Will the Republican crying ever stop? It is pathetic to still have to listen to some Republican child whining about the perceived positive media treatment of Obama. Its absolutely hysterical when you look at the facts. McCain was the medias boy. They practically gave him rimjobs for months, until he turned into an incapable, angry old piece of shit. Then the media actually did its job. And the right wing douchebags cant handle it.
The most amazing thing about this incessant bitching is how Bush was treated for the past eight years. As the nation's most shockingly pathetic president, Bush was hardly touched by the press for years. The man is a fucking war criminal and he was constantly given the kid glove treatment by the press. He should have been raped. By words. Seriously. The man should have been raped by words. I dont know how that works technically, but it should have happened. Every single day.
But lets move beyond the blatant hypocrisy and look at the actual facts. Before McCain went insanely negative and decided to lie his way to the White House, the press loved him so much they would have cleaned his dirty balls with their tongues. They were his base, according to Chris Matthews.
In all, 36% of stories about Obama have been positive, vs. 35% that have been neutral. And 29% have been negative.
Hmm. Not so bad, right? Sort of. Turns out the media were more negative toward Obama and positive toward McCain at the beginning, and then it turned. Maybe it started out well because of the McCain media barbeque.
John McCain has been campaigning hard for months and his traveling press corps has been working just as hard in covering him. So, this weekend McCain played host to a handful of senators and governors at his Arizona vacation home and today the press joined the party.
Two shuttle buses rode in with about 40 journalists onto what could be McCains version of President Bush's Crawford ranch if he wins in November.
Yeah, thats some quality journalism. If Obama had held a barbeque for the media, America would have shit pure bile. But nobody said a word about Grandpa McCain grilling up some meat for the media. As a matter of fact, they loved it.
As grillmaster, he looked like the all-American dad, with a story for every spot in the house.
So how did they taste? Objectivity prohibits a good reporter from passing judgement, but lets put it this way: everyone wants to come back.
Must have been awesome. Im surprised they didnt start spooning McCain to sleep at night. A flurry of positive McCain stories followed; sometimes reporters slid into a weird man love situation.
Brian Williams: You know what I thought was unsaid ---they took their position Chris, we're seeing the replay --- they end up in this spot and the sun is coming is just from the side and there in the shadow is John McCain's buckled, concave shoulder. It's a part of his body the suit doesn't fill out because of his war injuries. Again you wouldn't spot it unless you knew to look for it. He doesn't give the same full chested profile as the president standing next to him. Talk about a warrior...
Um. Do you guys need me to leave?
Meanwhile, Obama was getting the brunt of repeated negative attacks. His trip to Europe was too much. The media feasted on his connection to Reverend Wright for months. His connection to criminal Rezko was picked through obsessively. One of his consultants comments on NAFTA was falsely twisted and blown out of proportion, causing him to lose big in Ohio during the primaries. His lack of flag pin wearing was talked about incessantly. Oh, and was he patriotic? Hmm, better ask the people.
Ben Smith noted this question at CNN.com yesterday:
"Does Barack Obama show the proper patriotism for someone who wants to be president of the United States?"
As Ben noted, accurately, "Ive got to say, Ive never seen a reader poll like this on a mainstream media website (or, to be honest, a right-wing blog)."
And the wife was not off limits. Michelle made a gaff during a speech about whether or not she was proud to be an American and the media went apeshit. And occasionally she was called a bitch.
"Do you think Michelle -- do you think she leaves the impression -- not mine, but I've heard this -- that she has a chip on her shoulder?" Page responded: "I think that's BS. You know, people say that she's got a chip on her shoulder. That's like, well, she's been the B-word, which is a classic, you know, epithet against women whenever they sound aggressive or they really state their mind. ... Maybe I know her too well. She doesn't have a chip on her shoulder." McLaughlin then asked: "You don't think she's a black militant?"
She must be a black militant, I mean, she went to Harvard.
The truth of what happened is that the media followed the polls.
Obamas coverage was negative in tone when he was dropping in the polls, and became positive when he began to rise, and it was just so for McCain as well. Nor are these numbers different than what we have seen before. Obamas numbers are similar to what we saw for John Kerry four years ago as he began rising in the polls, and McCains numbers are almost identical to what we saw eight years ago for Democrat Al Gore.
The little baby Republicans are just upset because they dont remember what its like to be on the other side. McCain dug his own grave by running the most heinous campaign Ive ever seen. Lies, racism, more lies and focusing on bullshit points when America was on fire led to his negative media coverage. He dug his own grave. The media coverage was a reflection of the worst run campaign since the mighty Rudy Giuliani.
And the negative coverage wasnt gone. It ebbed and flowed, like the mind of John McCain.
That big dip before the 2nd debate was when the media was bringing up the Ayers nonsense over and over. It didnt stick, mostly because our country was in the middle of dying and people didnt give a shit about some terrorist not convicted of anything 30 years ago. What they did care about was the shockingly pathetic choice of Sarah Palin, McCains insanely retarded choices during the beginning of the economic meltdown and his angry persona during the debates. Turns out making stupid decisions and being an asshole doesnt lead to positive stories. While McCain was melting down and making mistakes left and right, Obama was running a smooth and smart campaign, giving the media nothing to attack.
Then McCain began began attacking the media because he was so used to being their lover. No longer were the media editing out footage of John McCain not knowing the difference between Sunnis and Shiites, as CBS had done two months earlier. Now the media were doing their jobs.
There is a tendency in the media to kick ourselves, cringe and withdraw, when we are criticized. But I hope my colleagues stand strong in this case: it is important for the public to know that Palin raised taxes as governor, supported the Bridge to Nowhere before she opposed it, pursued pork-barrel projects as mayor, tried to ban books at the local library and thinks the war in Iraq is "a task from God." The attempts by the McCain campaign to bully us into not reporting such things are not only stupidly aggressive, but unprofessional in the extreme.
And the ensuing election result went as expected. But the right wing and other idiots cant help but try to rewrite history. Yesterday, Time magazines Mark Halperin opened his dumbhole and let loose.
"It's the most disgusting failure of people in our business since the Iraq war," Halperin said at a panel of media analysts. "It was extreme bias, extreme pro-Obama coverage."
Oh. Lets have an example, shall we?
Halperin, who maintains Time's political site "The Page," cited two New York Times articles as examples of the divergent coverage of the two candidates.
"The example that I use, at the end of the campaign, was the two profiles that The New York Times ran of the potential first ladies," Halperin said. "The story about Cindy McCain was vicious. It looked for every negative thing they could find about her and it case her in an extraordinarily negative light. It didn't talk about her work, for instance, as a mother for her children, and they cherry-picked every negative thing that's ever been written about her."
Oh, shit. The story really didnt talk about her awesome mothering skills Who says that without then pulling a hammer out of a bag and hitting himself in the head?
The story about Michelle Obama, by contrast, was "like a front-page endorsement of what a great person Michelle Obama is," according to Halperin.
Huh. None of that black militant stuff? This would be due to the fact that they couldnt find anything. And because the media and the public werent biting on the usual bullshit stories. Now, lets take a look at some ideas Halperin had for McCain early in the campaign. From a list of what McCain should do to beat Obama:
5. Make an issue of Obama's acknowledged drug use.
6. Allow some supporters to risk being accused of using the race card when criticizing Obama.
7. Exploit Michelle Obama's mistakes and address her controversial remarks with unrestricted censure.
8. Play dirty without alienating his party.
11. Emphasize Barack Hussein Obama's unusual name and exotic background through a Manchurian Candidate prism.
12. Employ third party groups like the NRA to hit Obama on issues that might turn off general election voters. Perhaps an ad such as this will run in Ohio: So, what do you really know about Barack Obama? Did you know he supports meeting with the head of terrorist states? Do you know he is calling for the repeal of the law preventing gay marriage?
Thats the guy who thinks the positive media treatment of Obama was disgusting. Hes basically Mr. Crybaby Shit Pants. The media didnt destroy Obama using fucked up and bullshit attacks, so they didnt do their job. The media didnt sink to the lows they usually go to, because the nation is literally in peril and the consequences of focusing on issues that dont matter could be huge. This election was not treated like a game, as it usually is and McCain suffered because of it. In years passed his the fundamentals of the economy are strong comment would have been ignored in favor of talk about Ayers. McCain was nothing short of an angry idiot during this campaign and the coverage was a refection of reality. He was a shit candidate and he got the coverage he deserved. Obama was an amazing candidate and he got the coverage he deserved. Get over it you immense babies.
FearTheReaper is a writer, actor and stand up comedian. Check back each Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday for more from FearTheReaper and read his blog, Stop All Monsters.
Oh, I hope they never stop crying! The more they cry and throw tantrums the worse they make it for themselves in the up coming election cycles. So, CRY BABY CRY!!!!!
You ever wonder what it's like to live in "NeoConLand" where people actually expect Obama to fix everything with his magic wand? That seems to be their big talking point now.
"Oh, you elected him, and if he doesn't fix the economy, kill Bin Laden, make everyone wealthy, etc, in the first 100 days, we'll be here to say 'told ya so!'!!"
I think that was the topic of Idiot Limbaugh's show today. Although I'm not sure. I can only stand about 5 minutes of his brand of stupid on my drive home, or else I get tempted to drive into oncoming traffic.
Coyotemike said:
You ever wonder what it's like to live in "NeoConLand" where people actually expect Obama to fix everything with his magic wand? That seems to be their big talking point now.
"Oh, you elected him, and if he doesn't fix the economy, kill Bin Laden, make everyone wealthy, etc, in the first 100 days, we'll be here to say 'told ya so!'!!"
I think that was the topic of Idiot Limbaugh's show today. Although I'm not sure. I can only stand about 5 minutes of his brand of stupid on my drive home, or else I get tempted to drive into oncoming traffic.
What's really humorous about the above effect (I've noticed it, too) is the recent news that the roll-back of the Bush tax cuts on the upper echelon probably aren't happening too soon, if they even happen prior to 2011 and their already-scheduled expiration date.
Coyotemike said:
You ever wonder what it's like to live in "NeoConLand" where people actually expect Obama to fix everything with his magic wand? That seems to be their big talking point now.
"Oh, you elected him, and if he doesn't fix the economy, kill Bin Laden, make everyone wealthy, etc, in the first 100 days, we'll be here to say 'told ya so!'!!"
I think that was the topic of Idiot Limbaugh's show today. Although I'm not sure. I can only stand about 5 minutes of his brand of stupid on my drive home, or else I get tempted to drive into oncoming traffic.
What's really humorous about the above effect (I've noticed it, too) is the recent news that the roll-back of the Bush tax cuts on the upper echelon probably aren't happening too soon, if they even happen prior to 2011 and their already-scheduled expiration date.
It's like they don't think we understand what reality is. We're Liberals, not Libertarians!
Lets start off on a bad note, I voted Mcain. Don't bother ripping me a new hole I won't listen or be convinced otherwise just like you all won't listen to my arguement against Obama! I didn't vote Rep to keep corporate America strong we all know it isn't, blame it on credit and credit alone for the most part, both unscrupulous creditors making it too easy and those of us who abused it profusely. They stupidly gave it hoping for huge penalty assessments to you when you maxed it out and missed a payment screwing up your nice little installments and now can't afford the payments and now you have hopefully nice things that you can't afford and not a ton of Starbucks receipts. Key point to the above crap, If you're going to do something stupid make it worth it!
Now for the hate mail. Obama has himself, I saw him say it on Tv that the majority of the reasons he was voted in can't be changed in the first 4 YEARS OR POSSIBLY 10 OR EVEN MORE!!!!! So you can vote Rep or Dem for the president and it will make very little impact evidently. The areas that we truly need to watch and vote for and write letters to that will make a difference is congress, they can override vetos, and they are the ones adding billions in pork, like a "$3 million dollar projector" (not claiming as fact just for arguement that we all heard about Obama.) Until the back scratching and pork is taken out of congress we're still all screwed!
And now to finish. In an outstandingly mature way (I expect no less from my experience with liberals, once again no hate mail I can't help what my experiences are!) "Shut the.....Crybabies (said once and not worth repeating) I seem to remember an election in the not so distant past that centered around Florida that a "party" filed a lawsuit over (once again no claims as to right or wrong.) If you can whine so can we EXCEPT we aren't filing a LAWSUIT we are bitching about our own parties weaknesses! So even in victory you can't be civil!! Grow up! The title to this thread points toward an attitude that is the cause of the political split in this country, 'when I'm right fuck you! and when you're right fuck you!', you were probabling flipping off the tv and didn't even listen to Mcains succession speech! He was a gentlemen and graciously lost and now ASSHOLES! who "won" (voter not Obama himself) are talking shit! I'm sick and tired of internet opinions thinking they matter, like polls they don't but you can still have them. I do like the way Obama doesn't have that smug bad guy "Your Fucked Grin" anymore. I wish an election could be chosen like the dating game all the info you get is qualification and political/voting history, no parties, names, or faces, like getting a loan on line all about the numbers, not the person smiling for a commission across the desk. Me, and I will always get less accomplished as a whole than We and Us. We need to vote for Us, note I voted for Me, or I wanted to be a part of history! Obama and Mcain are both part of history and about the only voter that also is in this election is Joe the Plumber, you won't go down in history because you helped vote in the first black president, but I'm sure if he fucks up really badly! Your Rep friends won't let you forget it just like ya'll don't with Bush, so remeber if it comes back around "Shut th....Crybabies!"
I'll be honest I don't care what party is in "charge" as long as things don't get worse or they get better!
DangerousD said:
A fine of my previously mentioned attitude.
What?
I'll assume your smart and expect a accurate 3 sentence summary of my response!
What about his smart?
I seem to remember an election in the not so distant past that centered around Florida that a "party" filed a lawsuit over (once again no claims as to right or wrong.) If you can whine so can we EXCEPT we aren't filing a LAWSUIT we are bitching about our own parties weaknesses!
Right, because our guy actually won the election. Bush didn't. Or, at that point, hadn't. You'd have to be stupid to try to sue now. But back in 2000, there was actually something to sue about.
Obama has himself, I saw him say it on Tv that the majority of the reasons he was voted in can't be changed in the first 4 YEARS OR POSSIBLY 10 OR EVEN MORE!!!!! So you can vote Rep or Dem for the president and it will make very little impact evidently.
.... Okay, let's look at it like this. You're trapped in a room where someone has sprayed shit all over the walls. Two guys want in, for some reason. One guy wants to come in to help clean it up, but he tells you it's going to take a long time and a lot of hard work. It will probably be gross, too. The other guy wants to spray more shit on the walls. Which one do you want to let in?
you were probabling flipping off the tv and didn't even listen to Mcains succession speech! He was a gentlemen and graciously lost
I don't know if you can make any guesses as to what I was probabling doing on election night, mostly because I don't know what probabling means. But I listened to McCain concession speech. I don't know how you make a succession speech if you didn't succeed. Did we watch the same election? Anyways, you neglect to mention the McCain supporters booing as he made his speech. You don't find a lot of precedent for that in previous elections.
Did you read this article? He's addressing the crying conservatives who are trying to call foul-play on this election. Exactly what you're raging against. The ones who are saying that Obama only won because of the media. He's pointing out how that's complete bullshit. You need to step away from the computer, breathe, maybe take a nap, then come back and read this article, then spellcheck your reply.
DangerousD said:
A fine of my previously mentioned attitude.
What?
-Sorry A fine Example of previously mentioned Attitude.
I'll assume your smart and expect a accurate 3 sentence summary of my response!
What about his smart?
-Better than saying fine the you summarize it you idiot, merely a friendly (or so I thought) assumption
I seem to remember an election in the not so distant past that centered around Florida that a "party" filed a lawsuit over (once again no claims as to right or wrong.) If you can whine so can we EXCEPT we aren't filing a LAWSUIT we are bitching about our own parties weaknesses!
Right, because our guy actually won the election. Bush didn't. Or, at that point, hadn't. You'd have to be stupid to try to sue now. But back in 2000, there was actually something to sue about.
-Unless you have all the ballots from Florida to count niether you nor I can make that assumption.
Obama has himself, I saw him say it on Tv that the majority of the reasons he was voted in can't be changed in the first 4 YEARS OR POSSIBLY 10 OR EVEN MORE!!!!! So you can vote Rep or Dem for the president and it will make very little impact evidently.
.... Okay, let's look at it like this. You're trapped in a room where someone has sprayed shit all over the walls. Two guys want in, for some reason. One guy wants to come in to help clean it up, but he tells you it's going to take a long time and a lot of hard work. It will probably be gross, too. The other guy wants to spray more shit on the walls. Which one do you want to let in?
-I guess we could say one guy wants to clean it up but it probably won't happen when he's in the room, said he. And it can only be assumed the other is only going to spray shit neither of us know.
you were probabling flipping off the tv and didn't even listen to Mcains succession speech! He was a gentlemen and graciously lost
I don't know if you can make any guesses as to what I was probabling doing on election night, mostly because I don't know what probabling means. But I listened to McCain concession speech. I don't know how you make a succession speech if you didn't succeed. Did we watch the same election? Anyways, you neglect to mention the McCain supporters booing as he made his speech. You don't find a lot of precedent for that in previous elections.
-Sorry PROBABLY, you fail to mention McCain telling people to Stop booing.
Did you read this article? He's addressing the crying conservatives who are trying to call foul-play on this election. Exactly what you're raging against. The ones who are saying that Obama only won because of the media. He's pointing out how that's complete bullshit. You need to step away from the computer, breathe, maybe take a nap, then come back and read this article, then spellcheck your reply.
-They can cry all they want its a free country, they may feel its valid, it just won't go to court and be decided on, if it could be and they were found against and still cried then they need to shut up. Until then they have as much validity as we do pointing out poor writing and editing of something that will never truly matter.
Katieesq said:
^^^ South Park referencing Shakespeare makes me hot.
This article reminds me of the Republican boasts after the 2000 presidential election. Same shit, different party, different day.
False equivalencies make my brain weep.
In terms of the "crybaby" rhetoric - it's annoying. I'm not trying to equate voter fraud with specious claims of media bias. But I'm not convinced of FTR's point that McCain was given media rimjobs or of incessant Republican whining (though admittedly, I don't masochistically listen to talk radio like some of you).
I think this article is overblown. The media didn't feast on the Wright story - it just didn't stick. The Rezko story got a lot of in-depth press locally and some nationally, but it was only "picked apart" because the scandal went all the way to the governor. And bringing up one story of one McCain barbecue is hardly evidence the press was cleaning McCain's dirty balls with their tongues.
A discussion of media coverage throughout the campaign would be fascinating, but it's beyond the scope of a short article like this. It's too easy to cherry pick stories to make a point, which is exactly what happened here.
Katieesq said:
The media didn't feast on the Wright story - it just didn't stick.
Strongly disagree. During the primary, this was FIVE ALARM BLARING SIRENS for a good two plus straight weeks on every TV show and every blog and every radio show. This is probably the "scandal" that, on balance, received the most media coverage overall in this election cycle.
The Rezko story got a lot of in-depth press locally and some nationally, but it was only "picked apart" because the scandal went all the way to the governor. And bringing up one story of one McCain barbecue is hardly evidence the press was cleaning McCain's dirty balls with their tongues.
A discussion of media coverage throughout the campaign would be fascinating, but it's beyond the scope of a short article like this. It's too easy to cherry pick stories to make a point, which is exactly what happened here.
Agree to an extent, but FTR's point is cogent. The right's meme that Obama was given a free pass is flatly false. McCain was able to skate with gaffe after gaffe. This was in part because his record was much more robust than Obama's (a legitimate reason) and in part because the press just knew him better (an illegitimate reason.)
DangerousD said:
-They can cry all they want its a free country, they may feel its valid, it just won't go to court and be decided on, if it could be and they were found against and still cried then they need to shut up. Until then they have as much validity as we do pointing out poor writing and editing of something that will never truly matter.
And FTR has a legal right to make fun of them whether you like it or not. Legal rights weren't at all the point. This was:
So even in victory you can't be civil!! Grow up! The title to this thread points toward an attitude that is the cause of the political split in this country, 'when I'm right fuck you! and when you're right fuck you!'
Some crazy Republicans are still trying to insist that the nation was tricked into voting for Obama by the evil media. If you're not being one of those "fucking babies", then this really isn't directed at you now is it?
And I hope you were referring to your own posts with the "poor writing and editing" comment, because you're in no position to throw stones.
EDIT: Oh christ, there's more in there. Learn to use the quote function properly if you're going to use it, please.
FearTheReaper
NEWSWIRE
I'm lost
NOV 24, 2008 05:52 PM