Bachmann literally proves she is an idiot

#101
#101
Muschump said:
:eek:lol:

Let's step inside the no spin zone.

Each side is as guilty as the other, face it.
Click to expand...

Does Hannity pretend he's not giving his opinion and editing according to his bias? O'Reilly? BTW, BOR is pretty rough on "conservatives" too.

Does Rush pretend?

Again, I don't care if they're biased as long as they don't try to pretend they aren't... so I am not assigning guilt as much as giving credit.
 
#104
#104
BigPapaVol said:
what? Are you intentionally being obtuse? I labeled the bloggers as the tiny minority that makes up the conservative voice.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I was referring to the bloggers/talk show hosts being all over Bachman. Are these people part of the "MSM?" Serious question.

Comedy Central = MSM?
MSNBC = MSM?

I have no idea, it seems anything with a liberal bias is automatically the "MSM" while the most watched cable news network on TV is not the "MSM?" I think I'm misunderstanding the term.
 
#105
#105
Muschump said:
Sorry, I was referring to the bloggers/talk show hosts being all over Bachman. Are these people part of the "MSM?" Serious question.

Comedy Central = MSM?
MSNBC = MSM?
Click to expand...
No to all the above. MSNBC draws on traditional media for its hires but makes little bones about its bias.

I have no idea, it seems anything with a liberal bias is automatically the "MSM" while the most watched cable news network on TV is not the "MSM?" I think I'm misunderstanding the term.
Click to expand...

MSM would be the traditional outlets populated by reporters and editors that grew up through that system. For whatever reason, that system has favored people who are progressives, went to progressive/liberal journalism schools, and tint the news according to that bias.

NYT, Reuters, AP, WP, LAT, AJC, Miami Herald, network news, CNN (to a great degree),... are examples of MSM.
 
#106
#106
sjt18 said:
Why are you deflecting? Can't face the truth?
Click to expand...

What truth? That the most watched cable news network was all over Obama 24/7 during the campaign, and the most popular talk radio shows were all over Obama? Yes, I can face that truth. How many listeners to Limbaugh and Beck boast about?
 
#107
#107
Muschump said:
What truth? That the most watched cable news network was all over Obama 24/7 during the campaign, and the most popular talk radio shows were all over Obama? Yes, I can face that truth. How many listeners to Limbaugh and Beck boast about?
Click to expand...

The truth that Obama was NOT vetted by the Washington or political news corps. They agreed with him politically and were inspired by him personally on a mass scale. They gave him a pass that even Hillary noticed and complained about.

The sources you talk about do not employ 100's of reporters whose job is to investigate facts and report them. Their resources are far less. How many reporters hit Alaska to sift through Palin's emails? How does that compare again to the number that have demanded Obama's grades? Work history? Other background details?
 
#108
#108
sjt18 said:
The truth that Obama was NOT vetted by the Washington or political news corps.
Click to expand...

Was he vetted more or less than McCain? Sorry, I guess I just don't put enough stock in "traditional media" in 2011. I think most people get their news from the internet, cable TV, and talk radio nowadays. I could be off 100%. Probably am.
 
#109
#109
Muschump said:
Sorry, I was referring to the bloggers/talk show hosts being all over Bachman. Are these people part of the "MSM?" Serious question.

Comedy Central = MSM?
MSNBC = MSM?

I have no idea, it seems anything with a liberal bias is automatically the "MSM" while the most watched cable news network on TV is not the "MSM?" I think I'm misunderstanding the term.
Click to expand...
no, it isn't. The MSM is the old school voice of the democratic party. The networks, about 142% of newspaper and magazine circulation. MSNBC and comedy central don't qualify.
 
#110
#110
Muschump said:
Was he vetted more or less than McCain? Sorry, I guess I just don't put enough stock in "traditional media" in 2011. I think most people get their news from the internet, cable TV, and talk radio nowadays. I could be off 100%. Probably am.
Click to expand...

absolutely less. McCain had spent a life in public service and had been in many campaigns. BO was new, no one knew much about him except that he could read a good speech and frankly that was all they cared to know.
 
#111
#111
Muschump said:
Was he vetted more or less than McCain? Sorry, I guess I just don't put enough stock in "traditional media" in 2011. I think most people get their news from the internet, cable TV, and talk radio nowadays. I could be off 100%. Probably am.
Click to expand...

There isn't even a little bit of a doubt that you're off. While the traditional media has tapered off in its influence, it's still the big horse in the fray. Look at the ratings numbers and circulation numbers of the the old timers.
 
#112
#112
Muschump said:
Was he vetted more or less than McCain? Sorry, I guess I just don't put enough stock in "traditional media" in 2011. I think most people get their news from the internet, cable TV, and talk radio nowadays. I could be off 100%. Probably am.
Click to expand...

Much less but McCain was a dream come true patsy for the left. If he somehow won... he wasn't "that bad"... a "moderate".

But he was mostly a known... and tired... story.

Most people probably do get their news from alternate sources now. However I would suspect that the "middle" voters are inordinately influenced by the media they see the most. The stories in their daily papers usually follow the agenda set by NYT/WP/LAT. Their local news carries national news produced by the networks. The websites they commonly visit like Google, Yahoo, et al run news along the same lines and from the same sources.

They have to "seek" the other side. For most of them, if they had the interest and will to do that... they wouldn't be "moderate" swing voters. They'd choose a side.
 
#113
#113
BigPapaVol said:
There isn't even a little bit of a doubt that you're off. While the traditional media has tapered off in its influence, it's still the big horse in the fray. Look at the ratings numbers and circulation numbers of the the old timers.
Click to expand...

Limbaugh has higher ratings than any of the network newscasts :dunno:
 
#115
#115
Vols520 said:
The right has one cable station to watch. The left has the rest.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...
:cray:

1 in 1,000 people watch the most popular shows on MSNBC. Be scared. Compared to the non-MSM ~15,000,000 unique listeners to Limbaugh.
 
#116
#116
Muschump said:
:cray:

1 in 1,000 people watch the most popular shows on MSNBC. Be scared. Compared to the non-MSM ~15,000,000 unique listeners to Limbaugh.
Click to expand...

How many of those listeners are democrats like lg who just look for quotes?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#119
#119
Muschump said:
:cray:

1 in 1,000 people watch the most popular shows on MSNBC. Be scared. Compared to the non-MSM ~15,000,000 unique listeners to Limbaugh.
Click to expand...

About 100% of the "news" stories you find on yahoo, msnbc, google, et al will come from the traditional reporting svcs like AP. The same is true for local and national papers to include the non-editorial portions of the WSJ.
 
#120
#120
Muschump said:
I don't think I've ever seen Bush's birth certificate either. Seems like you want "your side" to get their priorities in order. Take it up with the birthers. Have Donald Trump demand a transcript.
Click to expand...

The Senate had to pass a resolution confirming that John McCain was eligible to run for president after his citizenship was questioned since he was born in the Panam Canal Zone. That bit of information seemed to have been misplaced when the MSM labelled the birthers as racists.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#121
#121
dreVol said:
The Senate had to pass a resolution confirming that John McCain was eligible to run for president after his citizenship was questioned since he was born in the Panam Canal Zone. That bit of information seemed to have been misplaced when the MSM labelled the birthers as racists.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

Not seeing the link between McCains situation and Obamas? Little help?
 
#122
#122
dreVol said:
The Senate had to pass a resolution confirming that John McCain was eligible to run for president after his citizenship was questioned since he was born in the Panam Canal Zone. That bit of information seemed to have been misplaced when the MSM labelled the birthers as racists.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

duh. McCain's not black. it's a non-story.
 
#123
#123
Muschump said:
Not seeing the link between McCains situation and Obamas? Little help?
Click to expand...

John Mccain's status as a US citizen was raised by media outlets during his campaign. The Senate passed a resolution declaring him natural born citizen. Barack Obama's status as a natural born citizen is raised by the birthers. Rather than pursing the story, the MSM declares anyone who questions Obama's citizenship a xenophobic racist
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top