Posted on 02/14/2007 5:57:26 AM PST by AT7Saluki
Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney formally announced today that he would seek the Republican nomination for President, but one would hardly know this from watching CBS’s "Early Show." Romney’s candidacy received exactly ten seconds worth of coverage, following stories on a Utah mall shooting, winter storms, and the ongoing soap opera of Anna Nicole Smith’s demise. However, on Saturday, when Illinois Senator Barack Obama announced his candidacy as a Democrat, CBS’s "Saturday Early Show" devoted 9 minutes and 9 seconds, (549 seconds) to this story, a greater than 54:1 bias.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsbusters.org ...
At what point does this get so blatant that even Joe six-pack can't ignore it?
At CBS, Romney Is No Obama As Network Devotes 54 Times As Much Time To The Democrat..........
So maybe the "fairness doctrine" is a good idea after all?
Romney's not black.
FoxNews cut away from his announcement after just a few minutes.
They had to get back to breaking news on what was in Anna Nichole Smith's refrigerator, etc.
[And they are doing more Anna today. This trash tabloidism on FoxNews has now been going on 7 straight days.]
I learned this from the Media.
"So maybe the "fairness doctrine" is a good idea after all?"
As the fairness doctrine was applied before, it only applied to pure political speech. That which was disguised as news wasn't regulated. This why the liberals like it so much; it would apply to Rush and Glenn Beck, but not the MSM when reporting 'news'. As Rush has said, talk radio IS equal time.
Then again, neither was Obama's. Never mind .....
Who makes that judgment? If the MSM does not cover his candidacy, it makes it something of a self-fulfilling prophesy. Romney is among the top tier Rep candidates and he has a far more impressive public service resume than Obama, a MSM manufactured candidate. None of the Rep candidates have received anywhere near the MSM coverage of Hillary and Obama. It is plain and simple bias.
I can't decide which is worse - the ANS story, or the psycho-b**** astronaut story that ANS knocked out of the tabloid news cycle.
The MSM has decided to shove Obama down our throats hoping they can cause a rerun of the Little Jimmy Carter presidency.
The enemedia has LONG since past a point of fairness/balance, where to one side its arguably fair (while they footsied around with push-polls and push-stories), and the other where its blatant and just testing new ground every day and they couldn't care less if the "cat was out of the bag", which it is now. I don't know exactly when we past this point, and of course, its been obvious here alot longer that that. Its immaterial though. But now, with enemedia ratings way down, its becoming obvious to such a larger extent, it could be near a tipping point in the American citizenry (I can hope!).
They should give equal time to candidates, but I doubt Mitt will be enough to out this new progressive national surge....
You are right, but at least I got a kick out of Matt Lauer's interview with Romney this AM. Romney bitch slapped Lauer big time. Lauer's did not pretend to hide his opinion of Romney so Lauer made a point to through hard balls. Romney hit them out of the park. Even Romney's answer as to why he has switched is stand on abortion was perfect and unassailable.
I'm no Romney cheerleader. I'm so conservative I would make Ronald Reagan look like a leftist, but in the current field of RINO losers Romney may be the only one with half a chance.
s no Duncan Hunter, but he's got the charisma and the look of a winner.
Most of America now gets its news from The Daily Show...
I predict that Obama will end up like Howard Dean in 2004. Not with a clear breakdown, but in the sense of a supernova. His flame will burn very brightly for about 6 months to maybe a year. But once the questions start coming, and the Clinton crime syndicate starts putting out dirt, Obama will fold like the empty suit he is. Americans would do well to consider that Obama is, after all is said, a politician. The rest, Harvard Law, activist, race, and so forth, are window dressing. He is a phony, along the same lines as another flim-flam man, Bill Clinton.
Which is watched by a mere one million viewers on a good night.
I didn't realize the US polpulation had declined in number so rapidly (/sarc)
Just because Romney is a skilled speaker doesn't make hm trustworthy. He's definitely a professional politician. The only thing you can truly believe is his record.
Actions speak louder than words, and in the case of politicians, their recrod of actions are the only thing you can really trust.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.