Is the media in the bag for Newt?

[Synthaholic]

I suspect they are awaiting instructions on how to counter facts with an alternative.

Facts?


"more people have been put on food stamps by Barack Obama than any president in American history." - Newt Gingrich

More were added to food stamps under Bush than under Obama, reports Brooks Jackson: "Newt Gingrich claims that 'more people have been put on food stamps by Barack Obama than any president in American history.' He's wrong. More were added under Bush than under Obama, according to the most recent figures...Gingrich would have been correct to say the number now on food aid is historically high. The number stood at 46,224,722 persons as of October, the most recent month on record. And it's also true that the number has risen sharply since Obama took office. But Gingrich goes too far to say Obama has put more on the rolls than other presidents. We asked the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food and Nutrition service for month-by-month figures going back to January 2001. And they show that under President George W. Bush the number of recipients rose by nearly 14.7 million. Nothing before comes close to that."

​

Of course, you wouldn't know a fact if it pushed your customer out of the way and bit you on the ass.

Did you even read this?... what a spin.. it's Bush's fault for the recipients added during his admin, but somehow not so for Obama because he inherited a mess? Not to mention in a mere 3 years, Obama has added only a few hundred thousand less than under Bush's 8?

Priceless.

However you spin it, Newt lied.

 

[amrchaos]

If the media is in the bag for Newt, then it is possible that CNN set up the question so Newt can answer in a forcible way. Forcible enough to send undecided republicans into his corner for the South Carolina primary.

I have called Newt a sabotuer for the Dem's, and the 'handling' of the debate by Newt appeared staged to me. If the liberal media was against Newt, they would have taken into account how Newt performed against the moderator in past debates. The moderators normally would not ask the question right off the bat(which King has done) but knife Newt through his opponents like in previous debates so that Newt could not answer directly.

All Newt did was verbally body-slam a liberal. That is how a Newt won S.C. In that case, Hannity should run for President!

 

[Warrior102]

I wonder who's next on the media list to get bitch-slapped by Newt. I want to see Piers Morgan wet his panties and cry when Newt yells at him.. LOL!

 

[Warrior102]

However you spin it, Newt lied.

When? Where?

You want to be the next one bitch-slapped by Newt - ?

 

[Synthaholic]

If the media is in the bag for Newt, then it is possible that CNN set up the question so Newt can answer in a forcible way. Forcible enough to send undecided republicans into his corner for the South Carolina primary.

I have called Newt a sabotuer for the Dem's, and the 'handling' of the debate by Newt appeared staged to me. If the liberal media was against Newt, they would have taken into account how Newt performed against the moderator in past debates. The moderators normally would not ask the question right off the bat(which King has done) but knife Newt through his opponents like in previous debates so that Newt could not answer directly.

All Newt did was verbally body-slam a liberal. That is how a Newt won S.C. In that case, Hannity should run for President!

What makes you think John King is a Liberal? Or were you not thinking?

 

[Synthaholic]

However you spin it, Newt lied.

When? Where?

You want to be the next one bitch-slapped by Newt - ?

When he made his food stamp comment. Are you retarded?

 

[Warrior102]

However you spin it, Newt lied.

When? Where?

You want to be the next one bitch-slapped by Newt - ?

When he made his food stamp comment. Are you retarded?

Facts are sometimes difficult to accept aren't they?

 

[Avorysuds]

If the Media is liberal then they played their cards just right.... Newt won SC, if they can get him to win Florida and eventually the nomination Obama will be sittin pretty.

At that point I’d bet the media starts pushing for Paul to run third party and covers it.

 

[Jarhead]

um...newt played this up because SC is a very right leaning state who already thinks the media is far left. Newt basically jerked over all their faces and the people wanted more of it. You can see it in this thread as well.

In the end the story is this. Newt played it up to the base, they loved it, but he still dodged the question. You can't take one debate in a primary and use it for the rest of the race. If he were to win it would be a different ballgame, so his answer would have to be different.

Or

He could answer it the same and risk loosing the middle more moderate Indies and GOP...

Another one who decided to deabte something he knows nothing about.

Obviously, you didnt watch the debate.

i watched the clip of it, he didnt answer it. he whined about the media and how disgusting it was for them to ask such a question.

nice try..... Like i said its rather meaningless anyways. Newt is a hypocrite when it comes to marriage so his opinions on it are meaningless.

wow...so you admit the media is biased..

You watched a clip of it....they didnt show you his answer?

News for ya bud....he ANSWERED THE QUESTION.

Your media just didnt feel it appropriate for you to hear it.

Sure...it is OK for them to ask the question....but they prefer you not know the answer.

Your media just made an ass of you.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Immature diversion from the point I was making.

Guess you just didnt have anything better to respond with.

Just saying Diversion doesnt work anymore.

My was not a diversion. Mine was a response to something someone had said that was inaccurate.

No one is saying the media does not report the facts equally.....they do.

But it is HOW they report them that makies it appear there is media bias.

With the GOP candidates...we hear the media say "Rommeys critics feel he has something to hide in regard to his tax returns"

With Obama....we heard..."It is not unusual for a candiate to not want to release his college transcripts...some do, some dont."

Why didnt they say "Obamas critrics feel he may have something to hide regarding his college transcripts...afterall...it is true..his critics felt that

Oh SHIT! Well, shit, why didnt you present that evidence earlier.

"Why didnt they say..." isnt proof of anything other than you thought up a question they didnt answer. Why didnt they ask Bush what happened to the millions that was lost in Iraq? Bias or they didnt ask?

Because I can think of questions they asked Obama and not Bush but what the fuck does that mean? Nothing.

 

[Jarhead]

um...newt played this up because SC is a very right leaning state who already thinks the media is far left. Newt basically jerked over all their faces and the people wanted more of it. You can see it in this thread as well.

In the end the story is this. Newt played it up to the base, they loved it, but he still dodged the question. You can't take one debate in a primary and use it for the rest of the race. If he were to win it would be a different ballgame, so his answer would have to be different.

Or

He could answer it the same and risk loosing the middle more moderate Indies and GOP...

Another one who decided to deabte something he knows nothing about.

Obviously, you didnt watch the debate.

i watched the clip of it, he didnt answer it. he whined about the media and how disgusting it was for them to ask such a question.

nice try..... Like i said its rather meaningless anyways. Newt is a hypocrite when it comes to marriage so his opinions on it are meaningless.

Hey folks...

HERE IT IS....

PLASMABALL THINKS IT IS OK TO DEBATE SOMETHING BASED ON A SNIPPET...A CLIP OF WHAT HIS MEDIA DEEMED WAS WORTHY OF HIS KNOWING.

I mean...you actually said he never answered the question.

That is completely false.....he answered it completely.

 

[Synthaholic]

When? Where?

You want to be the next one bitch-slapped by Newt - ?

When he made his food stamp comment. Are you retarded?

Facts are sometimes difficult to accept aren't they?

Yeah, when they are not factual.

 

[amrchaos]

If the media is in the bag for Newt, then it is possible that CNN set up the question so Newt can answer in a forcible way. Forcible enough to send undecided republicans into his corner for the South Carolina primary.

I have called Newt a sabotuer for the Dem's, and the 'handling' of the debate by Newt appeared staged to me. If the liberal media was against Newt, they would have taken into account how Newt performed against the moderator in past debates. The moderators normally would not ask the question right off the bat(which King has done) but knife Newt through his opponents like in previous debates so that Newt could not answer directly.

All Newt did was verbally body-slam a liberal. That is how a Newt won S.C. In that case, Hannity should run for President!

What makes you think John King is a Liberal? Or were you not thinking?

Oh my fault. It is better to say that Newt verbally body-slammed CNN, a media outlet held to be liberally biased by many republicans. That is how a Newt won S.C. In that case, Hannity should run for President!

Now is there a problem?

 

[Jarhead]

Just saying Diversion doesnt work anymore.

My was not a diversion. Mine was a response to something someone had said that was inaccurate.

No one is saying the media does not report the facts equally.....they do.

But it is HOW they report them that makies it appear there is media bias.

With the GOP candidates...we hear the media say "Rommeys critics feel he has something to hide in regard to his tax returns"

With Obama....we heard..."It is not unusual for a candiate to not want to release his college transcripts...some do, some dont."

Why didnt they say "Obamas critrics feel he may have something to hide regarding his college transcripts...afterall...it is true..his critics felt that

Oh SHIT! Well, shit, why didnt you present that evidence earlier.

"Why didnt they say..." isnt proof of anything other than you thought up a question they didnt answer. Why didnt they ask Bush what happened to the millions that was lost in Iraq? Bias or they didnt ask?

Because I can think of questions they asked Obama and not Bush but what the fuck does that mean? Nothing.

hey..

They intervvciewed Newts X right before a primary.

Did they interview any of Obamas former class mates?
Did they interview any of Obamas parishoners at Wrights church?
Did they interview anyne part of the Resko company?

Heck...I got a question....who did they interview to dig up any dirt that may be out there about Obama?

Who from his past did they intertview?

 

[Jarhead]

i watched the clip of it, he didnt answer it. he whined about the media and how disgusting it was for them to ask such a question.

nice try..... Like i said its rather meaningless anyways. Newt is a hypocrite when it comes to marriage so his opinions on it are meaningless.

Hey folks...

HERE IT IS....

PLASMABALL THINKS IT IS OK TO DEBATE SOMETHING BASED ON A SNIPPET...A CLIP OF WHAT HIS MEDIA DEEMED WAS WORTHY OF HIS KNOWING.

I mean...you actually said he never answered the question.

That is completely false.....he answered it completely.

We do it all the time here...I watched the whole clip of him not really answering it, and giving King shit for it.

If there was more, feel free to provide said evidence and we can go from thier.

He didnt answer the question, he just blasted King and the media ( which was his answer). Im not sure where you are going with this and how you are reading my " he didnt answer the question".

He answered it with a dodge.

Yo...

he reacted to the question....and then he answered the question.

Yet the media that deemed it appropriate for the question to be asked did not feel the public warranted knowing his answer.

I willnot provide you a clip. I dont need to. You want to assume you are correct....go for it....live in your ignorance.

I love it.

 

[deaddogseye]

The media is on Romney's side.... Newt stings them back.

Actually, the media is on Obama's side.

yes that is right -- which also compels them to favor Newt over romney. most Democrats in DC feel he will be one of the easiest opponents for obama to defeat in the general election. right or wrong they think of romney as more electable

 

[Warrior102]

What makes you think John King is a Liberal? Or were you not thinking?

Who would think that? The guy wreakes of Conservatism...

 

[ClosedCaption]

My was not a diversion. Mine was a response to something someone had said that was inaccurate.

No one is saying the media does not report the facts equally.....they do.

But it is HOW they report them that makies it appear there is media bias.

With the GOP candidates...we hear the media say "Rommeys critics feel he has something to hide in regard to his tax returns"

With Obama....we heard..."It is not unusual for a candiate to not want to release his college transcripts...some do, some dont."

Why didnt they say "Obamas critrics feel he may have something to hide regarding his college transcripts...afterall...it is true..his critics felt that

Oh SHIT! Well, shit, why didnt you present that evidence earlier.

"Why didnt they say..." isnt proof of anything other than you thought up a question they didnt answer. Why didnt they ask Bush what happened to the millions that was lost in Iraq? Bias or they didnt ask?

Because I can think of questions they asked Obama and not Bush but what the fuck does that mean? Nothing.

hey..

They intervvciewed Newts X right before a primary.

Did they interview any of Obamas former class mates?
Did they interview any of Obamas parishoners at Wrights church?
Did they interview anyne part of the Resko company?

Heck...I got a question....who did they interview to dig up any dirt that may be out there about Obama?

Who from his past did they intertview?

Hey,

They asked Obama about Bill Aires but never asked Bush about his relationship with the Bin Ladens...You know what that means...Yep, Media Bias.

We can do this all day but at the end of it all, it's just you laying out bullshit to claim you are the victim of the liberal media, liberal education, liberal historians, liberal scientists, liberal brainwashers, liberal washing machines that wont get that stain out etc.

It must be tough always being under attack...Thats when you let your conservadaddy hold you tight and tell you what a big bad world is out there and he'll protect you

 

[Jarhead]

We do it all the time here...I watched the whole clip of him not really answering it, and giving King shit for it.

If there was more, feel free to provide said evidence and we can go from thier.

He didnt answer the question, he just blasted King and the media ( which was his answer). Im not sure where you are going with this and how you are reading my " he didnt answer the question".

He answered it with a dodge.

Yo...

he reacted to the question....and then he answered the question.

Yet the media that deemed it appropriate for the question to be asked did not feel the public warranted knowing his answer.

I willnot provide you a clip. I dont need to. You want to assume you are correct....go for it....live in your ignorance.

I love it.

Ah cute spin.....And lovely punt.....

You claimed he answered it, so it falls on you to provide proof.

You won't, i win.

ahh...

Perhaps....from debate standpoint...sure...I wont produce the evinidence...so you win.

Congratulations. You won a debate with an anonymous poster on the internet.

Yet you are please as punch that you have no idea that he answered the question.

An example of someone who prefers to be labelled a winner over knowing the truth.

 

[Katzndogz]

My was not a diversion. Mine was a response to something someone had said that was inaccurate.

No one is saying the media does not report the facts equally.....they do.

But it is HOW they report them that makies it appear there is media bias.

With the GOP candidates...we hear the media say "Rommeys critics feel he has something to hide in regard to his tax returns"

With Obama....we heard..."It is not unusual for a candiate to not want to release his college transcripts...some do, some dont."

Why didnt they say "Obamas critrics feel he may have something to hide regarding his college transcripts...afterall...it is true..his critics felt that

Oh SHIT! Well, shit, why didnt you present that evidence earlier.

"Why didnt they say..." isnt proof of anything other than you thought up a question they didnt answer. Why didnt they ask Bush what happened to the millions that was lost in Iraq? Bias or they didnt ask?

Because I can think of questions they asked Obama and not Bush but what the fuck does that mean? Nothing.

hey..

They intervvciewed Newts X right before a primary.

Did they interview any of Obamas former class mates?
Did they interview any of Obamas parishoners at Wrights church?
Did they interview anyne part of the Resko company?

Heck...I got a question....who did they interview to dig up any dirt that may be out there about Obama?

Who from his past did they intertview?

I'm waiting for them to interview obama's drug dealer.