Obama Media Love Fest

[rushmc 23]

Well what do you know. It is now official


http://www.sacredheart.edu/pages/24790_poll_media_s_love_affair_with_obama.cfm

Quote

POLL: MEDIA'S LOVE AFFAIR WITH OBAMAA new Sacred Heart University national poll found 64.9% of Americans say the purported national media “love affair” with U.S. Senator Barack Obama is very (30.5%) or somewhat real (34.4%). Another 26.5% suggested the love affair was somewhat unreal (8.5%) or not at all real (18.0%). Others, 8.6%, were unsure.

Majorities of both Republican and Democratic voters surveyed agreed the national media love affair is real – 78.3% and 58.5% respectively.

“It should come as no surprise that a large majority of Americans perceive Senator Obama as receiving more favorable media treatment compared to Senator McCain. Obama is a fresh, young and charismatic political figure. Any politician who is routinely compared to John F. Kennedy and Bobby Kennedy, as Obama has been, will surely cultivate support among journalists. This will change, however, once the nominating conventions are over and the general election campaign begins. The euphoria will subside and we are likely to see more balanced coverage,” stated Dr. Gary Rose, professor and chair of Sacred Heart University’s Department of Government and Politics.

More than two-thirds of Americans included in the poll, 67.9%, believed U.S. Senator Barack Obama is receiving the most favorable media coverage to date in the campaign. Just 11.1% indicated U.S. Senator John McCain was receiving the most favorable media coverage. Some, 14.8%, indicated they saw the media coverage as equal while 6.3% were unsure.

“When just 6.3% of those surveyed were unsure about the balance of media coverage for the candidates, it’s a good indication it is obvious to Americans – but maybe not to the national media,” said Jerry C. Lindsley, director of the Sacred Heart University Polling Institute.

Majorities of both Republican and Democratic voters surveyed suggested Senator Barack Obama is receiving the most favorable national media coverage – 80.3% and 63.1% respectively.

In a three-way U.S. Presidential candidate line up, “none of the above” fares well on a November ballot question. Eight hundred survey respondents were given the choice of U.S. Senator Barack Obama, U.S. Senator John McCain and “none of the above” for president this November. Senator Barack Obama led with 37.8% followed by Senator John McCain at 27.0% and “none of the above” at 22.3%. Another 13.0% were unsure.

Republican voters were more likely to say “none of the above” (19.2%) than Democratic voters (14.2%). And, conservatives were significantly more likely to say “none of the above” (23.0%) than liberals (17.1%).

Lindsley said, “More than two-fifths, 44.8%, told our researchers that they would be very or somewhat likely to support a strong third-party candidate if one emerged. This has to be unsettling to both candidates.”

“With respect to the poll concerning support for third parties, it is not at all unusual to find a substantial portion of the electorate indicating displeasure with the nominees of the two major parties, and a willingness to vote for a third-party candidate. This is a fairly typical finding. However, when given the opportunity to actually vote for a third-party candidate, the vast majority of these disenchanted respondents will balk at the opportunity and cast their vote for either the Democratic or Republican candidate. A good number of those persons polled who supported ‘none of the above’ will also vote for one of the two major party candidates. The United States has been a two party system since the beginning of the republic, and this will not change any time soon,” stated Dr. Rose.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[billvon 3,120]

It's like the FOX-Bush love fest, but with less stupidity!

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

It's like the FOX-Bush love fest, but with less stupidity!

any kind of media bias is stupid - regardless of which party - so I don't see how it's less or more just because of the direction of the political bias

it's kinda counter-mission - don'tyathink?

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[rhys 0]

Of course the media love him, his followers follow his every move and his haters follow his every move.

That shit sells new papers and tv commecilas man!

Just print Obama on the front page and you are home and hosed!

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix

[quade 4]

Quote

Of course the media love him, his followers follow his every move and his haters follow his every move.
That shit sells new papers and tv commecilas man!
Just print Obama on the front page and you are home and hosed!

And exactly how is that different than just about any President?

The truth is that every network follows what the President does, good or bad and reports it. Depending on the exact situation, they may give more or less time to it on any given night, but as far back as I can remember none of them could go have a hamburger without members of the press tagging along and reporting it.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[rhys 0]

Quote

And exactly how is that different than just about any President?

It is not, and I never said it was.

This is just a see saw of interest.

Before when GW was all over the news I bet the right didn't think anything of it, but now the negro guy won, the blood is boiling and they want answers gaw'dammit.

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix

[Rookie120 0]

Quote

but now the negro guy won

Yup! Just because he's black. It has nothing to do with the policies he's trying to ram through. Just because he's black.

If you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck!

[Andy9o8 2]

You were just looking for an excuse to say "ram", weren't you?

[warpedskydiver 0]

Shhhhhh don't mention he is black, that would be racist yo!


I have a friend who was my roomie for over 4 years.

We were at a party with manny hotties who were dnacing and gettin naked etc.

One of them turned to our friend Vicki and "whispered "He's black!" to which Rafael replied "I know!"

[rickjump1 0]

Quote

It's like the FOX-Bush love fest, but with less stupidity!

This is more than a Fox-Bush love fest. We're talking about the tingling up the leg of Chris Matthews. Nope, its more. This could lead to massive ejaculations anytime the BHO speaks. On the other hand, how have they been hiding it up until now?

Do your part for global warming: ban beans and hold all popcorn farts.

[livendive 8]

Quote

Well what do you know. It is now official
...

Now? Source notwithstanding, the article was written in August 2008. I'm not denying that Obama gets some biased treatment from the press, but I wouldn't cite that particular article as proof.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[rushmc 23]

http://www.foxnews.com/video2/video08.html?maven_referralObject=9972437&maven_referralPlaylistId=&sRevUrl=http://www.foxnews.com/

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[billvon 3,120]

>This is more than a Fox-Bush love fest.

Then where are the lies about WMD's? Where are the democrats doing the perp walk who are "accidentally" labeled republicans? Where are the scathing condemnations of anyone who disagrees with Obama? Where are the "TRAITOR!" labels?

You have a long way to go if you're going to get back to the one continuous orgy that was the FOX-Bush lovefest.

[rushmc 23]

Show them! Post them!

As for the lies bull shit. That lunacy is stupid at best and a lie at worst

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[billvon 3,120]

>Show them! Post them!

Sure. Here are just a few.

=========
FOX's Baier claimed Duelfer report included "suspicions" that Saddam smuggled WMDs to Syria
January 13, 2005 6:13 pm ET

FOX News national security correspondent Bret Baier falsely claimed that the Iraq Survey Group's (ISG) report on the search for illicit weapons (WMDs) in Iraq articulated "suspicions that many weapons made their way into Syria before the war began." In fact, while Bush administration officials have hinted that they suspect Iraq smuggled banned weapons into Syria, the ISG's final report, commonly known as the Duelfer report, included no evidence to support this conjecture.
===========
Fox host sides with guest calling Colin Powell a “traitor” to GOP
Posted May 6, 2009, 3:49 PM PT
First broadcast: May 6, 2009

Fox panelist Nick Dipaolo says the GOP should ignore Colin Powell’s advice that the party should leave Rush Limbaugh behind and move towards the center. “Who cares what Colin Powell thinks?” Dipaolo asked. “We’re going to take advice from a traitor now? We need to get back to small government, low taxes.”
================
On Fox News Sunday, Hume falsely asserted that Al Qaeda in Iraq "was there before we got there"
September 09, 2007 3:03 pm ET

SUMMARY: On Fox News Sunday, Brit Hume asked Juan Williams, "Who are we fighting there [in Iraq] now, Juan?" then answered his own question: "Al Qaeda in Iraq. They were there before we got there, and they're there now." In fact, U.S. military and intelligence officials have reportedly stated that Al Qaeda in Iraq didn't exist before the U.S.-led invasion in 2003, didn't pledge its loyalty to Osama bin Laden until October 2004, and isn't controlled by bin Laden or his top aides. Further, the 9-11 Commission found "no evidence" that contacts between Saddam Hussein's Iraq and Al Qaeda "developed into a collaborative operational relationship" before the Iraq invasion.
==================

[rushmc 23]

Quote

>Show them! Post them!

Sure. Here are just a few.

=========
FOX's Baier claimed Duelfer report included "suspicions" that Saddam smuggled WMDs to Syria
January 13, 2005 6:13 pm ET

FOX News national security correspondent Bret Baier falsely claimed that the Iraq Survey Group's (ISG) report on the search for illicit weapons (WMDs) in Iraq articulated "suspicions that many weapons made their way into Syria before the war began." In fact, while Bush administration officials have hinted that they suspect Iraq smuggled banned weapons into Syria, the ISG's final report, commonly known as the Duelfer report, included no evidence to support this conjecture.
===========
Fox host sides with guest calling Colin Powell a “traitor” to GOP
Posted May 6, 2009, 3:49 PM PT
First broadcast: May 6, 2009

Fox panelist Nick Dipaolo says the GOP should ignore Colin Powell’s advice that the party should leave Rush Limbaugh behind and move towards the center. “Who cares what Colin Powell thinks?” Dipaolo asked. “We’re going to take advice from a traitor now? We need to get back to small government, low taxes.”
================
On Fox News Sunday, Hume falsely asserted that Al Qaeda in Iraq "was there before we got there"
September 09, 2007 3:03 pm ET

SUMMARY: On Fox News Sunday, Brit Hume asked Juan Williams, "Who are we fighting there [in Iraq] now, Juan?" then answered his own question: "Al Qaeda in Iraq. They were there before we got there, and they're there now." In fact, U.S. military and intelligence officials have reportedly stated that Al Qaeda in Iraq didn't exist before the U.S.-led invasion in 2003, didn't pledge its loyalty to Osama bin Laden until October 2004, and isn't controlled by bin Laden or his top aides. Further, the 9-11 Commission found "no evidence" that contacts between Saddam Hussein's Iraq and Al Qaeda "developed into a collaborative operational relationship" before the Iraq invasion.
==================

Glad you think this supports your assurtions!



And the "traitor" comments? Anything for those?

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rickjump1 0]

Quote

>This is more than a Fox-Bush love fest.

Then where are the lies about WMD's? Where are the democrats doing the perp walk who are "accidentally" labeled republicans? Where are the scathing condemnations of anyone who disagrees with Obama? Where are the "TRAITOR!" labels?

You have a long way to go if you're going to get back to the one continuous orgy that was the FOX-Bush lovefest.

Bill, I don't know where you are going with this. The US media elected BHO; nothing short. How come so many democrats signed on to the WMD? Is that disgusting to you? The scathing condemnations of anyone who disagrees with BHO is simple: they are called racists or potential terrorists. I guess you don't remember the Dep of Homeland Security sizing up vets? You are talking about FOX, one network you don't take seriously; right? Emperor BHO has everthing but FOX.

Do your part for global warming: ban beans and hold all popcorn farts.

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

The US media elected BHO; nothing short.

WTF? Do you mean to tell me that I waited in line outside in the cold for 3-4 hours to help ensure McCain wasn't elected for nothing, that only the media's votes mattered, that all my pre-election research of the candidates' platforms was wasted?

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[rushmc 23]

Yes

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[FreeflyChile 0]

Quote

And exactly how is that different than just about any President?

I think this is a really interesting question.

Of course, any President commands a lot of attention and most of the things a President does will sell papers (or internet hits nowadays) because of the influence and power that may result.

I do think that Obama is different because the historical aspect of this still has allure to a lot of people, because it's still early enough in his presidency (in my opinion) where we can't tell whether his ideas on the economy (and attempts to fix things), health care, etc, will uiltimately be a huge success, a collossal failure, a moderate success or failure, or be a footnote in history - so there's still the hope that got him elected in the first place.

He still has a wow/superstar/celebrity status with the public here and abroad because he's a great speaker - and publically a stark contrast to his predecessor.

I think that by the end of the Bush administration the opinion of GWB was SO negative that ANYONE short of Dick Cheney would have at least some sort of honeymoon. Obama's so different from Bush (speaking about personality, public persona - not political leaning) that I think people are still in that whole "Thank God it's not Bush" mode.

Because of the way information is now distributed, with the speed it moves and with the extremely short public attention span that we have now as a society, it SEEMS like Obama's been around for a while and he's been in the news for a long time - but it's been only 6 months! As Tom Cruise tells the defendant in A Few Good Men - that's a hockey season!

If the economy, in the next 6 months, shows definitive signs of improvement - I think Obama will get the credit and continue to be a media darling. If, in 6 months, things don't change, then people will really start to go 'this guy's no different than all the rest'. I'm not sure if that's fair - 1 year is a rather short period to measure turnaround and recovery from the mess we've been in, but that's what I think.

My personal opinion of the man - I like him, he's great publically (I think that this country needs good PR) but after the campaign he ran, I am squarely in 'you talked the talk, now walk the walk' mode.

Show me, don't tell me.

[rushmc 23]

They love him in France too

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/12066453/obama-sarkozy-pdf

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln