News Being Manipulated In Favor Of Bush

The Chattanoogan ^ | 8/10/04 | Mildred Perry Miller

[stylin_geek]

You know, you make an excellent point. She thinks she is free to air her opinions, yet is not interested in anyone disagreeing with her.

Well, Mildred, guess what? If you allow inane drivel to be published, then you had best be prepared to take the consequences. Oh wait, I forgot, in liberal land, there are no consequences for actions.

[ScottFromSpokane]

At the risk of finding myself quarentined at Guantanamo or Abu Graib....

I will continue to read this only if I am paid for it. There's no other plausible motivation.

[backhoe]

This article is so astoundingly out of touch, I can't restrain myself any long... Mildred, for your own sake, read these:

 D.C. journalists favor Kerry 12 to 1: N.Y. Times informal poll confirms media lean left

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/918370/posts

Creator of 'Mr. Sterling' Admits: We TV Writers Are '99% Leftist'
NewsMax.com ^ | 5/27/03 | Carl Limbacher and NewsMax.com Staff

Professor's Study Shows Liberal Bias in News Media

CyberAlert -- 05/07/1996 -- NQ CyberAlert
... recent Freedom Forum survey of Washington reporters and bureau chiefs revealed 89
percent voted for Clinton versus 7 percent for Bush in 1992. Do you think the ...

Great Debate#9
... opinions skew their professional writing. Nuzzo pointed out that a 1995 Freedom
Forum survey showed 89 percent of the media voted for Bill Clinton while the ...

Break up Microsoft?...Then how about the media "Big Six"? [ ...
... Why? They're usually wrong. 92% voted for Clinton. Libertarians, by contrast,
much enjoy being Right. You may (continue to?) derive your understanding of ...

-Poll confirms Ivy League liberal tilt--

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/896865/posts

The Politics of Hollywood
Uncommon Knowledge ^ | July 20, 2001 | Peter Robinson

A poll by the Center for the Study of Social and Political Change in 1992, eighty-three percent of film and television writers, directors and producers voted for Bill Clinton. Eighty-three percent. The vote that Clinton received in the country at large, forty-three percent.

No Bias in Media, ha ha, tee hee

[Zyke]

You know I have the same frustrations with the media. By the way what happen to Sandra Bergler? Seems that stealing secret documents that could pose a security risk is top news. Oh, wait wasn't he Bill's boy, let's hold off on that one.

How's the news on the oil for food program scam going? Oh, wait, France may have had a part in that. Let's hold off on that since Kerry likes France.

You get the picture. I feel your frustration.

Let me help you understand better, with my boot.

[counterpunch]

to: Millermaj@aol.com
subject: Way to tell it like it is!

I am sure there will be those who disagree with this, but please don't let me know about it. I am very busy with positive activities and will not have time to read or respond.

Mildred Perry Miller Millermaj@aol.com


Not. You are a moron. I suggest in the future that if you don't want to recieve emails like this, don't publish your email. You have now been added to every spam list on the planet.

[fly_so_free]

"CNN and Fox news show very little difference."

BWHAAAHHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!

This needs a barf alert.

[Let's Roll]

Ah, Mildred, we wish the news favored Bush - but for the sake of argument it would be good if you could give some examples instead of simply making allegations.

Terrorists need less attention? Excuse me if I celebrate the fact that YOU aren't in charge of this country's defense.

Pre-emptive war(s) will likely save even your life, Mildred. Sorry if you prefer to call them wars of agression, but we just need to get it done, if it isn't done with the style points you would prefer - too bad.

And then after dropping your linguistic turds, you skip off, warning the readers not to react as you are too busy to respond or even read. Smart move, Mildred - you're in way over your head.

[sd-joe]

How far left do you have to be to think that CNN is on Bush's side?????

[gatorgriz]

I quit when and where you said... Upon seeing the disclaimers and the you might not agree with me's; I know I'm in for another in a long, long line of liberal lectures... I don't have the time nor the need for it...

[Nataku X]

Why don't the two Blabocrat channels, CNN and Fox, say more about the exposing of the CIA agent?

Because it wasn't done by the Bush administration, it was done by the lefty NY Times. Sheesh!

Why don't they talk more about the deficits and the unfunded programs such as "No Child Left Behind Act?"

'Cause they think that going on endlessly about Abu Ghariab is far more damaging.

Why is Senator Shelby not excoriated the same as Sandy Berger?

Uhm, they've gone on and on about how Sandy Berger is NOT at fault and he just made honest mistakes completely unaware of what he was doing.

Why do they not say more about the 9/11 Commisson report and Bush's failure to heed its warnings.

Because they actually read the report and it wasn't nearly as damaging to Bush as they thought.

[VisualizeSmallerGovernment]

I'm not sure what unconstitutional activity Fox and CNN are engaged in. Here is an obscure tidbit I found while looking through the Constitution one day:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

[StoneFury]

Will somebody please ship this nut off to Guantanamo?

[WilliamofCarmichael]

This newspaper employee typed in statements of the type I've seen in newspapers' ombudmans' columns. Readers were livid because, for example, the newspaper didn't remind readers often enough that Reagan caused the AIDS problem.

All the items listed have been covered and covered pretty well. The problem is the newspaper's employee wants more vitriol. None of this President Bush stuff, Liar Bush is what the employee wants. Not U.S. forces, but criminal U.S. forces.

The employee misses the days of the big three networks -- there "truth" was as the employee wants, in many cases.

[Zhangliqun]

She is out of luck. I sent her a point-by-point refutation anyway. (What better way to invite endless scathing e-mails then to say you don't want a response?)

[dufekin]

Given the obvious spelling problem ("quarentined" isn't a word, according to my collection of dictionaries and your abiding fear of being imprisoned as a terrorist, I will assume that you are Abu Musab al-Zarqawi writing under a pseudonym. Based upon this assumption, I do hereby declare the contents of this article to be consistent with enemy propaganda. Too bad (for the terrorists) that its incoherence renders this propaganda piece entirely pointless.

[sport]

When you can tell from an article's very first sentence fragment that the author is a lying gasbag, why continue any further?


2 posted on 08/10/2004 4:59:31 PM PDT by Dont Mention the War (

My sentiments also!

[prairiebreeze]

She lost me in the first sentence.

Don't worry, there was nothing to find in her entire rant. Except non-sensical ranting, Bush hatred and liberal whining.

Prairie

[GodBlessRonaldReagan]

News Being Manipulated In Favor Of Bush



Yes, but only on Bizarro World, where everything am backwards!

[Liberty Valance]

I think it comes as a complete surprise to the liberal left that WE, on the right, ARE the revolutionaries. Politics has been tied to their failed 60's utopian ideals for too long! These are real times for real people!

Whew...did I say that?

Bush/Cheney '04

[Psycho_Bunny]

Why do they not say more about the 9/11 Commisson report and Bush's failure to heed its warnings

Even granting the universe to be infinite, I still don't there there'd be anywhere this sentence would make sense.