Fox "News" is Crap

[BigPapaVol]

Originally Posted by VolDad

Where was that explanation 25 pages ago when LG said FOX is Crap and Biased?

Could have saved about 24 pages.

because he knows full well that the coverage isn't about Obama being a rock star. It's because Obama is a blatant liberal and borderline socialist, which dovetails nicely with nearly 100% of the viewpoints in network newsrooms. Hillary had similar type lefty media fawning and she's nothing but a huge ankled, unattractive, faux politician. Her political slant made here a media darling.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

[KB5252]

Originally Posted by BigPapaVol

because he knows full well that the coverage isn't about Obama being a rock star. It's because Obama is a blatant liberal and borderline socialist, which dovetails nicely with nearly 100% of the viewpoints in network newsrooms. Hillary had similar type lefty media fawning and she's nothing but a huge ankled, unattractive, faux politician. Her political slant made here a media darling.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

That would be cankles!

[utvolpj]

Is media playing fair in campaign coverage? - Yahoo! News

interesting article. I'm still trying to figure out which side is rep'd more in the MSM Maybe all Fox is trying to do is level the playing field?

For each of the weeks between June 9 and July 13, Obama had a much more significant media presence. The Project for Excellence in Journalism evaluates more than 300 political stories each week in newspapers, magazines and television to measure whether each candidate is talked about in more than 25 percent of the stories.
Every week, Obama played an important role in more than two-thirds of the stories. For July 7-13, for example, Obama was a significant presence in 77 percent of the stories, while McCain was in 48 percent, the PEJ said.

[TennNC]

Originally Posted by BigPapaVol

because he knows full well that the coverage isn't about Obama being a rock star. It's because Obama is a blatant liberal and borderline socialist, which dovetails nicely with nearly 100% of the viewpoints in network newsrooms. Hillary had similar type lefty media fawning and she's nothing but a huge ankled, unattractive, faux politician. Her political slant made here a media darling.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

Why did W get more coverage and better treatment against Gore?

Bush Sr. against Dukakis?

Reagan against Mondale?

Obama vs. McCain coverage about politics only? Puh-lease. When Bobby Jindal runs for POTUS in 2012 and starts getting all sorts of fawning, I'd love to see you somehow paint him as a liberal and borderline Socialist.

And btw, Hillary Clinton is the wife of one of the most popular people in the world. She's not as much a rock star as Obama, but she has star power too if by nothing else than her rock star husband.

[lawgator1]

I think that Obama's trip is getting a good bit too much media attention and I agree that the media is treating him much better than McCain.

I don't particularly like Obama or McCain, really. Pluses for McCain would be his experience and I think he is intellectually honest. He loses points for his age, his lack of any charisma, and his sometimes unsettling anger management problems. Pluses for Obama would be that he is charismatic and with a same-party in Congress situation, perhaps more would get done. Minus issues: inexperience, naivete, and lack of foreign policy savy.

[BigPapaVol]

Originally Posted by TennNC

Why did W get more coverage and better treatment against Gore? That's a completely ridiculous question and not because it's a hard answer. It's simply a guise for a lie.

Bush Sr. against Dukakis? More absurdity. Bush Sr. was painted as the most boring and unqualified guy ever.

Reagan against Mondale? There is no possible way that Reagan got better treatment than Mondale. It was probably one of the few where the field was relatively level, even though Reagan did have more appeal and more reason to be newsworthy.

Obama vs. McCain coverage about politics only? Puh-lease. When Bobby Jindal runs for POTUS in 2012 and starts getting all sorts of fawning, I'd love to see you somehow paint him as a liberal and borderline Socialist. I'm saying it's about politics. If Obama were the exact person he is, but with JC Watts politics, he wouldn't have anchors traveling with him. Jindal will never be fawned over by the network clowns. Isn't ever, ever going to happen, never. Did I mention Never, Ever?

And btw, Hillary Clinton is the wife of one of the most popular people in the world. She's not as much a rock star as Obama, but she has star power too if by nothing else than her rock star husband.

See Bold above. As to the final question, Hillary didn't get this much press while her husband was still the rock star. I know you don't want to say it, but the Networks' love affair with the liberals is in full swing now with Obama and was going to be that way with Hillary. The press has created the rock star politician type that you're saying they're fawning over. The chicken actually came before the egg in this case.

[lawgator1]

Originally Posted by BigPapaVol

See Bold above. As to the final question, Hillary didn't get this much press while her husband was still the rock star. I know you don't want to say it, but the Networks' love affair with the liberals is in full swing now with Obama and was going to be that way with Hillary. The press has created the rock star politician type that you're saying they're fawning over. The chicken actually came before the egg in this case.

I actually don't think it would have been quite this over-the-top with Hillary. And while political bias has something to do with it, I think its got more to do with the newness of Obama and the perception that he's in this whirlwind of popularity.

The reality is that McCain is about as interesting as stale bread. Now, he might make a better president. But he just isn't one-tenth as exciting or energizing as Obama.

Not trying to justify the media over-coverage of Obama versus McCain. I sense it and think its real, too. Just trying to explain it and a good part of it has to do with the interest levels that the two can generate and the reality is that McCain is just plain yawn inducing.

[volsforever27]

Originally Posted by lawgator1

I actually don't think it would have been quite this over-the-top with Hillary. And while political bias has something to do with it, I think its got more to do with the newness of Obama and the perception that he's in this whirlwind of popularity.

The reality is that McCain is about as interesting as stale bread. Now, he might make a better president. But he just isn't one-tenth as exciting or energizing as Obama.

Not trying to justify the media over-coverage of Obama versus McCain. I sense it and think its real, too. Just trying to explain it and a good part of it has to do with the interest levels that the two can generate and the reality is that McCain is just plain yawn inducing.

So you're saying all this media love is strictly about his shining personality and has nothing to do with his politics? OK.

[hndog609]

Originally Posted by volsforever27

So you're saying all this media love is strictly about his shining personality and has nothing to do with his politics? OK.

I think that's what he's saying, I agree him on it, and it points out just how sad our election process has become. Make no mistake, there will be thousands of people that could flunk Jaywalking that will be in the polls.

[volsforever27]

Originally Posted by hndog609

I think that's what he's saying, I agree him on it, and it points out just how sad our election process has become. Make no mistake, there will be thousands of people that could flunk Jaywalking that will be in the polls.

I know they think he's a rock star, but as it's been pointed out before, if he had a R beside his name this wouldn't be happening.

[hndog609]

Originally Posted by volsforever27

I know they think he's a rock star, but as it's been pointed out before, if he had a R beside his name this wouldn't be happening.

I also agree with that.

[615 Vol]

Originally Posted by volsforever27

I know they think he's a rock star, but as it's been pointed out before, if he had a R beside his name this wouldn't be happening.

Because the (R)'s are boring. Come join the party over here.

[volsforever27]

Originally Posted by 615 Vol

Because the (R)'s are boring. Come join the party over here.

I guess when spend everyone else's money it is like a party.

[TennNC]

Originally Posted by BigPapaVol

See Bold above. As to the final question, Hillary didn't get this much press while her husband was still the rock star. I know you don't want to say it, but the Networks' love affair with the liberals is in full swing now with Obama and was going to be that way with Hillary. The press has created the rock star politician type that you're saying they're fawning over. The chicken actually came before the egg in this case.

In your world of absolutes, I suppose I could understand your perspective on this. For surely no media outlet could've given W an easier route to the WH despite his many attempts to get in their good graces or his campaign's attempts to paint him as the good-ole cowboy outsider candidate from manly, independent Texas with a very well-known last name. I mean, if they have an R next to their name, the media will do everything to destroy them - just destroy them. If they have a D next to it, they'll anoint him the second coming of the messiah - regardless of any other factors. And don't give any credit to the charisma of any of these candidates. No - give that credit 100% to the media. Republicans, poor folks, they have to constantly overcome this despite how great their candidates really are.

Yes, in your world, the conspiracy is in full swing. Run with it.

[volsforever27]

Originally Posted by TennNC

In your world of absolutes, I suppose I could understand your perspective on this. For surely no media outlet could've given W an easier route to the WH despite his many attempts to get in their good graces or his campaign's attempts to paint him as the good-ole cowboy outsider candidate from manly, independent Texas with a very well-known last name. I mean, if they have an R next to their name, the media will do everything to destroy them - just destroy them. If they have a D next to it, they'll anoint him the second coming of the messiah - regardless of any other factors. And don't give any credit to the charisma of any of these candidates. No - give that credit 100% to the media. Republicans, poor folks, they have to constantly overcome this despite how great their candidates really are.

Yes, in your world, the conspiracy is in full swing. Run with it.

I love reading your posts... they get me through the day.