EvilMonkey

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Sep 9, 2008 -> 12:59 PM) I'd just like to note that after 290 pages in this forum it would be very difficult to find a whole lot of substantive reasoning for Obama being a good selection other then political reasons to win on November 4th. EDIT: What happened to "Country First"? Fixed that for ya.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 9, 2008 -> 11:53 AM) In reality, how much worse could PRNK be? They have literally starved millions of people to death and been a thorn in the side of the entire world. What could happen, a madman steps in for him? Oh wait... Well, Kim still had somewhat of a world view. These doubles may have never been outside of whatever city they are kept in. One bats*** carzy General whispering in their ears and suddenly South Korea is invaded. However, maybe of of these Kims could have a desire for peaceful reunification with the south?

QUOTE (bmags @ Sep 9, 2008 -> 11:41 AM) well, here. Scan through. http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/ti...=0&s=newest DO NOT PICK EDITORIALS. Scanning through, I just find that this was my main argument about the real liberal bias in reporting. I think journalists in general are biased towards the poor and underreported. In reporting, I don't think it's "THIS ISN'T WORKING, LOUSY REPUBLICANS" usually it's "If you are going to have this program at least make it do what it's supposed to do" (solve problems). Rarely do these articles mention political parties, if at all, and these are hyper regional. Usually the main players you see are the governor or Bloomberg. I will grant you that they rarely mention parties, unless there was some specific law or bill related to the story. But come on, who is generally perceived to be against social spending of any kind, whether it is right or wrong? And again, I will agree that in general, they are just lazy. But each reporter has their own sources and groups that they trust, which contribute to theirlaziness. As for your list, sometime hard to tell the difference btw the two. 'City Refines Formula' shows how this puts more people under the poverty level. Doesn't automatically increase incoming cash, but will change things. 'State Aims to help..' points to a success. 'Food Stamps Buy Less..' has this line in it " The bill, which was passed over President Bush’s veto, will also raise for the first time since 1996 the amount of income that families of fewer than four can keep for costs like housing or fuel without having their benefits reduced. " . 'Technology and Food' is a positive article. After page 1, they wanted me to log in, so that is as far as I got. I will grant you that they usually don't mention the eeeevil Republicans, but if they are negative, they are almost always because the program needs more money.

QUOTE (bmags @ Sep 9, 2008 -> 10:24 AM) Another Alpha Dog post with no examples. Were there any examples of the media negativity in what I replied to?

I read about this a day or two ago and wasn't sure what to make of it. Very frightening, and very possible.

QUOTE (Chet Lemon @ Sep 9, 2008 -> 09:22 AM) Don't liberals have an affinity for government-funded programs (e.g. food stamps, americorps, TANF, etc.)? From what I have observed in media, there are hardly ever any positive stories reporting the accomplishments of such programs. The media has shown a passel of stories presenting solely negative aspects of these programs over the years. And every one of those negative stories implies that if only there were more money for said program, all would be right! Win-win. Pretend that you are pointing out a bad program, but then get to blame the eeeevil republicans for not giving the program enough money to succeed!

QUOTE (Texsox @ Sep 8, 2008 -> 09:58 PM) Sorry Alpha, if this story was about McCain you would scream media bias that it was even reported, since it was not true. Just think about the push poll that Bush used to destroy McCain in 2000. Also, there would have to be a story about someone from the other party to balance this. Negative stories about politicians are not bias, nor are positive ones. And I guess some people need a D or R next to someones name to know if what they did was good or bad. I don't. Alright tex, you are half right. i would have screamed about that being reported, but about either guy. I was trying to be over the top like you often are in these discussions. Let's try this one. Here is a non-politcal story. See if you can spot the agenda of the reporter. http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editoria...edless_carnage/ I'll save you the time, it is contained here: If the reporter had done his job, he could have done a quick check to verify that what the Brady campaign told him was true or not. it is not. There is no legal way that guy could have purchased a gun in that, or any other state. A quick Google check will show that you do need licenses, and background checks would have red-flagged this guy immediately. The paragraph implies that he walked into a store and just bought a gun. So the reporter prints a statement that is false, without checking to see if it was true. Did they have an agenda, or just lazy? Or both? I would say both, but the laziness is born from the agenda by trusting the source completely.

VP wannabe Joe and the 2nd amendment.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Sep 9, 2008 -> 09:41 AM) He rents an apartment in Washington. But following ahb's suggestion, he should move.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Sep 9, 2008 -> 09:43 AM) I never had a problem with his travel costs. I only had a problem that his method of transportation was a private jet, billed to the state. if you are going to bill the state, then do something a little more efficient for such a relatively short trip - car, or amtrak perhaps. Even JOE takes Amtrak! Yeah, the jet thing was bad.

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Sep 9, 2008 -> 09:27 AM) isnt this kinda like the problem Blogo has with his family living in CHicago and him CONSTANTLY traveling to and from Chicago? If you want to be the reformer who cuts government spending, then actually make the gutsy call and move. Even doing that, she still spent less the the guy she replaced. She even firer HIS personal chef that he kept. Maybe if she had a few book deals she could have afforded to buy a second house near the capital. Move? Has Obama moved to Washington since he has been in the Senate? He has been on record saying that he has 'only' one house.

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Sep 9, 2008 -> 08:46 AM) Palin Billed State for Nights Spent at Home I wonder if the Wa Post has a team of reporters going over Biden's expense reports? Considering he has been in office almost as long as Obama has been alove, I am sure there would be enough in there to keep them busy for a long time.

QUOTE (bmags @ Sep 9, 2008 -> 07:25 AM) Okay, so obviously we've had disagreements about whose controlled the media narrative. I contended a month ago, that since Obama won the primaries, he's had more coverage, but less positive coverage. I argued also that in trying to be fair to McCain, the media has been unequivocally taking his media claims and not reporting on things that they would on Obama (negative) Obviously, the disagreement was over positive coverage. Where you guys felt not adequate coverage was given to some Obama scandals, like Rezko, which you feel still isn't dead. I'd like the media to tap into McCain's advisers, personally, especially Randy Scheunemann. BUt too my POINT, I think an example for me of the media trying to compensate for their more Obama coverage is their coverage of polls. All of the "why isn't Obama ahead by more" polls. Well, then so post convention, they said "where's the bump" and Obama got a bump and people called it a bump. Then now McCain gets a bump, and news stories are going crazy about how the RACE IS TIED, MCCAIN IN LEAD, i mean many of these came int he weekend where McCain always does better, its post convention where historically there is always a bounce, and other factors. But now you'd have us believe that McCain just suddenly became Usain Bolt. Expectations play a huge part of that. The media really didn't think the convention would go as well as it did for the republicans, and the bump was alot bigger than they thought. never in their wildest nightmares did they expect to ever have to report that Obama and McCain were TIED! So to them, its news. Keep expecting the floor, occasionally you get hit by the ceiling. (Not you, the media)

QUOTE (Buehrle>Wood @ Sep 8, 2008 -> 09:29 PM) Original is much better: http://img165.imageshack.us/img165/189/1218062796760xd1.jpg I dunno, there is a certain sense of weirdness talkign to someone about a fleshlight, as opposed to a coke bottle. However I am sad to see that it was ripped off, it takes a little bit away from the humor.

QUOTE (Rex Kicka** @ Sep 8, 2008 -> 09:48 PM) Oooo... this is a puzzler. When Sarah Palin was mayor, the Alaska state government passed a law requiring law enforcement to provide rape kits, free of charge. Wasilla was billing alleged rape victims for their rape kit. Who opposed this? Wasilla's Police Chief, the guy that Sarah Palin appointed because he didn't want to shut the bars down before 5AM. http://www.frontiersman.com/articles/2000/05/23/news.txt The story doesn't say when the practice of charging for them began. Are you saying that she started this? And your 5 Am thing must be in a different story. Love how the other guy there, Zager, is all high and mighty about not charging the victims. I wonder if his town offers free ambulance services as well? Fannon's last line is what should happen, the criminal should be theone to pay.

Wow, it came up a short while ago. Screen grabs of an online customer service rep dealing with someone who keeps saying he accidentally his fleshlight! The whole thing! And finally at the end, he says sorry, he left out the word 'broke'. Scroll down a bit more, some of them still come up, so you can get the picture.

http://forums.joerogan.net/showthread.php?t=74612

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Sep 8, 2008 -> 07:34 PM) The cuteness of Palin will wear off soon. This pick will blow up in their face before it's all said and done. Repeat that three times and click your heels, Dorothy.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 8, 2008 -> 07:38 PM) Wow, you managed to go on one hell of a rant there without addressing the subject at all. Why is Brit Hume for example allowed to anchor a news show whereas Olbermann is not? I have no problem with Olbermann being removed. I think it's a fair response to some of his actions during the conventions. But that doesn't explain why an other network gets to run out a far right guy, call him an anchor, and have no one complain at all. The only time anyone raises a stink is when it's a left-leaning person on the air doing so. Scarborough doesn't get his time in the morning cut back (at least not yet) after his behavior at the convention which was just as bad as KO's. Complain all you want, nobody is stopping you. Every time Rush opens his yap a liberal dies a lttle inside. How long did his MNF gig last? And FYI, compared to Olberman, Hume is as middle of the road as possible. Do any of his actions even compare to Olbermann on a good day? No.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 8, 2008 -> 07:45 PM) Fine outsource something to Hannity and then I'll respond to the substantive points. Nothing you've said makes it clear why Brit Hume is ok and Olbermann isn't. Did you watch MSNBC at all during either convention? if you honestly believe that Olbermann doesn't dream of being on his knees in front of the alter of Obama, then we have nothing to talk about. He is not a reporter, he is an over-opinionated gasbag. And when he tries to 'report', he can't hide it. MSNBC wouldn't make any lineup change if it wasn't in their own interest, finalcially or otherwise. That's all I keep hearing from the liberal side, 'the media isn't biased, unless it is biased towards making money'. oh, and Donohue's show wasn't cancelled for ideological reasons, it was cancelled because he couldn't even outdraw Connie Chung! Nice try, Glen, but no. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/26/business...df0&ei=5070 Oh, as for his third point? yeah, we all know that the media overwhelmingly donate to and vote republican. Try again, Glen.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 8, 2008 -> 04:21 PM) Response outsourced Glen Greenwald? Come on, that's like saying response outsourced to Sean Hannity.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Sep 8, 2008 -> 04:43 PM) Sean Hannity has to be one of the most annoying people ever. *Holds nose and squeaks* "Do you hear about blah blah blah? Do you hear blah blah blah?" "The most comprehensive (biased) election coverage anywhere". PUKE. I would have to agree with you there.

Obama identified one of the 7 states he thought existed that nobody else knew about! New Pennsylvania! I wonder if that is next to New Ohio? Anyone know what the capitol is of New Pennsylvania? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AuysikG55Ks

QUOTE (Texsox @ Sep 8, 2008 -> 10:45 AM) Exactly, the interpretation begins as soon as they seek to verify something the government has said or even begins to rewrite something. A word for word transcript eliminates that chance of bias. A direct from the government to you story also eliminates that possibility. They are reporting exactly the "w"s. And as soon as they begin an investigation they would usually have to have something specific to investigate. How else would they have caught say Clinton or Edwards? They wouldn't start out we're going to investigate every member of Congress or every intern. They need something to check out or investigate. So why even have a press that investigates? That is an immediate bias. You and I will never agree here. Investigate, even let your biases lead your investigation, but simply report what you find, not infuse it with your glee and finding somethign bad about the other side, your disappointment at not finding anything or a bunch of made up crap to make it seem like you found something when you really didn't. Which one of these looks like it has an agenda? "Reporters acting on a tip investigated today whether or not Barack Obama had fathered 17 kids out of wedlock as he is rumored to have done. The source of the rumor was tracked down to John A. Whackypants, who told us that 'he delivered every last one of them himself". Our reporters managed to get access to the hospital records which show that no such births occurred, and that Mr. Whackpants is not a licensed doctor in this, or any other state, and had been recently released from a mental institution." vs. "Reporters today acting on a tip investigated today whether or not Barack Obama fathered 17 kids out of wedlock, as he is rumored to have done. The source of the rumor was tracked down to a John A. Whackpants, who told us that 'he delivered every last one of them himself". Clearly a man with a political vendetta, we researched Mr Whackypants to find out if what he asserts was true. What we found was that there are no hospital records, he is not a licensed doctor and that he voted Republican in the last election. "This just shows the levels that some people will stoop to in order to win an election", an Obama spokesperson said. "The other side is going to try and scare you because he doesn't look like them, because he is different." The McCain camp was unavailable for comment.

It seems that a healthy dose of the violence at the Republican Convention was organized by some University of Minnesota staff, and AFL-CIO union members! http://www.examiner.com/x-701-National-Def...rchists-for-RNC Should they be disciplined for these actions? Schools nowadays are punishing students for all sorts of things they do off-campus, including blogs and web pages. Why not teachers who promote violence, using school resources? Odds that they get fired? Anyone?