Velociworld

As was said about meth addicts, "Once the needle goes in it never comes out."

Oh yes - the old liberal media canard - which oh so obviously treated poor old George Bush so much worse than the "fussy little crybaby" currently in office.

Well - here is a challenge for you and your cronies. Why not put together your own video - like this one http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YDR47EKTrCQ - showing just how "hellbent on delegitimizing the previous administration" the news media really was.

If it's as bad as you say it was - it should be easy. Prove once and for all just how liberal the fourth estate is. Prove once in for all that MSNBC is so much more pro Obama and anti Bush then Fox is Anti Obama and pro Bush.

Quit your crying about how poorly Bush was treated - and put up or shut up. Come on!

Hey Mintosh, listen up. You want a challenge?

Well - here is a challenge for you and your cronies. Why not put together your own video showing just how "hellbent on legitimizing the previous administration" the news media really was.

If it's as bad as you say it was - it should be easy. Prove once and for all just how objective the fourth estate is. Prove once in for all that MSNBC is so fair in their coverage of Obama and Bush, then Fox is Anti Obama and pro Bush.

Quit your crying about how poorly Obama is treated - and put up or shut up. Come on!

You're the one pushing challenges here, so YOU step up to the pump, chump. But you wont.

So take a flying fucking leap and shut the fuck up, punk. It's not up to V man or anyone else to satisfy the likes of you with proofs that you'd never accept regardless. No, you'd still have your head the up your ass, proclaiming loudly the sanctity of your beloved media cocksuckers and the pristine purity of your messiah in cheif.

I'd tell you to blow it your ass, but your head is obviously obstructing that path.

Jim
Sunk New Dawn
Galveston, TX

Jim,

Many on the left have indeed made the case that the mainstream media not only failed to critique Bush Policies - but actually worked to legitmate his policies. I do find some of this line of reasoning convincing. But I am not even talking such a radical line here.

I take my point as much more diplomatic than that. Implied in Vman's post - is the idea that Bush faced difficult trials (Ironic - considering how he calls Obama THE crybaby) - while Obama gets off comparatively easy. My point is - well - what about Fox. And I provide a video which indicates just how hard Fox has been on Obama. If Vman wants to claim that the opposite is the case - and that Bush faced much more difficult trials from MSNBC, CNN, The New York TImes - then he should be prepared to counter the evidence I have provided with evidence of his own.

Now - unless Vman wants to simply proclaim that Fox is not a news organization (now there is an argument I could gladly meet him half way on)- he should be able to provide some sort of reasonable response to this challenge.

Mintosh,
What was not the truth in your video link? One could counter with the Dan Rather dismissal because of the lies about Bush's NG Service. What would be the point? The lumpenproletariat are already elected to office.

Mintosh, you need to get your head screwed on straight. This post isn't about Obama, or Bush. And you won't find me carrying much water for Bush anyway. It's about the media double standard, and their shameful refusal to perform their due diligence on Obama. As for your contention the media propped up Bush, do you mean

CBS interposing "Snipers Wanted" over a clip of Bush, and Dan Rather trying to throw an election with obviously fake documents?

MSNBC allowing Olbermann to rant like a lunatic? How many times was Bush his World's Worst Person? How many times did he bray "Have you no shame?" like a jackass?
Or was it Chris Matthews yukking up executing Bush with Malachy McCourt?

Or perhaps you mean ABC's Terry Moran gushing about Kanye West's assertion that Bush hates black people?

Or all of the media blaming Bush for the devastation of Katrina, when the real culprits were Ray Nagin and Kathleen Blanco?

Fox News may fact-check Obama, but I don't recall anyone on Fox calling for his death, like the other networks did with Bush.

As Daniel Patrick Moynihan once said, "You are entitled to your own opinion, but not to your own facts."

Starting with the assumption that liberals are too stupid to know shiite from Shinloa, does this imply that the left is so used to eating shiite that they actually like the taste?

Mint: Are you honestly that obtuse, or did the obstetrician drop you on your haid?

Mintosh:

How did Bush react to his critics? Did he declare war on any of them? Did he set up a "fact-check site" to debunk all the falsehoods?

Did he respond at all?

No, he ignored them as much as he possibly could. He figured (rightly or wrongly) that history would judge him and that responding to ankle-biters wasn't worth his time, and furthermore that it would be undignified to do so.

Obama is a freaking narcissist, and narcissists can't take ANY criticism from ANYONE, ever. It drives them right over the edge. They take ridiculous measures to fight back without stopping to think that they're being self-defeating in doing so.

Bush had many faults, but narcissism wasn't one of them.

Pay attention to how Obama in his speeches will say in one sentence how open he is to debate and then in the next PHRASE say that he's not going to listen to "those who created the mess in the first place" or to "cynics," who are people who don't believe that he can pull off his grandiose plans.

The country is a mess, but Obama is an even worse mess. Exactly the wrong kind of personality to be in that office.

V-man,

Ummm. Yes of course. Your post IS about the double standard. And SURPRISE!! Mine is too!! In your post you use different treatments of Bush and Obama - to make your case that the double standard is alive and well. And. . . . SURPRISE!!! I do TOO!! Which only makes sense - since you did so first. So tell me -- who is it that needs to get their head screwed on straight?

But enough snark - let's consider your points.

1). CBS interposing "Snipers Wanted" over a clip of Bush

Well - if you were playing fair, you really would mention that this wasn't in a news broadcast - but in an episode of The Craig Kilburn Late Night Show. Stupid? Yes. But we do give greater license to comedy shows then news media - for good reason.

2) Dan Rather trying to throw an election with obviously fake documents.

For which - I might remind you - he eventually lost his job. Compare this - by contrast - to all the talking heads on Fox and CNN giving lip service to the equally discredited claim that Obama shouldn't be president for the lack of a birth certificate. Has anyone lost their job for making such claims? I didn't think so.

3. MSNBC allowing Olbermann to rant like a lunatic? How many times was Bush his World's Worst Person? How many times did he bray "Have you no shame?" like a jackass?

Ok - so I'll give you that one, even though I think his rhetoric pales by comparison to the ad hominem attacks by the likes of Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, Bret Baier, Megyn Kelly and Neil Cavuto (the list goes on) calling Obama everything from a fascist to a communist to a racist. Which reminds me - all you got is Olbermann? I'll even give you Rachel Maddow and your still on a loser.

4.) Or was it Chris Matthews yukking up executing Bush with Malachy McCourt?

First - McCourt is not a News reporter and does not work for CNN. Second, here is what he said: "Capital punishment? I think that if—I have got to find that guy in Spain who indicted Pinochet and get him for war crimes, and I get him to do the same thing for Bush. And in that case, I would be for capital punishment. Otherwise, I am against it." - http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14697476/ This is hardly the "calling for his death" that you suggest it is.

5.) Or perhaps you mean ABC's Terry Moran gushing about Kanye West's assertion that Bush hates black people?

Haven't seen this - but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and raise your list of unhinged left-wing pundits to 3. However, I must say that it doesn't sound like this example comes even close to matching Beck's "Obama hates white people" rhetoric.

6.) Or all of the media blaming Bush for the devastation of Katrina, when the real culprits were Ray Nagin and Kathleen Blanco?

This - of course - points to a difference of political philosophy. Is it a federal or a state issue? If a disaster of this immense proportions deserves federal response - then Bush dropped the ball - big time. However - At best its an even split - as Fox was over run with these same pundits blaming Nagin and Blanco - and defending Bush.

Now - you have said there is a double standard which favours Obama. I have not said there is one that favours Bush/GOP; rather, I only mean reject your assertion and suggest instead that MSNBC and Fox just about balance each other out. Funny thing is - you really have to pony up some more evidence before you prove this even split. In other words - I'm being pretty damn generous here. So - get to work, dude.

Ah. Haid

Ok I get it now, Mintosh has a blog and is looking for hits. Sorry not going there at least Erin shows some skin.

Ah, Mentos. So CBS/NBC/ABC/CNNTimeWarner/Newsweek/New York Times/LATimes/Washington Post/Hollywood/The entire fucking higher education establishment is balanced by Fox News and Rush Limbaugh?

That sounds like a fair fight. Which is why Obama is pissing his pants over Fox News and Rush Limbaugh.

As the great W.C. Fields said to Baby Leroy: Go away, kid. Ya bother me.

V-Man,

Ok - I guess my real target - quite simply - is Fox News. And my real point - is that there is an entirely unhinged element to Fox unmatched by anything on the left.

Whether or not this really "evens things out" or not - is a much more complex discussion. But really - honestly - is there anything to match the ad hominem and unhinged rhetoric of Fox News - captured by media matters - and linked to in my first post?

May as well leave you alone though - since you really don't have anything approaching an enlightening response.

hey, Minty:

Civilized,rational people can have civilized, rational discussions, but since you are neither, I'm going to use one of your own points to demonstrate how ignorant you are, and I'll use small words so you're sure to understand.

Dan Rather used an obviously faked memo to sabotage a man whose ball-sweat he was unworthy to drink, merely because, being leftist scum, he didn't like him. That's called Defamation, and not only is it illegal, it is immoral, and his behavior- especially after being caught at this stupidity- is the very definition of "unhinged"

A lot of people would like to see O's birth certificate, because it is the right of the American people to know that the duly elected president is legally qualified to hold the office. That is not only legal, but it is a requirement. Me, I don't care if he was born on mars, nothing qualifies him to hold the office he was given, he's a post turtle.

Anyone with three active brain cells can refute any claim you make, any time. The fact that you cannot see this, and can only offer invective against Fox News, means that you have drunk deeply of the Kool-Ade distributed by the entire liberal establishment, from the networks, who gave up reporting news ages ago, to the entertainment industry, who never miss a chance to denegrate any conservative, to the dead tree media, who in the main belong to the One. You are too brainwashed to see that very nearly every newscast by any of the old media that mentions the word "Bush" is subtly at the least, usually overtly, and often unhingedly denigratious toward Bush or anything that can be considered conservative.

me, I don't have time to waste with the likes of you, consider yourself extremely lucky I have spent this much time. Oh, and by all means, proceed with the usual typical ad hominem etc as all trolls do.

"May as well leave you alone" Yep. God forbid you learn something.

Oq,

1. Could you please point out to me precisely where my discussion becomes "uncivilized." With my 3 brain cells I can't quite sort this complexity out for myself.

2. What part of the fact that Rather lost his job for his stupidity - don't you understand? This discussion is about whether there is a leftist bias in the press. When the leftist is purged by the system for betraying a bias - this should be a sign of the system's objectivity - and yet you all insist on labeling it a sign of the system's bias?

3. Let me get this straight.

a.) Questions raised about where and what a standing president was up to from 1968 (at which time his father was a House of Rep. member on the House Ways and Means Committee) to 1973 during which time he landed a comfortable position in the Texas Air National Guard and during which time approximately 37,000 serviceman lost their lives in Vietnam. Questions such as these are out of bounds and as sure a sign as anything of the leftist degeneracy of the fourth estate.

b.) Questions about where a standing president was on August 4, 1961 - the day of his birth at which point he had no will or responsibility of his own. Questions that are raised despite the fact that a certification of live birth has been provided (http://www.politifact.com/media/img/graphics/birthCertObama.jpg)

Questions about this are perfectly resonable for endless chatter by newsmen - who also think the man a fascist, communist, racist - and are as sure a sign as anything that the news organization hosting these newsmen is "fair and balanced"? And mark the news organization as the one voice of reason standing up against the leftist bias of the rest of the fourth estate?

Do I understand now? Or am I missing something?

"Could you please point out to me precisely where my discussion becomes "uncivilized""

Yes, here.

"Quit your crying about how poorly Bush was treated - and put up or shut up. Come on!
"

but then, pointing that out to you is like trying to teach a pig to sing.

As to the rest of the idiocy you have spewed, I guess it isn't obvious to you because you ooze obliviousness; the Won is, in fact, a fascist. A communist, and a racist. Of course, with that mouthfull of Koolade, you have problems tasting the shinola.

"a comfortable position in the Texas Air National Guard"

...where he piloted some of the most unstable, crash-prone planes ever built. If that fits your definition of "comfortable," then let me know where I can buy one of those funky dictionaries: sounds like an entertaining read.

Raising the question about Bush's TANG service isn't off-limits.

Producing obviously forged documents to derail a presidential election is.

Dicentra, minty's just oblivious. Look at the contortions he has to go through to get "rather/illegal" to equal good, and "obama/legal" to equal bad. The very definition of the fact-proof screen. An original thought couldn't be sladgehammered into this ijits head.

Rather lost his job - which in my opinion is just about right.

Meanwhile - the loonies on fox questioning Obama's birth - are celebrated by the right as somehow the one meaningful voice in a corrupt and biased fourth estate.

Have these loonies on fox done anything illegal? Doubtful. But to herald Rather's dispicable behaviour as a sign of the fourth estate's degeneracy, while simultaneously celebrating fox even while it makes very morally ambiguous claims about Obama's birthright - is an extreme form of cynicism that decent people would and should steer clear of.

And for those of you calling me out as a troll - I will take it as a badge of distinction that I have now been callled out as a troll both here - and at Daily Kos.

Minty: Don't flatter yourself. You obviously lack the awareness to be considered human, let alone a troll. Go back to suckling at the hopeeychangey teat. Hope you like the milk sour.