lunch, and the magazines available were rather vintage).

The article was all about Cindy McCain. This was long before Palin, of course, and so Cindy was the "woman associated with McCain," getting the spotlight for how she would be as a first lady. The article introduced his kids (all of 'em) and showed Cindy in ballgowns that cost more than my HOUSE (lent by the magazine, of course, that's what that magazine is FOR). She looked really good.

Anyway, the article talked about her drug use, and quoted her on it, and it came off rather well - she realized her life wasn't going well or productively, put a stop to it, etc. It was a sympathetic article, and for the record, her past drug use does not bother me.

I'm not a McCain supporter, but the past drug use of any candidates in this race OR spouses are not what I based my decisions on.

The other point I never see made is that even if there was a liberal bias in the mainstream media, that should say a lot about the parties themselves and not just about an individuals' political biases. What I mean is, these people are inundated with a much larger flow of information than the average American is on a daily basis. They make their living by reporting on and investigating the major events in the world. After eight years of reporting daily on every farkup of the Bush administration, is it any wonder that these people have largely decided that Obama would make a better POTUS? That the Republicans have by-and-large screwed over the American people? It's like if someone's job were to taste food all day and if they decided they like one restaurant's food over another, someone saying "Oh you're just biased for them." The more pertinent point is that it's these people's careers to think about and report these things. It's not like the media gains anything personally by a certain party being in power, in fact a lot of them are quite wealthy and would benefit financially from Republican tax policies. You think people like Jon Stewart, Bill Maher, Keith Olbermann and all the major reporters on the major stations don't make more than 250K per year? If they show a bias for one candidate, their opinion should not be considered irrelevant.

inebriated brain: Obama and his friendds have gotten a free pass from the NYT and dozens of other media outlets while 'joe the plumber' has a media rectal exam.

I have problems following the logic behind this argument. You find it more probable that since there is publish less dirt about Obama than on other people, there must be some kind of coverup by the media? Have you ever considered that the reason may be that there is less dirt about Obama than many other people?

Joe the plumber gets ratings right now, and can drink my hot stinky pee.

This thread needs more trolls, so I can lick their sweet tears

This thread will bring 'teh lulz'.

cpttripps: ? More like or

Yep.

"b-b-but ACORN!"

"b-b-but voter purges/caging!"

"b-b-but Ayers!"

"b-b-but troopergate!"

"b-b-but he's an Arab mooslim!"

"b-b-but he's old!"

"b-b-but he's a super-secret america-hating socialist!"

"b-b-but so is McCain!"

These are the issues so often trotted out to help 'inform' voters. The overpowering majority of which I see as men of straw, marching implacably along the wave of 'mediocratic' insanity.

FTFA: "Nor have you interviewed his poor relatives in Kenya and determined why Barack Obama has not rescued them. Thus there is a terrific lack of balance here."

Why exactly would they need to be saved? They have their own lives over their, and it's their home.

Just because someone's nation is relatively poor, doesn't mean that they can't live a happy life in their own country.

inebriated brain: The point is the MSM did not bring these things to light without the untraditional media forcing them. You honestly think CNN or any of them would have even brought up Rev. Wright had his words not been brought to light by Sean Hannity?

Hannity is "non-traditional" media?

The MSM has talked about Wright. They've talked about Ayers, they've talked about the Rez, they've done the whole dog-and-pony show. There just isn't anything there. I'm sorry you won't be satisfied with anything less than tangents being turned into hard news and ending in outright vilification of Obama by all media outlets, but, in the words of the Dread Pirate Roberts, you need to get used to disappointment.

inebriated brain: and since when is Cindy running for president anyway?

"Michelle Obama isn't proud of America"

"Terrorist fist jab"

go fark yourself you myopic turd

Judith Miller. Don't assume the nytimes is that much better than fox.

EdTheHead: You've got to admit, she does look like a crackhead.

I'd let her suck my dick for coke.

Atillathepun: Nemo's Brother: Hillary Clinton said that Fox was covering the campaigns more level-handedly than anyone.

She said this while dodging heavy sniper fire.

And she used a heavy southern accent.

It's funny, Fox News spends almost as much time quoting the NYT as as a source as they do bashing them. Which is it, are they a legitimate source of information or biased trash?

neonstz: Have you ever considered that the reason may be that there is less dirt about Obama than many other people?

This is part of the result of the decline of education in this country. The failure of critical thinking, and the rise of gut-based reality. I can't tell you how many times I've seen some idiot saying Obama has yet to elaborate about Ayers or the Muslim thing simply because he has not "admitted" what they already believe to be true regardless.

Faux News figured this out, that people want to hear things they already believe. Bad for democracy/progress, but good for business I guess.

cpttripps: The other point I never see made is that even if there was a liberal bias in the mainstream media, that should say a lot about the parties themselves and not just about an individuals' political biases. What I mean is, these people are inundated with a much larger flow of information than the average American is on a daily basis. They make their living by reporting on and investigating the major events in the world.

This "but the media are teh smarter because they're liberal!" approach doesn't work. Republicans make up a bigger percentage of white collar business. They too accept a larger flow of information than the average American, and routinely get to see what makes America tick.

But it would be incredibly arrogant to assume that makes Republicans smarter, just as you're trying to imply with the largely Democratic media.

The article the campaign is crying about. I don't really see the attack here...

Link (new window)

justoneznot: It's funny, Fox News spends almost as much time quoting the NYT as as a source as they do bashing them. Which is it, are they a legitimate source of information or biased trash?

That depends. Is the information pro-Republican or not?

This is a simple metric.

inebriated brain: Gaboo: So now Sean Hannity is some obscure figure?

No but his on the evil fox news, and he does talk hate radio. So obscure, no. Traditional, no.

From what I have seen, the media (mainstream or not) has investigated everything the McCain campaign has claimed about Obama.

Bill Ayers. Community organizing. Obama drug use. campaign contributions. The list goes on and on about what they won't investigate. And when i say investigate, I mean actually find out facts, not just take the word of the Obama campaign.

You look like the kind of douchenozzle that would say "hate radio". Seriously, grow up.

Endless whining

Rich Bond, then chair of the Republican Party, explained during the 1992 election, "There is some strategy to [bashing the 'liberal' media]. . . . If you watch any great coach, what they try to do is 'work the refs.' Maybe the ref will cut you a little slack on the next one."
http://www.utne.com/2003-07-01/Myth-of-the-Liberal-Media.aspx

"I admit it," Bill Kristol told The New Yorker in 1995. "The whole idea of the 'liberal media' was often used as an excuse by conservatives for conservative failures."
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20000313/alterman