Can't Ever Catch a Break............

Originally posted by Seekerof
gmcnulty,
Will this news piece, that you are presenting above, recieve the same amount of press coverage as those naval/military personnel, "colleagues", that stated that Kerry was unfit to be commander-in-chief?
seekerof

I don't know.

How could I know that?

And then who would go about measuring the "coverage"

I don't mind answering questions.......but Crystal Balls I don't have.........do you?

gmcnulty,
Calm down dude. It was only a question asking for your opinionated thoughts. I understand that neither of us has a working, reliable 'crystal ball', but we do know how the press has been operating of late, don't we? Hence my question.



seekerof

Originally posted by kegs
Hmm, this isn't the first time this has happened.
edit on 13-6-2004 by kegs]

Kegs me boy...............I think we need to start a list.............just so we can keep up with the dueling lists of supporters of the other guy..........

G-D this is getting all so confusing...........most of america has alkready made up therte minds......last look at Zogby, the undecided are in the 7% range.................

and together both will..........in total...........spend $1 B to win this election.

All to get a job paying straight salary and no bonus or incentive pay.....

Make ya wonder......

I don't know which paper is more to the right-- the Times or the Washinton Post-- and they have both reported the story in the same manner... and if you want to talk about right-wing media tools, the source of the Kerry story, cnsnews.com, is one of the most biased out there, which is why they
forgot to mention that the motive for the Vietnam vets to sign the petition has nothing to do with Kerry's qualifications--it is that they are unhappy with the fact that Kerry demonstrated against the atrocities perpetrated by the U.S. against civilians during the war... In their eyes, he is a traitor--remember how they treated Hugh Thompson after he testified at the court martial of the CO of the My Lai massacre? He was treated as a pariah--which is typical when a soldier "goes outside of his unit."

Sure the L.A. Times is a liberal news media outlet, lmgnyc.
If its not, then I guess bias is its new motto?
Perhaps this will show what I am refering to?
A Tale of Two Letters

Bias doesn't get much clearer than this. The lead story in today's Los Angeles Times trumpets a letter, written by 26 former diplomats, calling for the defeat of President George W. Bush. On the front page, the story goes out of its way to suggest that the letter is a bipartisan effort. The editors save for the back pages (or entirely omit) significant evidence suggesting that the signatories are partisan Democrats. Not one word of the Bush perspective appears on the front page. It's all on page A26, safely out of the view of the average reader.

The L.A. Times's prominent and sympathetic treatment of this letter stands in marked contrast to its coverage of a letter that was released in May by hundreds of former military men, many of whom served with John Kerry, questioning Kerry's honesty and fitness to serve as Commander-in-Chief. The letter, which was signed by every officer in Kerry's chain of command in Vietnam, was buried by the L.A. Times in stories appearing on pages A21 and A20. In the little coverage the paper did provide, the stories ignored the central accusations of the letter, and gave prominent play to the spin that the letter was a partisan hit job.

More given in the link above.

Oh, and maybe this can shed some light on 10 of those 26 distinguished gentlemen on gmcnulty's list:

A William Crowe in Alexandria, Virginia gave $2000 to Howard Dean.

Jeffrey Davidow gave $1000 to John Kerry.

Charles Freeman of D.C. gave $2000 to Howard Dean.

Joseph P. Hoar gave $1000 to Howard Dean.

Robert Keeley gave $300 to Howard Dean.

George Moose gave $2000 to John Kerry.

A James Phillips of Arlington VA gave $1000 to John Kerry.

A William Smith from Washington, D.C. gave $2000 to Kerry.

Retired diplomat Michael Sterner was a cheapskate: he gave only $100 to Dean.

Alexander Watson gave $1,050 to John Kerry.

From the same link above.



seekerof

[edit on 13-6-2004 by Seekerof]

What the hell's your point?

MY whole thing is, "How the hell can you say or know that the LA Times is a LIBERALly biased newspaper from the report of some folks that aren't going to support Bush.................are all the other papers who reported the Navy folks who think Kerry's screw up all RW rags then..............????


You want my opinion....................to some degree...........they all suck.

Not one of the US papers escapes error or bias.............so what new.

You want to know what's going on?

Start thinking for yourself and stop letting others do it for you........

First admit your own bias............... and then assume those folks you've trusted all the time have been lying to you................. ASSUME...

Then pick one truism they've been telling you over the years and PROVE IT RIGHT. Prove to yourself they aren't the liars you assumed them to be( for the sake of this experiment I'm suggesting)

If you read above........I read them all............FYI.........That guy with the dirt bomb idea they arrested of the plane in Chicago................I knew he was coming 3 days before the story broke..............I read in DAWN..........the Pakistanis arrested him, questioned him before turning him over to the CIA who baby sat him all the way to Chicago����..

The quality of the info we get is crap��to much Michael Jackson and other trash stories stealing valuable space and time from important news���.. Plus the foreign press writes better copy with fewer adjectives���.

I defend none of them�����I read them all but critically���.

Seekerof,

Thanks for posting those links, and the story.
It helps complete the Story!


gmcnulty,

The Lefter you are, the Righter they seem. And Vice-versa

Everyone gravitates to the opinions that press their emotional, and philsophical buttons.

CNN had a near monopoly, in cable news. They lost the monopoly, because
not everyones buttons (personal truths) were getting attention.

Fox News (or FAUX news, if you prefer CNN) saw the vacuum, and filled it.
Successfully, I might add. I'm guessing that there must be LOTS of stupid people in your opinion, because ratings are so high..CNN probably won't report that

Just because you feel so strongly about something doesn't make it a universal truth. Aggressively preaching your ideals, does no good either.
"Pearls before Swine"



[edit on 14-6-2004 by spacedoubt]

Originally posted by gmcnulty
A group of 26 former senior diplomats and military officials, several appointed to key positions by Republican Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, plans to issue a joint statement this week arguing that President George W. Bush has damaged America's national security and should be defeated in November.

I am confident that history will show that "defeat in November" will not be and will not have been nearly enough restitution. When all truths are out and all cover-up and spin is removed, the Bush admin criminals will have hell to pay. This group shows a soft touch for circumstances as grave as they are and the agenda behind a soft touch is always interesting.

I see jail in their future too.............if not in this country 'fersure somewhere in Europe, oh masked one............

You still have not answer 'the question'..........does he? or not? wear that sexy mask to bed...................