Corporate media continues to spread lies about Barack Obama... anyone surprised

"de-marginalized" eh?

why thank you.

mar·gin·al·ize [mahr-juh-nl-ahyz]
–verb (used with object), -ized, -iz·ing. to place in a position of marginal importance, influence, or power: the government's attempts to marginalize criticism and restore public confidence.


therefore, your quaisi-made up word would be the opposite of that....

thanks again.

You're quite welcome. I figured you had to be smart in some topics and not ignorant of everything. But a blind hog finds an acorn once in a while.
 
You're quite welcome. I figured you had to be smart in some topics and not ignorant of everything. But a blind hog finds an acorn once in a while.

well... I do not claim to be universally wise....but I do use probability and statistics a lot in my job...
 
I'm challenging this quote.

Obama is currently a much greater threat to Hillary than the GOP. Hillary has her political machine, the LIBERAL corporate interests AND the LIBERAL MSM busy shooting Obamas' legs out from underneath him.

There's no such thing as a liberal MSM.
 
There's no such thing as a liberal MSM.

Other then ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS, TBS, NPR, CNN, BBC, HBO, HSN, MTV, VH1, Showtime, Gore TV, Reuters, The Associated Press, Time Magazine, Newsweek, The New Republic, the Nation, The New Yorker, The New York Times, The Los Angeles Times, The Seattle Times, The Seattle Post-Intelligencer, Seattle Weekly, The Boston Globe, The Village Voice, The San Francisco Chronicle, The San Francisco Examiner, USA Today, The Washington Post, Atlanta Journal Constitution, Arizona Daily Star, The Anniston Star , The Decatur Daily, Montgomery Advertiser, The Tuscaloosa News, Anchorage Daily News Arkansas Time, Tuscon Daily Star, The Alameda Times-Star, Contra Costa Times, The Los Angeles Daily News, The Fresno Bee, Marin Independent Journal, Merced Sun-Star, The Modesto Bee, The Monterey County Herald, The Oakland Tribune, La Opinion, The Santa Rose Press Democrat, The Sacramento Bee, San Jose Mercury News, San Mateo County Times, Santa Cruz Sentinel, The Valejo Times-Herald, The Eureka Times Standard, The Ventura County Star, Aspen Daily News, The Boulder Daily Camera, Durango Herald, Fort Collins Coloradoan, Greeley Daily Tribune, The Stamford Advocate, The Wilmington News Journal, Bradenton Herald, Daytona Beach News-Journal, Florida Today, The Gainesville Sun, The Miami Herald, Orlando Sentinel, The Palm Beach Post, St Petersburg Times, Sarasota Herald-Tribune, South Florida Sun-Sentinel, Treasure Coast News/Press-Tribune, Atlanta Journal-Constitution, The Macon Telegraph, The Honolulu Advertiser, Honolulu Star-Bulletin, Bonner County Daily Bee, The Idaho Statesman, Chicago Defender, Chicago Sun-Times, Edwardsville Intelligencer,Rockford Register, Lafayatte Journal and Courier, The Des Moines Register, Iowa City Press-Citizen, Quad City Times, The Storm Lake Tribune, Lexington Herald-Leader, The Louisville Courier-Journal, Teen Lexington Herald-Leader, Owensboro Messenger-Inquirer, The Shreveport Times, Bangor Daily News. the Kennebec Journal, Portland Press Herald, The Baltimore Sun, The Berkshire Eagle, The Framingham MetroWest Daily News, Milford Daily News. The Springfield Republican, The New Bedford Standard-Times, the Worcester Telegram & Gazette, The Argus-Press, The Bay City Times, The Battle Creek Enquirer, the Detroit Free Press, The Flint Journal, the Lansing State Journal, Livingston County Daily Press & Argus, The Muskegon Chronicle, Parasites Weekly, Petoskey News-Review, The Saginaw News, the Port Huron Times Herald, Traverse City Record-Eagle, Duluth News Tribune, The Mankato Free Press, St. Cloud Times, the Columbia Daily Tribune, The Kansas City Star, St. Louis American, St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Springfield News-Leader, Billings Gazette, Las Vegas Mercury, the Las Vegas Sun, the Las Vegas Review-Journal, the Nevada Appeal, the Reno Gazette-Journal, the Concord Monitor, The Keene Sentinel, the Portsmouth Herald, The Nashua Telegraph, the Lebanon-Hanover Valley News, The Bergen Record, the Burlington County Times, the Bridgewater Courier News, the Camden Courier-Post, The Vineland Daily Journal, the Parsippany Daily Record, The Jersey Journal, The Gloucester County Times, The Hackensack Record, the Newark Star-Ledger The Trenton Times, the Albuquerque Tribune, The Santa Fe New Mexican, The Buffalo News: “News for Discerning Buffalo”, the Oneonta Daily Star, The Ithaca Journal The White Plains Journal-News, The Corning Leader, Newsday, The Glen Falls Post-Star, the Rochester Democrat and Chronicle, the Elmira Star-Gazette, the Staten Island Advance, the Albany Times-Union, Willie the Wino’s Grand Central Station Restroom Scribblings, the Asheville Citizen Times, The Charlotte Observer, the Elizabeth City Daily Advance, The Greenville Daily Reflector, The Raleigh News & Observer, the Greensboro News & Record, The Southern Pines Pilot, the Wilimgton Star-News, The Bismarck Tribune, the Grand Forks Herald, the Akron Beacon Journal, The Toledo Blade, the Dayton Daily News, the Zanesville Times Recorder, The Daily Astorian, the East Oregonian, the Medford Mail Tribune, the Portland Oregonian, The Eugene Register-Guard, the Salem Statesman Journal, The Coos Bay World, The Beaver County Times, The Bucks County Courier Times, the Wilkes-BarreCitizen's Voice, The Doylestown Intelligencer, the Uniontown Herald-Standard, The Allentown Morning Call, the Washington Observer-Reporter, The Philadelphia Daily News, The Philadelphia Inquirer, the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, the Wilkes-Barre Times Leader, the Anderson Independent-Mail, The Myrtle Beach Sun News, The Memphis Commercial-Appeal, The Jackson Sun, Nashville Scene, The Tennessean, The Berkeley Daily Planet, Berkeley Voice, The Berkeleyan, ¡Berkemundo!, the Corpus Christi Caller-Times, the Lone Star Iconoclast, the Longview News-Journal, The Lufkin Daily News, the Waco Tribune-Herald, the Bennington Banner, the Brattleboro Reformer, The Burlington Free Press, the Rutland Herald, The Barre-Montpelier Times Argus, the Newport Daily Press, The Roanoke Times, The Virginian-Pilot, The Everett, The Olympian, The Tacoma News Tribune, The Bremerton Sun, the Tri-City Herald, the Walla Walla Union-Bulletin, the Boston Phoenix, the Charleston Gazette, the Huntington Herald-Dispatch, Howard Stern, the Madison Capital Times, The Green Bay News-Chronicle, the Racine Journal Times, the Kenosha News, the La Crosse Tribune, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, The Sheboygan Press, The Wausau Daily Herald, The Guardian, The Independent, the Paris Daily Snivel, Der Spiegel, Democracy Now. The Huffington Post, The Progressive Review, Alternet, Dissident Voice, AntiWar.com, Common Dreams, Truthout.org, MoveOn.org, TomPaine.com, Counterpunch, Mother Jones, The Progressive, The American Prospect, Dollars and Sense, The Progressive Populist, The Weekly Standard, New Left Review, Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, YouTube, Marvel Comics, The Weekly World News, Indymedia, DailyKos, Wonkette, DemocraticUnderground, The Prairie Home Companion, Pravda, Granma, and Al Jazeera.
 
Mr. Conley Wrote Over and Over:
Does that make it right?

What a silly response to my post. Of course it doesn't make it right, hence why I was so careful to post examples from both sides of the political spectrum. Both "lefties" and "righties" have been subject to the intense scrutiny, mockery, and manipulation of our media...your response has absolutely nothing to do with my post - which means that you either completely misinterpreted or completely didn't read my post.

Let me restate in case I was confusing...

Whining that Barak Obama is somehow being treated DIFFERENTLY by the media in a NEGATIVE way when compared to others is ludicrous. If anything, Barak has received FAR BETTER treatement from the media than ANY of his fellow presidential hopefuls (although I would argue that Giuliani has been pretty much left alone so far).

The media is OBVIOUSLY not "attacking him because they are scared of his politics," in fact, the media is fawning over him and have made him a rockstar before he really has opened his mouth to say anything of substance.

The premise that he is a victim is, in my opinion, an attempt by the left to win votes from uninformed voters who love the notion of an underdog, or a mistreated minority with a heart of gold to love and call their own. The truth of the matter is that the media has been making goo-goo eyes at Obama for months. The so-called "scandals" that the original article brings up are ridiculous nothings...and anyone with a brain knows it.

My point was this: Obama is the medias darling, they will protect and nuture him just like they did Howard Dean until they decide he can't win...then they will invent a reason to get rid of him that will have nothing to do with any real reason why he is unelectable - and the public will be too stupid to realize it happened, just like Dean was done in with a scream - when really it was because the media knew that once the public really started to examine Dean - they would realize he was unelectable.

To blame the right-wingers for Obama's fake scandals is silly...they are created specifically to make the sheep in this country LIKE OBAMA MORE, not less. If we really were intelligent, we would stop blaming the evil righties and lefties, and take a long, hard look at the media and its power to make and/or break political candidates so easily - and how our apathetic society just nods and says, "Yea, that guy screaming was kinda weird....I'm SO not voting for him."

So hopefully, Mr. Conley, you understand now that my point was not to say, "Well....they do it too!!!!" but rather to point out that the media attacks everyone and anyone...all based on whether or not they feel it will help them reach their political ends.

To whine about Obama's poor treatment is pathetic...when the media begins to treat him with one ounce of the contempt and derision they treat some others...then perhaps Media Matters will have something to write about....
 
Yepsen: Unease over '02 Iraq vote rattling Clinton campaign
By DAVID YEPSEN
REGISTER POLITICAL COLUMNIST


March 22, 2007
Add comment



Cambridge, Mass. — One reason Barack Obama has closed on Hillary Clinton's lead in national polls of the Democratic race for president is the fumbling way the senator and her campaign have handled the questions surrounding her vote for the Iraq war in 2002.

She simply won't apologize for her vote and that upsets some Democratic activists. There were signs here Monday night the Clinton campaign is getting a tad rattled about the matter.

The subject came up at a forum of campaign strategists held at the Institute of Politics at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government. Clinton senior strategist Mark Penn, Obama media adviser David Axelrod and John Edwards' campaign manager, Jonathan Prince, faced questions from students at the school.

One student asked Clinton's Penn: "How do you convince those of us who might otherwise be inclined to support her that she has the judgment not to get us involved in another quagmire?"

Penn said Clinton has taken responsibility for her vote and has criticized the Bush administration's handling of the war. "Do you think Hillary Clinton is the kind of person who, if president, would have started the Iraq war? No."

He then brought Obama into the discussion by saying, "The records on this are very complicated," and accused Obama of once saying "he didn't know exactly how he would have voted if he was in Congress because he didn't have the full intelligence."

At that, Obama's Axelrod interrupted to say, "You've got to read the whole quote." (And the campaign quickly e-mailed the statement, in which Obama concludes, "I would have voted no.")

But Penn kept at it and said that once Obama got to the Senate, he voted for $301 billion in funding for the war and that with one exception has voted with Clinton on all Iraq war issues.

When it was his turn, Axelrod said, "I kind of regret that Mark went there" in bringing up Obama's positions and accused him of using "partial quotes" to do so. He said Obama has said "I wasn't in the Senate. I don't know what they were looking at. What I was looking at told me this was the wrong war, that it wasn't justified and that it would lead to a quagmire from which we would have a hard time extricating ourselves."

Axelrod then told Penn: "I really think it is important, if we're going to run the kind of campaign that will unify our party and move this country forward that we do it in an honest way and that was not an honest way."

But Penn came back and quoted Obama as saying, "My view is not much different from Bush's now. I think the real question, to you David, is when he got to the Senate, he voted for all the authorizations, said we had a military role in Iraq, didn't give a speech for over a year on Iraq while Senator Clinton gave six. Is this election going to turn on what happened on 2002 or on the future? Who will do the best job in Iraq?"

Axelrod shot back: "What Senator Obama has said is we need to be as careful about getting out as we were careless getting in... I did not sit here and comment on Senator Clinton's decision back in 2002. You found it necessary to draw Senator Obama into this discussion. Are we going to spend 10 months savaging each other or are we going to try to lift this country up?"

Axelrod concluded: "Had we followed Senator Obama's advice in 2002, we wouldn't be talking about de-escalation right now."

Bottom line: Penn's a smart guy, but he's shouldn't have tried to make Obama's positions an issue when his own candidate is in such a jam on the subject. While going on the attack is an understandable defense, if the crowd reaction at the Kennedy School was any kind of focus group for the Clinton campaign, the argument is a big loser with the left.

The English novelist Edward Bulwer Lytton wrote in 1839, "the pen is mightier than the sword." But at Harvard Monday night, the Axe was mightier than the Penn. Score one for Obama.

http://desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070322/OPINION01/703220379/1035/OPINION
 
Thats where your mistake comes in. You have to pole at least 100 million voters for a pole to be even close to be accurate. If edwards, obama (or whatever his name is) and hillery are all the democrats has to offer, they are in sad shape indeed. If an accurate pole was done, these three clowns wouldn't get one percent of the votes. So at this time I would say "the other party" has about 99 percent of the votes. And "YES", my pole is as accurate as any put out to date.

I would respond to your post, but there is so much wrong with everything you just said that I don't even know where to begin. I'm simply overwhelmed.
 
I would respond to your post, but there is so much wrong with everything you just said that I don't even know where to begin. I'm simply overwhelmed.

If you are lib these days and your choice for President is Hillary, Obama, or Edwards - it is like deciding if you want a broken leg, or a broken arm, or a broken hip

The moonbat peace niks are getting very upset with the elected Dems and 08 may be a blood bath for the Dems
 
Good to see you too...
Gem said:
What a silly response to my post. Of course it doesn't make it right, hence why I was so careful to post examples from both sides of the political spectrum. Both "lefties" and "righties" have been subject to the intense scrutiny, mockery, and manipulation of our media...your response has absolutely nothing to do with my post - which means that you either completely misinterpreted or completely didn't read my post.
That's all I needed.

Gem said:
Whining that Barak Obama is somehow being treated DIFFERENTLY by the media in a NEGATIVE way when compared to others is ludicrous. If anything, Barak has received FAR BETTER treatement from the media than ANY of his fellow presidential hopefuls (although I would argue that Giuliani has been pretty much left alone so far).
Granted, in general Obama recieves good treatment; however, I have yet to see anyone

Gem said:
The premise that he is a victim is, in my opinion, an attempt by the left to win votes from uninformed voters who love the notion of an underdog, or a mistreated minority with a heart of gold to love and call their own. The truth of the matter is that the media has been making goo-goo eyes at Obama for months. The so-called "scandals" that the original article brings up are ridiculous nothings...and anyone with a brain knows it.

My point was this: Obama is the medias darling, they will protect and nuture him just like they did Howard Dean until they decide he can't win...then they will invent a reason to get rid of him that will have nothing to do with any real reason why he is unelectable - and the public will be too stupid to realize it happened, just like Dean was done in with a scream - when really it was because the media knew that once the public really started to examine Dean - they would realize he was unelectable.

To blame the right-wingers for Obama's fake scandals is silly...they are created specifically to make the sheep in this country LIKE OBAMA MORE, not less. If we really were intelligent, we would stop blaming the evil righties and lefties, and take a long, hard look at the media and its power to make and/or break political candidates so easily - and how our apathetic society just nods and says, "Yea, that guy screaming was kinda weird....I'm SO not voting for him."
Occam's Razor disagrees. What you're postulating is some sort of massive, media-wide conspiracy to get Barack Obama elected president or at least make a show of it. The articles and slander stand to the contrary, and unless I see some evidence of intentional misdirection my not only the MSM but the conservative media then I will have to reject your conspiracy theories.

I don't deny that Obama is sitting atop a wave of unwarranted praise and adulation, but to insinuate that this entire thing is some sort of plot is absurd.
Gem said:
So hopefully, Mr. Conley, you understand now that my point was not to say, "Well....they do it too!!!!" but rather to point out that the media attacks everyone and anyone...all based on whether or not they feel it will help them reach their political ends.
I realize that wasn't your point; however, you failed to consider the attacks on Obama that have occured expect to say it's the Vast Left-Wing Conspiracu (VLWC) all over again. Not only do I believe this to be false, but it wrongfully ignores the serious attacks that have occured.
 
hey Jasondork- take off the tinfoil hat, and go out and socialize instead of spending hours playing Doom.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top