patching...
Welcome back, Patch Blogger!
Local Voices

The Choice, The Media and The Debates

As we come down to the final push for the Election, it is becoming clear that there are two distinct courses for the office of President of the United States. 

These divisions are becoming clearer everyday. 

With debate season starting on Wednesday, Oct. 3, 20 percent of the electorate is saying they can be persuaded by what is said or not said, and who looks more confident and self-assured in their performances.

While President Obama, his spin machine and a pliant and openly cheering press lower the expectations of his debating skills, Mitt Romney seems to be playing some defense of his own and trying to say nice things about Mr. Obama. It is funny how Mr. Obama's campaign is now trying to paint the President as a mediocre debater, who is out of practice. 

Questions from the Obamagasm media are tossing soft ball questions to anyone on the Obama team and allowing enough lowering of expectations so as to think he can barely form a sentence, while at the same time letting everyone know that Mitt Romney has fought a primary campaign and had many debates with that field.  Also, Mr. Romney has had much more time to prepare for the debates than the president so it should be assumed that if Mitt Romney does anything less than decimate a wounded incumbent, it would be a victory for Mr. Obama. 

Mr. Obama is anything but a poor debater. The issue is he is going to not have a tele-prompter and will have to answer questions as they are thrown at him.  However, with dependable liberals Jim Lehrer and Bob Schieffer hosting the first debate in Denver, the name should be soft balls and grenades. 

Another funny thing happened on the way to my blog today: CNN issued a poll, showing the race tightening before the debates. Curious, given Mr. Obama, according to most main stream polls, is ahead 2-6% and pulling away in swing states. 

But, like most everything in this rigged election, the polls are pre-baked, and an oversampling of Democrats by 7-9% is the norm for this cycle. Again, a pliant and openly cheering for re-election press is in the tank for Mr. Obama. Pat Caddell, has labeled the Media, the Enemy of the Public.  He was the one-time pollster for President Jimmy Carter.  Here is the You Tube video of his speech.  

Caddell, far from a right winger, along with Doug Schoen and Kirsten Powers have all called into question the way the election has been covered.  They have pointed out many instances of liberal media bias and media, hell-bent on attacking Mitt Romney and trying to make him and his campaign look bad for months now.  The press has allowed this president to get a total pass on Libya, which, to me is the second worst scandal of this presidency. 

The first one is the Fast and Furious gun running scandal that is still unfolding and is mired in the liberal roots for more gun control, not to mention, the countless Mexicans that have been killed by this ill conceived program. 

The good news is that Hugo Chavez would vote for Mr. Obama and feels that Mr. Obama would vote for him. Boy, I feel way better now, maybe Sean Penn will become both their new BFFs. 

Interesting point, but when you have a media that is determining what news we see and when we see it and what context, there is a major problem. 

I, like most, want my news without spin and analysis.  I want the hard facts that never seem to come to light in the mainstream media reporting.  I am a grown up, I can handle the news, good or bad.  When the press is openly cheering for re-election of a candidate, it is bad for the country.  The media in the US is acting like the media for that thug Hugo Chavez in Venezula.  Venezula, which by the way, should be a wealthy country is instead living in poverty and many times without electricity because their leader believes in the grand experiment of Socialism.  I hope that we are not next.

It is time for the media to start reporting fairly and accurately about this race and stop cheering for the Blue team.

STW

8:05 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012

There you go again Kurt with the most bias views of all. The label,"Liberal Media" is a label given by Fox News. A show on cable that is by far the most bias entertainment show ever shown. To continue to attack the air TV news with facts made up from Fox, Rush or Sean, is insulting. This is not to say there isn't bias in the media. Of course there is. There is bias everywhere. That's way most people seek more then one source. Slate this in way you want, you are now in the same category as the others: No longer worth reading or listening to.

Reply
Comment_arrow

Kurt Shea

9:06 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012

Thanks for the feedback. Liberal Media is a term that is in common use from people with common sense. I get my facts from a variety of sources, however, when you listen to the main networks, you get a total left wing bash fest on anyone who disagrees with the Obama administration. The main stream, liberal media is totally in the tank for Mr. Obama, and if you can't see that, then you may not be qualified to read my opinion pieces. Take care and have a nice day.

Comment_arrow

Joyce Denn

10:03 am on Wednesday, October 3, 2012

Kurt wrote: "Liberal Media is a term that is in common use from people with common sense."
Pardon my bluntness, but that is nonsense; "liberal media" is a canard developed and promoted by the right wing.

Darcy Sperle

9:29 am on Wednesday, October 3, 2012

Well written Kurt. At least Fox News acknowledges that they lean to the right. The main-stream media claims to be objective or neutral. Anyone who educates themselves on the issues and gets their facts from several sources can clearly see that the main news shows are on Obama's side and choose what to report and what not to report. How many people knew that the attack on the Consulate in Libya was an orchestrated terrorist attack and NOT an impromptu mob attack caused by a stupid YouTube video? US intelligence knew hours after the assassination of the US Ambassador on 9-11 that this was a planned terrorist attack, but the main stream media chose not to report it that way because it would make Obama look bad as he skipped his daily intelligence briefing and jetted off to Vegas for a campaign stop. That's just one of MANY instances. Good job Kurt.

Reply
Comment_arrow

Joyce Denn

10:06 am on Wednesday, October 3, 2012

Ah, yes, the "daily intelligence briefing" lie:
'Ultimately, what matters is what a president does with the information he receives from the CIA. Republican critics may find fault with Obama’s handling of foreign policy. But this attack ad turns a question of process — how does the president handle his intelligence brief? — into a misguided attack because Obama has chosen to receive his information in a different manner than his predecessor.

As it turns out, no president does it the exact same way. Under the standards of this ad, Republican icon Ronald Reagan skipped his intelligence briefings 99 percent of the time.'
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/the-bogus-claim-that-obama-skips-his-intelligence-briefings/2012/09/23/100cb63e-04fc-11e2-8102-ebee9c66e190_blog.html

Darcy Sperle

11:12 am on Wednesday, October 3, 2012

You're missing the point entirely. I understand that under normal daily circumstances, it's probably no big deal to skip an intelligence briefing, and that other presidents received briefings in different manners. But these were not normal circumstances. The point is that the media chose to ignore the FACT that the White House knew this was an orchestrated terrorist attack within hours of it happening yet the President did not stay home and take care of business. If this were a Republican president that did this under these circumstances, he'd have been shredded by the media, and rightly so.

I appreciate your reply, but the Washington Post is another one of Obama's lap-dogs.

Reply

Leave a comment