Damn, 19 posts and still dont know what he said.

(03-20-2009 11:16 AM)ShockerBob Wrote:  

(03-20-2009 11:09 AM)EagleRockCafe Wrote:  

(03-20-2009 11:01 AM)Observer Wrote:  I don't know what Obama said on tv last night, and I really don't care. The man is a disaster. Check today's financial reports on his miscalculated budget projections. And since when is any off topic discussion not proper on this board? The greatest line of sarcasm post this year is, "the media do not have a bias." Freaking hilarious.

You are so correct. It comes out today that the Obama administration has only missed the budget deficit projection by a Trillion dollars. Meanwhile he is out partying on the left coast on a talk show. The man's ego is out of control. It would be nice if he spent a little time filling the 17 high level spots that are empty at the Treasury department instead of being on Leno. Of course his Treasury Secretary selection just proves how smart Obama is. What a jewel he is.

What's sad is that Obama and his administration already know the economy will rebound in 2010. Therefore they can spend the pork like there's no tomorrow on the basis of "we're saving the economy." When the money is generally only paying off it's benefactors from the election (highest spending bills ever by the way).

The rebound in 2010 was due way before Obama was elected.

Obama will take credit for it, and will use that in the 2012 re-election.

So true. They are taking advantage of the economic crisis to put huge spending in place to implement their left agenda. I really believe the American people are seeing it for what it is though.

So much for being informative. I figured at least one person would post what was said or a link to it. Not all of us watch tv 24-7.

ETA: Now that I've found the comment ( http://voices.washingtonpost.com/sleuth/..._game.html ) I will comment that it was a pretty stupid thing for anybody to say, much less the president. Add to that the fact that -- based on what we saw of his bowling on the campaign trail -- special olympians could wax the lanes with him.

(03-20-2009 11:19 AM)bleed blue and gold Wrote:  Damn, 19 posts and still dont know what he said.

(03-20-2009 11:21 AM)texd Wrote:  So much for being informative. I figured at least one person would post what was said or a link to it. Not all of us watch tv 24-7.

ETA: Now that I've found the comment ( http://voices.washingtonpost.com/sleuth/..._game.html ) I will comment that it was a pretty stupid thing for anybody to say, much less the president. Add to that the fact that -- based on what we saw of his bowling on the campaign trail -- special olympians could wax the lanes with him.

And then it happened. Amid laughter, Mr Obama quipped, “It’s like - it was like the Special Olympics, or something.” And in the instant he said it, you could see a flash of realisation in his eyes: I’ve just mocked the disabled. On live TV.

(03-20-2009 11:02 AM)BlazerFan11 Wrote:  

Sophandros Wrote:The fact of the matter is that the media is corporate. Once you understand that, you'll realize that (with the exception of Fox News and Air America), the media do not have a bias.

You can't be serious. Keith Olbermann, Chris Matthews, etc. on MSNBC aren't biased?

Those are indivuals who do are making editorial comments. MSNBC, as a network, is not biased in their reporting of events.

Again, THE MEDIA (ie, the people making decisions) are only biased toward the bottom line. Nothing else. Olberman, Matthews, Limbaugh, and Hannity are entertainers. They don't make the decisions on how news is reported. Once you realize that, believe me, you'll have a better grasp of things.

(03-20-2009 11:25 AM)cb4029 Wrote:  

(03-20-2009 11:19 AM)bleed blue and gold Wrote:  Damn, 19 posts and still dont know what he said.

People are pissed about that? Sounds like people are just bitching and complaining because they can.

(03-20-2009 11:09 AM)BlazerFan11 Wrote:  What about the "phony outrage" of the politicians who piss away trillions in free handouts for their special interest groups, then try to act like defenders of taxpayer money by trying to get back a scant $165 million?

The outrage should be directed at the billions that AIG has shipped off to foreign countries, not about the .1% of the bailout that they squandered on bonuses.

Yes, the bonuses are eggregious because these same douchebag execs laid off thousands of people earlier in the year, but at the same time, that's nothing compared to the amount of our money that they sent to other countries.

(03-20-2009 11:27 AM)EagleRockCafe Wrote:  And in the instant he said it, you could see a flash of realisation in his eyes: I’ve just mocked the disabled. On live TV.
[/b][/i]

The tonight show isn't live.

What would Sarah Palin think? Joe Biden is probably pretty happy that he's number 2 on the ticket in gaffes now.

(03-20-2009 11:11 AM)EagleRockCafe Wrote:  

(03-20-2009 11:02 AM)BlazerFan11 Wrote:  

Sophandros Wrote:The fact of the matter is that the media is corporate. Once you understand that, you'll realize that (with the exception of Fox News and Air America), the media do not have a bias.

You can't be serious. Keith Olbermann, Chris Matthews, etc. on MSNBC aren't biased?

Don't you know, MSNBC is just showing us poor dumb fools what we should be thinking because we are just lost souls without brains. I love how Soph points out Fox and doesn't mention MSNBC. Hilarious and so typical of the left.

No, but I mentioned Air America. MSNBC isn't biased in its reporting of the news.

How typical of the right wingnuts not to be able to read.

(03-20-2009 11:12 AM)ShockerBob Wrote:  

(03-20-2009 09:58 AM)Sophandros Wrote:  Additionally, the media fanned the flames that the decline in the stock market a few weeks ago was Obama's fault (instead of poor 4Q08 earnings reports, recently released unemployment figures, etc), but when they have been going up, it's because of statements made by companies. But I guess if you have an agenda, the media is against you.

Go look at the Stock Market figures after Obama won the election. No media involved here, just look at what the market did when he was elected.

(03-20-2009 09:58 AM)Sophandros Wrote:  The fact of the matter is that the media is corporate. Once you understand that, you'll realize that (with the exception of Fox News and Air America), the media do not have a bias.

LOL and the Communist News Network, Keith OberImAHugeDouche, Bill Mauer, LARRY F'N KING AREN'T BIASED AND DON'T HAVE AN AGENDA.

PLEASE PASS ME THE DOOBIE YOU'RE SMOKING IN LOUISIANA

(03-20-2009 09:58 AM)Sophandros Wrote:  As for the comment, yes it was in poor taste.

I thought it was pretty funny. People who were ragging on Obama for doing a bracket (especially conservatives), are going a little too far and are just finding something to jab at him for. I thought it was badass to be honest.

Although, East Coasters GaySPN (owned by the ABC Liberals) would never allow for BUSH to do that.

AND TO ADD TO THAT: If Bush said this he would be chastised by the media for weeks. WEEKS.

(03-20-2009 09:58 AM)Sophandros Wrote:  But aren't you guys on the right wing always the ones telling people not to have such a thick skin? Bloody hypocrites.

Oh ok, like any left wing Liberals have never been hypocrites themselves...

(03-20-2009 09:58 AM)Sophandros Wrote:  Honestly, I'm much, much, much more upset at this adminstration's decision to make veterans pay for their healthcare out of pocket.

I agree with you.

Right after the election, 3Q08 earnings reports were coming out, and those weren't good...

If you think that CNN has a "liberal bias" then you are WAY, WAY, WAY, WAY to the right and out of touch with reality.

I've already addressed the difference between individual op-ed pieces and the manner of news reporting.

No, Bush would not have been chastized by the media for weeks. However, at this point, no one has any proof either way, so your "if Bush did this..." comments are rather worthless as far as the discussion goes.

I never claimed that any liberals were NOT hypocrites. Either refute the claim that telling someone to have a thick skin one minute, but then turning around and acting like a bunch of wusses (as ERC did with his phoney outrage) is hypocrital, or just admit the hypocrisy. It's not that difficult to do. Stay on topic.

And on the last point: we need to do what we can to make sure that our congressmen know that we're upset about this and that their jobs are on the line if they let that happen.

(03-20-2009 11:27 AM)EagleRockCafe Wrote:  

(03-20-2009 11:21 AM)texd Wrote:  So much for being informative. I figured at least one person would post what was said or a link to it. Not all of us watch tv 24-7.

ETA: Now that I've found the comment ( http://voices.washingtonpost.com/sleuth/..._game.html ) I will comment that it was a pretty stupid thing for anybody to say, much less the president. Add to that the fact that -- based on what we saw of his bowling on the campaign trail -- special olympians could wax the lanes with him.

And then it happened. Amid laughter, Mr Obama quipped, “It’s like - it was like the Special Olympics, or something.” And in the instant he said it, you could see a flash of realisation in his eyes: I’ve just mocked the disabled. On live TV.

See what happens when the teleprompter doesn't tell him what to say.

(03-20-2009 11:02 AM)Chappy Wrote:  What a retarded thing to say.

So the new outlets aren't biased, just the journalists/entertainers who report the news on the new outlets, and are the face of the news outlets? Got it.

You can't say that Fox is biased, but MSNBC isn't. Either they both are, or they both aren't. End of story. You must be looking at the world through your Obama-shaped commemorative glasses.

(03-20-2009 11:41 AM)Blazing Saddles Wrote:  

(03-20-2009 11:02 AM)Chappy Wrote:  What a retarded thing to say.

You know what, lost in all the other nonsense was that gem of a post.

To whatever....person....equated Obama or any president to the stock market, I suggest you watch this http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index....-knows-all

(03-20-2009 11:43 AM)BlazerFan11 Wrote:  So the new outlets aren't biased, just the journalists/entertainers who report the news on the new outlets, and are the face of the news outlets? Got it.

You can't say that Fox is biased, but MSNBC isn't. Either they both are, or they both aren't. End of story. You must be looking at the world through your Obama-shaped commemorative glasses.

No, you don't get it (just like you don't get economics...). Fox has a bias in the manner in which the news is reported, like which stories they choose to run, etc. MSNBC, when it comes to reporting the news, does not share such a bias.

MSNBC's EDITORIALS are very biased. No one denies that. However, the content and the manner of their NEWS STORIES is not biased, unlike with Fox News. HOWEVER, Fox is smart with that, because they recognize that there is a market for people like you who believe in the myth of the liberal media, so it's not as if their bias is necessarily a bad thing. It makes Rupert Murdoch a lot of money, after all. As someone who worships at the alter of laizzez faire capitalism, you should embrace the concept of a biased station like Fox News.

Personally, I enjoy Fox. I like seeing different perspectives of the same story. I like to watch BBC America, CNN, and Fox in order to get a full spectrum of a certain topic. But that's just me.

(03-20-2009 11:49 AM)Sophandros Wrote:  

(03-20-2009 11:43 AM)BlazerFan11 Wrote:  So the new outlets aren't biased, just the journalists/entertainers who report the news on the new outlets, and are the face of the news outlets? Got it.

You can't say that Fox is biased, but MSNBC isn't. Either they both are, or they both aren't. End of story. You must be looking at the world through your Obama-shaped commemorative glasses.

No, you don't get it (just like you don't get economics...). Fox has a bias in the manner in which the news is reported, like which stories they choose to run, etc. MSNBC, when it comes to reporting the news, does not share such a bias.

MSNBC's EDITORIALS are very biased. No one denies that. However, the content and the manner of their NEWS STORIES is not biased, unlike with Fox News. HOWEVER, Fox is smart with that, because they recognize that there is a market for people like you who believe in the myth of the liberal media, so it's not as if their bias is necessarily a bad thing. It makes Rupert Murdoch a lot of money, after all. As someone who worships at the alter of laizzez faire capitalism, you should embrace the concept of a biased station like Fox News.

Personally, I enjoy Fox. I like seeing different perspectives of the same story. I like to watch BBC America, CNN, and Fox in order to get a full spectrum of a certain topic. But that's just me.

The "myth" of the liberal media??? MSNBC doesn't slant news stories??? Olberman and Mathews were removed from reporting any news after the way they slanted news stories at the conventions last summer. Geez, give it up on that issue. Quit drinking the kool aid.

(03-20-2009 11:53 AM)EagleRockCafe Wrote:  

(03-20-2009 11:49 AM)Sophandros Wrote:  

(03-20-2009 11:43 AM)BlazerFan11 Wrote:  So the new outlets aren't biased, just the journalists/entertainers who report the news on the new outlets, and are the face of the news outlets? Got it.

You can't say that Fox is biased, but MSNBC isn't. Either they both are, or they both aren't. End of story. You must be looking at the world through your Obama-shaped commemorative glasses.

No, you don't get it (just like you don't get economics...). Fox has a bias in the manner in which the news is reported, like which stories they choose to run, etc. MSNBC, when it comes to reporting the news, does not share such a bias.

MSNBC's EDITORIALS are very biased. No one denies that. However, the content and the manner of their NEWS STORIES is not biased, unlike with Fox News. HOWEVER, Fox is smart with that, because they recognize that there is a market for people like you who believe in the myth of the liberal media, so it's not as if their bias is necessarily a bad thing. It makes Rupert Murdoch a lot of money, after all. As someone who worships at the alter of laizzez faire capitalism, you should embrace the concept of a biased station like Fox News.

Personally, I enjoy Fox. I like seeing different perspectives of the same story. I like to watch BBC America, CNN, and Fox in order to get a full spectrum of a certain topic. But that's just me.

The "myth" of the liberal media??? MSNBC doesn't slant news stories???
Put down the kool aid.

Yes, the liberal media is a myth. The media is run by major corporations with corporate interests in mind. It is NOT about forwarding a "liberal agenda" (and if you think that Obama's agenda is liberal, then you're WAAAAAAY the heck out to the right and maybe need to join the rest of society...).

MSNBC has a slant in their editorials, but not in how they report the news.

Anyway, to sum things up: If you are standing at the 45 yardline, the 50 doesn't look too far away. If you are standing under the goalposts, then it's really, really far away.

Most of the people on this thread posting from the political right are standing under the goal posts. Obama is around the other 45 yard line from them. To them, he seems really far to the left, but to the rest of sane America, he's a centrist.

The media hover between the 45s, by the way.

By the way, if MSNBC had a bias, they would not have pulled Olbermann and Matthews from reporting news...