bin laden died, obama...played cards...

[ballen0351]

Its kinda interesting topic. As my commander and Chief Id much rather he have been in the room paying attention to what was going on. On the flip side once the order to go was given there was not much left for him to do but wait. Id want to watch it myself out of respect for the guys on the mission but again not much I can do. I dont think people should be ratting him out however if that guy was his assistant or whatever he was he should keep his trap shut.

I also find the double standard of the press just kinda sickening. I dont mind them being hard on Bush if they were equally hard on Obama but to show favorites is bad. Part of the reason for freedom of press was to be a watch dog of the Govt not a lap dog to one party.

 

[Steve]

I think we see what we look for. Media simply struggles for relevance. Billc posts many legitimate issues. Frankly, I agree with some of the big issues. But billc doesn't post any article criticizing or taking to task the GOP. Is it intentional? Maybe. But my guess is he sees what he looks for. We all do it.

The problem with being unaware of this is that we can begin to believe that if we don't acknowledge things, they don't exist, and in turn become apologists. So, while billc often posts interesting articles, some are a little whacky, and all represent only one position.

People make excuses for Benghazi or fast and furious, just as they excuse Iran contra or the blatant war profiteering in Iraq and Afghanistan with Halliburton and Kellogg brown and root.

But regarding media, I think there are two kinds. Those that push agendas and those push angles and stories that they will believe increase their revenue and viewership. It's not difficult to distinguish them.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[ballen0351]

The problem with the media is most people don't take time to look for other sources. Most people sit down after work and watch the nightly news and don't know they are getting half truths or even no truths. Many here see it but we also debate politics on the internet and most people don't. So when the evening news pushes an agenda regardless of which side they push its bad for everyone. Like I said they were supposed to be keeping the people informed on the goings on of the Govt not picking sides.

 

[billc]

But billc doesn't post any article criticizing or taking to task the GOP.

Actually, it is intentional. I post the problems that the other party has...why? Because the main sources of news for the general public, the main sources of entertainment for the general public and the main sources of education for the general public all lean to the left and do not take the democrat party or it's politicians to task. So there is no reason for me to take on the GOP because they are already hammered by all the "legitimate," sources in our society. When you have the level of opposition to one political party in journalism, the entertainment community and our education system, that you have in our country it creates a huge problem in finding the right people to serve in public office.

Notice, in the most recent scandals involving democrat politicians...they rarely if ever identify them as democrats. Any scandal involving Republicans...they lead the story with their party affiliation.

So I don't feel the need to use my time going after the problems in the GOP...after all, the GOP establishment even has the Tea Party, a group I support, going after them. The GOP establishment also has the biggest names in talk radio going after them as well...Rush, Hannity, Beck, Mark Levin, so I am more than knowledgeable about the problems with the GOP because I listen to all these guys and the other critics of the GOP, it is hard not to hear the GOP being criticized in this country...so they have more than enough critics and attackers...the democrat party needs more...and obama needs to have a lot more as well.

 

[oftheherd1]

As to the false meme generated by paying attention to "petty," attacks by the left on conservatives and members of the Tea Party and soon the Libertarian party...

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journa...epublicans-Better-at-Diversity-than-Democrats



So you see, these "petty," and false, attacks take their toll on the truth when it concerns Conservatives and Tea Party members...that is why the left does it non-stop...in the case of obama, the posts aren't petty, they are simply highlighting the truth about the man that the media doesn't want to cover...the real man behind the myth of obama...

Some truth to that, but you do seem to take it to an extreme sometimes.

Of course, we have liberal posters who I think do the same thing.

 

[oftheherd1]

...How else could e party of slavery, Jim Crow, lynching, the Kkkk, and all manner of racism (the democrats) have convinced the very people they hurt with those practices to vote democrat. Itcomes from years and years of democrat attacks, both petty and major, and years and years of republicans thinking that those attacks can't work...and yet they do.
...

So what may seem minor and petty can actually be important, especially when it is repeated and highlighted. If you only allow the media to frame the image of Obama...he gets reelected to a second term...instead of being voted out because he is a poor leader.


...

Don't let yourself look less than informed. You do bring up some good points sometimes. But the above disregards the Great Society and War on Poverty. When I was a kid, one of our neighbors (our properties co-joined in some places) was black. He once mentioned voting republican. Back then, since my parents were democrats, as well as most people in that area, I figured I was too. So I asked him why he would vote republican. He told me it was because the republican party had helped his people. I had a lot of respect for him so I still wished he had voted democrat ( :lol2: ), but I sure understood his position.

But President Johnson, like it or not, changed the perspective of blacks about the democrats. He wasn't someone in history, who might still once in a while do things for blacks. He was a live person, leading the democratic party, to do good things for blacks, and others. Whether you like what he did or not, that's when the big change happened.

And before him, President Truman had gotten blacks attention as well. He had fought the KKK in local politics, and as president, he had ordered the military desegregated.

That is all from my perspective of course. If I have distorted anything from a black perspective, I hope someone will correct me.

 

[Steve]

The problem with the media is most people don't take time to look for other sources. Most people sit down after work and watch the nightly news and don't know they are getting half truths or even no truths. Many here see it but we also debate politics on the internet and most people don't. So when the evening news pushes an agenda regardless of which side they push its bad for everyone. Like I said they were supposed to be keeping the people informed on the goings on of the Govt not picking sides.

That sounds less like a problem with media and more like a problem with the consumer.


Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Steve]

Actually, it is intentional. I post the problems that the other party has...why? Because the main sources of news for the general public, the main sources of entertainment for the general public and the main sources of education for the general public all lean to the left and do not take the democrat party or it's politicians to task. So there is no reason for me to take on the GOP because they are already hammered by all the "legitimate," sources in our society. When you have the level of opposition to one political party in journalism, the entertainment community and our education system, that you have in our country it creates a huge problem in finding the right people to serve in public office.

Notice, in the most recent scandals involving democrat politicians...they rarely if ever identify them as democrats. Any scandal involving Republicans...they lead the story with their party affiliation.

So I don't feel the need to use my time going after the problems in the GOP...after all, the GOP establishment even has the Tea Party, a group I support, going after them. The GOP establishment also has the biggest names in talk radio going after them as well...Rush, Hannity, Beck, Mark Levin, so I am more than knowledgeable about the problems with the GOP because I listen to all these guys and the other critics of the GOP, it is hard not to hear the GOP being criticized in this country...so they have more than enough critics and attackers...the democrat party needs more...and obama needs to have a lot more as well.

It's a shame to hear that you do it on purpose.


Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

 

[billc]

Hmmm...why should I devote my time to attacking the GOP, when paid professionals in journalism, entertainment, and education do it 24/7 with more access to main stream America than a little post on martialtalk? I think the world can get by without me airing all my complaints about the GOP on this little website...

 

[billc]

Now here is an excellent example of what I mean...from the entertainment wing...the new movie "The Butler," ...and it's distortions...

http://pjmedia.com/lifestyle/2013/08/16/5-ways-lee-daniels-the-butler-rewrites-history-to-suit-liberals/

5. It overstates its case.


Whitaker’s Butler is a tortured soul (largely the creation of screenwriter Danny Strong, who also wrote the Sarah Palin hatefest Game Change) who has known all kinds of heartbreak, but the Washington Post article about a real long-serving White House butler that was the original basis for the movie is free of the anguish or anger with which the movie is loaded. In the first two or three minutes there are references to two lynchings, a rape (of the butler’s mother) and a racist murder (of his father). None of these things happened to the actual butler, who also didn’t have an activist son nor another son who died in the Vietnam War.

3. It says Ronald Reagan was an enemy of civil rights….


Though Dwight Eisenhower (played by Robin Williams) is favorably portrayed in The Butler, fellow Republicans Richard Nixon (John Cusack) and Ronald Reagan (Alan Rickman) are thrown under the bus because the modern Left is obsessed with the fiction that Republicans are enemies to black people...

The only Reagan-related racial issue that The Butler can muster is his veto of sanctions against apartheid-era South Africa, which wasn’t even a US Civil Rights issue and which Reagan believed would worsen conditions for blacks in that country. The movie portrays this entirely understandable decision (which was overridden by Congress) as simple heartlessness toward black people.

 

[jks9199]

Its kinda interesting topic. As my commander and Chief Id much rather he have been in the room paying attention to what was going on. On the flip side once the order to go was given there was not much left for him to do but wait. Id want to watch it myself out of respect for the guys on the mission but again not much I can do. I dont think people should be ratting him out however if that guy was his assistant or whatever he was he should keep his trap shut.

I also find the double standard of the press just kinda sickening. I dont mind them being hard on Bush if they were equally hard on Obama but to show favorites is bad. Part of the reason for freedom of press was to be a watch dog of the Govt not a lap dog to one party.

How much should he have watched? He gave the go-no go, and they got into their transport. The actual raid was probably only a fraction of the total operation time; did he need to be hovering in the situation room while they were in transit? Should he have moved in several days prior as they began to plan and prepare? (Folks, prep for an op like that, in a unit like that, gets near as dangerous as the real thing, because they were almost certainly doing run throughs with live weapons...)

 

[arnisador]

Now here is an excellent example of what I mean...from the entertainment wing...the new movie "The Butler," ...and it's distortions...

So...you're saying that fictional movies aren't always exactly accurate, as you perceive the facts to be?

 

[elder999]

Jks9199,

Just to be accurate, I've scrolled down the list of threads started by me, and you aren't even close in saying I should only post on Obama once or twice a week...I have maybe one or two Obama specific threads in the last 15 days, if that. The threads that I have posted about are mainly the I.R.S. scandal global warming and obamacare, the zimmerman trial, gun control issues and other topics, the ones related to Obama deal with policy or actual scandals, all of which aren't being covered properly by the government/democrat media.

I

You would have to ask his friend in the video who actually made the comments. check his interview in the article.

Gotta love that search function-100 threads started by the OP where he mentions "Obama."

Granted, many of those have absolutely nothing to do with Obama-the fact that he winds up mentioned by the original poster is indicative to me of a degree of obession...:l;fao:

 

[Steve]

Hmmm...why should I devote my time to attacking the GOP, when paid professionals in journalism, entertainment, and education do it 24/7 with more access to main stream America than a little post on martialtalk? I think the world can get by without me airing all my complaints about the GOP on this little website...

Do you think that rush, Sean, Michelle, Ann and the good folks at fox, brietbart and all of the other places you get your information from are volunteers?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[billc]

No, but they do not have immediate access to the American people, as the rest of the government/democrat media do. You have to go to am radio, or cable news networks to see them, while ABC, CBS, NBC, PBS are right there on everyones television. Watch any television show...and you are likely to see jabs at conservatives or the groups they support...inserted into regular, popular television shows. The hosts of the Sunday news shows on regular networks, by and large, are all left leaning and sympathetic to the democrats and their policies, if not having worked for them directly before they became hosts of those shows...so the people you mentioned Steve, Rush, Sean, Hannity, Michelle Malkin, and Ann Coulter have a much more limited audience and less exposure to the American people. They are also more than likely not brought up in a positive way, if at all, in the education system the majority of American children attend. So again, it is the combination of easy access and saturation of the "petty," comments made about conservatives and their groups that create a false image that becomes accepted as "ordinary," and has a real impact on the culture and the outcome of elections.

So why should I devote my time to attacking the GOP? Fairness? As Rush always says, he is fairness because so much of the rest of the media are already on the opposite side...and have easy access to the American people...

So...you're saying that fictional movies aren't always exactly accurate, as you perceive the facts to be?

In the case of this movie...it fits what I have posted here...it takes shots at Republican President's that may not be in the original material, and puts in events that focus on race issues, of the past, for the sake of keeping them alive, when the original material doesn't include them...showing that the race hustlers will take absolutely any opportunity to push their "petty," attacks, even in a movie that isn't about the racism they show...

The idiots promoting the movie oprah and the lead, Forrest Whitaker, even went so far as to compare Trayvon Martin to Emmet Till, when they were doing interviews for this movie...about a butler in the White House...

For the record, the death of Trayvon Martin was tragic and sad...but he was not Emmet Till or even close to Emmet Till...but the people who need racsim to continue for their own fortunes and mental well being need to generate new victims of racism...even if there is no way race had anything to do with Martin's death...

The non-stop "petty," attacks from the left and the race hustlers have an effect because of the saturation in the culture...

Everyone keeps saying...when will we get past the issue of race...welll things like this movie are meant to keep us from getting past the issue of race...

 

[jks9199]

Okay jks9199,

I've scrolled to page two of the thread list and still haven't found all of the Obama based threads you say I have started...remember how many you said there were? I think a quick check would show you have made a point not based in fact.



...

But the "petty" stuff helps create a false image of this guy which in turn helps isolate him from the consequences of his decisions...

OK. Let's amend the challenge to simply picking a few of the most significant, important, or demonstrative stories that depict the so-called leftist agenda. I probably align most closely with a conservative libertarian mindset. Your posts push the hard right agenda, heavily. I'm sure you're familiar with the story of the boy who cried wolf; when you post so much of the minor stuff, it's easy to discount some real significant stories.

In this particular instance, it's a non-story. Obama is only working half-days on the weekends! Wow! How many hours do you work on your days off? I try to do as little work related stuff as I can; I'm working on breaking the habit of checking my work email regularly on my days off. As President, Obama doesn't have the luxury of a true day off; he's THE MAN and the phone will ring at 3 AM (a la a recent campaign), there'll be work he has to do on a day off or when he's on a vacation. You think he doesn't get a daily briefing on vacation? That would be a concern, if he let things slide like that.

During a military operation, a man with NO military experience (that's a different discussion about qualifications for the President) didn't hang out in the Situation Room for hours, essentially cluttering things up. He went upstairs, where he was still available instantly, and relaxed a little. I don't see a huge concern; he didn't go to a show at the Kennedy Center, he wasn't spending time with an intern in the Oval Office... Maybe I'm seeing things from a different perspective, but I never assumed that he would be sitting in the Situation Room all day during that op. I figured he'd be there when they were close, to when they were safe.

 

[billc]

100 or more out of...8,926....

 

[billc]

he's THE MAN and the phone will ring at 3 AM (a la a recent campaign)

Except when it is a call from the Ambassador in Bhengazi...he didn't seem to take that call...

The problem is the image...I believe he is just as accessible anywhere in the White House or anywhere in the country...the problem is the image put out by the White House was that he was in that room...the whole time...on the edge of his seat...and the media ran with it...and it wasn't true...it has helped to build up a myth about this guy that helped him get reelected...and if it was a Republican instead of him...it wouldn't have been allowed to happen...

 

[ballen0351]

How much should he have watched? He gave the go-no go, and they got into their transport. The actual raid was probably only a fraction of the total operation time; did he need to be hovering in the situation room while they were in transit? Should he have moved in several days prior as they began to plan and prepare? (Folks, prep for an op like that, in a unit like that, gets near as dangerous as the real thing, because they were almost certainly doing run throughs with live weapons...)

How much should he have watched? All of the raid. How much would you watch? In my opinion he sent these men in on one of the most dangerous and important missions of the war and he owed it to them to show some interest in the outcome. Thats not a knock on Obama it a knock on any President that wouldn't at a very min be in the room. Its what a leader does. Its what I expect from my commander and chief. And trainig with live weapons is not even close to as dangerous as the real thing. Nobodys shooting back at you in training. You dont agree thats fine its your opinion mine is a leader would have been there not playing cards. Say your a LT in charge of a SWAT Unit and send them into a barricaded gun man as the LT would you be in the Command Post playing cards?

 

[ballen0351]

That sounds less like a problem with media and more like a problem with the consumer.


Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

So you think its ok for the media to play Favorites? How can the consumer know there is a problem if they trust the news to report news not agenda? You dont know what you dont know.

Edit
I guess the better question should be do you think there is a bias at all?