Sarah Palin: The Sound and the Fury

[Sifu]

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

EYE ROLL, More Republican Rhetoric

[/quote]

So, basically you have no answer to the facts that I’ve posted. Good for you, you are nothing if not consistent.[/quote]

I have had enough of exchanges with you to realize that it is beyond your grasp to communicate
unless the person you are communicating with agrees with you

That is IMO where you and I part ways , I appreciate a different point of view. That is why I come here.[/quote]

You should appreciate a differing view as it’s the correct one. Also, it should be noted that you have one more post and still no response to the facts that I’ve posted.
[/quote]

What facts , your opinion ?
[/quote]

It’s obvious that you are able to go online, right? So, now all you have to do is check to see how many negative stories were run about Obama, vs Hillary. We don’t even have to bring Palin into this, as it’s obvious what the press did to her. Just compare Obama and Hillary. For heaven sakes even SNL did a few skits making fun of how biased the press was toward Obama. It’s not a secret. The mainstream liberal media wanted Obama to be President and now he is.

Those are facts. And I will point out that you have yet one more post and still no response to refute what I’ve pointed out. Come on take off your Reagan hating hat and put on your critical thinking hat and try to come up with a defense as to why the liberal media favored Obama.
[/quote]

These are not facts this is Republican Rhetoric. This is some one that has an inability to distinguish between fact and opinion.[/quote]

Here are some facts for you. Out of all the news outlets the one that was the most favorable to Obama was MSNBC and NBC. MSNBC is owned by General Electric. The same GE whose windmill division stood to make a fortune out of Obama’ green jobs policies.

[ZEB]

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

EYE ROLL, More Republican Rhetoric

[/quote]

So, basically you have no answer to the facts that I’ve posted. Good for you, you are nothing if not consistent.[/quote]

I have had enough of exchanges with you to realize that it is beyond your grasp to communicate
unless the person you are communicating with agrees with you

That is IMO where you and I part ways , I appreciate a different point of view. That is why I come here.[/quote]

You should appreciate a differing view as it’s the correct one. Also, it should be noted that you have one more post and still no response to the facts that I’ve posted.
[/quote]

What facts , your opinion ?
[/quote]

It’s obvious that you are able to go online, right? So, now all you have to do is check to see how many negative stories were run about Obama, vs Hillary. We don’t even have to bring Palin into this, as it’s obvious what the press did to her. Just compare Obama and Hillary. For heaven sakes even SNL did a few skits making fun of how biased the press was toward Obama. It’s not a secret. The mainstream liberal media wanted Obama to be President and now he is.

Those are facts. And I will point out that you have yet one more post and still no response to refute what I’ve pointed out. Come on take off your Reagan hating hat and put on your critical thinking hat and try to come up with a defense as to why the liberal media favored Obama.
[/quote]

These are not facts this is Republican Rhetoric. This is some one that has an inability to distinguish between fact and opinion.[/quote]

In all seriousness there is really only one poster who has less to say than you, but keeps posting nevertheless. But at least Headhunter is at times entertaining. Your shtick is just empty and boring.

[pittbulll]

[quote]Sifu wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

EYE ROLL, More Republican Rhetoric

[/quote]

So, basically you have no answer to the facts that I’ve posted. Good for you, you are nothing if not consistent.[/quote]

I have had enough of exchanges with you to realize that it is beyond your grasp to communicate
unless the person you are communicating with agrees with you

That is IMO where you and I part ways , I appreciate a different point of view. That is why I come here.[/quote]

You should appreciate a differing view as it’s the correct one. Also, it should be noted that you have one more post and still no response to the facts that I’ve posted.
[/quote]

What facts , your opinion ?
[/quote]

It’s obvious that you are able to go online, right? So, now all you have to do is check to see how many negative stories were run about Obama, vs Hillary. We don’t even have to bring Palin into this, as it’s obvious what the press did to her. Just compare Obama and Hillary. For heaven sakes even SNL did a few skits making fun of how biased the press was toward Obama. It’s not a secret. The mainstream liberal media wanted Obama to be President and now he is.

Those are facts. And I will point out that you have yet one more post and still no response to refute what I’ve pointed out. Come on take off your Reagan hating hat and put on your critical thinking hat and try to come up with a defense as to why the liberal media favored Obama.
[/quote]

These are not facts this is Republican Rhetoric. This is some one that has an inability to distinguish between fact and opinion.[/quote]

Here are some facts for you. Out of all the news outlets the one that was the most favorable to Obama was MSNBC and NBC. MSNBC is owned by General Electric. The same GE whose windmill division stood to make a fortune out of Obama’ green jobs policies.

[/quote]

While there is a conection , there are no FACTS other than there is a conection.

It is ironic but do you see the connection between Cheney and Haliburton ? IMO this is a closer connection

[ZEB]

[quote]Otep wrote:

President Clinton is an amazingly unbiased source for this dispute.[/quote]

Actually for Bill Clinton to attack the press something had to go very, very wrong. Maybe you’re too young to remember how the press fawned over Bill Clinton in 92’ and then again in 96’. But I remember it well. Also, how do you defend the media when even SNL pointed out how biased the mainstream liberal media was toward Obama? Everyone new it, it is a fact. There is a web site which tracks favorable news stories. Obama had more than Hillary, and McCain put together. He’s a manufactured candidate, and really, really bad President. But of course you won’t admit that either.

More, regardless of Obama’s political ideology or executive experience, I don’t see the need to look beyond his own campaign and charisma as reasons why he won the election. Imagine that, a an whose job has been that of a professional campaigner for the last decade runs the slickest campaign. Ludicrous, I tell you.

I agree, he was a good campaigner. When did I ever say that he wasn’t. But, keep in mind that when the media is your PR department that too plays into the scheme of things. Now run along and do your research. Obama received more favorable news coverage, and less unfavorable than any other candidate by far.

Now why is that?

[pittbulll]

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

EYE ROLL, More Republican Rhetoric

[/quote]

So, basically you have no answer to the facts that I’ve posted. Good for you, you are nothing if not consistent.[/quote]

I have had enough of exchanges with you to realize that it is beyond your grasp to communicate
unless the person you are communicating with agrees with you

That is IMO where you and I part ways , I appreciate a different point of view. That is why I come here.[/quote]

You should appreciate a differing view as it’s the correct one. Also, it should be noted that you have one more post and still no response to the facts that I’ve posted.
[/quote]

What facts , your opinion ?
[/quote]

It’s obvious that you are able to go online, right? So, now all you have to do is check to see how many negative stories were run about Obama, vs Hillary. We don’t even have to bring Palin into this, as it’s obvious what the press did to her. Just compare Obama and Hillary. For heaven sakes even SNL did a few skits making fun of how biased the press was toward Obama. It’s not a secret. The mainstream liberal media wanted Obama to be President and now he is.

Those are facts. And I will point out that you have yet one more post and still no response to refute what I’ve pointed out. Come on take off your Reagan hating hat and put on your critical thinking hat and try to come up with a defense as to why the liberal media favored Obama.
[/quote]

These are not facts this is Republican Rhetoric. This is some one that has an inability to distinguish between fact and opinion.[/quote]

In all seriousness there is really only one poster who has less to say than you, but keeps posting nevertheless. But at least Headhunter is at times entertaining. Your shtick is just empty and boring.
[/quote]

Zeb you continue to lose sight of the conversation , we are discussing facts not your opinion .

You are one to talk about someone’s Shtick , your is always the same , you attack them .

[ZEB]

Is there anything more enjoyable than watching a bunch of democrats try to say that the mainstream liberal media was not favoring Obama. This is high comedy, it must be, what else can you call it?

[pittbulll]

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Is there anything more enjoyable than watching a bunch of democrats try to say that the mainstream liberal media was not favoring Obama. This is high comedy, it must be, what else can you call it?

[/quote]

I have not heard any Democrats say that but I have heard a bunch of Republicans say the opposite

You can call it opinion

[ZEB]

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

Zeb you continue to lose sight of the conversation , we are discussing facts not your opinion

[/quote]

It’s just my opinion, really?

Comments made by sources, voters, reporters and anchors that aired on ABC, CBS and NBC evening newscasts over the past two months reflected positively on Obama in 65 percent of cases, compared to 31 percent of cases with regards to McCain, according to the Center for Media and Public Affairs.

HuffPost - Breaking News, U.S. and World News

Keep in mind that this is from the Huffington Post, which tends to lean very hard to the left.

What do you think of that Pit? Is it just opinion, or is it fact as I say? If you’d like I can post from another 10 or 12 sources just as credible.

Why is it so hard to admit that Obama was favored by your boys in the mainstream liberal media? It’s fact jack, sorry to burst yet another bubble that you live in. And this on the heals of your Ronald Reagan awakening.

Stick around Pit, I’ll open your eyes yet That is if your mind is not too closed.

[ZEB]

Hey Pit, here you go here’s another one just for you:

[quote]In a look at just the raw numbers, 36 percent of the reports on Obama were positive, 35 percent were neutral and 29 percent were negative.

The McCain stories were much more negative - in fact 57 percent of the stories were negative, 14 percent were positive and 29 percent were neutral.[/quote]

Did the media favor Obama?

[ZEB]

Hey Pit, how you doing?

The media coverage of the race for president has not so much cast Barack Obama in a favorable light as it has portrayed John McCain in a substantially negative one, according to a new study of the media since the two national political conventions ended.

http://www.journalism.org/analysis_report/winning_media_campaign

[pittbulll]

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Hey Pit, how you doing?

The media coverage of the race for president has not so much cast Barack Obama in a favorable light as it has portrayed John McCain in a substantially negative one, according to a new study of the media since the two national political conventions ended.

http://www.journalism.org/analysis_report/winning_media_campaign[/quote]

Good read , what’s your point ?

[ZEB]

And it continues…

About four out of 10 stories, editorials and op-ed columns about Obama were “clearly positive in tone,” the study said, compared with 22 percent for Bush and 27 percent for Clinton in the same mix of media outlets during the same first two months in office.

Fun Facts About the White House

[pittbulll]

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Hey Pit, how you doing?

The media coverage of the race for president has not so much cast Barack Obama in a favorable light as it has portrayed John McCain in a substantially negative one, according to a new study of the media since the two national political conventions ended.

http://www.journalism.org/analysis_report/winning_media_campaign[/quote]

You equate McCain’s negative image as being a product of the media rather than a product of his own behavior

[ZEB]

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Hey Pit, how you doing?

The media coverage of the race for president has not so much cast Barack Obama in a favorable light as it has portrayed John McCain in a substantially negative one, according to a new study of the media since the two national political conventions ended.

http://www.journalism.org/analysis_report/winning_media_campaign[/quote]

Good read , what’s your point ?
[/quote]

You either have alzheimer’s, or are purposely playing stupid, which is it?

I’ll refresh for you, You said it was just my opinion that Obama got favorable treatment from the main stream liberal media. I told you it was fact. I’ve now shown you evidence to back up my assertion.

Just say you give up because playing stupid probably won’t work… this time.

[ZEB]

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Hey Pit, how you doing?

The media coverage of the race for president has not so much cast Barack Obama in a favorable light as it has portrayed John McCain in a substantially negative one, according to a new study of the media since the two national political conventions ended.

http://www.journalism.org/analysis_report/winning_media_campaign[/quote]

You equate McCain’s negative image as being a product of the media rather than a product of his own behavior [/quote]

That’s not even a good try Pit, I liked it better when you played stupid rather than launch this lame attack.

One more time, Obama got more favorable news stories from the mainstream liberal media. And (chuckle) you say (more chuckling) that it’s all McCains fault.

LMAO.

Thank You.

[pittbulll]

[quote]ZEB wrote:
And it continues…

About four out of 10 stories, editorials and op-ed columns about Obama were “clearly positive in tone,” the study said, compared with 22 percent for Bush and 27 percent for Clinton in the same mix of media outlets during the same first two months in office.

http://journalism.about.com/od/trends/a/pressobama.htm[/quote]

Reading your articles is getting boring , they make no point, Obama has had unprecedented popularity until as of late .

So if you have a point , please make it

[ZEB]

Yes, the war hero had a terrible media image prior to the 08’ election didn’t he?

Whahaaha…that’s why he was seen as the lead candidate by both democrats and republicans to take the White House PRIOR to the media frenzy over Obama.

Pit, my 12 year old could have put up a better argument than that one. No wait, he would have been too smart to try to make such an outlandish claim that the mainstream liberal media is actually fair.

You kill me

[ZEB]

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
And it continues…

About four out of 10 stories, editorials and op-ed columns about Obama were “clearly positive in tone,” the study said, compared with 22 percent for Bush and 27 percent for Clinton in the same mix of media outlets during the same first two months in office.

http://journalism.about.com/od/trends/a/pressobama.htm[/quote]

Reading your articles is getting boring , they make no point, Obama has had unprecedented popularity until as of late .

So if you have a point , please make it[/quote]

The media gave him more favorable coverage. Please tell me you are not that dumb. Come on, you drive, drink and vote. Ha ha

[ZEB]

Pits defense: “nuh uh”

Sort of reminds me of the way you acted when I pointed out your flawed argument regarding Ronald Reagan.

You should just come to this great site for training information.

[pittbulll]

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Hey Pit, how you doing?

The media coverage of the race for president has not so much cast Barack Obama in a favorable light as it has portrayed John McCain in a substantially negative one, according to a new study of the media since the two national political conventions ended.

http://www.journalism.org/analysis_report/winning_media_campaign[/quote]

You equate McCain’s negative image as being a product of the media rather than a product of his own behavior [/quote]

That’s not even a good try Pit, I liked it better when you played stupid rather than launch this lame attack.

One more time, Obama got more favorable news stories from the mainstream liberal media. And (chuckle) you say (more chuckling) that it’s all McCains fault.

LMAO.

Thank You.[/quote]

This is the technique you use when you can’t negotiate an opposing opinion . The facts seem pretty clear to me . Obama got good press because IMO he was a good Candidate . And McCain got mediocre press because he is IMO Mediocre . Where did I lose you