P
- Status
R
RACJ
Guest
And a pathological liar such as Obama is NOT scary? Remember, we will be able to keep our doctors and health plans if we like them, a family of four may see a reduction in medical costs of $2500, and the Obamacare law would save $1.3T over 20 years? Brazen lies all. NO, this demagogue is not scary at all! And I am SURE that he was unaware of all the breaking scandals!
As for MIchele, she was careless with her rhetoric, and is not Presidential timbre either. But she is a great lady who loves America, and has done many wonderful things in her life, and I salute her.
R
RACJ
Guest
Maybe you are right, but the fact that a person of sterling integrity might not be electable is a modern day tragedy, not reason for delight.
Rob
B
BroomWagon
Guest
Pro Vobis is correct, get your news from the radio, Limbaugh, Hannity, Beck, Savage, Hugh Hewitt, Dennis Prager, Michael Medved, Mark Levin.
By the way, the uncharitable original post was saying āSarah Palinā, well, she has always been speaking up close.
So now, I donāt even think that is a valid point.
By the way, the uncharitable original post was saying āSarah Palinā, well, she has always been speaking up close.
So now, I donāt even think that is a valid point.
T
Teen4Christ
Guest
The state, for the lack of a better term, is not āCray-Crayā?And you know this how?
This is perhaps the most sensible and true post iāve seen on CAF in years in a political discussion.Bachmann is a (slightly) less airheaded version of Sarah Palin (her infamous Hezbolah has missles in Cuba remark). She appeals to Republican evangelicals and warmongers. Iām sure sheāll make a good addition to the Fox ānewsā staff, with lotsa long shots to show off her legs, like the other Fox blondes do.
Nothing like selling sex along with the propaganda.
O
october_baby
Guest
And reverend wright doesnāt bother you?
V
Vanny
Guest
And a pathological liar such as Obama is NOT scary? Remember, we will be able to keep our doctors and health plans if we like them, a family of four may see a reduction in medical costs of $2500, and the Obamacare law would save $1.3T over 20 years? Brazen lies all. NO, this demagogue is not scary at all! And I am SURE that he was unaware of all the breaking scandals!
As for MIchele, she was careless with her rhetoric, and is not Presidential timbre either. But she is a great lady who loves America, and has done many wonderful things in her life, and I salute her.
O
october_baby
Guest
I see from your handle, that your a teen from Ohio, Iām just trying to figure out how you A.The state, for the lack of a better term, is not āCray-Crayā?
This is perhaps the most sensible and true post iāve seen on CAF in years in a political discussion.
Know what goes on in Minnesota when your from Ohio, and B.You know so much about politics when your a teenager?
I
ishii
Guest
Ahh the āgolden ageā when Walter Cronkite was able to tell everyone what to think.
I
ishii
Guest
Good question. I think Christie is potentially worse in that he seems to want to rescue Obama (help him change the subject and deflect attention away from scandal and damaging news). Some might say its refreshing and that heās merely trying to reach out to the other side of the aisle. I am a bit more cynical: I think Obama is bad news and anything that helps him helps him further his agenda - which hurts America. So maybe Christie is worse. I donāt really take Bachman seriously - as a previous poster documented her comments on Iran: ākeep the nuclear option on the tableā etc. I think sheās a lightweight / loose cannon and kind a knee jerk evangelical type that would have a ājerUSAlemā bumper sticker.
Ishii
O
oldcelt
Guest
Actually, my family was more of the Huntley-Brinkley type.
I
ishii
Guest
O
oldcelt
Guest
Only those who were susceptible to being told what to thinkā¦just like today.
I
ishii
Guest
I think having more diversity of opinion in the newsmedia is a good thing - better than in the āgolden ageā when you had basically 3 networks that did little to challenge the prevailing wisdom. (wisdom being generally what came out of the Democrat party). So today is different - in that you have more variety of opinion in the media - esp. on cable and the radio.
Ishii
O
oldcelt
Guest
I agree with your basic notionā¦donāt know how you get that the democrats dominated back then, butā¦So far as the variety of sources todayā¦that may be true, but quantity does not equate to quality. There is a lot of very bad journalism being passed as fact.
I
ishii
Guest
True, there are āsheepleā today just like in years past, but in the so-called āgolden ageā the news was basically spoon-fed to an unquestioning, generally docile America.
Ishii
B
BroomWagon
Guest
Really, those who talk down Fox News really seem to want ācensorshipā of the press.
If they could find real examples of Fox reporting, those might be worthy criticisms however the litany of misreporting by NBC, ABC, CBS, CNN is so lengthy, MSNBC/NBC doctored the G. Zimmerman 911 tapes and so on, CBS had the Rather-Gate affair, these are serious matters. I know people will point out some little thing that Fox said but itās a molehill by comparison.
J
JustaServant
Guest
sigh
Itās my fault for for taking the thread off topic with a tongue-in-cheek speculative remark about Bachmannās future career options (that alone opens doors I will restrain myself in not sharing
)But I will respond nonetheless.
When I worked at newspaper back in the 1980s, the company, Scripps, had thier own lighthouse logo with this inscription: āShine the light, and people will find thier own wayā
I never said there was a āgolden ageā of news. Look up the history of journalism in the western world, there has NEVER been a golden age. That was back in the days of newspapers.
The advent of radio and TV news however changed the playing field. News became confused with entertainment, and its gotten worse as the decades pass. If there ever was a time of a āspoon-fed, unquestioning, generally docile Americaā, I would say that day is today. Unlike years ago, today people have their own ānews ghettosā they rely on. Cable and Internet. The result is confusion. What we have today is the illusion of diversity in news. It keeps people in the dark by playing to thier bias. You think youāre getting āfair and balancedā, but youāre just getting spoonfed the same propaganda, just prepackaged to appeal to your particular bias.
Thatās why Iām harder on Fox, because as a conservative myself, I see no conservatism on Fox, just what they want me to think is conservatism.
And to fair, Iāve seen the same response from classical liberals in regard to MSNBC, which is basically Fox for neo-liberals.
What we have today is information overload. We now have so much information, we donāt know how to separate real news from propaganda. So now, Americans are more in the dark than ever before.
We canāt even see the light to find our own way.
Joseph Goebbels would be proud.
- Status