Misinformation starts early in Bernard Goldberg's latest book
SUMMARY: Early in his new book A Slobbering Love Affair: The True (and Pathetic) Story of the Torrid Romance Between Barack Obama and the Mainstream Media, Bernard Goldberg offers an example of the media's purported "pro-Obama bias" that collapses on minimal review. In Chapter One, Goldberg cites as evidence the fact that The Early Show ran a segment called "Five Things You Should Know About Barack Obama" that featured trivia about Obama. But five days later, the show ran a segment called "Five Things You Should Know" about Sen. John McCain.
In the introduction to A Slobbering Love Affair: The True (and Pathetic) Story of the Torrid Romance Between Barack Obama and the Mainstream Media (Regnery), which Media Matters for America obtained in advance of its January 26 publication date, Bernard Goldberg claims that during the 2008 presidential campaign, "the mainstream media crossed a line. As a result, their credibility is in tatters. Hardly anyone trusts them anymore." But an example Goldberg offers early in the book -- in Chapter One -- of the "mainstream media['s] cross[ing] the line" collapses on minimal review. Goldberg writes that the media were "championing" Obama and cites as evidence that the June 18, 2008, edition of CBS' The Early Show ran a segment called "Five Things You Should Know About Barack Obama" that featured trivia about Obama. However, CBS also ran a segment days later called "Five Things You Should Know" about Sen. John McCain. The segment featured trivia such as McCain's high school nickname, television and movie cameos, and enjoyment of bird-watching and the fictional character Borat.
Goldberg writes in his first chapter:
Still, some on the Left were arguing that while there indeed was a pro-Obama tilt in the media, it had nothing to do with liberal media bias, which they dismissed as a conservative myth. What was really happening, their argument went, was that Obama was beating McCain in the polls and that perception -- of Obama as a winner -- was what was driving his favorable news coverage. And while there may be something to that, there was also the tone of the coverage, the fawning, I'm-just-so-thrilled-to-be-in-Obama's-presence tone -- that led many of us inescapably to conclude that a lot of mainstream journalists were not just covering Barack Obama, they were championing him.
[...]
There was Jeff Glor, one of the rising stars at CBS News, who reported on "Five Things You Should Know About Barack Obama." Sounding more like Obama's campaign manager than a network news correspondent, Glor helpfully related some really crucial information on the fastest rising star in politics: "In addition to enjoying basketball and cycling during down time, Obama loves to play Scrabble. ... Obama's job as a teenager was at a Baskin-Robbins and to this day he does not like ice cream. ... This is a man who plays to win. No matter what it is, whether it's the woman he wants to date or elected office or board games, there is an ambition there. There is a determination."
You can't make this crap up! [Pages 16-17]
But The Early Show also ran a "Five Things You Should Know" segment about McCain days later. During the June 18 broadcast following the segment on Obama, Glor even mentioned that the McCain segment was "[c]oming up soon enough." From the Nexis database transcript:
JULIE CHEN (co-host): All right, so when do we get to learn about the five things we don't know about McCain?
GLOR: John McCain coming up. That's our next segment.
CHEN: All right.
GLOR: Not today.
CHEN: Not tomorrow?
GLOR: Coming up soon enough.
CHEN: Oh, that's a tease.
GLOR: TBD.
CHEN: All right. All right. Jeff Glor, thanks so much.
Indeed, on the June 23, 2008, edition of The Early Show, co-host Harry Smith said: "Last week we showed you the five things you probably didn't know about Barack Obama. Now we continue our series, Five Things You Should Know, this time about John McCain." During his report, Glor discussed, among other topics, McCain's high school nickname and stated that McCain was a "maverick even back in high school." Glor later reported a "couple other things we learned about John McCain that did not quite make our list," including that McCain is "an avid bird-watcher," is a "huge fan of Borat" and has made appearances in the movie Wedding Crashers and the television drama 24. Glor concluded by expressing his "takeaway" from the list: "I would say with John McCain's it's a commitment to country, the idea of service. I mean, this is a man who's done everything, been everywhere all over the world and still there's this desire, I'm not done yet."
From the Nexis database transcript of the June 23, 2008, edition of The Early Show:
SMITH: Last week we showed you the five things you probably didn't know about Barack Obama. Now we continue our series, FIVE THINGS YOU SHOULD KNOW, this time about John McCain. And here with some interesting political tidbits, EARLY SHOW national correspondent Jeff Glor.
Good morning.
GLOR: Harry, good morning to you. So much of John McCain's story is so well-known, it was not easy coming up with five things. But here's a list we think might surprise you.
MCCAIN: I've served our country all my adult life and I am prepared...
GLOR: Number five: McCain was not born in any of the 50 United States.
WALTER SHAPIRO, Washington Bureau Chief, Salon.com: John McCain is the first presidential candidate to be born in--wait for the beat--the Panama Canal Zone.
GLOR: In fact, McCain lived there almost the whole first year of his life. His father had been stationed there by the Navy, creating an eventual source of controversy.
SHAPIRO: The Constitution says a president has to be a natural-born citizen.
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R-SC): I think we're all--feel really good that being assigned to the Panama Canal by the Navy and being born on a military base where you're doing your duty makes you an American citizen.
GLOR: Number four: A maverick even back in high school, John McCain was nicknamed "The Punk."
Offscreen Voice #1: There was always the cigarette in the corner of his mouth.
GLOR: A reputation that followed him to the Naval Academy.
SHAPIRO: John McCain graduated five slots from the bottom of the Annapolis class of 1958.
GRAHAM: I'd loved to have met the other four. He's obviously a very bright guy. I think his problems at the Naval Academy had to do with his maverick streak more than his intellect.
GLOR: Number three: When McCain was shot down in Vietnam, it was not his first, it was not his second, but his third plane crash as a pilot.
GRAHAM: I think John represents the spirit of a Navy fighter pilot to the fullest, and I will just end it with that.
GLOR: Number two: McCain's North Vietnamese captors called him "The Crown Prince."
(Excerpt from Vietnam era footage)
Offscreen Voice #2: Who is your father?
MCCAIN: His name is Admiral John McCain.
(End of excerpt)
GRAHAM: John's dad was in charge of the Pacific.
Offscreen Voice #3: (From Vietnam era footage) Want some light?
SHAPIRO: And the Pacific included the air over Vietnam.
GRAHAM: They were going to let him go as a gesture to the United States, and John said basically no.
GLOR: And the number one thing you might not know about John McCain? When he first ran for Congress, he was charged with being a carpetbagger.
SHAPIRO: John McCain decided to move to the state of Arizona, a state in which he never lived, and run for the US House in 1982. The Republicans running against him shouted 'Carpetbagger! Carpetbagger!'
GRAHAM: And I think he had a pretty good reply. 'For the longest I've stayed anywhere was in Vietnam.' And that put it in perspective.
SHAPIRO: Game, set and match.
GLOR: A couple other things we learned about John McCain that did not quite make our list. Senator Graham told us that McCain is an avid bird watcher and a huge fan of Borat. And did you know, Harry, that McCain has a budding acting career, appearances in both the movie "Wedding Crashers"...
SMITH: Mm-hmm.
GLOR: ...and the TV show, "24."
SMITH: Next time Borat comes, we'll have to let him wrestle with McCain. Borat...
GLOR: I remember seeing that, actually.
SMITH: Last week there was kind of a takeaway...
GLOR: Yeah.
SMITH: ...about Barack Obama's ambition. What is your sense, your takeaway from the five things you didn't know about John McCain?
GLOR: I would say with John McCain's it's a commitment to country, the idea of service. I mean, this is a man who's done everything, been everywhere all over the world and still there's this desire, I'm not done yet.
and look who was commenting on the mccain show. his best bud in the senate, lindsey graham. guess mom mccain was busy that day.
You mean this jerk wrote another book?
Of course that's the newest subject for conservatives to write about: How the media won the election for Barack Obama.
He won fair and square. Get over it.
If that is the best MMFA can do, if that is the best they can point out, then i cant wait to read the book. I might even have a chill run down my leg as i read it.
I think they were just so excited about this first bit of excrement that they couldn't wait to share it. I have no doubt that a thorough, ten point debunking is coming soon. Don't rush out to buy it until you know that it's total crap.
I suppose you ran out to buy and read it to know it's total crap? oh.. sorry. you're a liberal. you believe whatever MMFA tells you while your brain cells rot away from the kool-aid.
As usual, you're MissingDeePoint. This is, as far as I know, the first item on Goldberg's book at this site. They've found some BS in Chapter one, and that makes Pointofview immediately attracted to it, and causes you to reflexively defend it.
Cons to bullsh*t, like moths to a flame.
pwned
pointofview: "If that is the best MMFA can do, if that is the best they can point out, then i cant wait to read the book."
My reaction was similar. This article is weak, even by MM's standards. If you compared the so-called "misinformation" in Goldberg's book with that in books by Michael Moore or Al Franken, you'd see that Goldberg would be the clear winner (meaning Goldberg's book is far, far more truthful and accurate).
MM has to do much more than just post a catchy headline.
#@
Please point out all the lies in Moore's and Franken's books. I have read them all and now feel all funny on the inside knowing I may have been lied to repeatedly. I thank you in advance for documenting all the lies. Bias was the besty book EVER!! So factual and truthful!
Yep, if the best they can do is point out that Goldberg was to lazy to fact check anything you'll have to follow the usual conservative pattern of believing whatever you are told.
That chill running down your leg could quite possibly be your depends leaking.
shows you what liberals know. that substance is usualy warm, not chilly.. You should know allabout this process since liberals throw so much of the solid about and p*ss and moan about everything.
I know you bedwetters love the warm feeling you get but even the best adult waterproof undergarment will leak when full. By the time the liquid leaks it's usually not warm but cool.
Look, MSNBC has been guilty of gushing shamelessly over Obama- when the new President stepped out of his car to walk the rest of the way during the Inaugural Parade, Keith Olbermann could barely contain himself- "this guy keeps us on our toes, every time we think we've figured him out, he pulls something like this- he's always one step ahead! He's like what Lincoln said about General Grant- 'I hope the enemy never manages to figure him out!!" Olbermann went on to slobber over some more, saying that "Jimmy Carter was the first president to walk part of the way of the parade, but no President had done it since, until now"- when, in fact, Reagan was the only president since NOT to walk part of the way.
So yes, some media outlets have been over the top in their praise of Obama.
But where were idiots like Goldberg when that same media was elevating Bush to Savior Status in the weeks and months following 9/11? Remember, when The King Could Do No Wrong? Where was Chris Matthews, who seems to have suddenly found religion when it comes to criticizing Presidents, when Bush was making that BS landing on the aircraft carrier? He was calling him studly and admiring the cut of his uniform.
In fact, the media spent the better part of eight years lionizing George W Bush. Only when his popularity completely collapsed did they begin to demonstrate a realization of Bush that most of us had figured out long ago- that the President was a vapid, listless, clueless, lying airhead.
So for morons like Goldberg to peddle whine that the media adores Obama is awfully hard to swallow. Yes, he's getting good press right now- and sometimes, the positive spin can be a little grating, even to an Obama supporter like me. But it won't last. It's called a HONEYMOON. For Bush, it lasted seven years. Obama's in his first week. Cut them a little slack.
And nevermind the wet kisses McCain got from the media, and the kid-gloves they used on Palin.
Anyone remember the Wesley Clark/Bob Scheiffer fiasco? The MSM was tripping over itself to defend McCain against an attack that never occurred. Even Scheiffer was oddly incredulous at Clark's perfectly reasonable comment, and the media circled around McCain as though Clark had said something wrong.
And some of Clark's earlier comments were strangely met with defensiveness by the media on behalf of McCain.
I couldn't believe my freakin' ears.
And that's just two examples.
Kid-gloves on Palin??
You are an idiot
Yes, don't forget those vicious questions like, "What magazines do you read?" If any other politician had been asked that it would have been considered a softball.
Palin cracked like an egg sprayed with DDT despite the kid gloves.
Hey, just because Palin was under investigation doesn't give the media the right to tell you the facts!
"And that's just two examples"
Well keep digging because there are at least 100 the other way around for every one you can quote. Also, might help to use what is between the ears and not just the ears.
I see you provided not a single one to bolster your invisible point.
Seven YEARS????
The Bush "Honeymoon" lasted about seven hours. From 1 am on election night when they called Florida until 8 the next morning when everyone settled in for the recount.
You simply haven't been paying attention.
Even in defeat the right still have a need to lie, during the first couple of months after 9.11 the media became state run.Anything that was said by Bush or anyone else from the white house was taken for face value. Fox News and right wing talk radio lead the charge to slime or label people who was critical of Bush as anti-American i.e. the Dixie Chicks. Now Berine and these hacks on the right have the nerve to complain about the media when they were far worst during Bush first seven years in office. Get out of here with that mess.
2012 is the number times I want someone to kick Cheney
Only a classless LIBERAL would want to harm a 68-year-old man with heart disease.
Hey! The real Darth Vader was a double amputee and apparently had chromes disease, but he was STILL an evil, evil person like Cheney- and both deserve punishment for their crimes.
Ah...the REAL Darth Vader? So you ae CLASSLESS and live in a Fantasy World
I'm out of class right now, 'tis true, until later on this afternoon. Speaking of fantasies... was it your intention to spout off like you don't have a clue and even Joe from Blue's Clues couldn't help you or are you really delusional? I've been away for a week and have been reading over the past posts, and, well..., let me just say that you sound like you've been living under a rock since '01. Seriously, what's your problem with facts and reality, and don't you know how to google anything?
Only a classless conservative would not understand a simple joke. If I ever saw anybody kicking Cheney--believe me--I would put a stop to it (he types trying to keep a straight face). I only seek justice. And if that means imprisoning a 68-year-old man, so be it.
BTW, did anyone else think that Cheney in the wheelchair looked like Mr. Potter from It's a Wonderful Life?
Ha! I've been waiting for someone to use that It's a Wonderful Life reference! Love that movie! I watch i every Christmas Eve!
Hey, how do you make just the title of the movie Italics. I click on the Italics option, but nothing happens, or it makes EVERYTHING Italics.
Here we go. It's a Wonderful Life.
Crap it didn't make it Italicized.
The lying takes place on the left. The biggest canard is that somehow George Bush got a free pass from the media. That is a complete joke.
I will give you a month after 9/11 when there was some unity. However, at that point, ONE WEEK into Afghanistan it was a QUAGMIRE and we had to get out. Nightline did 2 or 3 nights worth of shows like that. We had a couple reporters on the big networks explaining how they don't wear a flag pin. Please, George Bush was a media punching bag.
I am willing to guarantee, without looking, that nobody in the mainstream media said we had to get out of Afghanistan a week after going in.
You've discredited yourself in other postings, but this one's a doozy.
that is simply untrue about afghanistan. to this day, there is little questioning of why we are there. and it's really long past time we started asking how long we should be there and what we hope to achieve. and if it really is achievable. in any case, the objective of invading afghanistan had one main purpose. they refused to turn bin laden over so we decided to go after him. he was allowed to escape at tora bora. if you would like me to be charitable, i can do that. i can say it was due to the usual bush lack of management and inattention to the business at hand. or i can be cynical and say that it wouldn't have been good for the ultimate goal, in others words invading iraq, if we had captured him then. either way he could have been captured or killed, and our forces were held back from doing it.
I think you meant the right wingnuts' response to Kosovo the very day Clinton sent the troops in.
You have shown before you haven't an inkling of the location of the key to the cabinet where the clues are kept, and you have continued to establish your consistency.
The media's surreal generosity to W has been well and indisputably documented. This site's readers have been paying attention.
Where has it been documented? On this site, bougt and paid for by George Soros and his Democratic party? Please.
The readers of this site live in a cocoon that hangs inside an echo chamber.
You're funny! If this site uses correct facts and context, does it matter who paid for it?
If only you could use the magic words "George Soros" to make all those correct facts go away.
The readers of this site live in a world where accuracy in reporting matters. But if you don't want to be here, that's okay.
It doesn't use FACTS, that's the point. It twists the truth as a matter of practice.
By the way, there are no CORRECT facts
"there are no CORRECT facts"
I think you just explained the whole conservative movement!
Since we disagree on something so fundamental as whether or not facts can be correct, I bid you good day.
LMAO!!!!!!
Please look up the definition of "fact" or "facts" . It is impossible to have "incorrect facts" therefore by definition there is no such thing as "correct facts". For teh simple minded majority on here, a fact is just htat, a fact. But now i see the problem - MMFA likes to twist the facts into hyperbole so I guess the readers are used to parsing the truth - ala Clinton.
Still LMAO!!
if something is a fact, then it is correct. yes or no?
if something is incorrect, it cannot be a fact. yes or no?
question 1. If something is fact it is real not cottect. Check your dictionary for proper defintions.
question 2 yes it can. it is fact that you incorrectly defined fact!!!
LMAO yet again!!
if something is incorrect, it cannot be a fact. yes or no? (Mefirst)
yes it can. it is fact that you incorrectly defined fact!!! (WorldlyM.R)
Nothing further. Continue LYAO at whatever reality you're imagining.
I can hardly believe that I feel compelled to defend this, but OK. I checked a dictionary. here's a definition of fact:
Emphasis mine, of course. So, an example of a correct fact would be one that not only is presented as having objective reality, but actually does have objective reality, such as "Barack Obama won the presidential election in 2008."
An example of an incorrect fact would be one that is presented as having objective reality, but doesn't actually have objective reality, such as, "There are no correct facts."
Oy Gevalt! What a farcockteh schmuck! Let me know when the make a flight-suited action figure outta the schmuck and spend the next five years makin' excuses for the putz. Ya got bupkis, Bernie. Ya always do.
Bernie should stick to sports.
You can't make this crap up! [Pages 16-17]
That's all they can do.
This is a joke, right MMFA?
You guys give a ringing endorsement of Goldberg's book in this story. Look at what CBS 'highlighted' about McCain:
1. Born in the Panama Canal Zone which is somehow 'controversial'
2. In high school he was nicknamed the 'punk' and 'there was always the cigarette in the corner of his mouth.'
3. The crash in Hanoi was his 'third' plane crash.
4. He graduated 5 spots from the bottom at Annapolis
5. He was a 'carpetbagger' when he first ran for office in Arizona.
Obama was/IS the chain smoker and he also has some 'controversial' birth records if I recall. Did CBS mention that? AND his grades have never been mentioned, I think because he won't release his college records.
This further disproves the 'myth' that any serious commentators covered Obama's birth records. Certainly the networks and major newspapers said nothing and it was barely mentioned on the top radio talk shows. It only was consistently mentioned on the most fringe programs.
"It only was consistently mentioned on the most fringe programs."
Where it belonged, as has been pointed out five hundred million times on this website. Thanks for your input, though.
"Where it belonged"
Right, to which I AGREE. It was a non-issue. It didn't need to be pointed out 5 million times here. Almost nobody listens to those fringe shows.
Meanwhile the LIE about someone yelling "Kill Him" at a Palin rally was EVERYWHERE. Can you see the bias?
Can you refute anything in what I said about the 5 things of Obama vs. McCain and the negative vs. positive tone?.
Got any links and PROOF of that?
Well I figured anyone can type search words in a box but her goes.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9X2j8IyNezY&feature=related
What, you expect me to buy a VIDEO of an ACTUAL Palin rally where someone screams N**GER as PROOF that Palin's base is littered with racists? When you have some REAL proof stamped by GOD, then we'll talk.
/extreme sarcasm
Randy
I cannot help but just laugh my a** off at how desperate the right wing nuts are at the fact that more than half of the entire U.S. no longer believes anything they say and completely trashed their team on Nov 4. Wah, Wah, poor babies! If you didn't vote for our crazy ideas then it must be the fault of the press for not pushing our crazy ideas!!
must be the fault of the press for not pushing our crazy ideas!!
Actually, the entire premise of this web site is that it's the fault of the press when liberals do not get elected.
Cheney 2012,
"Actually, the entire premise of this web site is that it's the fault of the press when liberals do not get elected."
That seems to be what Goldberg and other conservatives argue when Republicans/conservatives don't get elected.
Any comment on the content of the CBS McCain coverage vs. the content of the Obama coverage as cited by the all-knowing MMFA?
I didn't think so.
Obleo,still searching the pointless forrest?
C-2012 - you make very important points. I become most amused when asked for facts the far left switch subjects and tries to trun the issue back to the right. If this piece is a MMFA "gotcha" it fails miserably. Only an unintelligent person would fail to see the night and day difference in the two top 5 lists. Trying to say the media was "unbiased" and Goldberg were wrong because both His Highness and the Maverick had a piece on CBS is the one and true "FALSEHOOD" here.
This part is particularly damning
GLOR: I would say with John McCain's it's a commitment to country, the idea of service. I mean, this is a man who's done everything, been everywhere all over the world and still there's this desire, I'm not done yet.
The press just won't leave the poor man alone!
So is this:
SHAPIRO: John McCain decided to move to the state of Arizona, a state in which he never lived, and run for the US House in 1982. The Republicans running against him shouted 'Carpetbagger! Carpetbagger!'
GRAHAM: And I think he had a pretty good reply. 'For the longest I've stayed anywhere was in Vietnam.' And that put it in perspective.
SHAPIRO: Game, set and match.
In short, McCain, a HUGE war hero, can move to whatever state he wants, leave him alone.
The press is relentless!
Randy
-- Any comment on the content of the CBS McCain coverage vs. the content of the Obama coverage as cited by the all-knowing MMFA? -- cheney2012
mmfa cites the "fairness" by stating that both men received a "5 Things" segment on the Early Show while uncritically failing to report the context...not unusual.
Obama...1) Chicago style politics. 2) Doesn't wear fancy clothers. 3) Conservatives helped him lead the Harvard Law Review. 4) Loves scrabble. 5) Has a black father/white mother.
McCain...1) Called a carpet bagger. 2) Vietcong called him "crown prince. 3) Crashed 3 planes. 4) Nick named the "punk". 5) Not born in a U.S. state.
It's not hard to spot the bias...and the partisan wordsmithing by mmfa.
Just when we thought that the slime from Coulter, Fredosso and Corsi was enough.... along comes Bernie Goldberg with another laughing stock of a book...
Shesh... the rightwing blowhards will not go down or away without a fight...
I encourage them to keep doing it... the more they write of their delusions of grandeur the more can be exposed of the uselessness...
Ah if only that were Bernard's point, but alas no. He wants you to believe that McCain got no list at all. And of course you will leave off that they stuck with the "Maverick" branding int he piece and leave off the ending where they do nothing but praise him. It is clear that Bernard is a liar. A piece was done about McCain just like with Obama. The rest is simply spin spin spin.
Want to know why MMFA did not print out the transcript of teh Obama piece as they did with the McCain piece? It is because if they did and you read verbatim what was said, and tehn compared side to side the differences would be so stark that MMFA would not be able to "Spin" the argument. I continue to challenge MMFA to actually do a thorough journalistic analysis with all the facts side by side.
We have too many Lemmings on here that can't think and only spout venom from reading and accting based on face value what they are told.
Let's get some intelligent pieces/articles to debate.
"I continue to challenge MMFA to actually do a thorough journalistic analysis with all the facts side by side."
And I challenge you to say something of substance! You seem to go with the whole FoxNoise talking point that Obama is loved by the media (as opposed to 79% of the people and even more of the world) and that McCain and I'll assume that you mean that to be Bush/Cheney as well was beaten up and dispised by the very corporate media that are owned by other corporations that relied on billion dollar federal contracts that were big donor of Bush/Cheney....
Right.... the corporate owned media was not willing to go after them or McCain until after it was obvious that Obama was well on his way to winning...
Try again!
Obama beloved by the MSM?? How you ever got that from my reply is amazing. I only suggested that before MMFA tries to talk ablout falsehoods or disparage another's work it swhould do so in a fair manner. I said put things side by side and let the facts (i.e. in this case non-parsed complete transcripts of the two CBS segments MMFA is comparing). By being cute, only giving half the data, twisting words (as you tried to do with my reply) you can draw erroneous conclusions or conclusions where none exist.
You are also a clear example of choosing a point, drawing a line through it and concluding what someone else was saying/implying. I asked for a fair comparison - from you I gotsomehow that I am amMccain lover which means I must be a Bush/Cheney lover and that I love capitalists and teh exorbitant sums of money they can make = that is teh biggest pile of liberal dung I have seen in a long time.
BTW - LMAO at the ineptitude of themindless lemmings on here.
where did he say you were a mccain or cheney/bush lover? he said you seemed to be going with the talking point that the media loved obama, and mccain and bush/cheney were beaten up and despised by the corporate media. so you made the conclusion that he said you were a mccain lover and i don't see that anywhere. could you provide the quote where he said that?
MrR shows that he understands responses to his posts as well as he understands MMfA articles.
That is, not at all.
Sorry that should be a response to wesley.
OH boy a new attention whore...if you don't like the website then kiss off...because your "points" are stupid and it looks like you just want to pick a fight.
Nope, Cheney, you are incorrect. Instead, one of the most valuable aspects of MMFA is to point out that this myth of liberal media bias is fiction and that reporting good things about Obama is neither an indication of bias nor is it wrong to do so.
Instead, my point remain salient: The right wing nut agenda can only take hold with the help of FoxNews and a MSM that is too scared of Limbaugh and O'Reilly to report facts instead of needing to bring these crazy ideas into the mainstream.
Well put, MK. The Wordly Mr.R has been suckered into onr of the most popular traps of the right wing media, that unless coverage of two things is exactly equal, there is "bias".
My local sports shows generally report a lot more favorably about the Lakers than The Clippers, but I don't have any tinfoil-hat theories about those reporters.
If I was trying to nail McCain's granddaughter, I'd be hard-pressed to list five great things about him.
I've been coming to this site for years and posting comments when l think that they are a part of the discussion but l have to say that it's been a very long time since trolls with such bone headed viewpoints have turned up to comment!!!
Keep it up WorldyMrR and Cheney2012 (glad to see you have kept up with the wingnut tradition of adding numbers to your moniker), soon you with enter the looking glass worlds of missdee and pointofview!!
It's not just Fox. Last night I saw a clip on CNN of an old talking lizard with suspenders on CNN trying to ask Gramps about the Limbaugh quote "I HOPE HE FAILS". McSame wouldn't comment on Rush's statement since he didn't know the context in which it was used.
Which leads me to wonder is Johnboy carrying water for Rush or is Fatboy carrying water for Gramps?
C'mon king...you know better than that concerning Limbaugh and McCain's relationship.
As demonstrated by the movie "The Shawshank Redemption" being obtuse can get you a long stretch in solitary confinement.
I know they've got a "checkered" past but in a spirit of bipartisanship, CcCain should have said that we've got serious problems in the country today. Obama won the election and we need to work together. Anyone wishing failure on Obama also,wishes our economy and our country to fail.
There is no context in which the phrase "I Hope He Fails" can be interpreted to mean anything except "to prove my point, I''m willing for everyone to lose their jobs, their savings and possible their homes. Because I'm getting 40 million per year."
Limbaugh's made a bigger ass of himself than I thought possible with this statement. McCain attempted to cover said ass.
In the spirit of openness, to stick with the movie references and since I outed a plagiarist the other day, I used the phrase "checkered past" which was also used to describe H. I. McDonnough in "Raising Arizona".
I have no interest in sliding down the rabbit hole in defense of Limbaugh...that's his job.
You seem to think that anyone answering Larry King's question should have responded with something like, "Limbaugh's nothing more than a lardbutted blowhard who hates America...while hypocritically enjoying its benefits". Did I get that description about right?
I fully recognize your disdain for Limbaugh...your choice. But to suggest that either McCain or Limbaugh would carry water for the other is...well...is well, obtuse.
By the way...what plagiarist did you out? I obviously missed it.
Yes. It's an angle between 90 and 180 degrees.
If the media had any bias it was going soft on McCain's pandering and shifting policy positions. How many media outlets reported that McCain ridiculed cigarette taxes even though the proposed them ten years earlier?
The 2008 McCain campaign was an absolute disgrace, yet the media presented him as if he had some legitimacy as a candidate.
It was Barney (AnotherAmerican) Fife. he's been caught many times, just cutting and pasting whole paragraphs and presenting it as his own words. We all lift a word, phrase or idea, but whole paragraphs and articles is pushing it.
As an independent and an American citizen I certainly hope that Mr. Obama can turn things around, but not, however, at the expense of our fundamental beliefs as a nation i.e. too much permanent government intervention in the private sector (socialism). I also find it frightening that so many of the people posting here seem to truly believe that there was no bias on the part of the media during the election.It was so blatant that a child could see it!