CADsortaGUY
Lifer
Originally posted by: ironwing
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Originally posted by: ironwing
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Yep, the so-called "Party of Values" has been replaced by "The Party of Victims." Waaaah! Woe is us! Just a bunch of whiny crybabies any more.Originally posted by: Infohawk
Uh-oh it's the MSM boogieman again...Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Yep. It looks as though there are some cracks in the facade the media and dems have created.
Pointing out the obvious bias is not playing a "victim" - it's pointing out the obvious.
Reality is biased. This idea that the press should report on two candidates with equally glowing or negative stories is stupid. If one candidate is out kissing hands and shaking babies while the other is being a tard, it is not media bias that the press reports it that way.
Ah, so the press gets to decide for people? I thought they were supposed to provide the information...silly me for thinking the press was supposed to do actual reporting... but yet again this subject is off topic. There are other threads if you wish to discuss media bias.
Reading comprehension is not your strong point. If candidate A is running a pathetic, disjointed campaign it is perfectly legitimate for the press to report that candidate A is running a pathetic, disjointed campaign. This creates no obligation on the part of the press to report that candidate B is running a pathetic, disjointed campaign if, in fact, candidate B is running a well organized campaign. The pres is not being biased here but is reporting the state of the two campaigns which happen to be different.
Yes, I understood what you were trying to say but you don't seem to understand that it's reporting opinion and just who's opinion is it?
Also, no where did I suggest that it had to be equal - I'm not a lib who thinks the "fairness" doctrine is good...
BTW, there is another thread(one just started tonight in fact) for you to discuss media reporting and bias if you wish.
