Personally I believe Newsweek understand that Barrack may not have the magical 2nd term to finish effing up our country, so like good leftest they are trying to play "impartial" journalists once more. As soon as it seems that Obama may once again rise out of the swamp Newsweek will be back to its old self.
All in all I do believe its to late for all of them ABC,NBC,CNN,MSNBC and others like them.
If Obama is given his walking papers the media, and especially Hollywood will be screwed. Remember they went "all in" on Obama thinking this will be the beginning of the end of us as conservatives, Republicans, and Christians. They showed their hand and now they will be spending an insane amount of time walking back the almost 4 years of insults, bad jokes, lefty movies and interviews, lopsided editorials and all around nastiness. So here is the deal...
Do we let the media and Hollywood sink, implode, self destruct and rebuild America in our Image once more or do we throw them a lifeline and give them another crack at screwing us because their movies, TV shows and late night television is oh so cool?
This is more then just getting rid of Obama, he is the cancer put the MSM and Hollywood are the cancerous pullups the will always continue to churn out more cancers like Obama so its time we do a full cleaning!
Getting rid of Obama is just the beginning...
Chevy- agree with you 100%. After this November election, with conservatives taking over the House and Senate, and pushing Romney-Ryan, the U.S economy will rapidly turn around and improve. Americans will then realize how complicit the MSM was with the Marxist-ideolog, America-hating, sham of a president that Obama was. People are going to be pissed off at the media. Their days are numbered as financially viable businesses, and they will be held accountable for proliferating the great socialist lie that continues to assault our Constitution and Republic. The media has failed the defense of liberty.
High hopes (lots of guys high, for sure, in a drunken stupor of hope, also perhaps). Excellent campaign, you mean like Rome - when politicians promised other people's moneny? I don't call that genius, but abusive and pathetic.
1. Thanks for the filtering of Ol' Bob.
2. I don't know what possessed Newsweek to even hire Ferguson let alone run this as a cover story. Ferguson is an Actual Journalist.
3. Don't be thrown by Naill's praise of Obama. "We had such high hopes for the man". Phhhhht, of course he doesn't believe this. Can you not identify the voice of the "concern troll"? Really evil, effective trolls never reveal their true feelings because that would get them dismissed out of hand. Pretend to be sad, disappointed, shattered by the BOob's failure, now you're in like Flynn!
Haha, the libs aren't calling the title "Hit the road, Barack" racist, as some code word for slaves??? I'm shocked!
One thing about Ferguson btw... despite his smarts, had he accessed alternative media back in 2007/08 he would have know all there was to know about Obama to never ever attribute to Obama the acolades he did in that article. I'm amazed that the really smart people are not so smart after all. There is no excuse for not having known who Obama was from the beginning. The information was out there. Knowing it , Ferguson would never have allowed himself to type these words: I acknowledged his opponent’s remarkable qualities: his soaring oratory, his cool, hard-to-ruffle temperament, and his near faultless campaign organization.. Informed smart people see through this... as many had at the time. Too bad Ferguson didn't.
For Ferguson to say Obama "didn't deliver" indicates a profound confusion he has a about who, exactly, Obama is.
These shows and publications simply put forth these ideas so they can say, "See? We're balanced. We report both sides!"
I say - poppycock. A stopped clock is right twice a day. I think they're showcasing this guy because they're desperate to be relevant. Schieffer acts like he's some kind of weird space alien.
Bob Schaffer must have had a lousy day after this interview. Niall had a coherent answer for every one of his questions.
It's amazing to me that people believed a Marxist would provide anything other than economic misery; that is exactly what Marxism provides the countries that embrace it. The article reveals nothing new about the "Red."
Love Nial Ferguson, he is both lucid and lucent, heck even Liberals have to work at not listening to him.
What a masterfully crafted article! I think it was written so liberals would actually read the whole thing and start thinking for a change. After a few points to bash Obama's policies and leadership, a liberal might think about not reading it anymore.
But Niall masterfully peppers his article with liberal candy like:
"It was pretty hard to foresee what was going to happen to the economy in the years after 2008."
"After the imperial presidency of the Bush era, ..."
Every 3 or 4 paragraphs, Niall throws in something that is aligned with a liberal talking point, pulling back the liberal reader from the edge of closing the article.
Nicely done, Niall. Liberals might actually read this one from start to finish. At least independents will.
Bob is in a state of shock as he desperately attempts to get some Romney/Ryan negatives out of Ferguson. I'm convinced; this will be a landslide victory for Romney. There are a lot of folks who publicly still mouth "Obama Obama Obama" but when they get inside the booth...well that is a different story. In their heart of hearts Not even the staunchest BO supporter wants the bleak future he promises.
http://evilbloggerlady.blogspot.com/2012/08/barack-obama-finds-out-media-really.html Obama is starting to see the media turn on him. That will leave a mark.
I don't believe Newsweek is less liberal-socialist.
This is a survival move.
They are just that desperate; white-knuckle desperation makes the mind incredibly pliable and open to new directions.
This is they trying to prove to themselves they are open-minded, free expression proponents.
And hoping to sell a few more copies... I say don't give them the business.
They don't deserve it.
I don't even feel the need to read it. My apologies, RightScoop! I felt vindicated earlier in the day today, when my staunchest BO supporter friend told me that he never expected for the melt-down to come within His lifetime! To me, that meant, that as an Econ major, he was admitting that the left has known that the theories of the left are error-ridden and knowingly destructive! The guy just didn't think it would happen so soon!!???? WTH is with that, huh??? Please G-D may he see clearly now! Bless him, he's one of my dearest friends and been there in every way except politically in the last 4 years, May he continue to see more and more clearly as the days go by!!
I have no doubt that your friends continual education and march towards 20/20 vision is the result of your influence on him. People often say that on a site like TRS we're preaching to the choir. Somewhat true, but the choir members are out there spreading the truth and information we learn here. It makes a difference.
Did he show inclinations of blaming it on liberal polices or did he just mention the meltdown? If he didn't point to liberals he could very easily say the meldown is because of us....the right.
We didn't discuss blame, Kong, just that he has realized that the situation of our debt and entitlement obligations are going to have to be dealt with and soon. There is plenty of blame to spread between both sides of the aisle in not dealing with these daunting problems sooner rather than later, just that the end of the fiscal road is coming. All of us now have to put the brakes into action and stop hurtling toward the cliff. His realization that more and more spending is not the right course of action is big in my eyes. Some times we have to win over people one point at a time, in increments, like growing a seed into a plant that blooms and then produces fruit.
Cool. Let us all celebrate each time one of these people find religion. Thank you, freenca. Now you can enjoy your friend even more.
I think that this is too good to be true, in a sense. I have been saying that the establishment appears to be abandoning Obama, and is ready to change him out for Romney. This is just further proof that the media is getting the word handed down to them. I predict that this will lighten up right before the election, and they will make it appear to be a close race, and the numbers will reflect that. I certainly would be surprised if they let Romney win by, say, 10 points.
"I certainly would be surprised if they let Romney win by, say, 10 points."
You sound like you believe the election is rigged and the winner is already known. Yeah, there's fraud, but they can't "let" anyone win. All they can do is try to impact voters.
Hey now! It's my conspiracy theory, and I'm sticking with it, for now. :)
Seriously though, I have seen enough evidence to understand that it is absolutely possible, and highly probable. So, I am operating on the assumption that it is reality in this election to see if the logic plays out.
By analyzing patterns from past elections, I want to see if the same patterns appear this time around. This should be a good election to gauge it by, because there should be a large margin win for Romney, especially with the presstitutes paying him homage. The primary was very revealing, and supported my theory on this whole thing. Status quo would be a close election that gives both sides the feeling that their efforts were worthy, and continues the ruse of legitimacy in the electoral process.
Elections should not always be so close. If either candidate wins by a large margin, then I will concede that my theory is flawed, or that they were smart, and changed up their tactics. There is no reason to change their tactics at this point, because there is no substantial questioning of the process as of yet. You stick with what works.
Considering the way that the votes are counted, and that government gives the whole counting process over to a buddy corporation which has no oversight, and the testimony that I have heard from program writers, I don't see how it is not rigged. The simple math favors fraud. The odds are heavily against fair elections.
A couple more months and I will have a better picture of the whole thing. There are little known watchdogs who will be reporting, as well.
Ah, we are disagreeing on semantics. Every link you gave involved voter fraud. That's ok, because I agree and I am very aware of massive voter fraud. But the only point I'm trying to make is that is not "rigging" the outcome of the election. It's illegally and fraudulently trying to change the outcome and isn't always successful.
When I hear "rigged" I think "fixed" or forcing automatic outcomes that can't be beat. When Gore lost to Bush there was massive voting fraud for Gore. Reports of thousands of people voting for him in both Florida and New York. He still lost, which means the outcome wasn't rigged.
In other words, we totally agree about the fraud. There is plenty of fraud to go around. I'd suggest going back to paper ballots and getting rid of the machines altogether if they are so easily tampered with.
You see? We agree except for how it's labeled....which is nothing important.
I am not being condescending, but have you studied the issue? If you are interested, here are a few links to check out.
This is a five video series that has MSM reports on it.
This is a pretty detailed documentary done by HBO.
This is a computer programmer explaining how he created a program that would defraud an election, and gives a lot of good info.
This information is fairly convincing.
This lady formed a watchdog group, and is an expert on the subject.
The GOP primary election fraud was systemic across the country at the state level.
There is a massive amount of youtube videos of people at the actual caucus' who video taped many cases of vote switching from the caucus to the secret state GOP vote tallying locations.
It would take a lot of time to link them for you, but suffice it to say that I have my reasons for my opinion on this.
I agree, kong. There's a lot of fraud, but it would be really hard to fix the outcome. Imagine trying to rig the stock market. There's just not enough money!
"Hey now! It's my conspiracy theory, and I'm sticking with it, for now."
LMAO!! That was funny, I don't care who you are.
There's going to be a lot of fraud but that still doesn't mean it's rigged. Our votes count, but they try to steal a lot of them and add a bunch that shouldn't be. That's trying to impact the outcome fraudulently. They still can't fix the outcome.
I think it's going to be more and more difficult to pull off landslides because of the increasing number of people on the take. So many people are on welfare or foodstamps that they don't have an honest vote. They vote for their monthly check, not on the issues. The left will have a difficult time getting welfare recipients to vote, so it won't be easy for them, either. The more we let this go the more difficult it's going to be for us to even win.
Of course, that's my opinion and I hardly know everything, lol.
Let Republicans win by 10 points? They may not have a choice. Something I don't think I've seen much in past elections is regular Republicans standing up for the history of their party (as the party of civil rights). Ever since Biden's chain comment, some Democrats have believed Obama that Republicans are the party of racial animosity. But on most blogs, you will now see Republicans giving a history lesson on which party really has a history of racial animosity. It's almost as if the Party of Lincoln is being brought to the fight.
To state it a different way, ever since Romney and Ryan started defending their issues and attacking the Dems on false claims, it seems to have reinvigorated the Republican Party like I've never seen. If this continues, it's quite possible that there will be a tectonic realignment of the political parties in favor of the Republicans.
I agree with what you are saying. There should be much bigger win/loss margins in these elections. I think that it is probable that national elections are won or lost due to electronic election fraud. In retrospect, and after researching it, I think that this has been the case for the last three or four elections. Now, I am attempting to predict how the establishment is setting it up to cover for the predetermined end result. The media's job is to make the rhetoric match the outcome.
This is the first time I have had this perspective in a presidential race, so we will see if my theories match up in the end. Hopefully, some of the fraud will get exposed, as it did in the primary.
Don't get me wrong, I would take Romney over Obama, but if Romney is put in this way, then it would confirm that he is taking orders, as Obama has. I went through the Clinton and Bush years perplexed and ticked off about how everything went down, but now that I understand that they are systematically shutting the country down, it all makes perfect sense.
In short, you could say that this is a continuance of my fairly recent establishment conspiracy theories.
Hit the track barack
and don't look back, NO, NO
at least not until you get to Chicago...
and don't forget to take el MooCHO.
They saw the crowds turning out for R&R. Genuine enthusiasm and no buses of paid 'supporters'. The real thing may have woken them up. But leopards don't change their spots and they'll likely revert to type soon enough after MR wins in November. They are what they are. They've forfeited all credibility and deserve nothing for the near ruin they've brought on the USA. They can all go to he!! far as this observer is concerned.
And I sure won't be buying this, or any other, issue from the cynical toads. Hope may spring eternal, but not that these cretins may learn anything beyond their commie mantra - at least not in this heart.