The media in this country sucks!

[muleman]

 

[ki0ho]

GOOD ONE MULE......THE FIRST THING I DO WHEN I LOG ON IS LOOK FOR YOUR AND JEVS POSTS.........FAILING FINDING THOSE I JUST LOG OFF....YOUALL MAKE MY DAY...WELL NOW THAT IVE PISSED OFF EVERY BODY ELSE ....THINK ILL GO PLAY WITH MY STUBBY!!!!!!!!

 

[mla2ofus]

Sad, but oh so true!!! Thanks, mule!!!
Mike

 

[tommu56]

Wait till you see the time magazine article!
The diagram of the contacts between all involved looks like a Ballantine beer symbol

The article is good too.

 

[Doc]

I do believe the difference is "Before the Election" vs "After the Election". I would not be surprised if the Petraeus resignation was put off until after the election, nor would I be naive enough to think that both the Dems or the Repubs would have done the same if in office.

I read an email that I can't put my hands on right now but it fits this topic. Is Fox News driving a wedge between the population of this country? Fox is the one news channel who came out with egg on their face after this election. They often said the polls were done weighing the Dems to heavily, that actually Romney was ahead. Of course commentators can offer up their opinion and that is all it is, an opinion. Fox offered more 'opinion' that Romney was going to win than all the other stations put together.

In the end I am amazed at how accurate the polls were. They showed Obama ahead by 1% and damn if he did not win the popular vote by 1%. Same with the 2008 election. I did not want to believe the polls but again, they were right on. It amazes me that pollsters can poll 2000 people and come up with an accurate guess of how the election will come out.

Did Fox report accurately? Does the way they report drive a wedge between Liberals and Conservatives? I've watched Fox. I enjoy watching it more than most other news channels but I still watch the others for a more rounded view of what is happening.

At first I said to myself no way Fox is divisive or hurting the US with the way they report. Then I think on it more and it has me wondering, could Fox be part of the problem with the way they report news?

 

[FrancSevin]

I do believe the difference is "Before the Election" vs "After the Election". I would not be surprised if the Petraeus resignation was put off until after the election, nor would I be naive enough to think that both the Dems or the Repubs would have done the same if in office.

I read an email that I can't put my hands on right now but it fits this topic. Is Fox News driving a wedge between the population of this country? Fox is the one news channel who came out with egg on their face after this election. They often said the polls were done weighing the Dems to heavily, that actually Romney was ahead. Of course commentators can offer up their opinion and that is all it is, an opinion. Fox offered more 'opinion' that Romney was going to win than all the other stations put together.

In the end I am amazed at how accurate the polls were. They showed Obama ahead by 1% and damn if he did not win the popular vote by 1%. Same with the 2008 election. I did not want to believe the polls but again, they were right on. It amazes me that pollsters can poll 2000 people and come up with an accurate guess of how the election will come out.

Did Fox report accurately? Does the way they report drive a wedge between Liberals and Conservatives? I've watched Fox. I enjoy watching it more than most other news channels but I still watch the others for a more rounded view of what is happening.

At first I said to myself no way Fox is divisive or hurting the US with the way they report. Then I think on it more and it has me wondering, could Fox be part of the problem with the way they report news?

Not exactly right doc. David Sabato was onfox frequently. Of allthe polsters he got it absolutely right.

So did Scott Rasmussen who was also featured almost nightly on Fox

Dick morris made the big push for a Romney landslide and tossed the theories about the skewed polling. He was loud, articulate, believable,,,but inthe end,,,,, wrong. There were a lot of democrats guest saying differently, and GOP reps like Kasich of Ohio that spoke for their party. But Fox didn't call itfor Romney.

And the chief of Fox nightly broadcast called it early for Obama and Megyn Kelly damm near threw Bill O'Reily off the set.

I'd say they were midlin' on calling it and far more cautious than the other cable channels who threw in for Barry.

Perhaps many who tune to FOX only heard the pro Romney surrogates balancing opinions were there.

As for me,I didn't want to hear it. So I believed Kasich and Morris so clearly I saw a Romney win coming. But in review,the data was there. I shouldhave stuck with Rasmussen.

Romney took his foot off of Barry's neck too early. Barry had bumper stickers saying "Vote for me,the other guy wants you to get a job!"

While I thought that funny as hell,I never considered it would work. Neither did the GOP.

The left keeps saying Obama won by a large majority. Fact is he barely won.

Post election everybody can say they saw it coming. If you guessed right who can argue?

 

[REDDOGTWO]

Just remember that the one percent margin means a mandate for policies of Obama.

 

[Kane]

Is this why Pretty Boy Obama refuses to release his medical records?

You be the judge...Has the president had some work done?

Filmmaker Joel Gilbert contends President Obama has altered his facial profile for the national stage of American politics, citing two nationally known cosmetic surgery experts he consulted who concluded Obama had a 'nose job.'

"It appears Obama had some aesthetic refinement," said plastic surgeon J. David Holcom.

Gilbert is the producer of "Dreams from my Real Father," a documentary distributed by the millions to swing states that argues the late Communist Party USA activist Frank Marshall Davis was Obama’s biological as well as ideological father, not Barack Obama, the Kenyan, who came to Hawaii as a student in 1959."Obama has gone to great lengths to obscure his past," Gilbert said. "Now, in addition to the alleged document forgery and photographic forgery by Obama to hide his true identity, we now have evidence of facial forgery."

Holcolm described in detail his reasons for concluding Obama has had cosmetic surgery.

"The upper and middle nasal vault are both narrowed. The tip and infra-tip are softer and the tip has been rotated up," he said. “Alar height appears to have been reduced so the lower part of the nose that makes up the nostrils appears softer

"These changes are not characteristic of the natural aging process," Holcolm said, "where the tip tends to settle and rotate downward causing the appearance of a longer nose and where the tip also often widens noticeably."

Wendy Lewis, a cosmetic surgery consultant and author of 11 consumer health and beauty books, including “America’s Cosmetic Doctors & Dentists” and "Plastic Makes Perfect," agrees.

"In the three younger photographs, Obama appears to have a bulbous nasal tip with wide alar bases, not uncommon with males and with skin of color," Lewis said. "The more current photos show a thinner nasal tip which suggests some finessing of his nose over the years, but it is a very natural-looking effect."

So, why would Obama have a nose job?

Gilbert contends that it was done in an effort to hide his connection to a avowed communist, a man who many believe is Obama's actual father.
Gilbert told Corsi he believes Obama had plastic surgery because he was "concerned he was looking too much like Frank Marshall Davis as he got older."

"I don’t think it was a coincidence that Obama chose to undergo a rhinoplasty before running for U.S. Senate and facing the national spotlight. If Obama was identified as Davis' son, it would connect the Marxist dots of Obama’s entire life journey," Gilbert added.

In this reporter's non-medical opinion, it seems that President Obama's skin tone has also actually become lighter over the last several years. Given the fact that Obama is an avid golfer and does many outdoor campaign events, lack of sunshine would not seem to account for the lighter tone.
However, and again, this is only speculation, while we know that he has certainly not sequestered himself inside his office for the last eight or so years, he could have engaged in the now-popular practice of skin-bleaching.

Of course, the president has not reached the almost opaque tone of a post-1980's Michael Jackson, but he has definitely taken-on a different appearance and during his first debate with Republican nominee Gov. Mitt Romney, Obama actually looked a bit ashen.

While Obama has admitted to past marijuana and cocaine use, and many have speculated that the extent of his drug use and possible one-time addiction was the real reason he refuses to release his medical records, given today's social mores...an admission of having undergone plastic surgery may be even more embarrassing than heavy drug use.

 

[mak2]

I watched Fox a lot prior to the election. I figured Romney would win by at least 4% and that was accounting for Fox's exuberant optimism. I would say the election and Benghazi coverage by Fox is indisputable proof Fox is a Republican infomercial. I know I know, Fox is the Gospel.

 

[mak2]

Wow, you guys are something. Now you think he should release his medical records? I am kinda glad Obama won, 4 more years or right wing entertainment.

Is this why Pretty Boy Obama refuses to release his medical records?

You be the judge...Has the president had some work done?

Filmmaker Joel Gilbert contends President Obama has altered his facial profile for the national stage of American politics, citing two nationally known cosmetic surgery experts he consulted who concluded Obama had a 'nose job.'

"It appears Obama had some aesthetic refinement," said plastic surgeon J. David Holcom.

Gilbert is the producer of "Dreams from my Real Father," a documentary distributed by the millions to swing states that argues the late Communist Party USA activist Frank Marshall Davis was Obama’s biological as well as ideological father, not Barack Obama, the Kenyan, who came to Hawaii as a student in 1959."Obama has gone to great lengths to obscure his past," Gilbert said. "Now, in addition to the alleged document forgery and photographic forgery by Obama to hide his true identity, we now have evidence of facial forgery."

Holcolm described in detail his reasons for concluding Obama has had cosmetic surgery.

"The upper and middle nasal vault are both narrowed. The tip and infra-tip are softer and the tip has been rotated up," he said. “Alar height appears to have been reduced so the lower part of the nose that makes up the nostrils appears softer

"These changes are not characteristic of the natural aging process," Holcolm said, "where the tip tends to settle and rotate downward causing the appearance of a longer nose and where the tip also often widens noticeably."

Wendy Lewis, a cosmetic surgery consultant and author of 11 consumer health and beauty books, including “America’s Cosmetic Doctors & Dentists” and "Plastic Makes Perfect," agrees.

"In the three younger photographs, Obama appears to have a bulbous nasal tip with wide alar bases, not uncommon with males and with skin of color," Lewis said. "The more current photos show a thinner nasal tip which suggests some finessing of his nose over the years, but it is a very natural-looking effect."

So, why would Obama have a nose job?

Gilbert contends that it was done in an effort to hide his connection to a avowed communist, a man who many believe is Obama's actual father.
Gilbert told Corsi he believes Obama had plastic surgery because he was "concerned he was looking too much like Frank Marshall Davis as he got older."

"I don’t think it was a coincidence that Obama chose to undergo a rhinoplasty before running for U.S. Senate and facing the national spotlight. If Obama was identified as Davis' son, it would connect the Marxist dots of Obama’s entire life journey," Gilbert added.

In this reporter's non-medical opinion, it seems that President Obama's skin tone has also actually become lighter over the last several years. Given the fact that Obama is an avid golfer and does many outdoor campaign events, lack of sunshine would not seem to account for the lighter tone.
However, and again, this is only speculation, while we know that he has certainly not sequestered himself inside his office for the last eight or so years, he could have engaged in the now-popular practice of skin-bleaching.

Of course, the president has not reached the almost opaque tone of a post-1980's Michael Jackson, but he has definitely taken-on a different appearance and during his first debate with Republican nominee Gov. Mitt Romney, Obama actually looked a bit ashen.

While Obama has admitted to past marijuana and cocaine use, and many have speculated that the extent of his drug use and possible one-time addiction was the real reason he refuses to release his medical records, given today's social mores...an admission of having undergone plastic surgery may be even more embarrassing than heavy drug use.

 

[FrancSevin]

I watched Fox a lot prior to the election. I figured Romney would win by at least 4% and that was accounting for Fox's exuberant optimism. I would say the election and Benghazi coverage by Fox is indisputable proof Fox is a Republican infomercial. I know I know, Fox is the Gospel.

What curios logic Mak2.

Somehow,the fact that the Presidet's fan club did not carry much about Bengaizi doesn't indict those media that did.

You might remember, four Americans were mudered and three months later we still do not have a straight line story about what happened or why.

Why was the action blamed on an obscure U-Tube burb?

Why did real time observation not confirm it was an attack

Why were four Americans not supported by some action by our military after US soil and People were obviosly in mortal danger?

Why were the Navy seals at the annex told to stand down?

Why was the 3:00 AM phone call, made famous by Hilary in 2008, not answered by a cogent and proper leadership response?

And why did the main stream media not think it important to ask.

ABU Grabe was the silly action of some low level recruits at a militaryholdingprisonin Iraq. It spent six weeks front page above the fold in the NYT and led on every TV News cast. All to try and string the rambucious action to the Ova office.

No one died at Abu Grabe. But it was apparently of great importance to the media.

That said, then why did the main stream media not think four dead Americans in supposedly freindly Lybia, an important query to ask? To pursue with some emotion?

 

[mak2]

I watched Fox a lot prior to the election. I figured Romney would win by at least 4% and that was accounting for Fox's exuberant optimism. I would say the election and Benghazi coverage by Fox is indisputable proof Fox is a Republican infomercial. I know I know, Fox is the Gospel.

Fox has a full time critic because it is such an easy target.

http://mediamatters.org/

 

[Doc]

I watched Fox a lot prior to the election. I figured Romney would win by at least 4% and that was accounting for Fox's exuberant optimism. I would say the election and Benghazi coverage by Fox is indisputable proof Fox is a Republican infomercial. I know I know, Fox is the Gospel.

I watched Fox a lot prior to this election. I enjoy them usually. But do they get us all worked up over stuff that will be taken care of in due time? Benghazi for one.

They obviously are not gospel. MSM and Hollywood won this past election, so Fox lost. Guess that gives em 4 more years to bitch and complain and dig up things that are overlooked by the MSM.

 

[FrancSevin]

I watched Fox a lot prior to this election. I enjoy them usually. But do they get us all worked up over stuff that will be taken care of in due time? Benghazi for one.

They obviously are not gospel. MSM and Hollywood won this past election, so Fox lost. Guess that gives em 4 more years to bitch and complain and dig up things that are overlooked by the MSM.

Most of the MSM coverage of Bengaizi has been little more than a critique of Fox's coverage of it. One finds those who echo this approach to be as credible as those sources.

But serious fact finding, especialy if it may cast doubt on the President, is not part of the programing at the MSM. However, now that we have selacious sex scandals, iti s amazng what inquiring minds want to know. And what coverage the Bengaizi murder subject now gets at the MSM outlets

That said Doc, you have Fox well pegged. Like all news outlets, they have their agenda. Buyer beware is always the best approach to any product. especially the news.

 

[Kane]

Nixon resigned in the face of a Democrat Senate prepared to convict him for lying about a bungled burglary. A Democrat Senate failed to convict Clinton for lying about a blow job.

So we can rest assured that a Democrat Senate will give Hussien a pass for failing to provide security for Americans abroad, for allowing some of them to die when under assault, and then for lying to the American people about the nature of the assault, all in favor of his 'GM is alive, Bin Laden is dead' political narrative.

The Democrat Senate is aided and abetted, of course, by a lap dog media painting his failures, lies and deception as mere Republican politics.
.

 

[mak2]

I am not really arguing the point of whether Obama administration was right or wrong, there is an investigation going on. Then it might be a discussable point. At the very best Fox was irresponsibly trying to influence an election without all/any of the facts. The reason the rest of the media did not run it wall to wall like fox did was they at least need a little evidence. Doesn't bother fox, they had an agenda, get Romney elected. Absolutely no creditability. Then there was the Obama's Katrina meme, that was just funny.

Nixon resigned in the face of a Democrat Senate prepared to convict him for lying about a bungled burglary. A Democrat Senate failed to convict Clinton for lying about a blow job.

So we can rest assured that a Democrat Senate will give Hussien a pass for failing to provide security for Americans abroad, failing to protect 4 of them when under assault, and then for lying to the American people about the nature of the assault, all in favor of his 'GM is alive, Bin Laden is dead' political narrative.

The Democrat Senate is aided and abetted, of course, by a lap dog media painting his failures, lies and deception as mere Republican politics.
.

 

[Kane]

I am not really arguing the point of whether Obama administration was right or wrong, there is an investigation going on. Then it might be a discussable point. At the very best Fox was irresponsibly trying to influence an election without all/any of the facts. The reason the rest of the media did not run it wall to wall like fox did was they at least need a little evidence. Doesn't bother fox, they had an agenda, get Romney elected. Absolutely no creditability. Then there was the Obama's Katrina meme, that was just funny.

The Benghazi 'evidence' was clear in real time on 09/11/12. It was clear to the administration AND to the American people. But for Hussien to deceive the American people for 2 months "while it is being investigated" is OK with the Democrats.

Well, it was not OK for FOX or the rest of the American people. If not for FOX, mak2, you wouldn't know just what a liar your president is. Don't you think it is important to know that your president is a liar?
.

 

[mak2]

There is only one reality for you, Obamabad. Fox feeds into it, I think fox is becoming a cult. The cult of Obamahate. An investigation into a single military plane crash might take months. if you think a situation like that was clear in real time, well that kinda demonstrates how much you really don't understand. By the way it is interesting how you said the American people. Don't you think Obama voters Americans? Is so they were the majority of Americans.

The Benghazi 'evidence' was clear in real time on 09/11/12. It was clear to the administration AND to the American people. But for Hussien to deceive the American people for 2 months "while it is being investigated" is OK with the Democrats.

Well, it was not OK for FOX or the rest of the American people. If not for FOX, mak2, you wouldn't know just what a liar your president is. Don't you think it is important to know that your president is a liar?
.

 

[SShepherd]

There is only one reality for you, Obamabad. Fox feeds into it, I think fox is becoming a cult. The cult of Obamahate. An investigation into a single military plane crash might take months. if you think a situation like that was clear in real time, well that kinda demonstrates how much you really don't understand. By the way it is interesting how you said the American people. Don't you think Obama voters Americans? Is so they were the majority of Americans.

that's incorrect;

Thursday's report, from the Center for the Study of the American Electorate, put 2012 voter turnout at 57.5% of all eligible voters, compared to 62.3% who voted in 2008 and 60.4% who cast ballots in 2004. In 2000, the turnout rate was 54.2%

Read more: http://www.abc15.com/dpp/news/natio...-than-2008-and-2004-report-says#ixzz2CW2RIFeY


Estimates are that Barry won 51% of the popular vote. That makes the total % of the population that voted for him at around a little less than 28%. Hardly the majority of Americans.

 

[FrancSevin]

Whileeveryone tries to disern animpossible to prove factoid,IE; who may have altered the originalCIA assesment before it was reported to Congress,,,,,We stillhave what somewouldconsider a more important one.


Irregardless of the attempts to spin the story about the events at Bengaizi, why the hell did our leadership, Military or civilian, sit and watch for 9 hours as Men who kept their promise, did their duty, and waited invain for help that our nation was obligated to provide.. These trusted leadership folks watched in real time as obvious lethal events unfolded and let four Amreicans be brutaly murdered.

I frankly give a crap about what, or why, Petraeus said on September 11,12,13th or 14th. I think we shouldbeasking what did the CIC say that night and if he gave theorder he claims to"do whatever is neccesary" why wasn't action taken and if somebody failed to do their duty,why are we not looking to them.

The Valeri Plame investigation got more press and more action, and she wasn't ever in any danger, much less even outed.

 

[SShepherd]

Whileeveryone tries to disern animpossible to prove factoid,IE; who may have altered the originalCIA assesment before it was reported to Congress,,,,,We stillhave what somewouldconsider a more important one.


Irregardless of the attempts to spin the story about the events at Bengaizi, why the hell did our leadership, Military or civilian, sit and watch for 9 hours as Men who kept their promise, did their duty, and waited invain for help that our nation was obligated to provide.. These trusted leadership folks watched in real time as obvious lethal events unfolded and let four Amreicans be brutaly murdered.

I frankly give a crap about what, or why, Petraeus said on September 11,12,13th or 14th. I think we shouldbeasking what did the CIC say that night and if he gave theorder he claims to"do whatever is neccesary" why wasn't action taken and if somebody failed to do their duty,why are we not looking to them.

The Valeri Plame investigation got more press and more action, and she wasn't ever in any danger, much less even outed.

I'm thinking that if the current admin were to admit it was an act of terrorism by alqueda, before the election, it would mean his previous comments about having alqueda being "on it's heels" or having defeated terrorism would have been hammerd by the press and him made to look as having failed . He feard it might cost him voted so the decision was made to deflect the truth.

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/obama-touts-al-qaeda-s-demise-32-times-benghazi-attack-0

 

[mak2]

When did Obama (or anyone) say terrorism was defeated? Reference?

I'm thinking that if the current admin were to admit it was an act of terrorism by alqueda, before the election, it would mean his previous comments about having alqueda being "on it's heels" or having defeated terrorism would have been hammerd by the press and him made to look as having failed . He feard it might cost him voted so the decision was made to deflect the truth.

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/obama-touts-al-qaeda-s-demise-32-times-benghazi-attack-0

 

[Kane]

When did Obama (or anyone) say terrorism was defeated? Reference?

Good Lord, mak2, the word terrorism is not in the vernacular.

But to your point, FrancSevin, Mr. Obama clearly said that the military should "do whatever it takes" to save American lives. So, per chain of command protocol, he probably has that pesky written order stashed somewhere. He will show it to you if you ask.

 

[mak2]

And he refereed to it as a terrorist attack. It is on video. Was that the second debate? Your view of the chain of command is... I am not sure how to describe it, but it is not very realistic.

Good Lord, mak2, the word terrorism is not in the vernacular.

But to your point, FrancSevin, Mr. Obama clearly said that the military should "do whatever it takes" to save American lives. So, per chain of command protocol, he probably has the written order somewhere available for inspection upon demand.

 

[Kane]

And he refereed to it as a terrorist attack. It is on video. Was that the second debate? Your view of the chain of command is... I am not sure how to describe it, but it is not very realistic.

Yes, he uttered the word 'terror' in the Rose Garden on an unrelated topic (09/11/01) in an unrelated paragraph. Then why did he go on to promote the video for weeks (on the View et.al.) and blame the video (7 times) in front of the United nations?

And yes, mak2, a presidential order to commit military force is backed up in writing, signed by the president.

 

[mak2]

Good Lord, mak2, the word terrorism is not in the vernacular.

But to your point, FrancSevin, Mr. Obama clearly said that the military should "do whatever it takes" to save American lives. So, per chain of command protocol, he probably has that pesky written order stashed somewhere. He will show it to you if you ask.

Yes, he uttered the word 'terror' in the Rose Garden on an unrelated topic (0911/01). Then why did he go on to promote the video for weeks (on the View) and blame the video (7 times) in front of the United nations?

And yes, mak2, a presidential order to commit military force is backed up in writing, signed by the president.

so it is in his vocabulary?

 

[FrancSevin]

The narrative of the administration was tha,just like in the movies, kill the one bad guy and everybody has a good ending.
Kill OBL and terrorism is over.

All we heard for the last year was how he killied OBL and Bush didn't. So Obama saved the USA from the evil Al Qeada. Which was supposedly "On the ropes" At least that is what Barry said.

Turns out not to be true, the story isn't over. More like a Greek Opus the monster comes back.,,,,, only meaner, madder, and more of 'em.

Oops!

And then comes this annoying incident in Bengaizi. Just when Obama is gathering the faithful, four Americans die at the hands of the supposedly vanquished villian.

What to do, what to do?

 

[FrancSevin]

Good Lord, mak2, the word terrorism is not in the vernacular.

But to your point, FrancSevin, Mr. Obama clearly said that the military should "do whatever it takes" to save American lives. So, per chain of command protocol, he probably has that pesky written order stashed somewhere. He will show it to you if you ask.

Actually, we don't know to whom he gave those orders. We only know he claims he gave those orders.

"Do whatever it takes"....is that a clear order to bring in a plane?, a Drone?, a combat team?,,,,at task force? what? Let me be perfectly clear, that statement is not a specific order. It tells no one they have any authority to do anything.

Irrelavent anyway......No one will claim to have heard it,,,,except Fearless Fosdick hisself so far. And he hasn't blamed anyone yet.

 

[mla2ofus]

Remember what BO said:" The loss of those people was not optimal". I'm waiting to see if the loss of someone on high is "not optimal".
Mike