Forbidden Donut

Whoopi slammed him pretty good, lol I chuckled.
"Do I have to be worry about being returned to slavery..."

All I have to say in the third video his little diatribe that included saying "God" every other word made my fucking brain hurt. I can't imagine trying to listen to that guys speeches after Bush'.

While not the most intellectually stimulating interview ever, I would pay money to have our "top" news journalists put the heat on the candidates like this. It's not that the main stream media stopped asking hard-hitting questions, it's that they stopped caring when the interviewee shoveled a pile of shit into their ear.

He really didnt do a very good job. There were a few moments where he could have really made them look stupid. On that Whoopi asking about slavery thing all he had to do was say that there are now Amendments, which are part of the Constitution, that make that a dumb effing question. And for separation of church and state, Whoopi asked if he would govern as he thought God willed him to do or if he would govern according to the greatest good for the people. All McCain had to say was that those two positions are one and the same.

McCain is a moron. They know this. They exploited it. It's pretty simple to understand, man.

A moron? He wouldn't currently be in the Senate for Over 20 years if he was a "moron". Unless everyone in Arizona are morons. Though, I doubt that.

I think you may be on to something... hm...

Um... You're not paying attention. Look up "Nepotism" and get back to me.

Daddy and Granddaddy were Admirals, which got him into his military education and subsequent career, even after graduating 5th from the bottom of his class... Then he has his tasty narrative from Vietnam to catapult a senate career. He's done nothing to demonstrate an above average intelligence, and in fact demonstrates a minimal understanding of the issues, along with a limited capacity to discuss even the ones he does understand.

Maybe not a moron, but he ain't the sharpest tool in the shed. Which wouldn't matter if he weren't running against one of the most intelligent presidential candidates since Ross Perot.

the interview would have been any better if the cunts would have shut their traps and let the man speak. you can bet your ass if obama was sitting in that chair, he would have never faced the scrutiny McCain did. both Obama and McCain are jokes. Not one of them has anything better to say than anyone else....make me sick that either one of them is going to be our next president.

Every last one of Obama's interviews and debates have been softball after softball lobbed at him, and he still can't smack it out of the park! WTF is this guys problem!?

pull your head out of your ass. McCain's the media darling, Obama's just good ratings fodder.

I think he was referring to the fact that the people on that particular show are democrat/Obama supporters, not so much that the whole mainstream media goes easy on Obama.

okay, fair enough. I may have read to generally into his statement. But that is a general theme pushed by the McCain campaign that happens to be complete crap. Can't blame me for confusing a specific statement for the more popular generalized version.

/well you can but I'd prefer you not to.
//It was still an argumentum ad hominem. Their questions and the subsequent answers are invalid because they wouldn't have been as hard on Obama? Yeah... okay.

Let me specify a little more specific so you can understand where i was going with my previous statement. First off, they invite McCain onto the show to talk about his ideas and his plan if he were to become president....then when the man tries to talk and explain himself those old, loudmouth whores won't shut up and let him talk. Perhaps maybe the feel the urge to get their speck of intellect out while they can, before they lose it? who knows. You seem like a smart man, and it is clear as day that most of those mongrels on the view are Obama supporters. Now, you can you sit there and tell me that if the roles were reversed, and Obama were sitting in McCains place that he would have faced as much scrutiny as McCain did? NO...he wouldn't have. Not that I blame the women on the view for being arrogant, and just plane rude....I think anyone with a preference for the other candidate would do the same thing. Now you stated McCain is the 'media darling', I can't help but laugh. What about that little rant by Russell Brand on the 2008 VMA Awards? Or how almost all of the elite-news media outlets are all for Obama, don't be so naive. I'm not here to defend McCain, i do not support him...nor do i support Obama, neither of them is qualified for the job of commander in chief, I'm merely ranting about how the whole media bias in this country is fucked. It's upsetting that the media can't let the men speak their minds, and get their ideas out there to everyone without having to try and influence the people. Look at Ron Paul, the man's campaign was suffocated because of the media bias for both McCain, Obama, and Hillary. amiright?

McCain was only the darling of the mainstream media during the Republican primaries. He was the most liberal one and thus they pushed him to win. Now that it is him v. Obama it seems obvious that he should no longer be favored by the MSM if it is indeed liberal. And it is...something like 85-90%

You're right. Angry, but right.



A presentation by a british comedian on the VMA Awards are now the pinnicle of political discourse. got it.


Citation needed.


Qualifications for CiC:
>35 years of age. Born in America. They're both qualified. Nice try though. If you'd like to detail YOUR ideal presidential qualifications that can be done though.



Your view of things is a bit silly. And the cognitive dissonance involved in writing your post is staggering.

hm... 85-90% huh? Sounds official. Where'd you get that from? What defines a "liberal media" outlet?

Once again, loudly, for the kids in the back:
The media are not "in the tank" for any candidate. They are "in the tank" for their own pockets. If talking about lipstick on a pig gets ratings, that's what they'll report on.

You're conspiracy theory is cute though.

indeed he is, but that whole segment of the show was aired during the initial broadcast, and every repeat broadcast of the show after that. It could very easily have been edited out.




I figured you would have picked up that by now....Disclaimer:the previous posts are of opinion of the original poster, and not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of this forum.



Before all of this gets out of hand, let me say this: I'm an engineer...I'm slightly qualified to talk about physics and math....not politics. You seem to have a very good working knowledge of politics, but neither you, nor I are intelligent enough people to know how the world works to give an intelligent opinion on the subject. Politics is such a biased topic of discussion and I just can't stand to be drug along any further with it.

hum de dum, time for more links that i get chided for posting. http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington...a-politics.html

The two studies cited in the article are here:
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.a...301702713742569

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19113485/

And here is a study from the 70s, 80s, and early 90s that has many graphs and tables illustrating bias:
http://www.mediaresearch.org/biasbasics/biasbasics3.asp

I've had this argument ad nauseum on fark and don't feel like continuing it here. You can't base bias in the media on anything other than the content of their reporting. The. End.

fair enough, but its hard to measure that, so what would prove it to you?

I have an inherent tendency to disregard things that I've been taught as true my whole life until I feel like they've been adequately proven. If the teachers felt the need to remind me every day, (In this case, the media itself is the teacher), that the media is liberal, I assume they are obfuscating the reality.

Here comes the anecdote war:
This morning I saw Joe Scarborough and Mika or whatever the hell her name is (MSNBC morning show), interview a wall streeter who wanted to tell us that the Golden Parachute clauses in the FM/FM CEOs' contracts should be honored. I'm a liberal. That's bullshit IMO. There's arguments for both sides, though. The argument for my side was never made. There's only one... it's not that complicated. They let him spin these CEO's as being hard working red blooded americans whose livelihoods are just as jeopardized by the crash of their company as their employees.

/the argument btw is that when company A is absorbed by company B, company B gets to renegotiate or outright eliminate contracts with the employees of company A. In this case, company B was the US government using the taxpayers money. They (we) are completely within their (our) rights to request a renegotiation that doesn't involve the CEOs being rewarded for pulling the rug from underneath our economy.

Just throwing this out there, but is it possible for reporters to have a personal preference and not let that get in the way of them reporting facts?

A large amount of your articles point to the funding of candidates from journalists, but I don't see how that necessarily affects their reporting. If it is possible to separate your personal life from work, would it not be possible to separate your political leanings for work?

The numbers mean less when the fact that many of the journalists are just reading what other people wrote is brought up. They mean even less when the fact that everything is screened by a higher up in the business.

Don't misunderstand me. The television (save a few) and print news do lean left. Radio and a few television news shows are to the right. It isn't always black and white. Fox news (leans to the right) called McCain a liar.

Bias is one thing, but most media outlets aren't unreasonably biased.

And the degree to which McCain screams about media bias is getting absurd.

More from today's Morning Joe.

Asked to respond to Obama's latest attack ads, giving the opportunity to decry them as slander, he instead chose to attack the host by saying,
"Ah, I don't--it's not up to me, Mika, to make those kinds of judgments. I'll leave it up to the American people. I still say to you, and I know you're a supporter of Senator Obama, if you would urge him to come and do townhall meetings with me, as I've asked him to do time after time, the whole tenor of the campaign would change."

Following up with a line that doesn't even apply because that's how he's playing gotcha this week.

"Obama isn't playing by my rules. Wahhhh. Tell him to play by my rules and maybe I won't be such a dillweed! Neener neener."

Bonus: he called Mika's retort that her brother works for his campaign a "cheap shot" before leaving.

can't wait til this guy has to sit down with Putin...

While I tend to agree with you, perhaps choosing a different member of the media would be more appropriate. I watch Morning Joe every day, and it is clear that Mika Brzezinski is very much an Obama supporter. The same was true throughout the primaries as well.

She's the type of person who twists Petraeus' "victory" comments into "Petraeus says we have no chance of victory in Iraq" -- something I've seen her do multiple times over the past few days.

I agree, except her bias was irrelevant to the question he was being asked.

"Do you think the Obama ad, using your words about the fundamentals of the economy. Do you think that ad was fair?"

appropriate response: No, and here's why...

his response: you're in the tank for obama so I don't have to answer that. Also if only Obama had come to town halls I wouldn't have to resort to the sleazy ads I'm running with my name on them made by the same people who smeared me out of the running 8 years ago.

McCain: a man of threats-
I won't tell you how to catch Bin-Laden unless you make me president.
I won't stop running lies as truth unless Obama debates me on my terms.

I'd also like to add that I thought she was in it for Hillary in the Primaries. But I didn't watch as much then, so perhaps I just caught a few comments and judged to early.

From the NRfuckingO of all places

"Since 2000, John McCain had thrived on his irrepressible chattiness with the press, talking about anything reporters wanted for as long as they would listen. The press loved the access and avoided “gotcha” coverage, letting McCain explain any seeming gaffes. The arrangement worked beautifully for both sides — until McCain became the Republican presidential nominee."

Recently he has been denying the access that afforded him gentle press coverage. Now he's seeing what every other politician has seen. And he's bitching about the Librul media and it's working.