Typical white people

[crux]

Will Obama get another free black pass from the liberal media?

 

[asur]

Yes it appears so.

But he shouldn't. He's setting race relations back 50 years
if elected. I don't think he will be elected now
but who knows.

Criticizing G. Ferraro in his so called speech was pretty low.

Not that Ferraro didn't deserve it, it's just that he used his speech
to score cheap political gain.


Obama is still riding dirty with Rev Wright also.

Can we say he will also be the First Racist President of the US?

 

[Castle]

I wonder if Don Imus was black....what would Obamas comments on the subject have been? Since they are on record, why are they so different from his comments on Wright? Of course one doesn't really have to wonder but the hypocrisy is so thick that you have to ask.

 

[Libsmasher]

I wonder if Don Imus was black....what would Obamas comments on the subject have been? Since they are on record, why are they so different from his comments on Wright? Of course one doesn't really have to wonder but the hypocrisy is so thick that you have to ask.

Let me imagine what the Obama speech would be in such a case (a black Imus)

Obama: "Yes, Mr. Imus said 'nappy-headed hos'. People who are not black may not understand the significance and historical context of this as used by a black person. When used by blacks, it is a diminutive that suggests familarity, shared identity, and hence solidarity in the struggle for civil rights. So actually, Mr. Imus' comment was a positive and worthy statement. People seem to be forgetting about Mr. Imus' many humorous, insightful, and entertaining comments, trying to reduce him to a caricature based on this one comment. But the whole incident shows we need a dialog on race in this country."

 

[PLC1]

The "liberal media" is a myth perpetrated by rant radio and dissatisfied right wing ideologues. The media is driven by profit, plain and simple, and will publish what sells air time or newspapers. No, Obama won't get a "black pass" from the media, and he must distance himself more than he has from his bigoted and America hating preacher, or he'll never get the presidency.

I would have bet even odds that Obama would be the next president before this story broke. Now, McCain is the most likely winner by far, unless, of course, some new development should change the probabilities yet again.

 

[Castle]

Let me imagine what the Obama speech would be in such a case (a black Imus)

Obama: "Yes, Mr. Imus said 'nappy-headed hos'. People who are not black may not understand the significance and historical context of this as used by a black person. When used by blacks, it is a diminutive that suggests familarity, shared identity, and hence solidarity in the struggle for civil rights. So actually, Mr. Imus' comment was a positive and worthy statement. People seem to be forgetting about Mr. Imus' many humorous, insightful, and entertaining comments, trying to reduce him to a caricature based on this one comment. But the whole incident shows we need a dialog on race in this country."

Holy crap! Your skills are wasted here as this stroke of genius deserves a bigger audience. BRAVO!

 

[Libsmasher]

The "liberal media" is a myth perpetrated by rant radio and dissatisfied right wing ideologues.

Yaaa, surrrrrre.

The media is driven by profit, plain and simple, and will publish what sells air time or newspapers.

The lib media was a monoply for 40 years - from the 1950s to the 1990s. In that period, people had to listen to their lib crap because they had a ---->monopoly<-------- AND they made money - they were the only game in town. Their monopoly precluded any conflict between making money and drenching the news with liberal idiology. But in the 1990s, things began to changes, as cracks appeared in the Lib Media Berlin Wall: Fox news, Rush, and the widespread availiabilty of the net, appeared. As I showed in my other post, the lib media is still overwhelming but no longer a monopoly. With large corporations the newest pillar of liberalism in this country, it even doesn't matter that they aren't a monopoly anymore - corporations run with lib ideology are still happy to advertise with them. So there is no choosing between profits or lib propaganda, that's a false dichotomy

No, Obama won't get a "black pass" from the media, and he must distance himself more than he has from his bigoted and America hating preacher, or he'll never get the presidency.

Obama has gotten a free pass for months and months from a worshipful lib media. The Rev. Wright incident was so horrible that even the lib media couldn't ignore it, but if there are no more surprises about Obama, they'll edge back to their free pass mode.

 

[Libsmasher]

Holy crap! Your skills are wasted here as this stroke of genius deserves a bigger audience. BRAVO!

I thank you, I thank you.

 

[Dr.Who]

The "liberal media" is a myth perpetrated by rant radio and dissatisfied right wing ideologues. The media is driven by profit, plain and simple, and will publish what sells air time or newspapers. No, Obama won't get a "black pass" from the media, and he must distance himself more than he has from his bigoted and America hating preacher, or he'll never get the presidency.

Somehow the profit motive has not contradicted the ability of most newspapers or tv news outlets to be blatantly liberal. Just as profit has not stopped Fox or talk radio from being conservative.

 

[Dr.Who]

The lib media was a monoply for 40 years - from the 1950s to the 1990s. In that period, people had to listen to their lib crap because they had a ---->monopoly<-------- AND they made money - they were the only game in town. Their monopoly precluded any conflict between making money and drenching the news with liberal idiology. But in the 1990s, things began to changes, as cracks appeared in the Lib Media Berlin Wall: Fox news, Rush, and the widespread availiabilty of the net, appeared. As I showed in my other post, the lib media is still overwhelming but no longer a monopoly. With large corporations the newest pillar of liberalism in this country, it even doesn't matter that they aren't a monopoly anymore - corporations run with lib ideology are still happy to advertise with them. So there is no choosing between profits or lib propaganda, that's a false dichotomy

Yet they are losing market share now. So perhaps profit will be a factor yet.

 

[SW85]

Just reporting on it is damning enough for Obama. People are starting to see through the glitzy veneer and glimpse at the vicious racial grievance-monger underneath.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

Yes it appears so.

But he shouldn't. He's setting race relations back 50 years
if elected. I don't think he will be elected now
but who knows.

Criticizing G. Ferraro in his so called speech was pretty low.

Not that Ferraro didn't deserve it, it's just that he used his speech
to score cheap political gain.


Obama is still riding dirty with Rev Wright also.

Can we say he will also be the First Racist President of the US?

I cant even count the dumb things in just one post

Setting back Race Relations 50 years? realy so if he gets Elected we will go back to Jim Crow or something? I can see how the first black President would do that..

Then you cry that he attacked someone...yet then say it was diserving...if it was Deserving...then why cry?

And first racist President? lol sure if you dont count at least half of them...Nixon loved Jews. And the we all know how much first presidents all where so equal rights for blacks...or woman....or Catholics....

That and he is not Racist...but thats just a small point..

And I am not a Obama supporter right now, but those so against him clearly have issues it seems.

 

[Andy]

Yet they are losing market share now. So perhaps profit will be a factor yet.

Well typically the media is left, simply because they are in the news business. Bad news sells. A news agency that publishes "everything is wonderful, joy and happiness is wide spread!" will not have very high ratings. It's the "end of the world could be on us! Film at 11" Will have the 11 o'clock ratings.

As a result the reporters are constantly bombarded with negative news since they are reporting it, and Liberals will always see the current system as bad, and want to change, even if the alternative is worse.

You also have situations like the New York Times, that has been taken over by a Communist activist. I'm reading "Off with their heads!" By Dick Morris. It's truly amazing how slanted NYT has become.

 

[PLC1]

Yaaa, surrrrrre.



The lib media was a monoply for 40 years - from the 1950s to the 1990s. In that period, people had to listen to their lib crap because they had a ---->monopoly<-------- AND they made money - they were the only game in town. Their monopoly precluded any conflict between making money and drenching the news with liberal idiology. But in the 1990s, things began to changes, as cracks appeared in the Lib Media Berlin Wall: Fox news, Rush, and the widespread availiabilty of the net, appeared. As I showed in my other post, the lib media is still overwhelming but no longer a monopoly. With large corporations the newest pillar of liberalism in this country, it even doesn't matter that they aren't a monopoly anymore - corporations run with lib ideology are still happy to advertise with them. So there is no choosing between profits or lib propaganda, that's a false dichotomy




Obama has gotten a free pass for months and months from a worshipful lib media. The Rev. Wright incident was so horrible that even the lib media couldn't ignore it, but if there are no more surprises about Obama, they'll edge back to their free pass mode.

A dissatisfied right wing ideologue has been heard from.

Ideology sucks. Profit rules. There is no "liberal" media.

Do you really think that Rupert Murdock is a liberal?

 

[bewitched]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-drop_rule

In 1967, the U.S. Supreme Court, in its opinion in the case of Loving v. Virginia, conclusively invalidated Plecker's Virginia Racial Integrity Act, along with its key component, the one-drop rule, as unconstitutional.