Something about lemmings comes to mind.
To be honest with you, I thought Bush got his arse whipped in that debate, and I am definitely on his side. I can't imagine which debate these guys thought they were watching if they thought he won.
It's sad that grown men can't have their own opinion..
So now they'll be forced to declare Bush the loser again Friday regardless if he does well or not.
I seem to recall the MSM rather strongly denying that the fact that they allow their collective leftism to influence their "reporting".
Yet here we have a couple of MSM heavyweights admitting that their brethern's views influenced, and even overrode, their own...
Too little - too late. Thomas Evans and David Gregory lost an opportunity to distinguish themselves from the rat pack aka the media.
John Kerry won style points on the ability to be a well-dressed pain in the a@@ (pita).
Bush won substance points.
It could be me but I prefer substance over style. Were there missed opportunities to slay the pita? I think so...but then Bush would have be characterized as "mean."
Gee, no wonder they like sKerry ... they're followers, too.
Do I sense that IMUS really has turned on sKerry? I know he told the Presidents' Father he didn't like what Kerry did when he returned from Vietnam.
As to David Gregory etal... are they Stepford reporters? Didn't God give them a brain to THINK with? Why are these people in the news business if they can't think for themselves?
When you are a liberal reporter, you are TOLD what to think. NO individual thinking allowed!
I think I've been wrong about journalists, I think they do know the truth when it bites them in the butt. I was under the Bernie Goldberg assumption that their liberalism was so ingrained that they didn't know they were biased, but this report makes me rethink that.
When Gregory admits that he saw missed opportunities for Bush, he's admitting Kerry lied, otherwise there wouldn't have been any opportunities for Bush to miss. These reporters know softball questions when they hear them, they throw them out themselves everyday to democrats. And what they saw last thursday was softballs to Kerry and "what did you do wrong?" questions to Bush. Bush won just by the fact that he didn't go over and slap the crap out of the moderater.
So, I think journalists know the truth, but they're so convinced that liberalism is the right way that they ignore it in order to push their own agenda.
That's my theory and I'm sticking to it. :)
Well hell, this is what I thought all along. Even here on FR, folks were disappointed in Bush, but the idea that he "lost" took some time to grow and spead. I think that, contrary to the media mantra, he held his own, drew blood with some jabs, and elicited sympathy with his occasional pissed-off expressions.
We are voting on our Cammander-in-chief........not the best debater........heck, even I can out talk that "kept man" Kerry!
Pray for W and Our Troops
Bush won hands down on substance. Unfortunetly, the mindless masses cannot think for themselves and a great number actually believe the BS spewed by the DNC shills, aka journalists.
Not just RATS. Good Republicans gave in to worry and handwringing and did real damage by their wailing and gnashing needlessly.
The focus should have been, and hopefully from this point forward will be, to support our man completely and focus on the content of what was said.
Bush did indeed win.
bttt
Who won the debate? Well, any of you see any DNC ads exploiting something Dubya said? On the other hand, do the words Global Test mean anything to you?
Bump.
Does anyone still harbor any hope that, regardless of the performance, the MSM would admit that a Republican won a debate? Anyone?