The Harvard Hug: What Else Are Media Hiding?

Investors.com ^ | 3-9-12 | IBD Editorial Staff

[radioone]

Bias: We were wrong. The media elite did in fact vet this president, but they covered up what they found. And now that citizen journalists are digging it up, they're trying to rebury it.

Exhibit A is the controversial video of Barack Obama praising and hugging radical Harvard law professor Derrick Bell. The media knew it existed four years ago and conspired with academia to hide it to get Obama elected.

"We hid this during the 2008 campaign," confessed Harvard law professor Charles Ogletree. PBS had it then, but cut both the audio and the hug in a report on Obama's Harvard days. The footage served as wallpaper. Now that Breitbart.com has put the entire video online, the major media have gone into damage-control mode for Obama.

PBS claims, disingenuously, "there's nothing new about the clip." NBC's Andrea Mitchell misled viewers by claiming Bell was "not a radical firebrand" but a "distinguished professor."

[philman_36]

You’re a clown!
Perhaps, but you look the fool. I'd rather be a clown.

I’ve got over a dozen years of the most conservative posts on FR.
I don't know that. And I'm not looking at years of replies. I'm looking at the replies you're making now.

All it takes is one slip and a cover can be blown.

[philman_36]

Pretty soon FReepers will have a clear picture of your unfamiliarity with logic.
Really? How is that?

[Donald Rumsfeld Fan]

Just what do you think might change Tom and Charlie’s minds?

changing there minds is not at issue. exposing them as incompetent journalists is the issue.

[Homer_J_Simpson]

“This is just as important”

NOT IT IS NOT!!! The voters you want DON’T CARE ABOUT THIS CRAP!!

I'm with G Larry on this one. A simple but powerful argument of how Algae boy's energy policy causes high gas prices will win over a hundred times more voters than a relatively more complicated argument about how he hung with lefty radicals back in college and why that is bad.

[philman_36]

If I’d said “us”, it would have grammatically placed me among those hyping the video.
You placed yourself on the conservative side when you used "we".
Then you used "you" which places you opposite of the conservative side.

It's pretty simple and doesn't need much logic to figure it out.

[G Larry]

Is there something that Rose or Brokaw have done or said that make you believe there are even a bit curious about Obama’s past?

Obama has 3 1/2 years of failure to point out, in addition to the list of radical agenda items, not yet accomplished.

The economy and and his anti-Constitutional behavior are all that need to be in focus.

20 year old video convinces nobody of anything.

[G Larry]

I used “we” for conservative and “You” for video hypers...

yes....simple....

[philman_36]

The voters you want DON’T CARE ABOUT THIS CRAP!!

Thanks Homer. Another good example.

It's not..."The voters we want..."

[philman_36]

I used “we” for conservative and “You” for video hypers...
Oh, look, we've got a new word to add to the lexicon now...Hypers!

[glennaro]

We have to get off of the birth certificate issue or we look like clowns
We have to get off of the natural born citizen issue or we look like clowns
We have to get off of the radical relationships issue or we look like clowns
We have to get off of the lack of media vetting or we look like clowns

This is the reasoning of those on the right -- akin to "there's nothing new here" for those on the left -- who don't want to expose (i.e., vet) Obama for the socialist, Muslim sympathizing, opponent of American exceptionalism he has, by his words and actions, shown himself to be.

[philman_36]

20 year old video convinces nobody of anything.
Golly gee whiz willickers! I didn't know that the video of Ogletree bragging about hiding that video was twenty years old.

[G Larry]

Can’t wait to see the polling of those who’ve dropped their support of Obama, due to the exposure of this video.....

Get that?

Specifically due to this video.

[Homer_J_Simpson]

It's not..."The voters we want..."

I'm not sure I understand the distinction. A vote is a vote. Unless it is in California, of course. Barky takes California no matter what.

[philman_36]

Specifically due to this video.
Which video, specifically, are you talking about?

[philman_36]

I'm not sure I understand the distinction.
Maybe you should first try to understand the discussion to understand the distinction being made.
Back to "Go" and you don't get the $200.

[philman_36]

Specifically due to this video.
Which video, specifically, are you talking about?

How is my logic holding up so far?

[philman_36]

C'mon, G Larry, which video, specifically, are you talking about?

[G Larry]

the one you seem obsessed about....

“Exhibit A is the controversial video of Barack Obama praising and hugging radical Harvard law professor Derrick Bell. The media knew it existed four years ago and conspired with academia to hide it to get Obama elected.”

the same one that will change no minds regarding support or abandonment of Obama.

The issues that will change voter’s minds are:

Obama’s unconstitutional behavior in office,
His commitment to outrageous spending,
His inability to grow private sector jobs,
His war on Christianity, free markets, and domestic energy production.

I’m going to go find another thread where folks care about these issues.
bye bye!

[ladyjane]

My ancestors founded Harvard. Later ancestors in that line founded Indiana University. Later ancestors, same line, founded Stanford and several other universities.

There you go again.

Harvard was actually founded by a court order.

Leland Stanford and his wife only had one son. He died when he was young.

Want to make more claims? LOL

[John W]

Perhaps. But, why can’t he be attacked on BOTH fronts?