You know the sad thing is that there is a bias of the media, but it is usually one that supports hypocrites like Sarah Palin and Rush Limbaugh.  Constantly the mainstream media focuses on these nutcases and actually gives the American people the idea that they might know what they are talking about.

Public reaction turns against Sarah Palin for making an ass out of herself, and it’s the fault of the media?  Please tell me how it’s the media’s fault that Sarah immediately tried to gain sympathy from Americans because she supposedly thought that her child had been insulted in a Family Guy episode, although she obviously didn’t care enough to research the episode, or for that fact even take the context of the full episode into account?

Even if she felt that she couldn’t be bothered to take a good look before mouthing off, as a person trying to get people to believe that she’s a professional politician that does not needlessly overreact, she probably has a large room full of people that would have been more than willing to do the
research for her and feed her the information in the small digestible parts that she could have easily and quickly comprehend.

But she didn’t.  She saw a quick and easy way to possibly gain the sympathy of a majority of Americans, and now her quick overreaction is what’s making her look like an ass.

No liberal biased media conspiracy, just the stupidity and overreaction of Sarah Palin.

If Obama had made such a political blunder, the media would be all over it.  Mainstream media wouldn’t hesitate for a split second to show that Obama
was being a hypocritical ass.  Obama is a Democrat and somewhat liberal President.

Look back at the Presidents we have had in the last forty years, Republican and Democrat.  And each time you will see that constantly the blunders of the Democratic Presidents were blwon way out of proportion by the mainstream media, while the Republican Presidents could make multiple major blunders and seldom did the media go after them anywhere near the level that they went after the Democratic Presidents.

Clinton tried to argue the exact definition of the word “sex” in a legal case about a sexual scandal involving him getting oral sex from a woman that he wasn’t married to, in the Oval office.  And the media tore into him with the wild abandon of a rabid dog.

Ronald Reagan sold a large number of F-16’s to the #2 enemy of America at the time, Iran.  There was even video footage of Reagan hypocritically stating
that he would not negotiate with terrorists, when he was in negotiations with Iran (A country that was known to help finance and support terrorists.) to sell them our most advanced fighter planes.

Reagan appeared in court and his defense, even though those F-16’s could not
have been sold to Iran without his personal Presidential approval, was that he couldn’t remember whether he had actually given approval or not.

Either he lied, and by lying perjured himself (A much better grounds for impeachment, especially when if his action aided and abetted an enemy of the United States, which selling F-16’s to Iran is, but its very definition treason.

Or he really couldn’t remember whether he had given approval or not, which would mean that he was impaired, and not competent enough to continue
being President.

But tell me.  Which President did the liberal media conspiracy go after more viciously?  Ronald Reagan for a treasonable offense, or Bill Clinton for a bit of infidelity that didn’t even put his marriage into jeopardy?

And which offense had more potential to hurt Americans, or possibly innocents from other countries?

Yes there’s a bias in the media, but take a good solid look at the news being reported and focused on, and you’ll quickly see that the wind is actually blowing the other way…

5 thoughts on “Sarah Palin Inserts Foot in Mouth, and the true media bias.

  1. What planet are you from? How much of the mispronunciation of the word corpsman from Obama was there compared to the hype about Bush’s inability to correctly nuclear? You damn sure didn’t hear much from Keith Olberman, Wolf Blitzer or Rachel Maddow when Barak said that he had campaigned in all 57 states. They give him a pass not because he’s black, but because he’s a liberal. Sarah is not nearly as stupid as you and others make her out to be. Come November, the dems are on the way out. In 2012, you’ll see your messiah was a one term wonder. As far as Clinton goes, he’s the biggest joke there ever was, at least until Al Franken came along.

    • Bush was a President that was known for mispronouncing words. He mispronounced so many words during his administration that he will probably go down in history as the President that mispronounced the most words and flubbed the most lines. I’m sorry that Obama hasn’t achieved such a dubious reputation in his use of the English language that people expect him to make a mistake every single time that he opens his mouth, like they did with George W. Bush. But Obama is human, and he is going to occasionally flub lines, just nowhere near as many as his predecessor did.
      Whether or not those three journalists said anything, about Obama’s 57 state flub or not, I am sure that the flub was properly represented in the media. And if you want I’m willing to bet that I can track down at least ten other journalists that made some sort of comment about the flub. But the truly said thing is that flub has been used to erroneously tie Obama with the powers that be with the Islamic religion, which is complete and utter hogwash. And another example of the Republican bias, for as far as I know at no single time did the media ever make that a flub that George W. Bush said had some sort of dire secret conspiratorial meaning. And if Sarah Palin is not as stupid as she makes herself out to be, then isn’t it high time that she figured out how not to seem so painfully stupid whenever anyone that is unbiased interviews her. I mean come on, she’s had plenty of time to try to get over her past mistakes of being incredibly sloppy at research and retaining research. Yet once again it is revealed as one of her biggest flaws. So are you saying that every single democrat will lose their political office in 2012? Not only is that a pretty ludicrous statement, but if that did happen it would mean that America would only have one de facto political party, and that’s the way that totalitarian governments are established. Although I would favor at least three political party choices, most will tell you that it is the ebb and flow of both Republicans and Democrats gaining and losing political power that has made this country great.
      Wrong. Barack Obama is not my messiah. During the election I was just as analytical and critical of Obama as I was for John McCain. He makes a mistakes, I am not going to hesitate to point it out when he does. And no, Clinton was not perfect, like all Presidents he made his fair share of mistakes. But I’d wager that years from now when the unbiased and objective accounts of The Clinton and George W. Bush Administration are written that far more historians use the words “the biggest joke that there ever was” to describe Bush’s Presidency then Clintons.

  2. I’ve seen Sarah interviewed several times. I find her to be an intelligent, thoughtful, honest person who has a good grasp on the issues. This country is divided into basically two political parties, and I’d be very happy and willing to vote for another party that mirrors my views more than the Republicans “if” I thought there’d be a snowball’s chance in hell of them being elected. That’s why I’ve never taken a serious look at the Libertarian party. They can’t get elected. The TEA Party will only achieve Obama’s reelection as it will split the votes in the Republican party. No, I don’t think Sarah can win and she is not the best choice for the Republicans to put up against Obama. But, I don’t see the vociferous hatred, ridicule and chastising that the left throws at her as any more than a planned character assassination because they’re scared to death of her public appeal. I’m puzzled by the Republican’s lack of decisive action while the Democrats flail and flounder around as they prepare to sink into oblivion. I don’t think that “all” the Democrats will be defeated, but, as you say, our system will most probably shift the balance as it usually does in the mid-term elections. Liberals are liars, charalatans and conceited fools. They have the proletariat right where they want them as they throw them a few crumbs and tell them that they’re their best friend. “IF” they were serious about “helping” the little guy, they’d be trying to “show a man how to fish and feeding him for a lifetime” as opposed to giving him a fish paid for by my taxes. Take my taxes and subsidize those who “cannot” and not those who “Will not.” When Obama said in a campaign speech, “There will be a time for you to make a profit, but, now is not that time.” I knew right away that he is full of shit. It’s not his job as President Messiah to tell anybody how much of a profit they can make. This is capitalism. At least until he and Harry succeed in seizing all our wages.

    • Spoken like a modern Republican. I think your opinions are mirrored well by your party, there’s no need for you to look elsewhere. When Jimmy Carter was in the White House, I first gained my thirst for politics and became a stout and devout Republican. My friends, family, and yes, my entire state are pretty much dominated by strong Republican values. The right to bear arms, a strong desire not to give away the store to immigrants (illegal or otherwise), the whole ball of wax. I mean, what right does the government have to step in and tell American entrepreneurs how to run their businesses and make a profit? Politics was the stuff I ate and drank, my only real passion. As the years past, I watched ever so closely as men like Reagan and Bush Sr. stepped in and did their thing. And in the end, I was proud to say to all my friends and family, and anyone who would listen, that I was justifiable in my conclusions, and beyond a shadow of a any doubt, I was completely and utterly, full of crap!
      I watched as Reaganomics became voodoo economics (Bush Sr.’s words), and then became Bushonomics. I cringe to this day at how the Republican party still clings to preaching that financial breaks to the wealthy corporations will trickle down on all us hard working lower income Americans. Can you feel that? It’s the trickling they were talking about. No wait, that’s just the rich taking a piss all over us! There’s a reason we outlawed sweat shops in this country dude. Anyone who believes that corporations and other wealthy business owners will run their empires morally and justly (where their workers are concerned) without some form of oversight and regulation, is well, incredibly naive. You put more money in the hands of most of these people, and you expect them to worry about their employees over their stockholders. I know there are exceptions, but really man, you honestly believe they’ll increase jobs over increasing their stock dividends. Or let me guess, you’re one of them. Do you own a business? Is that it? Need another tax break?
      I love to hear people debate today about those two financial geniuses (Bush Sr. and Reagan). Nothing amuses me more than to hear how the economic upturn during the Clinton administration was due to their brilliant brilliant planning. They tell me how Clinton just took advantage of strategies already put in place by his predecessors. My God! I wish just once, these people would take an honest look, or do some in-depth research, instead of just regurgitating the words of their friends and family. Reaganomics was labeled voodoo economics by a country who saw it wasn’t working. Even Bush Sr. got on board during his election campaign. Then after he’s elected, he turns around and tries the same thing. I guess it’s not always bad to do your friends favors, right? But shouldn’t you look at how many people you’re hurting with those favors. Bush had to follow up with a tax increase that he had promised he wouldn’t do. Read my lips “Liar”. He had no choice though, something had to compensate for all his favors. It cost him the next election too. And although Clinton can thank a non democrat for help balancing the budget and actually decreasing the national dept, even if just a tiny bit, it was not a Republican. It was Ross Perot! Clinton was smart enough to listen to a man who he had trounced, because he knew a good idea when he heard it. To this day, the best argument you hypocrites can come up with to down the man is that he got an extramarital BJ in the Whitehouse. Wow, really?
      I know that you like a lot of other beliefs, held aloft by the Republican party. Religious rights, an anti-abortion stance, the right to protect ourselves with guns. I hold many of these beliefs myself. I have just wised up to the fact that the current Republican party just uses these topics to win votes. No party which honestly cares about your rights and freedoms would ever have passed the Patriot Act, read it some time. No party who gave a damn about the unborn children, still young in the womb, would risk the homelessness and starvation of so many, just to put another nickel in the pockets of the super rich. Our religious rights and beliefs are important, but will mean very little if we fail as a country due to economic collapse. We’ll be lucky if we’re not all speaking Chinese. Our economy must take priority. I’m not saying you should sacrifice your beliefs, but you better pay attention to the man selling the hair tonic.
      Notice that I haven’t even mentioned the party’s, scratch that, the country’s biggest failure! Junior! The man should have his own sitcom, right after “Mama’s Family.” If you need me to point out the failure’s of this man, then my argument is pointless, you are beyond help. McCain, who I thought had a few redeemable qualities, lost his election, in my opinion, because of the last minute ad ran by the democrats. It was simply an excerpt of him speaking, saying proudly how he had voted with President Bush ninety percent of the time. Junior’s stigma was enough to drown him.
      He had some other help going down though, an intelligent, thoughtful, and honest person (your words, not mine). I’m not going to sit here and childishly make fun of her simple nature. I don’t believe she’s retarded. I do believe that she was an awful attempt at putting a prettier face on the Republican party which backfired horribly. Take a close look at her experience, and the size of her previous constituency, and you’ll quickly see, as most of the non sheep in this country, that she was little more than wallpaper, window dressing. With her qualifications, she should only approach the White House lawn, if she’s carrying a weed whacker. Oh well, at least she likes tea.
      I long for the day when I can be a proud Republican again. For now, however, I have more pride than to fall for the lies of the current party, and drown in the endless depths of that stupidity. I welcome debate, but come armed with at least a little fact. I am sick and tired of trounces others, just have them respond with something ignorant like “I can’t believe you support that ni%%@r!” But honestly, I believe that if you do your research and study the topic well enough, we won’t have reason to debate in the first place. Don’t you just love long rants.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s