Let's be reasonable then, shall we? Who cares what the media says? They are paid to take one side or another, there is no legitmate debate occuring in main stream media, including Larry King for god sake.
The facts are this. Sarah Palin is a backward, ignorant sociopath and a philistine. She makes that clear every time she opens her mouth, no need to refer to media journalistic trash to arrive at this obvious conclusion. When one considers the intellectual standard of the current crop of politicians, what more can one expect? After all the president is a functioning illiterate who stole the Presidency in the first place. Yes, it WAS stolen. I did a search for political treatise by the two Presidential Candidates and their VP's. Between the four of them Obama has a 45 page book out which amounts to , "Hi , my name is Obama, I am Black, meet my wife and kids." The average congressman is worth $3.9million, while Mayor Bloomberg is in the forbes richest 400 Americans, worth over TWENTY BILLION DOLLARS. I have been accused of all sorts of lunacy, but it pales compared the lunacy that considers Sahar Palin is fit to hold public office and that the United States is a functioning Democracy. A ten year can see this is not the case. What is the excuse of supposed rational adults for believing such utter stupidity? On Oct 2, 6:10 pm, RichardForbes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > You are expecting a reasonable reply from a mindless drone like Mikey, > who cannot be honest about anything? > > Good luck on that one. > > On Oct 2, 4:03 am, Gaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Need I go on? > > > There are many more where those came from. > > > The Link is provided should you care to see many, many more. > > > On Oct 2, 1:01 am, Gaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >http://www.mediaresearch.org/biasbasics/biasbasics2admissions.asp > > > > “The elephant in the newsroom is our narrowness. Too often, we wear > > > liberalism on our sleeve and are intolerant of other lifestyles and > > > opinions....We’re not very subtle about it at this paper: If you work > > > here, you must be one of us. You must be liberal, progressive, a > > > Democrat. I’ve been in communal gatherings in The Post, watching > > > election returns, and have been flabbergasted to see my colleagues > > > cheer unabashedly for the Democrats.” > > > — Washington Post “Book World” editor Marie Arana in a contribution to > > > the Post’s “daily in-house electronic critiques,” as quoted by Post > > > media reporter Howard Kurtz in an October 3, 2005 article. > > > > “There is, Hugh, I agree with you, a deep anti-military bias in the > > > media. One that begins from the premise that the military must be > > > lying, and that American projection of power around the world must be > > > wrong. I think that that is a hangover from Vietnam, and I think it’s > > > very dangerous. That’s different from the media doing it’s job of > > > challenging the exercise of power without fear or favor.” > > > — ABC News White House correspondent Terry Moran talking with Los > > > Angeles-based national radio talk show host Hugh Hewitt, May 17, > > > 2005. > > > > “I believe it is true that a significant chunk of the press believes > > > that Democrats are incompetent but good-hearted, and Republicans are > > > very efficient but evil.” > > > — Wall Street Journal political editor John Harwood on the April 23, > > > 2005 Inside Washington. > > > > “I worked for the New York Times for 25 years. I could probably count > > > on one hand, in the Washington bureau of the New York Times, people > > > who would describe themselves as people of faith....I think one of the > > > real built-in biases in the media is towards secularism....You want > > > diversity in the newsroom, not because of some quota, but because you > > > have to have diversity to cover the story well and cover all aspects > > > of a society. And you don’t have religious people making the decisions > > > about where coverage is focused. And I think that’s one of the > > > faults.” > > > — Former New York Times reporter Steve Roberts, now a journalism > > > professor at George Washington University, on CNN’s Reliable Sources, > > > March 27, 2005. > > > > “Personally, I have a great affection for CBS News....But I stopped > > > watching it some time ago. The unremitting liberal orientation finally > > > became too much for me. I still check in, but less and less > > > frequently. I increasingly drift to NBC News and Fox and MSNBC.” > > > — Former CBS News President Van Gordon Sauter in an op-ed published > > > January 13, 2005 in the Los Angeles Times. > > > > “The notion of a neutral, non-partisan mainstream press was, to me at > > > least, worth holding onto. Now it’s pretty much dead, at least as the > > > public sees things. The seeds of its demise were sown with the best of > > > intentions in the late 1960s, when the AMMP [American Mainstream Media > > > Party] was founded in good measure (and ironically enough) by CBS. Old > > > folks may remember the moment: Walter Cronkite stepped from behind the > > > podium of presumed objectivity to become an outright foe of the war in > > > Vietnam. Later, he and CBS’s star White House reporter, Dan Rather, > > > went to painstaking lengths to make Watergate understandable to > > > viewers, which helped seal Richard Nixon’s fate as the first President > > > to resign. The crusades of Vietnam and Watergate seemed like a good > > > idea at the time, even a noble one, not only to the press but perhaps > > > to a majority of Americans. The problem was that, once the AMMP > > > declared its existence by taking sides, there was no going back. A > > > party was born.” > > > — Newsweek’s chief political reporter, Howard Fineman, “The ‘Media > > > Party’ is over: CBS’ downfall is just the tip of the iceberg,” January > > > 11 , 2005. > > > > “Most members of the establishment media live in Washington and New > > > York. Most of them don’t drive pickup trucks, most of them don’t have > > > guns, most of them don’t go to NASCAR, and every day we’re not out in > > > areas that care about those things and deal with those things as part > > > of their daily lives, we are out of touch with a lot of America and > > > with a lot of America that supports George W. Bush.” > > > — ABC News Political Director Mark Halperin during live television > > > coverage immediately before John Kerry’s concession speech on November > > > 3, 2004. > > > > “I know a lot of you believe that most people in the news business are > > > liberal. Let me tell you, I know a lot of them, and they were almost > > > evenly divided this time. Half of them liked Senator Kerry; the other > > > half hated President Bush.” > > > — CBS’s Andy Rooney on the November 7, 2004 60 Minutes. > > > > “There’s one other base here: the media. Let’s talk a little media > > > bias here. The media, I think, wants Kerry to win. And I think they’re > > > going to portray Kerry and Edwards — I’m talking about the > > > establishment media, not Fox, but — they’re going to portray Kerry and > > > Edwards as being young and dynamic and optimistic and all, there’s > > > going to be this glow about them that some, is going to be worth, > > > collectively, the two of them, that’s going to be worth maybe 15 > > > points.” > > > — Newsweek’s Evan Thomas on Inside Washington, July 10, 2004. > > > > The Washington Post’s Howard Kurtz: “You’ve said on the program Inside > > > Washington that because of the portrayal of Kerry and Edwards as > > > ‘young and dynamic and optimistic,’ that that’s worth maybe 15 > > > points.” > > > Newsweek’s Evan Thomas: “Stupid thing to say. It was completely wrong. > > > But I do think that, I do think that the mainstream press, I’m not > > > talking about the blogs and Rush and all that, but the mainstream > > > press favors Kerry. I don’t think it’s worth 15 points. That was just > > > a stupid thing to say.” > > > Kurtz: “Is it worth five points?” > > > Thomas: “Maybe, maybe.” > > > — Exchange on CNN’s Reliable Sources, October 17, 2004. > > > > Newsweek Editor Jon Meacham: “The work of the evening, obviously, is > > > to connect George W. Bush to the great war leaders of the modern era. > > > You’re going to hear about Churchill projecting power against public > > > opinion....” > > > MSNBC’s Chris Matthews: “But Iraq was a popular cause when he first > > > started it. It wasn’t like Churchill speaking against the Nazis.” > > > Meacham: “That’s not the way the Republican Party sees it. They think > > > that all of us and the New York Times are against them.” > > > Matthews: “Well, they’re right about the New York Times, and they may > > > be right about all of us.” > > > — Exchange shortly after 8:30pm EDT during MSNBC’s live convention > > > coverage, August 30, 2004. > > > > On Oct 2, 12:46 am, "mike532 [ Republicans for Obama ]" > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > [ let me say this first i stole this from another poster " > > > > rockskipper" and i wish to thank him and Larry > > > > king ! ] Last night, on The Larry King Show, one of > > > > the republican surrogates, > > > > in reference to the news reports that Sarah Palin is in actuality a > > > > real bimbo -- exclaimed that usual bull-shit line -- "...the liberal > > > > media" ..something or other. Mr. King promptly interrupted her, and > > > > asked the question, I've been waiting for someone, on one of these > > > > political programs, to finally ask one of these republican 'whinners' > > > > -- he asked -- "What liberal media are you talking about?" And he > > > > had > > > > the gall to ask her to name the media she was criticizing." > > > > > OMG -- the bitch face was at a complete loss for words! She couldn't > > > > name a one (singular - medium). She was dumbfounded! > > > > > Larry went on for her to specify her complaint, at which "media" he > > > > asked -- "Limbaugh" -- Newsweek -- Bill O'Reilly - Sean Hannity -- > > > > "just name the ones you have in mind" -- In other words, lady - what > > > > in hell are you talking about? > > > > > My hat is off to good old Larry "the King" -- & defender of the > > > > truth. In a sea of wimpy wannabees, he a supreme journalist! He IS > > > > the 'Master of The Universe' in my book today! Mr. King did what > > > > any > > > > honest professional interviewer -- should always do -- he called her > > > > out; and by doing so, revealed to his audience -- that the lady > > > > surrogate, and her bull-crap accusations against the so called > > > > "liberal media" is just what I called it earlier -- 'a line of neo- > > > > con > > > > republican garbage' that I am sick of hearing! > > > > > THANKS LARRY! > > > > > God Bless Ya' -- you old pro! > > > > You ARE the man -- Mr. King. > > > > > Now, how about some of you other motor mouths -- step up to the stove > > > > and give these bullshitters a little of their own heat, just for a > > > > change!!! What ya' say -- if you're gonna' call yourselves > > > > journalist > > > > -- you have to stop acting like weenies and pussies. PERIOD. > > > > > This election is way too important this time folks, to give anybody a > > > > free pass on anything!! Let's get down to the > > ... > > read more » --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
