Romney is being treated as if he is the one who's the incumbent... (parade, Obama)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It sure seems to me that the press have been treating Romney as if he's been the one who's been in office. Pouncing on everything he says, being held to the standard of a man who is actually President. Yet at the same time, the same press do not go after the actual President.
They all but ignore the debacle that was the Libya terror attack and how the Admin handled it from day one. They give him a pass for not meeting with world leaders. Essentially, Barack has been doing nothing but campaigning. He is not being held to the standard of President like Romney is. He is not taking heat or tough questions (except from Univision) on his term in office and the many broken promises and failures.
Is there a doubt in anyones mind, that if the press treated Barack as the incumbent, and the man who has indeed been President for the past few years, that he would have zero chance to get elected?
True-
The press completely ignores ALL OF THE PROBLEMS of the Obama presidency and his current and constant errors. It is hilarious. Only the brainwashed left does not realize that the US media has become a partisan propaganda unit and no longer reports "news".
Even you can't believe what you are saying here...lol. If Romney were a poor candidate, in more ways than one I might add, the press wouldn't feel the need to constantly tear him down for every little thing. They know he is the only adult in the room and to top it off he is wealthy, good looking, has a beautiful family and...God forbid is a moral and a decent person who lives by his convictions. The press and the left ( which are the same) can't stand that combination.
Sorry, but you seem to be in the Fox bubble - just anti-Obama at all costs, since, like the rightist media you must make stuff up in order to make a case. For instance the vague comment that he is the "only adult in the room" begs for some explanation. The country has improved (slowly) since the repub crash of 2008 - but you're just one of many who is willing to go backward just to get rid of someone you personally hate.
The point is, Romney is crippling himself because of his strange comments and seeming disdain for his lessers - like the typical cliched image of the out-of-touch conceited snob - an image which most campaigners would avoid. His statements are strange for a campaigner who wants to get votes from other than a small minority of upper-income people. His situation is that of someone in a bubble of privilege now forced out of it and befuddled by the real world. Maybe he is decent on the inside, but who would know?
He selects an Ayn Rand "Virtue of Selfishness" running mate which could indicate a neo-con ideology of "me, mine, my friends, people I like, and allies above all" - everyone else is expendable (yeah, this is the Rand philosophy, and not really uncommon).
Handing the country over to Wall Street to toy with again - not good!
And, so what if he is (was born) wealthy - what does this prove? This seems to be the simplistic conservative view that "a man is his money".
And right-wing posters complaining that Mitt is being treated badly? Please...
It's a sad state when some people don't know, I'd bet they really do but, just want to stir the s..t like some immature teenager, the difference between a gov't contract whee you actually provide something of value for the money you get, and welfare where you receive money fromt the go't WITHOUT giving anything back in return.
The press completely ignores ALL OF THE PROBLEMS of the Obama presidency and his current and constant errors. It is hilarious. Only the brainwashed left does not realize that the US media has become a partisan propaganda unit and no longer reports "news".
All one has to do is look at the lack of coverage of Fast and Furious.
Holder testifies before Congress many time and the lame stream media doesn't say a word.
Romney's 47% comment gets 10 times the coverage of Obama's bump in the road comment.
You're pretty defensive about a little 2-sentence post.
You are just repeating yourself - perhaps you answered some of those ads I mentioned. Doesn't matter...
So you admit your little 2 sentence posting was garbage? I agree..
I'm waiting for you to point out some of these ads so I can apply..
No, you're 2 busy talking about ads that dont exist. Talking about hypocracy
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest
So you admit your little 2 sentence posting was garbage? I agree..
I'm waiting for you to point out some of these ads so I can apply..
Still waiting..
Why so shrill and defensive about this?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quick Enough
Unlike you I use may sources, both left and right, for my news.
Oh no. Do you know how long the fascist media has been around? 35 years when Limbaugh started his career - and I knew immediately what he was about. You should know too. Then Fox and others joined the parade as propaganda arms of the Repugnant Party. Yeah, I hear them...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quick Enough
All one has to do is look at the lack of coverage of Fast and Furious. Holder testifies before Congress many time and the lame stream media doesn't say a word.
Romney's 47% comment gets 10 times the coverage of Obama's bump in the road comment.
Notice here that the program was started under repubs and is certainly a right-wing scheme. Of course you don't like it now - because Obama continued it. How heavily did you complain in 2006? http://www.statesmanjournal.com/arti...n-Fast-Furious
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.