Double Standard?!

[remarkso]

Why is it that when the unemployment rate was 5.6% in 1996 the media hailed Bill Clinton as a God, but now when unemployment is 5.6% the media acts as if George W. has a flawed economic plan??

Maybe it's the same reason why in 1988, 1992, 1996, and 2000 the Republican candidate's military experience was considered a non-issue, but now in 2004 it's right on the top of every comparison list.

Face it, the mainstream media can't stand a republican/conservative candidate...no matter what the issue!!

 

[winston churchi]

It is sickening isn't it?

The media has brainwashed many Americans into believing that a democrat will be better suited for the White House, it doesn't matter which one.

The NY Times has publicly announced its support for Jk...Who stand for what? Inconsistancy.

Inconsistancy is an acceptable argument for the White House these days. Jk has a record that is dizzy to say the least.

I truly wish Americans would take a closer look at JK and make a rash decision as to the suitability of this man as Commander and Chief of this country.

If what is written about him is true and he does pull our troops out of Iraq and Afgan. than we are telling the world we are open for more attack. The United States will not defend itself and the world against terrorist. We will be doomed. It will open doors for more terrorist acts -

I have never heard one person, on this website or otherwise who can give an logical reason why JK should take that Presidential seat. Not one. This is frightening.

Instead all one hears is swear words against Bush which hold no merrit.

 

[tim_duncan2000]

and welcome to the board.

 

[Avatar4321]

Its odd, Ive seen Democrats argue about how much better we were under Clinton, yet they cant seem to answer what great things he has done. Yet i can easily list a number of great things Bush has done and how we are better now than four years ago and they cant provide one reason not to vote for him, just try to assault his character (ironicly after declaring character didnt matter during the former admistration) and yet are totally surprised that they are losing power.

 

[Moi]

Originally posted by remarkso
Why is it that when the unemployment rate was 5.6% in 1996 the media hailed Bill Clinton as a God, but now when unemployment is 5.6% the media acts as if George W. has a flawed economic plan??

Maybe it's the same reason why in 1988, 1992, 1996, and 2000 the Republican candidate's military experience was considered a non-issue, but now in 2004 it's right on the top of every comparison list.

Face it, the mainstream media can't stand a republican/conservative candidate...no matter what the issue!!

Absofrickenlutely.

 

[Avatar4321]

Thought of another one after seeing the News Today.

Why is it Democrats can make baseless accusations that Bush knew about 911 and didnt do anything to stop it, and that ISNT politicizing 911. Yet when Bush runs an ad showing how he has been a strong leader during times of crisis, thats politicizing 911 and is offensive. I mean hello?!? Which one should people be outraged at?

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by Avatar4321
Thought of another one after seeing the News Today.

Why is it Democrats can make baseless accusations that Bush knew about 911 and didnt do anything to stop it, and that ISNT politicizing 911. Yet when Bush runs an ad showing how he has been a strong leader during times of crisis, thats politicizing 911 and is offensive. I mean hello?!? Which one should people be outraged at?

I know exactly what you mean, I made that very same point earlier.

 

[MtnBiker]

Originally posted by Avatar4321
Thought of another one after seeing the News Today.

Why is it Democrats can make baseless accusations that Bush knew about 911 and didnt do anything to stop it, and that ISNT politicizing 911. Yet when Bush runs an ad showing how he has been a strong leader during times of crisis, thats politicizing 911 and is offensive. I mean hello?!? Which one should people be outraged at?

I say put their money where their mouth is. Moveon should produce and ad with Howard Dean claiming "Bush Knew".
Lets see how much political capital that would gain them.

 

[Zhukov]

How about the D outrage after Pres. Bush's 'unilateral' invasion of Iraq to depose a dictator, followed by D demands for a unilateral invasion of Haiti to prop up a dictator?

Still trying to figure that one out; though I suppose I needn't look any further than Clinton and the Congressional Black Caucus. What a legacy.

 

[Zhukov]

Or how about the media frenzy when Michael Moore made his unsubstantiated comment about the President's military service, and barely a squeak from the media when evidence suggesting Sen. Kerry may have had an affair came onto the radar?

 

[Avatar4321]

You know i was outraged at the hypocrisy on the left earlier, but now I realized something. If the media is going to act as though these positive upliting ads are attack ads, they are going to continue to play them an analyze them. Which means more people will see Bush's positive ads without Republicans having to spend as much.