the civil war in the Democratic party:
Donna Brazile admits on CNN that her new plan for the "new" Democratic party involves "not needing" core Democratic constituencies. For some reason, even though people heard her say it - the transcript starts after that particular quote, right at the part where someone is asking her what the heck she means.
Not that it's really much of a secret to working class voters - or to the other core constituencies that Brazile intends to boot from the party. Of course when Obama means 'change', he means we are what needs to 'change'. Right? Unity means everyone is united in anger against America - meaning scapegoats standing in for America's sins. Right? Obama's "new kind of politics" means the novelty of seeing a Presidential candidate openly insulting America and its people - which is touted as "calling things the way they really are". (Of course, it's no way to govern - but who ever said Obama actually cared about governing? I mean, have you seen his voting record?)
The closest we have (yet) is the part right after the offensive statement - where she revises what she said:
Gary, IN:
Wolf Blitzer tries to get the mayor of Gary, IN to explain why he's holding on to the votes (the two obvious possibilities: 1. because he is trying to manipulate news coverage of Hillary's win, or 2. intention to tamper with votes.)
Showing posts with label bias. Show all posts
Showing posts with label bias. Show all posts
Wednesday, May 7, 2008
Saturday, April 19, 2008
CNN stumps for Obama (some more)
headline: Obama movement gets angry
You know, I clicked on the CNN video image because it looked like maybe there had been violence. I thought, oh no, has it started already? Pushing and shoving - that was what the icon looked like to me. Like maybe a fight had broken out.
But, no, it's just CNN doing its best to make sure that happens later. To warn us that Obama backers are very angry, and if we elect Clinton, it would be a bad thing.
Nice little narrative they've got set up there, don't they?
First, Obama isn't a political campaign - it's a movement.
And, CNN tells us, the internet is full of rage. Never mind how many of those bloggers are paid. Never mind that the bloggers overrepresent a single demographic.
Frat Boy is America now (until the general, when I expect CNN will suddenly remember it prefers McCain). We are supposed to let the least experienced choose our candidate. Is it just me, or is there an edge of "or else" thrown into this mix?
And what would happen if Clinton got elected the nominee? Let's cut to an Obama supporter to find out! Let's talk about how it would make them very angry. Because we all know that's how elections are run - vote for my candidate or else the kids will throw a temper tantrum.
Isn't CNN sort of encouraging an irresponsible attitude here? Oh - I forgot - they like it when the Democrats have riots, don't they? Nonstop coverage. Who would have imagined such a thing could happen?
Never mind that most Democrats have voted for Clinton. Yes - Clinton has more Democratic party votes than Obama, who has relied on those college kids to get mommy and daddy to indulge them (for the nomination - not the general election). (See Young Obama Backers Twist Parents' Arms, NYTimes)
The fact is, the entire media has thrown in for Obama.
Who gets to choose the President again? Oh yes - the wealthy guys who control the three companies that own almost all the media outlets in America. And they want Obama - precisely because it is now increasingly obvious that Obama cannot and will not defeat McCain.
You know, I clicked on the CNN video image because it looked like maybe there had been violence. I thought, oh no, has it started already? Pushing and shoving - that was what the icon looked like to me. Like maybe a fight had broken out.
But, no, it's just CNN doing its best to make sure that happens later. To warn us that Obama backers are very angry, and if we elect Clinton, it would be a bad thing.
Nice little narrative they've got set up there, don't they?
First, Obama isn't a political campaign - it's a movement.
And, CNN tells us, the internet is full of rage. Never mind how many of those bloggers are paid. Never mind that the bloggers overrepresent a single demographic.
Frat Boy is America now (until the general, when I expect CNN will suddenly remember it prefers McCain). We are supposed to let the least experienced choose our candidate. Is it just me, or is there an edge of "or else" thrown into this mix?
And what would happen if Clinton got elected the nominee? Let's cut to an Obama supporter to find out! Let's talk about how it would make them very angry. Because we all know that's how elections are run - vote for my candidate or else the kids will throw a temper tantrum.
Isn't CNN sort of encouraging an irresponsible attitude here? Oh - I forgot - they like it when the Democrats have riots, don't they? Nonstop coverage. Who would have imagined such a thing could happen?
Never mind that most Democrats have voted for Clinton. Yes - Clinton has more Democratic party votes than Obama, who has relied on those college kids to get mommy and daddy to indulge them (for the nomination - not the general election). (See Young Obama Backers Twist Parents' Arms, NYTimes)
The fact is, the entire media has thrown in for Obama.
Who gets to choose the President again? Oh yes - the wealthy guys who control the three companies that own almost all the media outlets in America. And they want Obama - precisely because it is now increasingly obvious that Obama cannot and will not defeat McCain.
Labels:
bias,
CNN,
inciting violence,
irresponsible coverage,
irresponsible media,
Obama,
Obama coverage,
riot
you're suprised by olbermann why now?
Keith Olbermann was always nasty, so how come Clinton's supporters just notice this now?
It used to be fun to watch him because he bags on people you don't like. Harmless fun as long as you don't take it seriously. But he was never worth taking seriously. He was always just a funnel for peoples' rants.
I actually thought it was good to have "one of them" on our side. Because, you know, Democrats being such wimps, maybe we always lose because we don't know how to fight hard and hateful? Sometimes I enjoyed him - other times he made me cringe. I never really thought too much about either reaction.
If this election teaches us anything it should be that how you do a thing matters, even when it's targeted at someone you don't like.
It used to be fun to watch him because he bags on people you don't like. Harmless fun as long as you don't take it seriously. But he was never worth taking seriously. He was always just a funnel for peoples' rants.
I actually thought it was good to have "one of them" on our side. Because, you know, Democrats being such wimps, maybe we always lose because we don't know how to fight hard and hateful? Sometimes I enjoyed him - other times he made me cringe. I never really thought too much about either reaction.
If this election teaches us anything it should be that how you do a thing matters, even when it's targeted at someone you don't like.
Labels:
angry,
bias,
hate tactics,
manipulation,
Olbermann
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)