Barack Obama would be nothing without the slobbering left wing media, agree?
|
|
|||||
|
119 votes
|
|
58% | |||
|
58 votes
|
|
28% | |||
|
29 votes
|
|
14% | |||
Time magazine gushed in 2008 about Barack Obama's 12-year tenure as a
law lecturer at the University of Chicago Law School, saying, "Within a
few years, he had become a rock-star professor with hordes of devoted
students."
FACT: In 1999, only 23 percent of the students
said they would repeat Obama's racism class. He was the
third-lowest-ranked lecturer at the law school that year. And in 2003,
only a third of the student evaluators recommended his classes. A spring
1994 class attracted 14 out of a student body of 600; a spring 1996
class drew 13.
Shortly after Barack Obama won the 2008
presidential election, Prairie State Blue, a liberal blog, attributed
his victory to the fact that Illinois' deeply entrenched government
corruption had forced "political reformers" in the state legislature
like Obama "to network outside the traditional political circles."
The
claim illustrated Obama's success throughout his career at presenting
himself as an outsider and reformer even as he became a skillful
operator inside one of the nation's most corrupt political systems.
FACT:
Former Illinois Sen. Peter Fitzgerald, a maverick Republican and
reformer, told The Washington Examiner that Obama never fought
corruption, even when it was being done by Republicans. "I've never seen
him fight corruption. He never wanted to upset the apple cart with the
Chicago machine," Fitzgerald said.
Chris Lauzen
said Obama "was not on the playing field. In my opinion, Barack Obama
was a product and beneficiary of how politics are practiced in Illinois.
It would be impossible to call him a reformer."
Barack
Obama's carefully constructed image as a civil rights lawyer who wanted
to heal the black community was greeted with skepticism by some Chicago
activists.
FACT: Robert Fitch, a radical leftist and
freelance journalist who specialized in urban politics and economics,
said Obama surrounded himself with people who got rich on Chicago's $1.6
billion neighborhood demolition program known officially as the Plan
for Transformation.
At least 25,000 low-income
apartments in Chicago were destroyed under the program, which forced
thousands of black families -- many of whom lived in Obama's state
Senate district -- to move out of the city. Obama's political allies
directed the effort.
"What we see is that the
Chicago core of the Obama coalition is made up of blacks who've moved up
by moving poor blacks out of the community," Fitch charged in a 2008
speech before the Harlem Tenants Association. Fitch died in 2011.
More
and more it is ever apparent that the Barack Obama the liberal media
has been selling as a savior, is a fraud. He has stepped his way to the
top on the backs of hard working Americans. Sorry to break it to the
dumb masses that follow his garbage talking points, but your King has no
clothes.
Read More: http://www.followingjohngalt.org/barack-obama-woul...
Top Opinion
-
Balladeer-PWCM-POTL 2012/12/02 22:07:29Obama would be nothing with the slobbering left wing media
Now, let's address a rational argument. The "media" is a business composed of literally thousands of sources, including print, radio, TV, and internet. As with any business, they depend on revenue to succeed. Revenue for the media is dependent upon viewership. If the media were to report everything from a liberal perspective, then they would alienate a substantial portion of their viewership and hence, cost themselves a great deal of money. You can allege that certain individuals within these organizations are liberal, but you would be a fool to claim that those same individuals are the ONLY ones making the business decisions for the company. Even if you limit yourself to "main stream media," which is, by definition, a media source wi...
Now, let's address a rational argument. The "media" is a business composed of literally thousands of sources, including print, radio, TV, and internet. As with any business, they depend on revenue to succeed. Revenue for the media is dependent upon viewership. If the media were to report everything from a liberal perspective, then they would alienate a substantial portion of their viewership and hence, cost themselves a great deal of money. You can allege that certain individuals within these organizations are liberal, but you would be a fool to claim that those same individuals are the ONLY ones making the business decisions for the company. Even if you limit yourself to "main stream media," which is, by definition, a media source with a viewership or listenership above a certain number (let's say a million people), then you would have to include such amazingly liberal sources as Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and Fox News.
There is no such thing as the "liberal media."
It is the responsibility of the media to police the actions of both parties with equal coverage and to do so without prejudice or personal bias.
There are two quotes shown above in a Series of 12 Articles that you are welcomed to read, research and verify. They not only cover the 6 years to which you half-assedly commented on but they also cover nearly 25 years of Obama's protected history. Try reading some of it before you come here and condemn them.
Consider yourself enlightened now idiot, this is information I learned in 1980 during my tenure as a journalism student and then expanded on during my career as an investigative reporter in Chicago. No go put that business crap in your Bong and smoke it because it's pretty evident you are stoned.
So yea...the free press to which you are referring is "free from government" control. The free press to which you should be referencing (as per my post and this poll) is NOT free from market forces.
Your post about the free press is thus ironic - namely in that it supports my point because the free press will NOT just report what the President wants. Nonetheless, it is irrelevant to this survey.
Also, I will point that out that the sheer FACT that you are able to cite to sources of negative information regarding Obama's "protected past" indicates that the information is not so protected or secret. It also would indi...
So yea...the free press to which you are referring is "free from government" control. The free press to which you should be referencing (as per my post and this poll) is NOT free from market forces.
Your post about the free press is thus ironic - namely in that it supports my point because the free press will NOT just report what the President wants. Nonetheless, it is irrelevant to this survey.
Also, I will point that out that the sheer FACT that you are able to cite to sources of negative information regarding Obama's "protected past" indicates that the information is not so protected or secret. It also would indicate that the media is out there doing its job by gathering that information.
Unless you want to tell me that it was the guy on Twitter or Facebook or Sodahead that uncovered that information?
The man was just ELECTED with a MAJORITY of votes. More than 50% of this country supports the man.
Try putting in the following values:
350 million for population (which is larger than the number you cited)
118 million for sample size
The resulting MoE is: 0.01%.
Math is fun.
"The man was just ELECTED with a MAJORITY of votes. More than 50% of this country supports the man."
Do you need help from a 5th grader?
Thus, at a sample size of 118 million, the results will be within 0.01% of the result from a poll that actually obtained the results from all 300 million. Seeing as how Obama garnered more than 50.1% of the popular vote, one can reasonably extrapolate that if you actually got all 300 million to vote, the result would be pretty much exactly the same.
Obama would still get more than 50% of the vote.
Gloat now Mr. T because the election results were as unfortunate for you as for me and all Americans.
Now, you can try to tell me that there is no way I can prove that 15% of America refused to vote for Obama specifically because of his skin color. But guess what, you can't prove that 15% voted for Obama because of his skin color either.
As for your allegation of voter fraud....yea...good luck proving that voter fraud/intimidation had ANY significant impact on a result where Obama won the electoral college by 130 votes and the popular vote by nearly 2.5 million.