Time debunks the stupidest "scandal" in the extraordinarily imbecilic history of Republican-manipulated American media. (Whew!)
Every day, the Republicans tell Americans how utterly devoid of the slightest bit of intelligence or good sense they are. Every day, some Americans lap it up.
Licking the floor in a public bathroom would make more sense.
Every querulous mention of a fist bump by the media means that they agree with the Republicans about our intelligence.
Thursday, July 3, 2008
Utter, complete, moronic stupidity
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
republican manipulated media? How so? The media is, and has always been far left. They practically swoon over Obama.
You've been listening to too much of the right-wing media to get a clear picture. The media is tepidly liberal on a few social issues, but they even gave raving racist Jesse Helms a respectful send-off (to hell). But the media is quite conservative on economic issues, though they call it centrist because they learned it at Harvard, et al.
Look around you a little. Everyone but the Kool-Aid drinkers knows that the media spent six or seven years lying down for (and lying for) Duhbya. A fair weighing of the character of Gore and Duhbya would have resulted in far more negative stories about Duhb' and far fewer about Gore. Getting to faux balance would have been better, though still not accurate. But the media hated Bill Clinton (and still can't remember that he left office with higher job approval numbers than their saint, Ronald Reagan), and Gore had to suffer.
So they lionized the ridiculous disaster that Duhbya would become and rolled over without asking any tough questions about Iraq. Some liberal media! I expect Fox and the Wall Street Journal ed page to be filled with jingoistic assholes (and sure enough!), but the New York Times (news division) and the Washington Post (ed page) both led the march to war. Oh, and of course, CNN and MSNBC (who fired Phil Donahue, their only liberal then, despite his network-leading ratings) were right there running Bushist bullshit in 24-hour rotation.
Even now, the media has recovered from its flirtation with Obama and spends huge amounts of energy defending McCain from any criticism. You'll note that they didn't raise a finger to defend John Kerry's war record. Nope, again they put the Swift Boat Liars into heavy rotation even after their bullshit claims had been thoroughly debunked.
Now, when Bud Day hypocritically attacks Wesley Clark, most of the media doesn't even mention his role with the Swift Boat Liars.
If you think the media is not almost completely corporatized, ask why corporations get so much better press than unions. Sure, there have been crooked unions, but there have been far more crooked corporations. Why haven't the constant corporate scandals affected the media view of the benign corporation?
Maybe Obama has nothing Important to say, that is why the Media gives him so little coverage.
He is uneventful, and is just a politician, saying the things the audience wants to hear. There is nothing to to report about him.
Simply put, he has never done anything that qualifies him as a potential president. - Maybe someday for the future?
Welcome back, capitalizing Anonymous. Couldn't stay away, huh?
While you were gone, though, you didn't come up with something more plausible that this? Guess I'll have to check your other four (or more) comments, but I'm not optimistic that you'll say anything really challenging.
Post a Comment