jake_lex: I think it's just that Romney is so inept, and such a bad liar, that the press just can't cover for him anymore. They're trying, but Romney and Ryan just keep making such stupid mistakes that they have to join the rest of us in chortling at Romney's boner.

Was it a Joker Boner though?

FTA
This was a dastardly liberal plot by the media indeed; it's hard to imagine what Romney could have done to prevent it. I mean, other than not issuing statements slandering the administration ("sympathetic") and then holding press conferences to drive home the point.


No need to comment on the article. This pretty much sums up the whole situation.

I thought the GOP was defending the First Amendment this week.
You know, the absolute right of a drug dealer, swindler and porn producer to be free to produce agitprop that sets the world on fire (as long as he's a good Christian).

FlashHarry: the hilarious thing is, up until now, the press has been largely pro-romney and anti obama.

Wow, the POTUS gets more negative coverage than somebody who holds no public office. Who would have thought such a thing could happen in Obama's America?

The Dog Ate The Constitution: FlashHarry: the hilarious thing is, up until now, the press has been largely pro-romney and anti obama.

Wow, the POTUS gets more negative coverage than somebody who holds no public office. Who would have thought such a thing could happen in Obama's America?

I don't think that he's complaining about the president's coverage.

jake_lex: FlashHarry: the hilarious thing is, up until now, the press has been largely pro-romney and anti obama.

I think it's just that Romney is so inept, and such a bad liar, that the press just can't cover for him anymore. They're trying, but Romney and Ryan just keep making such stupid mistakes that they have to join the rest of us in chortling at Romney's boner.

/and Romney will show us how many boners he can make

The Dog Ate The Constitution: FlashHarry: the hilarious thing is, up until now, the press has been largely pro-romney and anti obama.

Wow, the POTUS gets more negative coverage than somebody who holds no public office. Who would have thought such a thing could happen in Obama's America?

Possibly those who support that opponent with no public office Sikhs acknowledge that more often, rather than pretending to be persecuted by grand conspiracies.

Infernalist: The Dog Ate The Constitution: FlashHarry: the hilarious thing is, up until now, the press has been largely pro-romney and anti obama.

Wow, the POTUS gets more negative coverage than somebody who holds no public office. Who would have thought such a thing could happen in Obama's America?

I don't think that he's complaining about the president's coverage.

Correct. He'sointing out the hypocrisy and disingenuousness of repubs complaining about a supposed liberal press bias.

Marcus Aurelius: vpb: FlashHarry: the hilarious thing is, up until now, the press has been largely pro-romney and anti obama.

They just pull for the underdog because a close race is good for business.

Acknowledging that Romney doesn't have a prayer would be very bad for the October ad blitz. There's hundreds of millions of advertising dollars at stake. It will go right down to the wire, after which Obama will blow Mitt out of the water.

I you're right, but I also think there's the weird, irrational fear of being labelled as having a "Liberal Bias^TM," which, despite not carrying any penalty (or truth), seems to terrify every single news channel that isn't Fox News (who wear their bias proudly).

Should, not Sikhs.

Strange auto complete. You'd think it would go all the way to assuming "Muslim" in true redneck style.

"Kill the messenger" has been an all-purpose fark-up excuse for 2,000 years.
In modern GOP context, it's as juvenile as "The dog ate my homework" and only the indoctrinated buy it.

Vote out the obstructionist GOP this year please.
They are an embarrasment to our entire nation/

Correction: right now, Romney is the Repubwhiner.

Romney cheers the deaths of American embassy workers everywhere. Romney fails to show his tax returns again.

So how many of these does Mitt fall into?

Psychopathy Checklist-Revised: Factors, Facets, and Items

Facet 1 Interpersonal
Glibness/superficial charm
Grandiose sense of self-worth
Pathological lying (maybe? He does retroactively change his past a lot)
Cunning/manipulative

Facet 2 Affective
Lack of remorse or guilt
Emotionally shallow
Callous/lack of empathy
Failure to accept responsibility for own actions (this fark article!)

Facet 3 Lifestyle
Need for stimulation/proneness to boredom (Does running for prez count?)
Parasitic lifestyle
Lack of realistic, long-term goals
Impulsiveness
Irresponsibility

Facet 4 Antisocial
Poor behavioral controls (Pretending to be a cop and pulling people over in college)
Early behavioral problems
Juvenile delinquency
Revocation of conditional release
Criminal versatility

Other Items:
Many short-term marital relationships
Promiscuous sexual behavior

The argument that the press is looking for a tight race because of ad revenue is, imho, dead wrong. For one thing, political ads are, by law, sold at the *lowest* price, so a political ad is the least desirable from a profit standpoint. For another thing, all of those slots have already been sold well in advance.

I have friends and relatives who still think this guy will save America. Makes me sad for them.

LouDobbsAwaaaay: mgshamster: Pathological lying (maybe? He does retroactively change his past a lot)

Are you joking? This has got to be the most obvious hit on the list.

Lack of remorse or guilt
Emotionally shallow
Callous/lack of empathy
Failure to accept responsibility for own actions
Parasitic lifestyle
Irresponsibility

Bain Capital.

Well, I was trying to give a fair evaluation. And the one's I bolded are the one's I think he falls into.

Marcus Aurelius: vpb: FlashHarry: the hilarious thing is, up until now, the press has been largely pro-romney and anti obama.

They just pull for the underdog because a close race is good for business.

Acknowledging that Romney doesn't have a prayer would be very bad for the October ad blitz. There's hundreds of millions of advertising dollars at stake. It will go right down to the wire, after which Obama will blow Mitt out of the water.

Same thing happened 2008. The race 'Tightened Up' right up until the largest victory since St. Ronald The Reagan.

I also liked how the 'Lieberal Mediaaaarggh' gave Willard cover on his middle class statement yesterday. It wasn't a gaffe, either. Mittens honestly believes the top 2 pct are middle class.

LouDobbsAwaaaay: mgshamster: Pathological lying (maybe? He does retroactively change his past a lot)

Are you joking? This has got to be the most obvious hit on the list.

I thought this was a maybe, because I wasn't sure if it was him doing the lying, or if he's just listening to and repeating what is aids/handlers are telling him.

red5ish: The argument that the press is looking for a tight race because of ad revenue is, imho, dead wrong. For one thing, political ads are, by law, sold at the *lowest* price, so a political ad is the least desirable from a profit standpoint. For another thing, all of those slots have already been sold well in advance.

More attention = higher ratings = able to charge more for even the lowest rate
Plus the media itself has shifted from "wants and likes attention" to "craves attention like the neediest attention whore ever" over the past two decades

JAYoung: I thought the GOP was defending the First Amendment this week.
You know, the absolute right of a drug dealer, swindler and porn producer to be free to produce agitprop that sets the world on fire (as long as he's a good Christian).

I know right. All those good American values that guy represents; what happened to that? Curious how quickly they pivoted to the "but, but, the media..." It's almost as if being perceived as defending scumbags is a bad thing. But why start now?

MFAWG: Marcus Aurelius: vpb: FlashHarry: the hilarious thing is, up until now, the press has been largely pro-romney and anti obama.

They just pull for the underdog because a close race is good for business.

Acknowledging that Romney doesn't have a prayer would be very bad for the October ad blitz. There's hundreds of millions of advertising dollars at stake. It will go right down to the wire, after which Obama will blow Mitt out of the water.

Same thing happened 2008. The race 'Tightened Up' right up until the largest victory since St. Ronald The Reagan.

I also liked how the 'Lieberal Mediaaaarggh' gave Willard cover on his middle class statement yesterday. It wasn't a gaffe, either. Mittens honestly believes the top 2 pct are middle class.

Well,compared to him, they are.

mgshamster: So how many of these does Mitt fall into?

All of them. Any of them.

jake_lex: FlashHarry: the hilarious thing is, up until now, the press has been largely pro-romney and anti obama.

I think it's just that Romney is so inept, and such a bad liar, that the press just can't cover for him anymore. They're trying, but Romney and Ryan just keep making such stupid mistakes that they have to join the rest of us in chortling at Romney's boner.

/and Romney will show us how many boners he can make

So Mitt's only hope it so inspire Obama to make a huge boner of his own.

This was not a "black dudes got big dicks" post, but I don't mind if it is read as such.

red5ish: The argument that the press is looking for a tight race because of ad revenue is, imho, dead wrong. For one thing, political ads are, by law, sold at the *lowest* price, so a political ad is the least desirable from a profit standpoint. For another thing, all of those slots have already been sold well in advance.

Speaking as someone in radio, I must say you were correct about the prices of ads. You still are correct with regard to actual candidate ads, but for SuperPAC money, we can charge as much as we want.

The argument that the press is looking for a tight race is still wrong, IMO the rub is that the press is craven and afraid of beating up on one guy too much, and therefore being called biased.

TheSopwithTurtle: jake_lex: FlashHarry: the hilarious thing is, up until now, the press has been largely pro-romney and anti obama.

I think it's just that Romney is so inept, and such a bad liar, that the press just can't cover for him anymore. They're trying, but Romney and Ryan just keep making such stupid mistakes that they have to join the rest of us in chortling at Romney's boner.

/and Romney will show us how many boners he can make

[media.tumblr.com image 460x307]

Great find, that image.

Lochsteppe: red5ish: The argument that the press is looking for a tight race because of ad revenue is, imho, dead wrong. For one thing, political ads are, by law, sold at the *lowest* price, so a political ad is the least desirable from a profit standpoint. For another thing, all of those slots have already been sold well in advance.

More attention = higher ratings = able to charge more for even the lowest rate
Plus the media itself has shifted from "wants and likes attention" to "craves attention like the neediest attention whore ever" over the past two decades

This, so much this.

Democrats don't need to think they have this in the bag. these people are criminals. they will lie,cheat and steal to win. you simply must vote and urge others to go to the polls with you. nothing will happen if you don't put forth some effort. they have too damned much money and control the govts of the swing states.

vpb: FlashHarry: the hilarious thing is, up until now, the press has been largely pro-romney and anti obama.

They just pull for the underdog because a close race is good for business.

This.

The media is simply struggling mightily to preserve the biggest ratings day they get in a 4 year span. If it's not close, and especially if the losing side doesn't think they can win, people simply won't tune in.

MFAWG: I also liked how the 'Lieberal Mediaaaarggh' gave Willard cover on his middle class statement yesterday. It wasn't a gaffe, either. Mittens honestly believes the top 2 pct are middle class.

Rmoney may just be using an old definition of "middle class" which at one time meant those people who were rich enough to afford servants. In the "middle class" portion of my city with lots of houses built 100 years ago, those houses that haven't been remodeled have servant quarters and rear stairs for the servants.

Mitt probably doesn't realize that the cost of help has gone up and you need to be in a much higher income bracket to afford permanent help.

shower_in_my_socks: ROMNEY: "Why are the press making this all about me??? Is it because I called a press conference to make this all about me?"

aka The Sarah Palin Defense.

Lochsteppe: red5ish: The argument that the press is looking for a tight race because of ad revenue is, imho, dead wrong. For one thing, political ads are, by law, sold at the *lowest* price, so a political ad is the least desirable from a profit standpoint. For another thing, all of those slots have already been sold well in advance.

More attention = higher ratings = able to charge more for even the lowest rate
Plus the media itself has shifted from "wants and likes attention" to "craves attention like the neediest attention whore ever" over the past two decades

Personally I think the way elections are handled are more of an editorial policy decision than a profit driven decision in a lot of cases. Obviously this will differ from outlet to outlet and profit never falls off the chart as a factor but for a lot of political coverage you just see them regurgitating press releases or acting like stenographers without any investigative reporting or investment in analysis. The people who are really throwing themselves into making elections sound tighter than they are are the campaign personnel.

Certainly competition for viewers has grown over the last two decades with all the freaking cable channels and the internet, etc. I would have thought that better quality coverage would attract viewers but I would have been wrong. Apparently showing pretty ladies and echoing the opinions of the viewers is the way to go to get top ratings. That and getting the viewers all worked up and outraged about manufactured issues with emotional appeal.

jake_lex: /and Romney will show us how many boners he can make

He's made 5 so far.