Patriots' Newest Target: obama 'Minion Media'

[jillian]

Why should the media cover a radical movement as if it represents the mainstream?

They didn't seem to have any trouble covering all the anti-Bush marches.

Swing and a miss. These protests have already gotten far more coverage than anti-war rallies did.

yeah, but he likes the sound of his lies ...

 

[Polk]

Over a million...under two million.

Obamanoids just can't stand the fact that the turn out was huge, the crowds were well-behaved

Showing that "huge" really is a relative term.

and some of the people were actually BLACK!

I'm glad for you guys that Uncle Ruckus could make it. Really.

 

[Oddball]

Why should the media cover a radical movement as if it represents the mainstream?

They didn't seem to have any trouble covering all the anti-Bush marches.

Swing and a miss. These protests have already gotten far more coverage than anti-war rallies did.

You concentrated on the "coverage" part and glossed over the "mainstream" part, which the anti-Bushie moonbat festivals were clearly not.

Hardly an unexpected diversionary tactic from a fellow moonbat.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Well, the MSM is going to have to do something. Viewership is off horribly, papers\ and magazine subscritions are plumetting. If these guys are so "mainstream" and "in the know", then why are people ditching them in droves? Fox news is kicking everybody's ass.. which says what? Libs are NOT the majority by a long shot. Keith Olberman, that lib darling has what, 25,000 viewers? Their little house of cards is crumbling...

 

[Vast LWC]

Over a million...under two million.

Obamanoids just can't stand the fact that the turn out was huge, the crowds were well-behaved and some of the people were actually BLACK!

Yeah, only:

1. The city of Washington DC was PARALYZED by the inauguration crowds, which numbered 1.8 million. Extra police and other civil services had to be called in for crowd control and to take care of other city needs. Traffic throughout the city and in a 10 mile radius was completely out-of-control. Any crowd over 1 million would have caused the same effects. NONE OF THESE THINGS HAPPENED DURING THE TEA PARTY PROTEST.. Period.

2. The supposed "source" for the 2 million number was a supposed spokesman for the Parks Services named "Dan Bana". There is in fact no spokesman for the Parks Services named Dan Bana, instead there is a chief spokesman named "Dave Barna". As seen here. Who has specifically stated in at least one past interview, concerning the Obama Inauguration, that the Parks department does not make estimates of this type. As seen here.

3. The ONLY reliable report of crowd size was reported by ABC News, who received a crowd size estimate from the DC Fire/EMC Department, and that was "around 60-70 Thousand" at approximately 11:30 AM. As seen here.

4. Even the organizers of the protest, FreedomWorks, admitted that the crowds were nowhere near their original estimates, and apologized for mis-quoting ABC News with a 1.2 Million person quote. As seen here. FreedomWorks later posted a corrected, perhaps still overly-optimistic un-official estimate of "Hundreds of Thousands" on their site.

 

[DavidS]

At first I assumed that the 2 mill number at DC was a gross overestimate.

Not so sure now. If it were substantially smaller, the media would be blaring it all over the place. It's being conspicuously silent on the matter.

Because it's old news. The media works in a 24 hour news cycle. Why would the media discuss a protest that took place in Washington DC nearly a week ago?

Protests happen every day in this country. Just because you've found a cause to protest that you believe in, doesn't make it any more relevant than any of the 50 million other causes that have been protested in the past 300+ years of this country.

 

[Polk]

They didn't seem to have any trouble covering all the anti-Bush marches.

Swing and a miss. These protests have already gotten far more coverage than anti-war rallies did.

You concentrated on the "coverage" part and glossed over the "mainstream" part, which the anti-Bushie moonbat festivals were clearly not.

Hardly an unexpected diversionary tactic from a fellow moonbat.

What about mainstream? Both of the events in question were described as the work of radicals.

 

[Oddball]

Well, the MSM is going to have to do something. Viewership is off horribly, papers\ and magazine subscritions are plumetting. If these guys are so "mainstream" and "in the know", then why are people ditching them in droves? Fox news is kicking everybody's ass.. which says what? Libs are NOT the majority by a long shot. Keith Olberman, that lib darling has what, 25,000 viewers? Their little house of cards is crumbling...

This might have something to do with it:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A3QS7PgoTao]YouTube - Charlie Gibson on WLS Radio Clueless About ACORN Scandal[/ame]

 

[Vast LWC]

But hey, who cares about silly little things like FACTS, right?

You'll just keep on repeating what the right-wing talking head Traitors tell you.

 

[DavidS]

Do you really thing those at the fringe media outlets like the NYtimes, NBC, and the Huffington Post are going to do honest reporting?

At this point they have shown their hand, they are reporting only for a far fringe of one political party and have lost their regard for investigative journalism and honest reporting.

Its a sad day when the NYtimes is relegated to "fringe" status instead of being mainstream like they used to be.

What's disgusting is that you're repeating recycled garbage from right-wing news sources from places like FoxNoise.

Pilgrim -- you don't think that the mega corporate conglomorate that owns FoxNews would, in any way, shape or form, wish to compete with another mega corporate conglomorate for advertising dollars, do you? The more they convince you that there's a massive left wing media bias out there whose aim is to hush anti-left news stories and pro-right news stories, the more people like you who refuse to do your own research will believe them and cut down on the big 3's 6:30 news viewership. The less viewers they have, the more advertisers that will be looking for a home to advertise their product and then all of a sudden, FoxNoise will come in with Beck, O'Reilly and Hannity and say "over here! over here!"

Nooo, but that can't be right, can it? Fox wouldn't lie to you at all in regards to how their COMPETITION acts in order to get you and millions of other people to watch their show, would it? I mean, Fox didn't reach out into some of the most conservative radio talk show hosts and give them air time on FoxNews, did they? Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly don't have any radio shows, right?

 

[DavidS]

Okay, so here I am waiting for one of you to produce something that any of the protesters said that was worthy of more news coverage than they got. Really, all anyone had to do was read the signs and listen to the usual talking points in loud voices. What did I miss? Did Glenn Beck actually speak? After all, there were placards reading GLENN BECK FOR PRESIDENT. I believe Dick Armey said a few words, platitudes only, such as "Obama violates what the founding fathers intended the size and scope of the government to be" but there were no other high profile people who spoke that I'm aware of, although a few Republican legislators were spotted wandering around.

The very problem cited regarding media attention ignores a simple fact: The media will ALWAYS glom onto the fringe elements of anything because it's more interesting. The protestors would have been better served if they had been instructed to leave their ugly signs behind.

Honesty would have been best preserved had the media reported truthfully on the make up of the crowds and not concentrated on two or three radical signs.

The media does not want to admit how overwhelmingly people are against the Messiah...so they pick out radical kooks and skinheads to depict "the crowd".

**** the media.

OVERWHELMINGLY AGAINST??

Bush left with a 29% approval rating -- where were you back then? I bet you agreed with most of his policies.

Obama has a 58% approval rating now. That's not overwhelming, bub.

RealClearPolitics - Election Other - President Obama Job Approval

 

[asaratis]

Honesty would have been best preserved had the media reported truthfully on the make up of the crowds and not concentrated on two or three radical signs.

The media does not want to admit how overwhelmingly people are against the Messiah...so that pick out radical kooks and skinheads to depict "the crowd".

**** the media.

Hmm...

RCP Average of Obama Approval rating:

Approve: 53.1 / Dissapprove: 42.3 / Spread: +10.8

Well, it would appear that the reason the "media does not want to admit how overwhemingly people are against" President Obama is that...

People are not in fact against Mr Obama at all, "overwhelmingly" or not.

Of course people like you are intent on creating the impression that they are, in a clear attempt to undermine the President in a time of war.

Which makes you a, say it with me, a Traitor.

What bullshit you spew. The people are overwhelmingly against his government take over of the medical system and his march toward socialism. The comments of those who are able to get on TV and quoted in other media do not represent a truthful report of the population in general.

That's what 9/12 was all about.

I will support Obama's efforts to improve America...not just to change it. We need change, but the change needs to be for the good. His proposals don't measure up to my definition of good. So.....**** him!

Obama is relaxing the US efforts on the war against terrorism. I don't need to undermine him there. I do hope he fails in weakening our country.

 

[DavidS]

They didn't seem to have any trouble covering all the anti-Bush marches.

Swing and a miss. These protests have already gotten far more coverage than anti-war rallies did.

You concentrated on the "coverage" part and glossed over the "mainstream" part, which the anti-Bushie moonbat festivals were clearly not.

Hardly an unexpected diversionary tactic from a fellow moonbat.

So, let me get this straight. The people who were protesting hundreds of billions of dollars being spent on an unnecessary war, which has killed nearly 5,000 US Troops, which has injured nearly 40,000 US troops, which has killed over a million Iraqi civilians are part of an "anti-Bushie moonbat festival" yet the people who protest excess government spending, higher taxes for the rich and liberal policies are patriots?

You sir, have the intellectual equivalent of a 5-year old and that's an insult to 5-year olds across the country.

 

[asaratis]

Okay, so here I am waiting for one of you to produce something that any of the protesters said that was worthy of more news coverage than they got. Really, all anyone had to do was read the signs and listen to the usual talking points in loud voices. What did I miss? Did Glenn Beck actually speak? After all, there were placards reading GLENN BECK FOR PRESIDENT. I believe Dick Armey said a few words, platitudes only, such as "Obama violates what the founding fathers intended the size and scope of the government to be" but there were no other high profile people who spoke that I'm aware of, although a few Republican legislators were spotted wandering around.

The very problem cited regarding media attention ignores a simple fact: The media will ALWAYS glom onto the fringe elements of anything because it's more interesting. The protestors would have been better served if they had been instructed to leave their ugly signs behind.

Honesty would have been best preserved had the media reported truthfully on the make up of the crowds and not concentrated on two or three radical signs.

The media does not want to admit how overwhelmingly people are against the Messiah...so they pick out radical kooks and skinheads to depict "the crowd".

**** the media.

OVERWHELMINGLY AGAINST??

Bush left with a 29% approval rating -- where were you back then? I bet you agreed with most of his policies.

Obama has a 58% approval rating now. That's not overwhelming, bub.

RealClearPolitics - Election Other - President Obama Job Approval

Approval ratings? Those are almost as meaningful to me as my daily horoscope!

If Obama had 99% approval rating and pushed his socialist plan in my face, I'd still say, "**** you, Marxist!"

 

[DavidS]

Honesty would have been best preserved had the media reported truthfully on the make up of the crowds and not concentrated on two or three radical signs.

The media does not want to admit how overwhelmingly people are against the Messiah...so that pick out radical kooks and skinheads to depict "the crowd".

**** the media.

Hmm...

RCP Average of Obama Approval rating:

Approve: 53.1 / Dissapprove: 42.3 / Spread: +10.8

Well, it would appear that the reason the "media does not want to admit how overwhemingly people are against" President Obama is that...

People are not in fact against Mr Obama at all, "overwhelmingly" or not.

Of course people like you are intent on creating the impression that they are, in a clear attempt to undermine the President in a time of war.

Which makes you a, say it with me, a Traitor.

What bullshit you spew. The people are overwhelmingly against his government take over of the medical system and his march toward socialism. The comments of those who are able to get on TV and quoted in other media do not represent a truthful report of the population in general.

That's what 9/12 was all about.

I will support Obama's efforts to improve America...not just to change it. We need change, but the change needs to be for the good. His proposals don't measure up to my definition of good. So.....**** him!

Obama is relaxing the US efforts on the war against terrorism. I don't need to undermine him there. I do hope he fails in weakening our country.

You are a traitor to this country and to its people. Get out!

 

[DavidS]

Honesty would have been best preserved had the media reported truthfully on the make up of the crowds and not concentrated on two or three radical signs.

The media does not want to admit how overwhelmingly people are against the Messiah...so they pick out radical kooks and skinheads to depict "the crowd".

**** the media.

OVERWHELMINGLY AGAINST??

Bush left with a 29% approval rating -- where were you back then? I bet you agreed with most of his policies.

Obama has a 58% approval rating now. That's not overwhelming, bub.

RealClearPolitics - Election Other - President Obama Job Approval

Approval ratings? Those are almost as meaningful to me as my daily horoscope!

If Obama had 99% approval rating and pushed his socialist plan in my face, I'd still say, "**** you, Marxist!"

This is because you are a right-wing nutjob. You've been brainwashed by the right-wing leaders to oppose everything the left-wing wants. Approval ratings are a measurement of how much of the country approves or disapproves the current president. So when you say you don't care about that, and then you say that there's an overwhelming majority of people who are against Obama - you contradict yourself.

Do me a favor. Do yourself a favor.

Read the entire Wikipedia article on Marxism.

Marxism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Please highlight the areas in which you believe Obama's policies match the policies of Marxism. Thank you.

 

[Vast LWC]

What bullshit you spew. The people are overwhelmingly against his government take over of the medical system and his march toward socialism. The comments of those who are able to get on TV and quoted in other media do not represent a truthful report of the population in general.

That's what 9/12 was all about.

I will support Obama's efforts to improve America...not just to change it. We need change, but the change needs to be for the good. His proposals don't measure up to my definition of good. So.....**** him!

Obama is relaxing the US efforts on the war against terrorism. I don't need to undermine him there. I do hope he fails in weakening our country.

No "Bullshit" here bub.

You said, and I quote:

The media does not want to admit how overwhelmingly people are against the Messiah...so that pick out radical kooks and skinheads to depict "the crowd".

I posted figures that proved that statement incorrect, and now you're trying to change your story.

Tell me, why do you like committing treason so much anyway?

 

[Vast LWC]

Approval ratings? Those are almost as meaningful to me as my daily horoscope!

If Obama had 99% approval rating and pushed his socialist plan in my face, I'd still say, "**** you, Marxist!"

Yeah, why put stock in such ridiculous things as Facts and Data...

...when you can have so much more fun making up any BS you want to?

But then right-wing traitorous nutjobs like yourself don't need to pay attention to those pesky "facts", and they certainly won't let a little thing like "the truth" get in their way.

 

[Maple]

It's high time, they want to consider themselves journalists then they need to act like one. Our freedom depends upon freedom of the Press and honest reporting, something that has been totally lacking in the mainstream media.

 

[Vast LWC]

It's high time, they want to consider themselves journalists then they need to act like one. Our freedom depends upon freedom of the Press and honest reporting, something that has been totally lacking in the mainstream media.

Still hanging with the conspiracy theorists I see, eh Maple?

FoxNews and Murdoch companies have spread at least a dozen major lies in the past few months, including (but not limited to):

Democrats put a provision to kill old people in their health plan.

Mr Obama is not a US citizen.

Mr Obama is a Nazi.

Mr Obama is a Stalinist.

And you have the ******* gall to sit there claiming that the REST of the media is part of some "Left-wing conspiracy", implying that FoxNews and their associates are the only media sources that report "factual" information?

How about giving me and the rest of America a break.

"they need to act like one"? Are you ******* kidding me? Seriously?