Writerbuckeye wrote:

dwccrew wrote:

Writerbuckeye wrote:

dwccrew wrote: It's funny to see the same people complain about the very same thing they used to defend Bush on. Ok, so the media is biased, tell us something we don't already know. Both presidents (Bush and Obama) are failures, let's move on and instead of adding fuel to the fire of bickering, let's start voting in people that actually will work together (regardless of political party) to help make our country better and return us to the status we once attained.

I'll rub my magic lamp and get right on that. In the meantime, we'll just shut down this board and stop talking politics. God knows, we don't want anyone to be guilty of bickering. :rolleyes:

Well see, that's the thing, you're not talking politics, you're whining just like the liberals did for 8 years.

You have been sucked into the very thing you don't like.

Whining? LOLOLOLOL. No. Not even close.

DISCUSSING the continuing disparity in how the media treats members of the two parties is not whining. You calling it that doesn't make it so.

Just as you calling the media biased doesn't make it so, true? The left has their media outlets as the right has their own as well. Both sides are stupid and are ruining this country.

Not true.

Studies have been done by others that show a distinct liberal bias, including one by UCLA.

Public opinion polls have confirmed what everyone already knows.

The "right" has Fox and the "left" has everyone else of consequence -- not exactly a level playing field.

Writerbuckeye wrote: Not true.

Studies have been done by others that show a distinct liberal bias, including one by UCLA.

Public opinion polls have confirmed what everyone already knows.

The "right" has Fox and the "left" has everyone else of consequence -- not exactly a level playing field.

Well since this is the politics forum and LJ requires you to post the link when you make claims like that, I'd like to see the link that you have read. Not doubting you, just interested in reading the study you speak of.

dwccrew wrote:Well since this is the politics forum and LJ requires you to post the link when you make claims like that, I'd like to see the link that you have read. Not doubting you, just interested in reading the study you speak of.

UCLA study on media bias

Article is a few years old but still valid IMHO.

Of the 20 major media outlets studied, 18 scored left of center, with CBS' "Evening News," The New York Times and the Los Angeles Times ranking second, third and fourth most liberal behind the news pages of The Wall Street Journal.

Well, i'm not being hypocritical in that i think everyone on the right or left that goes on about things like this are imbeciles.

Maybe if i had made fun of Bush for these types of comments but then was ridiculing you guys for them, i would be a hypocrite. But i think both sides are ridiculous, in this regard.

And, i understand i'm calling you guys names, ala douchebags, but so to are those on the left who were.

I understand the bias stuff, but i think these things are just ridiculous. But, that is the price we pay for being so connected and aware of all that is going.

But, to clear it up, all who make fun of a President for slips of tongue, on the right or the left, are giant, monstrous douches.

P.S., Major, i already got permission to use the word.

Writerbuckeye wrote: Not true.

Studies have been done by others that show a distinct liberal bias, including one by UCLA.

Public opinion polls have confirmed what everyone already knows.

The "right" has Fox and the "left" has everyone else of consequence -- not exactly a level playing field.

What about the AM dial pundits? Hmmm? All right winged...some of whom are radically right winged.

Sooo..you want slanted left, watch TV...you want slanted heavily right, turn on the AM dial. There's your fair and balanced.

Footwedge wrote:

Writerbuckeye wrote: Not true.

Studies have been done by others that show a distinct liberal bias, including one by UCLA.

Public opinion polls have confirmed what everyone already knows.

The "right" has Fox and the "left" has everyone else of consequence -- not exactly a level playing field.

What about the AM dial pundits? Hmmm? All right winged...some of whom are radically right winged.

Sooo..you want slanted left, watch TV...you want slanted heavily right, turn on the AM dial. There's your fair and balanced.

Those are ENTERTAINMENT programs -- not news organizations. Your point isn't valid for this discussion.

cbus4life wrote:
P.S., Major, i already got permission to use the word.

You don;t have permission to call others names on this subforum. Cut it out.

Will do.

I just want to know, how do you elect someone like Bush and then not expect him to get made fun of??? It's really unfair to present Bush, say "this is the guy we've chosen to run your lives" and then you bash ppl. for making fun??? C'mon!!!! You've seen the guy. I mean seriously.....

If only it had stopped with "making fun" you might have a point.

It went waaaaaay beyond that.

I honestly could care less about the gaff. There are simply more important issues.

^^^Oh there are more important issues but if you think for a moment that gaffes like this from the "most intelligent and articulate president to occupy the WH since Abraham Lincoln" will go unnoticed, you're out of your mind.

Who, of real credibility, has claimed this-that he is the "most intelligent and articulate president to occupy the WH since Abraham Lincoln"? Or are we making just wide general claims?

Get ready for the response that "the media and all the kool-aid drinkers have," without any actual evidence to back it up.

People were excited about his intelligence and the like, but no one was claiming that he was as intelligent as any President we've ever had, no one.

It would be interesting to see if his more ardent supporters have noticed (or will admit) that off the prompter, he's a verbal stumblebum more similar to his predecessor than different.

Of course he isn't as eloquent, but i don't really care, didn't really mind Bush and his stumbles either.

All in all, this entire thing is laughable on so many levels, both those bashing Bush and Obama.

queencitybuckeye wrote: It would be interesting to see if his more ardent supporters have noticed (or will admit) that off the prompter, he's a verbal stumblebum more similar to his predecessor than different.

I wouldn't call myself and "ardent supporter" and surely he's had his moments because deep down he's a nerd and nerd's tell lame jokes and fumble over their words from time to time....but he seemed to handle himself pretty well at the GOP issues conference without a prompter and with a whole caucus contrary to his "marxist/communist/anti-freedom/jew-hating/rap music agenda" having the opportunity to roast him.