Never any media bias - well maybe just a little. All the time.

LooseGoose wrote:

Noted that you attempt no defense of the indefensible.

See below. However, much like every conversation with The Dude, you will fail to provide a substantive reply and it will end up being a waste of my time to have engaged your nonsense.

LooseGoose wrote:1) IF Trump lost a Billion $$'s in 1995, he wouldn't owe taxes. So why are the press headlines about him not paying taxes? Would any of you pay taxes you didn't owe?

1. This is about Trump claiming the system is rigged against him when in fact he is a crony capitalist and the system is rigged in his favor.
2. This is about Trump positioning himself as the savior of the working class, but at the same time secretly exploiting the working class.
3. This is about Trump complaining about infrastructure, the VA, and all sorts of other government deficiencies, but not actually contributing anything to the system that protects his wealth.
4. This is about Trump being a welfare queen and making everybody else in society pay his way through life like a sleazy freeloader.

2) Related issue - every time someone brings up the Clinton scandals from the 1990's it's "20 years old and not relevant" but all weekend was spent on Trump's tax return from 21 years ago.

1. What was released is the most recent tax data available.
2. Trump's refusal to release more recent returns is suspicious.
3. People link the past with the present and assume he refuses to release his returns in 2016 because he is not paying taxes just like 1995. In other words, people assume the past is relevant to the present because the past specifically and directly informs the present.


3) Ivanka Trump hits the campaign trail - is closely questioned about how her father treats women. Can anyone tell when Chelsea Clinton has EVER been asked those questions???

1. Chelsea's father is not running for office.
2. Ivanka has a more prominent role in her father's campaign.
3. Ivanka has specifically taken up gender issues.
4. Ivanka's father and brother have directly referenced Ivanka in respect to questions about gender issues. Specifically sexual harassment in the workplace.  

Excited for   ,   ,   , or   . If I get really lucky you will link something from Newsbusters or ifuckinghateliberals.blogspot.wordpress.facebookmeme.com

I am sorry you have fallen for the greatest con in American history. Or maybe you are aware it is a con but have too much pride to turn back. Have you gotten your Trump yard signs yet?

If Trump wins this election it will be interesting watching you slowly move toward a discussion about how the media handed it to him.

I want to get a hat and hang it in the game/media room. I think it'd make a great conversation piece for years to come.

bump..

Turtleneck wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:

Noted that you attempt no defense of the indefensible.

See below. However, much like every conversation with The Dude, you will fail to provide a substantive reply and it will end up being a waste of my time to have engaged your nonsense.

LooseGoose wrote:1) IF Trump lost a Billion $$'s in 1995, he wouldn't owe taxes. So why are the press headlines about him not paying taxes? Would any of you pay taxes you didn't owe?

1. This is about Trump claiming the system is rigged against him when in fact he is a crony capitalist and the system is rigged in his favor.
2. This is about Trump positioning himself as the savior of the working class, but at the same time secretly exploiting the working class.
3. This is about Trump complaining about infrastructure, the VA, and all sorts of other government deficiencies, but not actually contributing anything to the system that protects his wealth.
4. This is about Trump being a welfare queen and making everybody else in society pay his way through life like a sleazy freeloader.

2) Related issue - every time someone brings up the Clinton scandals from the 1990's it's "20 years old and not relevant" but all weekend was spent on Trump's tax return from 21 years ago.

1. What was released is the most recent tax data available.
2. Trump's refusal to release more recent returns is suspicious.
3. People link the past with the present and assume he refuses to release his returns in 2016 because he is not paying taxes just like 1995. In other words, people assume the past is relevant to the present because the past specifically and directly informs the present.


3) Ivanka Trump hits the campaign trail - is closely questioned about how her father treats women. Can anyone tell when Chelsea Clinton has EVER been asked those questions???

1. Chelsea's father is not running for office.
2. Ivanka has a more prominent role in her father's campaign.
3. Ivanka has specifically taken up gender issues.
4. Ivanka's father and brother have directly referenced Ivanka in respect to questions about gender issues. Specifically sexual harassment in the workplace.  

Excited for   ,   ,   , or   . If I get really lucky you will link something from Newsbusters or ifuckinghateliberals.blogspot.wordpress.facebookmeme.com

I am sorry you have fallen for the greatest con in American history. Or maybe you are aware it is a con but have too much pride to turn back. Have you gotten your Trump yard signs yet?

If Trump wins this election it will be interesting watching you slowly move toward a discussion about how the media handed it to him.

Dad gum I think you've about justified it.

Noting your inability to defend your original assertions.

Gosh, you'd think they would point out she was a plant......nope.

Hillary Caught Using Child Actor At Pennsylvania Town Hall

At a Hillary Clinton town hall yesterday in Haverford, Pennsylvania, a 15 year old girl was supposedly "chosen at random" to ask a question of the former Secretary of State. But, the well-scripted performance raised some suspicion with a YouTuber named Spanglevision who decided to dig a little deeper. And, wouldn't you know it, the "random" participant was none other than child actor, Brennan Leach, whose father just happens to be Pennsylvania democratic State Senator Daylin Leach. Oh, and in case it wasn't obvious, Daylin supports Hillary for president...shocking.

And, of course, as pointed out by Spanglevision, the mainstream media couldn't get enough of the adorable young girl and her "brave" question. Here's coverage from the New York Times....

How many Trump yard signs are you up to now? Do you donate pies for the weekly phone bank gathering?

LooseGoose wrote:Gosh, you'd think they would point out she was a plant......nope.

Hillary Caught Using Child Actor At Pennsylvania Town Hall

At a Hillary Clinton town hall yesterday in Haverford, Pennsylvania, a 15 year old girl was supposedly "chosen at random" to ask a question of the former Secretary of State. But, the well-scripted performance raised some suspicion with a YouTuber named Spanglevision who decided to dig a little deeper. And, wouldn't you know it, the "random" participant was none other than child actor, Brennan Leach, whose father just happens to be Pennsylvania democratic State Senator Daylin Leach. Oh, and in case it wasn't obvious, Daylin supports Hillary for president...shocking.

And, of course, as pointed out by Spanglevision, the mainstream media couldn't get enough of the adorable young girl and her "brave" question. Here's coverage from the New York Times....

So, if your dad is a football coach and you talk football with your dad and you're well versed in the spread offense and you line the way Rich rod runs his offense and you go to a clinic he's speaking at, you're precluded from asking questions? Or if you do, and it's an intelligent thought provoking question you shouldn't get accolades for it?

Look, politics suck and there is a ton of phoniness in it, but a child raised in a political house who is an intelligent kid maybe just asked a good question.

We're looking for too many ghosts and making too much of stupid shit.

Jmo.

DWags wrote:

Look, politics suck and there is a ton of phoniness in it, but a child raised in a political house who is an intelligent kid maybe just asked a good question.

It means the kid is a phony by default. Not even sure what who we're talking about.

Hmmmm did the 15 year old girls dad get a heads up about the Trump tape before the girl asked Hills the question?

Turtleneck wrote:How many Trump yard signs are you up to now? Do you donate pies for the weekly phone bank gathering?

You get so testy when it's pointed out what phonies those you worship are.

Worship is being thrown around rather loosely.

Trump is a political grease fire the GOP created. They can live with him, the consequences and more importantly will live with a probable 6-3 moderate/liberal SCOTUS that will most likely occur in a one term HRC Presidency.

What does the GOP do after a HRC win in November?
Say our country has to wait until 2020 and can't rush into have a nine member SCOTUS?

GRR Spartan wrote:Worship is being thrown around rather loosely.

Trump is a political grease fire the GOP created. They can live with him, the consequences and more importantly will live with a probable 6-3 moderate/liberal SCOTUS that will most likely occur in a one term HRC Presidency.

What does the GOP do after a HRC win in November?
Say our country has to wait until 2020 and can't rush into have a nine member SCOTUS?

It ought to be a dream. According to all projections a recession is coming. The hatred will remain on both political sides. Should be a wonderful time. This Trump dump was timed perfectly to obscure the Wikileaks drop of yesterday - that Hills illegally coordinated with Soros among other things. And that infraction HAS been prosecuted in the past, won't be for her.

Ever consider the Russian connection?

Ever consider the GOP House is willing to have multiple investigations of servers, Sec of State offices, sequence of events etc but the same body refuses to even consider launching investigations into the Russian cyber activity?

Ever consider the last thing Putin wants is HRC in the White House?
Ever consider the "leaked" email could have been edited to enhance potential damage?
Ever consider Trump may have financial relationships with Russian oligarchs?

The GOP nominated Trump and chose to ignore multiple signs he had relationships connecting him to Russia including naming Paul Manafort as his campaign manager.

Soros? Really? The connie's favorite bogey man.

Take a breath and after the election read Jane Mayer's Dark Money to see how money from multiple American fortunes paved the way to what we see in today's GOP.

GRR Spartan wrote:Ever consider the Russian connection?
LOL, this is rich for a man supposedly disabusing me of conspiracies.
Ever consider the last thing Putin wants is HRC in the White House?
Please tell me why this would be true? She won't do shit to Russia.
Ever consider Trump may have financial relationships with Russian oligarchs?
And the Clintons and their Foundation don't? Are you ignoring that?

So overall it's all big money and the Russians supporting Trump? That's a laugh. If you look where the big donors are you'll find them donating to Hills. Facts not fantasy.

LooseGoose wrote:

Turtleneck wrote:How many Trump yard signs are you up to now? Do you donate pies for the weekly phone bank gathering?

You get so testy when it's pointed out what phonies those you worship are.

It could be worse. I could be you and spend my days worshiping Donald Trump and the 1950s.

Getting too testy Goose.
You think Trump's praise of Putin is acceptable? Okay

We disagree.

LooseGoose wrote:

GRR Spartan wrote:Ever consider the Russian connection?
LOL, this is rich for a man supposedly disabusing me of conspiracies.
Ever consider the last thing Putin wants is HRC in the White House?
Please tell me why this would be true? She won't do shit to Russia.
Ever consider Trump may have financial relationships with Russian oligarchs?
And the Clintons and their Foundation don't? Are you ignoring that?

So overall it's all big money and the Russians supporting Trump? That's a laugh. If you look where the big donors are you'll find them donating to Hills. Facts not fantasy.

It's not so much what Clinton will do to Russia as much as what she will do in the Ukraine and with NATO. Putin knows Trump will appease him on issues relating to Russia's near abroad and NATO expansion. Putin is concerned Clinton will intervene - diplomatically and economically - in the Ukraine and possibly continue to expand NATO.

Turtleneck wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:

So overall it's all big money and the Russians supporting Trump? That's a laugh. If you look where the big donors are you'll find them donating to Hills. Facts not fantasy.

It's not so much what Clinton will do to Russia as much as what she will do in the Ukraine and with NATO. Putin knows Trump will appease him on issues relating to Russia's near abroad and NATO expansion. Putin is concerned Clinton will intervene - diplomatically and economically - in the Ukraine and possibly continue to expand NATO.

If I had one iota of confidence Clinton would stand up to Putin over the Ukraine I'd feel better about her. I don't.

GRR Spartan wrote:Getting too testy Goose.
You think Trump's praise of Putin is acceptable? Okay

We disagree.

Did you agree with Obama and his minions in the press mocking Romney for warning about Russia?

Turtleneck wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:

You get so testy when it's pointed out what phonies those you worship are.

It could be worse. I could be you and spend my days worshiping Donald Trump and the 1950s.

Right back to "worshiping Trump" eh, Lil' bob?

Trump being a puke doesn't make Hills a saint.

EXCLUSIVE: New Email Leak Reveals Clinton Campaign’s Cozy Press Relationship

INTERNAL STRATEGY DOCUMENTS and emails among Clinton staffers shed light on friendly and highly useful relationships between the campaign and various members of the U.S. media, as well as the campaign’s strategies for manipulating those relationships.

As these internal documents demonstrate, a central component of the Clinton campaign strategy is ensuring that journalists they believe favorable to Clinton are tasked to report the stories which the campaign wants circulated.

At times, Clinton’s campaign staff not only internally drafted the stories they wanted published but even specified what should be quoted “on background” and what should be described as “on the record.”

The Clinton campaign likes to use glitzy, intimate, completely off-the-record parties between top campaign aides and leading media personalities. One of the most elaborately planned get-togethers was described in an April, 2015, memo — produced, according to the document metadata, by deputy press secretary Jesse Ferguson — to take place shortly before Clinton’s official announcement of her candidacy. The event was an April 10 cocktail party for leading news figures and top-level Clinton staff at the Upper East Side home of Clinton strategist Joel Benenson, a fully-off-the-record gathering designed to impart the campaign’s messaging:

LooseGoose wrote:

GRR Spartan wrote:Getting too testy Goose.
You think Trump's praise of Putin is acceptable? Okay

We disagree.

Did you agree with Obama and his minions in the press mocking Romney for warning about Russia?

Going back to that old post. It made no sense then but you still continue to trot it out.

LooseGoose wrote:

Turtleneck wrote:



It could be worse. I could be you and spend my days worshiping Donald Trump and the 1950s.

Right back to "worshiping Trump" eh, Lil' bob?

Trump being a puke doesn't make Hills a saint.

Yup, Dude, Sr.

LooseGoose wrote:

Turtleneck wrote:

It's not so much what Clinton will do to Russia as much as what she will do in the Ukraine and with NATO. Putin knows Trump will appease him on issues relating to Russia's near abroad and NATO expansion. Putin is concerned Clinton will intervene - diplomatically and economically - in the Ukraine and possibly continue to expand NATO.

If I had one iota of confidence Clinton would stand up to Putin over the Ukraine I'd feel better about her. I don't.

And you think Trump is going to stand up to Putin? Trump is already telling us he plans to appease Putin.

Turtleneck wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:

If I had one iota of confidence Clinton would stand up to Putin over the Ukraine I'd feel better about her. I don't.

And you think Trump is going to stand up to Putin? Trump is already telling us he plans to appease Putin.

So they both will. I fail to see how that makes Trump worse.


Vote Darrell Castle.

LooseGoose wrote:

Turtleneck wrote:

And you think Trump is going to stand up to Putin? Trump is already telling us he plans to appease Putin.

So they both will. I fail to see how that makes Trump worse.


Vote Darrell Castle.

So your answer is to vote for an isolationist? Makes sense.

Joe Concha, writing at The Hill, put the media’s coverage of the campaign in perspective when he compared the network news air time allotted to accusations made by several women against Trump versus the amount of time they spend talking about the Clinton related Wikileaks revelations. And I’m asking you to really pay attention to this short snippet even though it involves some math. (Emphasis added)

In viewing recordings by The Hill of each of the major network news evening newscasts, which are watched by an average 22-24 million viewers each night collectively, the newest batch of Wikileaks revelations — which include derogatory comments of Catholics by senior Clinton campaign officials and more disturbing examples of collusion between the media and said campaign (See: newsworthy stuff) — was covered for a combined 57 seconds out of 66 minutes of total air time on ABC, NBC and CBS.

In a related story, allegations by four women against Donald Trump accusing him of unwanted sexual advances was covered a combined 23 minutes.

Add it all up, and one presidential candidate’s negative news of the day was somehow covered more than 23 times more than another candidate’s negative news of the day.

Stop complaining about Trump’s “war on the media” because he’s right

LooseGoose wrote:Joe Concha, writing at The Hill, put the media’s coverage of the campaign in perspective when he compared the network news air time allotted to accusations made by several women against Trump versus the amount of time they spend talking about the Clinton related Wikileaks revelations. And I’m asking you to really pay attention to this short snippet even though it involves some math. (Emphasis added)

In viewing recordings by The Hill of each of the major network news evening newscasts, which are watched by an average 22-24 million viewers each night collectively, the newest batch of Wikileaks revelations — which include derogatory comments of Catholics by senior Clinton campaign officials and more disturbing examples of collusion between the media and said campaign (See: newsworthy stuff) — was covered for a combined 57 seconds out of 66 minutes of total air time on ABC, NBC and CBS.

In a related story, allegations by four women against Donald Trump accusing him of unwanted sexual advances was covered a combined 23 minutes.

Add it all up, and one presidential candidate’s negative news of the day was somehow covered more than 23 times more than another candidate’s negative news of the day.

Stop complaining about Trump’s “war on the media” because he’s right

And the time spent back in the 90's on a blowjob will never be eclipsed. Not close.

What your author doesn't take into account is the tittilation factor. What sells. My 19 & 16 year old are not very political. However they've become attached to the soap opera train wreck on tv. Is this guy actually typing with a straight face his belief that the news will get more viewers if they write about wiki leaks of emails that many close observers of politics find way more boring than "grabbing some pussy".
Trumps complicit in this. He craved attention. He knew what sells on tv he knew how to grab people's attention on Stern. If I'm a suit at network trying to keep my job and need ratings, I know what I lead and end with. I'll let your author here crank those emails up on Pbs and that audience.

News is news, but they still have a bottom line that Trump has to appreciate. If you don't think he is setting himself up for an hourly show after the election for upwards of 20 million a year or more, I have a bridge to sell you. Guy is slow playing all of us. If he wins he's the fucking president, if he loses he's the king of the 9 o'clock hour for the next four years.

Blame the audience not the networks.

Why isn't this covered? Because America doesn't care.

It should

https://www.thenation.com/article/amy-goodman-is-facing-prison-for-reporting-on-the-dakota-access-pipeline-that-should-scare-us-all/

Read Jane Mayer's Dark Money.  

Its a long read and talks a lot about the Koch Brothers but its also serves to show how getting a foothold in the political system beyond getting their choices elected.  

It means appointing the right people or hiring the right people to interpret and enforce laws after they get passed.  Everything from workman's comp to freedom of the press.

Allahpundit ‏@allahpundit 15m15 minutes ago
How the media rigged the election for Hillary, in one chart

LooseGoose wrote:Allahpundit ‏@allahpundit 15m15 minutes ago
How the media rigged the election for Hillary, in one chart

Funny how I have mentioned that data and even linked the article that graph comes from several times. You have always brushed it off. Now it becomes useful for your agenda so you post it.

Turtleneck wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:Allahpundit ‏@allahpundit 15m15 minutes ago
How the media rigged the election for Hillary, in one chart

Funny how I have mentioned that data and even linked the article that graph comes from several times. You have always brushed it off. Now it becomes useful for your agenda so you post it.

Sorry man. Was it this article?

Pre-Primary News Coverage of the 2016 Presidential Race: Trump’s Rise, Sanders’ Emergence, Clinton’s Struggle

They loved him in the Primary....when it could get him nominated to oppose Hills.

So now that data fits your agenda? Convenient. This is sort of how you like to selectively say "look, I have peer reviewed data so you are wrong and I am 100% right," or "peer review means nothing you stupid shitbird."

Trump must has 16 year olds running his campaign.

I saw 3 Trump ads tonight on CBS. TV3. Multiple poll tracker say his chances of winning MI are around 1 in 10.

Take the money being spent in MI and other states where he hasn't a chance and spend it all on PA, Ohio, Florida, Wisconsin North Carolina and Arizona.

Lamestream media will not cover the real stories.

Turtleneck wrote:Lamestream media will not cover the real stories.

Go ahead and mock

if a tree fell in the forest and there wasn't a republican there to whine about it, would the election still be rigged?

poor Goose.. his candidate - a billionaire white guy - living such a disenfranchised life..

Robert J Sakimano wrote:poor Goose.. his candidate - a billionaire white guy - living such a disenfranchised life..

Obsessed.