printboy: ...The pathetic excuse for a WH Press Secretary Robert Gibbs (Obama's Minister of PropOganda)...

Robert Gibbels

That is all.

Dancin_In_Anson: Someone just got taken off the Christmas Ramadan card list.

FTFY.

/Secrit Muslin

Helen Thomas is a DIRTY LIB and like most LIB WOMEN she is ugly. She is not totally hot like Ann Coulter and all the other HOT CONSERVATIVE BROADS WHO LOVE REAL AMERICA. She just wants to BASH BUSH because she is an UGLY LIB filled with HATE!!!

/i already miss 2007

aurorous: Only the Retards who voted for Obama actually believed that. The Democrats made their desire very clear "Anybody but Bush" they never qualified that with "Must be smarter than Bush" "Must be more ethical than Bush"

Sir, are you insinuating that Obama is not smarter than Bush? Are you that dumb? Even Bush knows Obama is smarter than Bush, and he's a retard.

This thread is so saturated with freeper butthurt I will have to shower 5 times just to get the stank off me.

Hang On Voltaire: They spent all of 2008 cheerleading for Obama.

flagpin, ayers, arugula, wright, pledge of alliance, the bowling ally, orange juice, whole foods, obama's birth certificate, and whitey all say you're full of it.


The Washington press is garbage.

AspectRatio: It's OK when Bush does it, though.

"Uh... well, heh heh, um... heh... shucks, Don, that question wudn't on th' list... hehe heh he...."

Eat shiat, republican coonts.

The only thing a tu quoque (aka a "But Clinton" or "But Bush") can prove is that Obama and Bush are just as bad.

Kyro: What exactly do you think the Press Secretary's job is? No matter which party is in office, the press secretary's duties are just to spin bullshiat. Stop acting so horrified. Dana Perino and Tony Snow did the same thing. And let's not forget the king of all bullshiat, Scott McCLellan. His BS was so strong he was able to write a goddamn book about it.

You forgot the Master - Ari Fleischer. Man is a legend

Kyro: Just now arriving at that, Subby? Helen Thomas has been calling bullshiat on politicians for decades. Don't start admiring her when she's taking shots that happen to align with your political leanings.

Subby may not know that, since the Bush administration refused to let Helen Thomas ask questions for years. Pussies.

DarnoKonrad: Hang On Voltaire: They spent all of 2008 cheerleading for Obama.

flagpin, ayers, arugula, wright, pledge of alliance, the bowling ally, orange juice, whole foods, obama's birth certificate, and whitey all say you're full of it.


The Washington press is garbage.

They covered for him for all those things. Hell most of those were not even covered by the MSM. "It's the new Camelot!" "WOW look at her upper arms!" "He is so cool!" "They are just too competent to make fun of!"

Another benefit of the right pushing the "liberal media" crap is that whenever the media criticizes Obama, they can say "EVEN THE LIBERAL MEDIA is turning against him!!1!"

aurorous: too bad they pissed away a perfect opportunity to put this country on the right track

By electing whom, exactly? John "The Economy is Strong" McCain and Sarah "Europe is a Country" Palin?

Everything I came in here to say was said for me in the initial post of this thread. The attempts to politicize Helen Thomas during the Bush administration were just weak attempts at trying to paint any hard questions as partisan. There's a reason she's been doing her job for so many decades, and it isn't because she kisses anyone ass, regardless of which party they belong to.

She may be hideous and annoying to listen to, but she's one of the few real journalists out there. Obama dismisses her at his own peril.

You guys do realize that Helen Thomas is no longer a journalist, right?

And as such is less likely to be called on at press conferences, right?

Mmmk.

So Helen Thomas was the "wicked witch of the east" when she was calling out your team, but you like her now that she is taking swings at Obama?

Hypocrisy of the highest order, you has it.

Every single one of us should be demanding all the White House reporters be as critical and probing as Thomas. I voted for Obama and I'm *ecstatic* to see her doing her job on the new administration. If you repubs had an ounce of integrity you would've valued her the last eight years but instead it was easier to make fun of an elderly lady who isn't a beauty pageant queen like you're used to seeing sound out the words on Faux News.

Lenny_da_Hog: Subby may not know that, since the Bush administration refused to let Helen Thomas ask questions for years.

Wow this thread is just dripping with "B.. b.. b.. BUSH!"

I thought your guy was supposed to raise the bar; openness, transparency, and CHANGE!

GoldSpider: Lenny_da_Hog: Subby may not know that, since the Bush administration refused to let Helen Thomas ask questions for years.

Wow this thread is just dripping with "B.. b.. b.. BUSH!"

I thought your guy was supposed to raise the bar; openness, transparency, and CHANGE!

Helen Thomas is my guy?

Hang On Voltaire: they covered for him for all those things.

*snort* Whatever dude. Here:

Do not go gentle into that good night, Voltaire. Never let that liberal media lie die in the light. Rage, rage against the dying of the Right.

mmm... pancake: Holy crap, this thread has gone into "B-b-but Bush!!!!!" overdrive. When did the Bush administration become the new standard of excellence for Obama? I thought this guy was going to be BETTER than the last guy.

He is, by a metric shiatload. Don't worry, you'll see more of it over the next 7-1/2 years. If you don't die of infected butthurt.

elchip: Another benefit of the right pushing the "liberal media" crap is that whenever the media criticizes Obama, they can say "EVEN THE LIBERAL MEDIA is turning against him!!1!"

I don't think the press is never going to criticize Obama. They will. That doesn't make them non partisan. They also gave Bush positive coverage occasionally. However, as a whole, it is impossible not to say that the mainstream press is liberal and reports in that fashion. There is not even an argument anymore. You are welcome to your own opinion but not your own facts

Turns out Obama isn't all Rainbows and Unicorn farts like y'all expected, huh? Turns out he's a lot like Bush, huh? Deficit spending, opaque gov't, control of the media, committed to a pointless war.

If you liked Bush you're gonna LOVE Barack Obama.

the opposite of charity is justice: If you repubs had an ounce of integrity you would've valued her the last eight years but instead it was easier to make fun of an elderly lady who isn't a beauty pageant queen like you're used to seeing sound out the words on Faux News.

If they had super powers they could fly around the earth fast enough to reverse time and take us back to 2002... so what's the point of speculating about things that can't possibly happen ?

Although the time travel thing is slightly more plausible than the integrity one.

DarnoKonrad:

Do not go gentle into that good night, Voltaire. Never let that liberal media lie die in the light. Rage, rage against the dying of the Right.



Source (new window)

The Obama infatuation is a great unreported story of our time. Has any recent president basked in so much favorable media coverage? Well, maybe John Kennedy for a moment, but no president since. On the whole, this is not healthy for America. (new window)

So much concern in this thread.

Subby, is Free Republic down?

/good to see such partisan hackery so out in the open

Davey Croquette: Turns out Obama isn't all Rainbows and Unicorn farts like y'all expected, huh? Turns out he's a lot like Bush, huh? Deficit spending, opaque gov't, control of the media, committed to a pointless war.

If you liked Bush you're gonna LOVE Barack Obama.

Well, there are some differences but he is just another incompetent politician

So subby, do you also now appreciate what a hypocritical partisan assclown you are?

savage henry: So much concern in this thread.

Subby, is Free Republic down?

/good to see such partisan hackery so out in the open

As opposed to the Palin thread which is full of mature political thought

GoldSpider: Lenny_da_Hog: Subby may not know that, since the Bush administration refused to let Helen Thomas ask questions for years.

Wow this thread is just dripping with "B.. b.. b.. BUSH!"

I thought your guy was supposed to raise the bar; openness, transparency, and CHANGE!

First, how can you discuss change without mentioning Bush? That's like saying in May, "It's not perfect out, but at least it's nicer than in February. It's getting better" and someone replying, "but.. but.. but.. Winter!"

Second, if Thomas wasn't allowed to ask questions to the Bush administration, and she is allowed to ask questions to Obama's, isn't that indicative of a positive change towards openness?

Thirdly, unrelated specifically to you, are people actually concerned about that whole Huffington Post/Iran question? What is the problem?

GoldSpider: Lenny_da_Hog: Subby may not know that, since the Bush administration refused to let Helen Thomas ask questions for years.

Wow this thread is just dripping with "B.. b.. b.. BUSH!"

I thought your guy was supposed to raise the bar; openness, transparency, and CHANGE!

I think the point is that Subby (who outted himself, so this should be no surprise) indicated that he's only cheering on Helen Thomas now that she's asking hard questions of Obama. Therefore said Subbs is nothing more than a partisan hypocrite.

As others have said here, it's the job of the press to smack the press secretary around and call him on bullshiat. That is gratifying to see, and it needs to be done more no matter who is in charge.

If you all had any principles left you'd see that.

If the media is overwhelmingly too prone to favoring Obama then we should go after the sources that have the highest ratings to make the most impact on the problem.

Now let me see if I can remember who has been crowing lately about the ratings of their favorite source... hmmm. Damn, I can't seem to remember who it was...

Anyone able to help me out with that ?

Hang On Voltaire: DarnoKonrad:

Do not go gentle into that good night, Voltaire. Never let that liberal media lie die in the light. Rage, rage against the dying of the Right.



Source (new window)

The Obama infatuation is a great unreported story of our time. Has any recent president basked in so much favorable media coverage? Well, maybe John Kennedy for a moment, but no president since. On the whole, this is not healthy for America. (new window)



If I'm reading that chart correctly, around 43% of Obama's coverage is positive. That means that around 57% is non-positive. Damn! You convinced me, OMG! the press is in bed with Obama!

The implication by the reporter is that you should take and answer unfiltered questions voted on by facebook?
Seriously? While not quite as bad as the questions one would get from youtube its not far off.
Hussain, when are you going to show your birth certificate?
Why havn't you blown up all of Iran yet?

A 5% difference in BC (the first dem in what, four cycles?) and GWB (Who barely won an election that was highly controversial) in positive coverage doesn't really lend a lot of credence to this "
liberal media" thing, you know.

As for Barack Obama, he was an underdog and the first Black President. of course with the increased volume of news around those two facts, you'll get more "positive" stories. (I'd be willign to wager there wasn't a choice of "neutral" stories)

And again, for those of you out there trumpeting this: For the most part, no one is horribly sad about their choice in voting. Theres no massive buyers remorse. You can stop laughing about how sad we must be that we've been duped. Given who was on the other ticket, I'd make the choice again in a heartbeat.

Hang On Voltaire:

Your graph might actually mean something if the press coverage was compared to approval ratings, but without context it's meaningless.

Hang On Voltaire: However, as a whole, it is impossible not to say that the mainstream press is liberal and reports in that fashion. There is not even an argument anymore. You are welcome to your own opinion but not your own facts

While you're over there in fantasy land, could you get me a hot redhead in a green Ferrari? I mean, since you're already deluding yourself and all...

Jairzinho: If I'm reading that chart correctly, around 43% of Obama's coverage is positive. That means that around 57% is non-positive. Damn! You convinced me, OMG! the press is in bed with Obama!

I am assuming much of the 'non-positive' would be neutral, and a smaller amount would be negative.

Too lazy to click the link to find out.

Need coffee.....ggglrg

Car_Ramrod:
Second, if Thomas wasn't allowed to ask questions to the Bush administration, and she is allowed to ask questions to Obama's, isn't that indicative of a positive change towards openness?

She was allowed to ask questions in press briefings under Bush

Hang On Voltaire: DarnoKonrad:

Do not go gentle into that good night, Voltaire. Never let that liberal media lie die in the light. Rage, rage against the dying of the Right.



Source (new window)

The Obama infatuation is a great unreported story of our time. Has any recent president basked in so much favorable media coverage? Well, maybe John Kennedy for a moment, but no president since. On the whole, this is not healthy for America. (new window)

Oh joy. A chart about a completely subjective assertion.

Next let's see kittens ranked from cutest to ugliest indexed by color.

It's bunk. I'm not blind or deaf. The media is saturated with rightwing pundits. And they've been blowharding since day one.

There was a whole month of nothing but speculation if Obama was a socialist. I'm sure that's reflected in your nice chart as well.

chipspastic: Your graph might actually mean something if the press coverage was compared to approval ratings, but without context it's meaningless.

Are the approval ratings high because of the media coverage, or is the media coverage high because of the approval ratings?

Diogenes: Do Reid and Thomas have a valid reason for being in a snit? I'd say so. But then I think of what happened with Ganon and Armstrong Williams and it falls into perspective.

Did Bush offer to make things more transparent with government and "raise the bar" and all that shiat?

B.. bu... but.... HOPE & CHANGE!

Hang On Voltaire: She was allowed to ask questions in press briefings under Bush

Although they moved her to the back and demoted her from her traditional status of asking the first question, IIRC.

This is really a new media v. old media argument about power, prestige and status. Newspapers have been given exclusive access fo so long that they believe they have some god given right to access and any changes to the status quo are viewed with suspicion.

There is about zero merit to the anger at the Huffington Post guy, who didn't pre-screen his question and asked the President something that he dodged answering. These asshats are just upset that they aren't afforded the same prestige that they have grown accustomed to.

To be fair though having hand-picked folks ask quesitons at a town hall is total BS and Obama should be called on that. It annoyed me to no end when Bush idd it and I am no happier about it under Obama.

Spanky_McFarksalot: "We have never had that in the White House. I'm amazed that you people ... call for openness and transparency."

What does she mean by "you people"??????

Hang On Voltaire: DarnoKonrad:

Do not go gentle into that good night, Voltaire. Never let that liberal media lie die in the light. Rage, rage against the dying of the Right.



Source (new window)

The Obama infatuation is a great unreported story of our time. Has any recent president basked in so much favorable media coverage? Well, maybe John Kennedy for a moment, but no president since. On the whole, this is not healthy for America. (new window)

ROFLMAO! You do realize the irony of that piece, don't you?

Jairzinho: Hang On Voltaire: DarnoKonrad:If I'm reading that chart correctly, around 43% of Obama's coverage is positive. That means that around 57% is non-positive. Damn! You convinced me, OMG! the press is in bed with Obama

Or you could click the link he provided you twit.

FTFL: 37% of Obama's coverage has been positive, 40% neutral and 23% negative.

Shouldn't you be on a corner rallying people behind Obama's health care plan like a good sheep?

Well, there are some differences but he is just another incompetent politician

Which is excusable UNLESS you spent 7 months telling the world you were NOt just another politician. Although, Ray Charles could have seen Obama as a garden-variety hack. That America chose form over substance once again is no surprise, either.

Mordant: If the media is overwhelmingly too prone to favoring Obama then we should go after the sources that have the highest ratings to make the most impact on the problem.

It's an 'us' vs 'them' thing. Add up all the rest, does it approximate the viewership of Fox?