If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Politicker)   Obama gives his big speech in Ohio, and the glowing press reviews are in: Politico wishes it was 20 minutes shorter, ABC dismisses it as just another lecture,and MSNBC rates it "one of the worst speeches I've ever heard"   (politicker.com) divider line 214
    More: Amusing, President Obama, ABC News, MSNBC, politicos, Ohio, stump speeches, Mike O'Brien, Jonathan Alter  
•       •       •

2065 clicks; posted to Politics » on 15 Jun 2012 at 12:21 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



214 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-06-15 12:59:53 AM
Don't care. This is a failing of the American politician system. We should be supporting the Syrian rebels; instead, we're so terrified of reelection that we can't be bothered to do anything besides make unfounded accusations. Who cares if the Russians are giving them brand new or refurbished Mi-24s? They're giving the Syrians Mi-24s! That's the problem, not whether they're new or Cold War vintage!
 
2012-06-15 01:00:28 AM

djkutch: Well, there's your liberal media.


Totally in the tank for that guy.
 
2012-06-15 01:09:35 AM

cameroncrazy1984: Romney does something stupid like have his campaign bus drive around the venue honking


But that's such statesmanlike behavior.

i284.photobucket.com
 
2012-06-15 01:10:41 AM

El Pachuco: cameroncrazy1984: Romney does something stupid like have his campaign bus drive around the venue honking

But that's such statesmanlike behavior.

[i284.photobucket.com image 85x95]


farking honkies.
 
2012-06-15 01:13:49 AM

Sabyen91: violentsalvation: MyRandomName: Watch most morning shows interview.the obamas, then watch a conservative. Tell me who gets softball questions.

There is a difference between FOX and MSNBC, sure. Everyone knows that, they report to THEIR audience. But if you don't think journalistic standards as a whole have almost completely collapsed, and collapsed without a bias, you are a fool. There are large-assed Kardashians to watch, FFS.

"This is CNN".

/worst offender in the chasing the juicy headlines business.


They are also the only cable news with any potential to cover the news well. It's sad.
 
2012-06-15 01:13:50 AM
You libtards don't understand. The liberal lamestream LLSM media is double reverse water carrying for Ba'ku Haakonian Ocampa. By saying that the pResident's speech sucked, they can give themselves cover from accusations that they are in the Current Occupant's camp.
 
2012-06-15 01:15:05 AM
O'Donnell said something like, "Both candidates gave speeches today but if you wanted to hear Romney's policy proposals you had to listen to Obama's speech."
 
2012-06-15 01:15:37 AM

Sabyen91: You ignore that they don't use the "Some people say" tactic.


Fox was first. They made a conscious decision to lean right - hell to plant a flag there. But then NBC made a business decision that MSNBC would counter Fox and be liberal. (It also decided CNBC would be almost fascist, for that matter, or at least decidedly "pro-capitalist" so as not to offend its viewers.) It's an audience building strategy where they all claim to be fair and balanced, but spend all day and night reinforcing stupid opinions about shallow, petty left/right battles that usually amount to nothing significant.
 
2012-06-15 01:17:23 AM

cmunic8r99: djkutch: Well, there's your liberal media.

 
2012-06-15 01:17:25 AM

moothemagiccow: lack of new material

He's not farking radiohead. You expected him to say something different from what he's been saying for the last six months? If they're jaded already, the press are going to hate the next 6 months of their lives.


I'm going to hate the next 6 months of my life just being subjected to this crap on a daily basis.

Can we just vote already?
 
2012-06-15 01:20:43 AM

Triumph: Sabyen91: You ignore that they don't use the "Some people say" tactic.

Fox was first. They made a conscious decision to lean right - hell to plant a flag there. But then NBC made a business decision that MSNBC would counter Fox and be liberal. (It also decided CNBC would be almost fascist, for that matter, or at least decidedly "pro-capitalist" so as not to offend its viewers.) It's an audience building strategy where they all claim to be fair and balanced, but spend all day and night reinforcing stupid opinions about shallow, petty left/right battles that usually amount to nothing significant.


This is why I get my TV news from foreign sources unless I catch the Big 3 nightly newscasts.
 
2012-06-15 01:22:42 AM

violentsalvation: Sabyen91: violentsalvation: MyRandomName: Watch most morning shows interview.the obamas, then watch a conservative. Tell me who gets softball questions.

There is a difference between FOX and MSNBC, sure. Everyone knows that, they report to THEIR audience. But if you don't think journalistic standards as a whole have almost completely collapsed, and collapsed without a bias, you are a fool. There are large-assed Kardashians to watch, FFS.

"This is CNN".

/worst offender in the chasing the juicy headlines business.

They are also the only cable news with any potential to cover the news well. It's sad.


That is true. They could but they go for missing blonde wimmins.
 
2012-06-15 01:24:20 AM

Mrtraveler01: moothemagiccow: lack of new material

He's not farking radiohead. You expected him to say something different from what he's been saying for the last six months? If they're jaded already, the press are going to hate the next 6 months of their lives.

I'm going to hate the next 6 months of my life just being subjected to this crap on a daily basis.

Can we just vote already?


No way, I haven't decided who I am voting for.

/Anybody who doesn't know by now should just stay home.
 
2012-06-15 01:24:38 AM

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: O'Donnell said something like, "Both candidates gave speeches today but if you wanted to hear Romney's policy proposals you had to listen to Obama's speech."


Romney has policy proposals?
 
2012-06-15 01:24:53 AM

Mrtraveler01: moothemagiccow: lack of new material

He's not farking radiohead. You expected him to say something different from what he's been saying for the last six months? If they're jaded already, the press are going to hate the next 6 months of their lives.

I'm going to hate the next 6 months of my life just being subjected to this crap on a daily basis.

Can we just vote already?


I vote we throw them all in a tank of starving piranhas and whichever one makes it to the surface, he's our next President.
 
2012-06-15 01:25:01 AM

moothemagiccow: He's not farking radiohead.


Michelle, on the other hand...


Heyo!
 
2012-06-15 01:26:24 AM
LasersHurt [TotalFark]


I actually watched the speech. It was very good - packed with facts, a little partisan snark here and there, but mostly good. He makes a good case, and I'm picking up what he's putting down.


www.doggydeucerml.com
 
2012-06-15 01:27:32 AM

ImpendingCynic: MyRandomName: God you are dumb. Let me put this simply... THE PRESIDENT ALWAYS RECEIVES HARSHER TREATMENT. They are responsible for more, they have more policy to criticize. Stop with your idiocy. Compare Obama coverage to 04 bush. Seriously you are dumb. The media didn't even investigate Obama dedicating his yearbook page to his dealer as a candidate, yet we all know how evil Ann romney is for riding horses. Grow up.

That was derptastic, even for you. Two "dumb"s means someone really got under your skin. And "the president always receives harsher treatment" followed by "The media didn't even investigate Obama" really pulls the shiatheap together.


lol
 
2012-06-15 01:27:35 AM

numbone: LasersHurt [TotalFark]


I actually watched the speech. It was very good - packed with facts, a little partisan snark here and there, but mostly good. He makes a good case, and I'm picking up what he's putting down.

[www.doggydeucerml.com image 400x267]


At least he created a job.
 
2012-06-15 01:30:28 AM

GAT_00: violentsalvation: cameroncrazy1984: violentsalvation: Yeah people like Alter are bending the truth for the right. whatever, farkers.

He's a victim of the same mentality as the others. If Obama makes a good speech and Romney does something stupid like have his campaign bus drive around the venue honking, they don't have a story.

They all came across with the same basic statement, and it has nothing to do with Romney. The speech was too long, it had little or no new material, it was not good for soundbites or invigorating anyone, it was only good background noise during a cat-nap.

I haven't heard it myself, and I don't plan to. But it is entirely possible that Obama and/or the speechwriters were off and the speech did not equal what it was touted to be. THere isn't any bias here, IMHO.

Except that every single network has been statistically shown to be harsher on the President than any Republican.

Start here and advance. Every single Republican candidate had at least one period where the media was more positive than negative in regards to them. Obama never has.


QFM-FT
And that included the three ring circus
Consisting of:
Rick Santorum
Michelle Bachmann
Newt Gingrich
Boring guy
Tim Pawlenty
Pizza Nutcase
Other Boring guy

Liberal media my aunt fanny
 
2012-06-15 01:32:39 AM

Sabyen91: numbone: LasersHurt [TotalFark]


I actually watched the speech. It was very good - packed with facts, a little partisan snark here and there, but mostly good. He makes a good case, and I'm picking up what he's putting down.

[www.doggydeucerml.com image 400x267]

At least he created a job.


Shovel garden trowel-ready, even.
 
2012-06-15 01:33:14 AM

violentsalvation: Sabyen91: numbone: LasersHurt [TotalFark]


I actually watched the speech. It was very good - packed with facts, a little partisan snark here and there, but mostly good. He makes a good case, and I'm picking up what he's putting down.

[www.doggydeucerml.com image 400x267]

At least he created a job.

Shovel garden trowel-ready, even.


Nice!
 
2012-06-15 01:34:41 AM

Mentat: violentsalvation: I haven't heard it myself, and I don't plan to. But it is entirely possible that Obama and/or the speechwriters were off and the speech did not equal what it was touted to be. THere isn't any bias here, IMHO.

That's the joke.



Well played sir, well played.

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: O'Donnell said something like, "Both candidates gave speeches today but if you wanted to hear Romney's policy proposals you had to listen to Obama's speech."


NPR summed the two speeches up with Romney basically saying "if you don't think the economy is awesome, vote for me" and Obama saying "Look at the things I do on the economy. Look at the things Romney will do. Pick the one you think will be better".

One of those two makes sense to me, and the other seems more like a deflection.
 
2012-06-15 01:34:53 AM

violentsalvation: They are also the only cable news with any potential to cover the news well. It's sad.


I just finished watching the speech. It was okay. It did have quite a few more facts than the average political speech. It was fairly confrontational. A lot of "if you think X is okay, vote for the other guy" stuff.

But I think I know why all the reporters are upset: Obama challenged them to report on the facts. He kinda hinted they needed to stop being so lazy and sensationalistic (yeah, I know).

I think he made them mad, lol. What? Actual reporting instead of who made a mistake today? How dare you!
 
2012-06-15 01:35:24 AM

Mrtraveler01: moothemagiccow: lack of new material

He's not farking radiohead. You expected him to say something different from what he's been saying for the last six months? If they're jaded already, the press are going to hate the next 6 months of their lives.

I'm going to hate the next 6 months of my life just being subjected to this crap on a daily basis.

Can we just vote already?


I wish. The primaries aren't even technically over. Romney won't get the nomination for another 2 and a half months.
 
2012-06-15 01:43:48 AM

downpaymentblues: violentsalvation: They are also the only cable news with any potential to cover the news well. It's sad.

I just finished watching the speech. It was okay. It did have quite a few more facts than the average political speech. It was fairly confrontational. A lot of "if you think X is okay, vote for the other guy" stuff.

But I think I know why all the reporters are upset: Obama challenged them to report on the facts. He kinda hinted they needed to stop being so lazy and sensationalistic (yeah, I know).

I think he made them mad, lol. What? Actual reporting instead of who made a mistake today? How dare you!


It's a bummer. They're really bad at their jobs. And they really don't seem to enjoy being told that.
 
2012-06-15 01:45:54 AM
Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.

Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battle-field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.

But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate -- we can not consecrate -- we can not hallow -- this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us -- that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion -- that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain -- that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom -- and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.


People said this one blew, too.
 
2012-06-15 01:47:12 AM

TheShavingofOccam123: Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.

Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battle-field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.

But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate -- we can not consecrate -- we can not hallow -- this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us -- that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion -- that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain -- that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom -- and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

People said this one blew, too.


It insisted upon itself.
 
2012-06-15 01:51:38 AM
Remember folks...when the media reports on "x", that means "x" never happened.

/you still won't get it in the morning if your liberal
 
2012-06-15 01:54:17 AM
Dammit.

your = you're
 
2012-06-15 01:54:50 AM

downpaymentblues: violentsalvation: They are also the only cable news with any potential to cover the news well. It's sad.

I just finished watching the speech. It was okay. It did have quite a few more facts than the average political speech. It was fairly confrontational. A lot of "if you think X is okay, vote for the other guy" stuff.

But I think I know why all the reporters are upset: Obama challenged them to report on the facts. He kinda hinted they needed to stop being so lazy and sensationalistic (yeah, I know).

I think he made them mad, lol. What? Actual reporting instead of who made a mistake today? How dare you!


Well, I am probably not going to watch it so I can't really have an actual opinion on the speech itself. And it might entirely be possible that the reporters felt pissed about Obama calling them out, but from what I read in the link it was the basically the same old Obama speech re-regurgitated and too long. I'm not saying he wasn't right in what he said or that it doesn't bear repeating.jpg, I can't, I didn't watch it. Basically what I read was they were hyped about a speech and they though '08 Obama was going to give it, but that wasn't the case. And I don't see that as media bias.
 
2012-06-15 01:55:19 AM

skipjack: Remember folks...when the media reports on "x", that means "x" never happened.

/you still won't get it in the morning if your liberal


How hard is it to get that? It was a petty, moronic statement.
 
2012-06-15 01:57:01 AM
Yeah, I think they're just pissed Obama told them to get off their ass and do their job.
 
2012-06-15 01:58:47 AM

violentsalvation: downpaymentblues: violentsalvation: They are also the only cable news with any potential to cover the news well. It's sad.

I just finished watching the speech. It was okay. It did have quite a few more facts than the average political speech. It was fairly confrontational. A lot of "if you think X is okay, vote for the other guy" stuff.

But I think I know why all the reporters are upset: Obama challenged them to report on the facts. He kinda hinted they needed to stop being so lazy and sensationalistic (yeah, I know).

I think he made them mad, lol. What? Actual reporting instead of who made a mistake today? How dare you!

Well, I am probably not going to watch it so I can't really have an actual opinion on the speech itself. And it might entirely be possible that the reporters felt pissed about Obama calling them out, but from what I read in the link it was the basically the same old Obama speech re-regurgitated and too long. I'm not saying he wasn't right in what he said or that it doesn't bear repeating.jpg, I can't, I didn't watch it. Basically what I read was they were hyped about a speech and they though '08 Obama was going to give it, but that wasn't the case. And I don't see that as media bias.


The problem I have with it is it was an average speech by Obama. Ok...average is pretty much what you would expect, right? These news outlets must have been expecting...what, Demosthenes? And he didn't live up to their expectations...so it is automatically a negative article.
 
2012-06-15 02:04:08 AM

Sabyen91: skipjack: Remember folks...when the media reports on "x", that means "x" never happened.

/you still won't get it in the morning if your liberal

How hard is it to get that? It was a petty, moronic statement.


Oh good. That means we both agree that just because a biased media reports on their bias, that their bias doesn't exist
 
2012-06-15 02:04:11 AM

Sabyen91: violentsalvation: downpaymentblues: violentsalvation: They are also the only cable news with any potential to cover the news well. It's sad.

I just finished watching the speech. It was okay. It did have quite a few more facts than the average political speech. It was fairly confrontational. A lot of "if you think X is okay, vote for the other guy" stuff.

But I think I know why all the reporters are upset: Obama challenged them to report on the facts. He kinda hinted they needed to stop being so lazy and sensationalistic (yeah, I know).

I think he made them mad, lol. What? Actual reporting instead of who made a mistake today? How dare you!

Well, I am probably not going to watch it so I can't really have an actual opinion on the speech itself. And it might entirely be possible that the reporters felt pissed about Obama calling them out, but from what I read in the link it was the basically the same old Obama speech re-regurgitated and too long. I'm not saying he wasn't right in what he said or that it doesn't bear repeating.jpg, I can't, I didn't watch it. Basically what I read was they were hyped about a speech and they though '08 Obama was going to give it, but that wasn't the case. And I don't see that as media bias.

The problem I have with it is it was an average speech by Obama. Ok...average is pretty much what you would expect, right? These news outlets must have been expecting...what, Demosthenes? And he didn't live up to their expectations...so it is automatically a negative article.


I think that it was over-hyped by someone and the twitterers in the the link didn't get what they were expecting.
 
2012-06-15 02:04:52 AM

Sabyen91: These news outlets must have been expecting...what, Demosthenes? And he didn't live up to their expectations...so it is automatically a negative article.


The cable news networks want blood. The bulk of them (I parse out some scattered individuals from the pack, like Anderson Cooper and Rachel Maddow, that continue to actually do their job) all but abdicated their role as journalists in favor of treating this not as a decision to decide who will lead this country, but as the ultimate reality show with the ultimate reality-show prize. And anything that doesn't make for good reality television is frowned upon.

I mean, really, how much time do any of the three networks spend in any given day covering non-political news or attempting to railroad news into political discussions? Like, say, covering an earthquake and letting it stay simply earthquake coverage as opposed to 'how will this earthquake affect the next election'?
 
2012-06-15 02:05:45 AM

skipjack: Sabyen91: skipjack: Remember folks...when the media reports on "x", that means "x" never happened.

/you still won't get it in the morning if your liberal

How hard is it to get that? It was a petty, moronic statement.

Oh good. That means we both agree that just because a biased media reports on their bias, that their bias doesn't exist


What media reported on their bias?
 
2012-06-15 02:08:19 AM

Gosling: Sabyen91: These news outlets must have been expecting...what, Demosthenes? And he didn't live up to their expectations...so it is automatically a negative article.

The cable news networks want blood. The bulk of them (I parse out some scattered individuals from the pack, like Anderson Cooper and Rachel Maddow, that continue to actually do their job) all but abdicated their role as journalists in favor of treating this not as a decision to decide who will lead this country, but as the ultimate reality show with the ultimate reality-show prize. And anything that doesn't make for good reality television is frowned upon.

I mean, really, how much time do any of the three networks spend in any given day covering non-political news or attempting to railroad news into political discussions? Like, say, covering an earthquake and letting it stay simply earthquake coverage as opposed to 'how will this earthquake affect the next election'?


It is silly. Bush got rave reviews for horrible debates...because they didn't expect more. Palin was expected to flame out and because she didn't piss her pants it was spectacular. Obama has, in the past, made incredible speeches. The fact that this one didn't hit their sweet spot and now the speech should be 20 minutes shorter. I guess he shouldn't have worn that short skirt.
 
2012-06-15 02:10:23 AM

violentsalvation: I think that it was over-hyped by someone and the twitterers in the the link didn't get what they were expecting.


There is a pattern. See my previous post. Dan Quayle would get rave reviews if he avoided saying the word potato. Churchill would get poor reviews if it wasn't the absolute BEST speech he had ever given.
 
2012-06-15 02:11:47 AM
Conservatives have short attention spans.
 
2012-06-15 02:12:52 AM
MSM pro-Romney bias
http://www.politicususa.com/media-bias-exposed-romney-gets-3-times-mo r e-positive-coverage-than-obama.html
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2011/11/why-didnt-repo r ters-call-romney-a-liar.html
http://www.nytexaminer.com/2012/03/secrets-and-lies-new-york-times-re p orters-give-mitt-a-free-pass
 
2012-06-15 02:13:49 AM

violentsalvation: but from what I read in the link it was the basically the same old Obama speech re-regurgitated and too long.



It was just okay, and yes, it was too long. I wouldn't go out of your way to watch it.
 
2012-06-15 02:16:13 AM

MyRandomName: cameroncrazy1984: MyRandomName: THE PRESIDENT ALWAYS RECEIVES HARSHER TREATMENT.

Prove it.

Hey farkhead. You remember my policy. Until you start citing your own posts you can go fark yourself. You cite nothing. Don't expect me to do your work. You can easily go Google 2008 media studies for the candidate or 2004 or 96 studies for the incumbent coverage.


Technically, the burden of proof was on you.

Someone asserted argument X.
You refuted X.
Someone asked for sources.

This isn't the slightest bit complicated.
 
2012-06-15 02:40:48 AM

djkutch: Well, there's your liberal media.


Yet the myth will continue.
 
2012-06-15 02:55:54 AM

skipjack: That means we both agree that just because a biased media reports on their bias, that their bias doesn't exist


Really? That's what you believe?
 
2012-06-15 03:01:37 AM
If he ain't singing Mammy and juggling watermelons then he's not entertaining.
 
2012-06-15 03:03:01 AM
It's Ohio. If it was boring, straightforward, just the facts, honest, no flowery bs, no clever allusions or symbolism, just saying what he meant, then he gave an excellent speech.
 
2012-06-15 03:03:54 AM

Pincy: If he ain't singing Mammy and juggling watermelons then he's not entertaining.


He wasn't fetchin' anything. WTF is up with that?
 
2012-06-15 03:09:20 AM

Pincy: If he ain't singing Mammy and juggling watermelons then he's not entertaining.


You are so 1930s. Ever heard of the Temptations? Singing "My Girl"? Update your music, and change the watermelon juggling to dancing FTW.
 
Displayed 50 of 214 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report