Jump to content

Andrea Mitchell Selectively Editing Romney Comments


Recommended Posts

Not that I would actually entertain the idea that fox doesn't do this regularly and spend time searching for proof that 1 + 1 = 2 ... but since the thing literally presented itself to me right when you are begging for it ... and we are hear talking nonsense anyway...here it is a very recent example from your network of choice and one that is clearly worse:''

 

(video at bottom)

 

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/jon-stewart-skewers-fox-news-for-using-edited-obama-video-to-criticize-immigration-policy/

 

Jon Stewart/Sean Hannity? That's not Fox News. Try again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 89
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

One more time. I started a thread about the MSM not really covering the egregious security leaks and you kept saying they were no more serious than the Valerie Plame deal. I explained to your sorry ass that the leaks were coming from high up in the administration and were obviously for political reasons. The Plame leak was from Richard Armitage in the State Dept. who didn't agree with Bush's foreign policy. No harm was actually done to Plame. The latest leaks here could harm many people including you or me. You kept telling me that my motives were strictly partisan. When I posted an article about Barbara Feinstein's indigation over the leaks to point out that I wasn't being partisan you tried to twist it all around. The leaks are very serious and the MSM lack of reporting and disinterest in holding this administration's feet to the fire is deplorable.

 

 

Can you imagine the schitstorm if Bush had openly targeted terrorists with drones and released the kind of classified info that this administration has? I haven't heard much about the Patriot Act or Gitmo in the last 3 1/2 years. I started a thread about the MSM not covering the leaks and I get crap here that the Valerie Plame deal was much worse. Certain posters here think it's ok to throw the people that helped us under the bus, but for someone in the State Dept. that disagreed with the Administration's foreign policy, to out someone that wasn't even undercover was worse than getting the good doc who helped us get OBL and the guy who infiltrated Al Qaeda and saved a terrorist attack into deep schit.

 

 

I'm posting this again just to show what a hypocrite you are 3rd. So AGAIN! Either provide the link to where I said any of the things you're claiming I said or STFU.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorry if you don't like my take on it 3rd lol but it is what it is you can disagree if you like. A quick survey of the front page shows:

 

Andrea Mitchell Selectively Editing Romney Comments

Illegal Immigration Takes Its Toll

President Obama, The Biggest Spender In World

Wow, Politico is Attacking The King

Axelrod Attacks H.W. Bush For Playing Golf

The Liberal Washington Post Attacking Obama

Why Aren't The Leaks Bigger News?

Healthcare Trade-Off

 

 

3rd a diarrhetic poster to be sure. But give him credit: Most of his topics are just a link to another story with no original thought attached.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can have a beer with anyone I'm really not a confrontational person offline when it comes to this stuff and I like getting into discussion. My criticism of you from where I sit (at my computer and not at a table w/ a beer) is you are too passionate about the daily media war...that is to say the surface level "pure politics" and the media's "reaction" (which is really just functioning as designed...a for-profit wedge to separate American voters from each other based on things they are willing to pay attention to as opposed to things they should be forced to pay attention to). It's noise. It doesn't matter. And most of all it isn't surprising or interesting IMO. Now we can all discuss it from time to time but the line between politics and policy is eviscerated by daily cable news and hurts the important discussions we should have as a country and even creates a situation where people in Congress lose their damn minds too. If everyone would just fight the extremes in their own party (note: extreme does not just mean race centric people or religious fanatics...it means no-compromise "I'm definitely right" Congressional officials) and denounce them the country would be much better...but legitimizing the girly high school aspects of coverage from both sides is counter productive (I believe both sides are equally guilty...and respond to the other fueling fire). And the bottom line is people from both sides (and IMO more so on the right at the moment) could use a little humility. If ever you become so convinced you are unquestionably right about something...it should trigger some mechanism in the depths of your brain that alerts you to the fact you are probably wrong.

 

 

This is an enlightened post. mainstream media is basically the same thing as soap operas ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorry if you don't like my take on it 3rd lol but it is what it is you can disagree if you like. A quick survey of the front page shows:

 

Andrea Mitchell Selectively Editing Romney Comments

Illegal Immigration Takes Its Toll

President Obama, The Biggest Spender In World

Wow, Politico is Attacking The King

Axelrod Attacks H.W. Bush For Playing Golf

The Liberal Washington Post Attacking Obama

Why Aren't The Leaks Bigger News?

Healthcare Trade-Off

 

 

Most topics of any poster and at least half of which are (at least titled/presented as) what I consider substanceless distraction. Almost all of which are designed to be hostile attack topics. And while you can pat yourself on the back for not wanted to throw women and doctors in jail over abortion most of your opinions...which you may well have formed on your own and not been spoon fed via conservative media IDK I don't know you....walk the party line loudly and proudly. This is what I see of you. Am I absolutely correct on this? Probably not...is it generally what I see? Yes.

 

 

So, my criticism of the MSM for malfeasance, ignoring important stories and making schit up carry no substance? A major part of the voting public gets their news from the MSM. Do you see how that could be a problem?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3rd a diarrhetic poster to be sure. But give him credit: Most of his topics are just a link to another story with no original thought attached.

 

For the most part the threads I start get a fair amount of discussion. They are clearly described in the title and either further description given in the body or a snippet from the link. I'm sorry that they are not more interesting to you, but I refuse to make up threads about gay marriage just so you will particpate in the conversation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the most part the threads I start get a fair amount of discussion. They are clearly described in the title and either further description given in the body or a snippet from the link. I'm sorry that they are not more interesting to you, but I refuse to make up threads about gay marriage just so you will particpate in the conversation.

 

Yes, but the discussion is almost invariably "My brand of stupid is better than your brand of stupid!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One more time. I started a thread about the MSM not really covering the egregious security leaks and you kept saying they were no more serious than the Valerie Plame deal. I explained to your sorry ass that the leaks were coming from high up in the administration and were obviously for political reasons. The Plame leak was from Richard Armitage in the State Dept. who didn't agree with Bush's foreign policy. No harm was actually done to Plame. The latest leaks here could harm many people including you or me. You kept telling me that my motives were strictly partisan. When I posted an article about Barbara Feinstein's indigation over the leaks to point out that I wasn't being partisan you tried to twist it all around. The leaks are very serious and the MSM lack of reporting and disinterest in holding this administration's feet to the fire is deplorable.

 

 

Can you imagine the schitstorm if Bush had openly targeted terrorists with drones and released the kind of classified info that this administration has? I haven't heard much about the Patriot Act or Gitmo in the last 3 1/2 years. I started a thread about the MSM not covering the leaks and I get crap here that the Valerie Plame deal was much worse. Certain posters here think it's ok to throw the people that helped us under the bus, but for someone in the State Dept. that disagreed with the Administration's foreign policy, to out someone that wasn't even undercover was worse than getting the good doc who helped us get OBL and the guy who infiltrated Al Qaeda and saved a terrorist attack into deep schit.

 

 

I'm posting this again just to show what a hypocrite you are 3rd. So AGAIN! Either provide the link to where I said any of the things you're claiming I said or STFU.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, my criticism of the MSM for malfeasance, ignoring important stories and making schit up carry no substance? A major part of the voting public gets their news from the MSM. Do you see how that could be a problem?

 

 

3rd saving the world with one conservative blog post link at a time. Hey if you are watching MSN you may not know that Obama plays golf...you should. Thank me later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3rd saving the world with one conservative blog post link at a time. Hey if you are watching MSN you may not know that Obama plays golf...you should. Thank me later.

 

 

If you had bothered to read it you would see that I was making fun of the situation. Axelrod had criticized H.W. Bush for playing golf when the economy was so bad. Axelrod, you know, the guy who is Obama's chief political advisor. Granted, it certainly wasn't some monumental happening, but I thought it was somewhat humorous. Nice job of taking that one thread and trying to have that represent the other threads I started.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One more time. I started a thread about the MSM not really covering the egregious security leaks and you kept saying they were no more serious than the Valerie Plame deal. I explained to your sorry ass that the leaks were coming from high up in the administration and were obviously for political reasons. The Plame leak was from Richard Armitage in the State Dept. who didn't agree with Bush's foreign policy. No harm was actually done to Plame. The latest leaks here could harm many people including you or me. You kept telling me that my motives were strictly partisan. When I posted an article about Barbara Feinstein's indigation over the leaks to point out that I wasn't being partisan you tried to twist it all around. The leaks are very serious and the MSM lack of reporting and disinterest in holding this administration's feet to the fire is deplorable.

 

 

Can you imagine the schitstorm if Bush had openly targeted terrorists with drones and released the kind of classified info that this administration has? I haven't heard much about the Patriot Act or Gitmo in the last 3 1/2 years. I started a thread about the MSM not covering the leaks and I get crap here that the Valerie Plame deal was much worse. Certain posters here think it's ok to throw the people that helped us under the bus, but for someone in the State Dept. that disagreed with the Administration's foreign policy, to out someone that wasn't even undercover was worse than getting the good doc who helped us get OBL and the guy who infiltrated Al Qaeda and saved a terrorist attack into deep schit.

 

 

I'm posting this again just to show what a hypocrite you are 3rd. So AGAIN! Either provide the link to where I said any of the things you're claiming I said or STFU.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you had bothered to read it you would see that I was making fun of the situation. Axelrod had criticized H.W. Bush for playing golf when the economy was so bad. Axelrod, you know, the guy who is Obama's chief political advisor. Granted, it certainly wasn't some monumental happening, but I thought it was somewhat humorous. Nice job of taking that one thread and trying to have that represent the other threads I started.

 

 

Easy now, don't let me get ya down just keep doing the lord's work one thread at a time and eventually I'm sure the Democrats will cease to exist. I know you aren't partisan btw you're just right about this stuff so it's all good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, but the discussion is almost invariably "My brand of stupid is better than your brand of stupid!"

 

And when you post in them your comments somehow avoid the "stupid" brand? I must be crazy for posting political things on a political board. :doh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the most part the threads I start get a fair amount of discussion. They are clearly described in the title and either further description given in the body or a snippet from the link. I'm sorry that they are not more interesting to you, but I refuse to make up threads about gay marriage just so you will particpate in the conversation.

 

5 minutes have passed. Isn't it time for you to link to another story.

 

Or you could keep pu$$ying out.

Edited by John Adams
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I generally try to avoid posting in PPP as I have no taste for the "game." (although I troll here frequently) That said, anyone who cannot recognize this as a primo example of the MSM (Big 3 Networks, NY Times, LA Times, WAPO, CNN, PMSNBC) being so in the bag for ANY Democrat and so vehemently opposed to even the most moderate of GOP candidates, then that person is simply living a lie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes have passed. Isn't it time for you to link to another story.

 

Or you could keep pu$$ying out.

 

Since you have claimed to be a "teacher", an "engineer", and an "attorney", I'll respond. I'll fill all of your fantasies here and post a subject that interests you. You'll have to tell me though, because the only one I've seen is you being passionate about is gay marriage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1340246609[/url]' post='2489884']

Since you have claimed to be a "teacher", an "engineer", and an "attorney", I'll respond. I'll fill all of your fantasies here and post a subject that interests you. You'll have to tell me though, because the only one I've seen is you being passionate about is gay marriage.

RI owns you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...