I am again reminded of nun2sharp's signature line:Oh how the media love him so, "He is the great teacher. He is this guy that stands above everybody." You'd think he was Jesus Christ to hear Chris Evans talk about him. Incredible!Quote:
It is only by believing in God that we can ever criticize the Government. Once abolish God, and the Government becomes God.
YouTube - " Obamas is sort of God." Newsweek editor Evan Thomas Said On TV !!!! 6/5/09
What do you think? Can Obama walk on water?
comment removed by gratewhitehuntr @2:45
personally, I find any comments deifying Obama to be blasphemous. we all know that Chuck Norris is the only one worthy of such worship.
but seriously, it is a bit sickening. I know there will always be [insert political party]-rabid-fanboys and that they will say all kinds of ridiculous things... but the Obama fanboys are pretty zealous, even for fanboys.
he's just another politician, no better or worse than all the others. owned by lobbyists and toes the party line the way you'd expect.
I think, and again I will play devil's advocate here, that the reason that the media is so smitten with Obama is that never in the history of the US has so much been done in so little time with so much fervor.
I am not tooting a horn here but look at the past president's and the accomplishments that they have had in their respective tenure. I think not since FDR have we had to dig in our heels and pull ourselves up as a nation.
Right wrong or indifferent he is doing that. Pulling us up and getting us into a better position in the world. In 1920 it took a World War to snap the great depression here at home a great driving force that shifted the US into overdrive for production and infrastructure. Today we cannot have a World War to do that with so the president has to get creative. Find other ways to shift the driving forces of our economy so that it does create jobs, creates stability.
Personally I don't care if he is a Democrat, Republican, or Communist. As long as he can get the job done.
The media's problem is that they have no ammunition to smear him with. Sorry but the media in general has become a smear monger. Looking for any little thing to throw into the face of the sound bite driven American consciousness to either dissuade or ramp up an event.
Do the job you were hired to do and do it the best of your ability. Others be damned.
FWIW
While I disagree that the Obama fanboys are any worse than others, I have to agree with you on everything else.Quote:
Originally Posted by jockeys
I have to agree here as well. The news media (that once venerable "fourth branch" of the government) is here for one reason, and one reason only, and that is to get you to pay attention during the commercials. They will blast you with whatever outragous imagary to grab your attention so that they can then sell that attention to an advertiser who will tell you that your not going to get laid because of your dandruff. I guess you'd better buy his shampoo.Quote:
Originally Posted by singlewedge
Think Rush Limbaugh gives two F#%ks about anything he talks about? No, he's trying to sell Breath Assure mints, or whatever else it is now days. You think the CBS, CNN, MSNBC or Fox News organizations really care that you get an entire story? Think again. They are selling your attention to advertisers. That's where they make their money, and that's who they owe their loyalty to.
Do they say outragous BS? Yes, and they do so on purpose just to get you wound up and ****ed off. Advertisers call that mental state "Arousal", and they know that you're more recptive to advertising messages when you're that way.
There are a few good print sources of news, but outside of that, there are no reliable sources. Certainly not on commercial television, and vanashingly little on public television.
Sorry, I wandered a bit off topic
Of course he can. Was not he appointed to do miracles?Quote:
Originally Posted by hoglahoo
Bless you, child. You will be saved from damnation since you believethQuote:
Originally Posted by sparq
Seriously after seeing him on his last tour I wasn't sure anymore either.
He has some adaptability (if something like that exists) that would make a chameleon ashamed.
It make a nice change to see people actually *like* their leader. It is probably so foreign and unusual that they get a bit over-enthusiastic. :p
Let's face it - money is God to a lot of people. If Obama gets the Economy back on its feet, then he may not be God, but for a lot of people he will at least be up there with the Pope!
James.
That's what you get for watching msnbc. It's time you accept your own responsibility for failing to follow the 'fair and balanced news'.Quote:
Originally Posted by hoglahoo
YES WE CAN! YES WE CAN! YES WE CAN!!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by singlewedge
...compared with his predecessor, I can understand the confusion. ";"
From reading this messageboard. Most who portray him as a messiah seem to be from "the other side of the trench". Or rather they portray others as portraying him as such.
As far as I know he was elected on a whole slew of issues and partly because of issues that he did not stand for (but the opposition did). And one of his primary slogans were "change". Some people seem to be expecting mind-blowing alterations or even a revolution of how things work.
As an outsider, change does seem to be happening. Certainly on a global stance. Not necessarily at a break neck speed. But slowly.
Not limited to this post at all, I sometimes feel a certain biased form of rhetoric aimed at the other side. And sometimes it makes me wonder what people try to achive with those remarks, replies or posts if you will. If it is merely to vent frustration or have fellows of like mind bellow "Hear Hear!" I actually kind of understand it from a human psyche perspective. But if it is to try and convince others I highly doubt those passive aggressive retorts will grant any positive faction from those of undicided mind.
This post from me is not directed at anyone in particular in this post, but is certainly pertaining to the issue and general content of the subject - please don't feel that I'm trying to single anyone out here, because I'm not.
Well that may be. And maybe that is a good topic for another thread. It isn't extraordinary to see one side portray the other as ridiculous. But in this particular case, we are commenting on Chris Evans' own portrayal of his own thoughtsQuote:
Originally Posted by Chady
and who would have figured God would have a stutter?
Wow! In a country, that 76% identify themselves as Christians, that video wasn't particularly helpful for Obama.
Hmm...i wonder what Obama's political advisors/analysts will have to say about it?
One can always count on, as either democrats or republicans, the press to screw things up.
I don't have a good view on what he is doing inside the US. But on a global scale, things have really taken a different turn. No more 'axis of evil' rethoric, no more 'with us or against us' crap...Quote:
Originally Posted by Chady
Journalism at it's best? Going to get good, linear thinking work from that guy.... not! I wonder how his journalism professor in college is taking all his obvious, unregulated, bias driven crap! Sad day for Newsweek indeed!
Richard
Sheesh, these nitpicking, anti-Obama threads. There's half a dozen a day, at least. We get it.
Actually, I thought it was a thread about journalistic partisanship.Quote:
Originally Posted by Blade Wielder
This is how it works. If message boards had been around during lincoln, just imagine :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Blade Wielder
When journalist partner with the government we have.......a problem! That is the point here not, if you you like or dislike Obama.
R
Last night I dreamed that McCain had won and died and Sarah Palin was sworn in. When she was sworn in and asked if she would defend the constitution she said,"You betcha!" and I awoke in a cold sweat with butterflies in my stomach. :eek:
I am not sure what your point is. I remember message boards very well during the presidency of Bush and I do not think it can get much worse than that. So what exactly should I imagine about Lincoln?Quote:
Originally Posted by Slartibartfast
Where? I like Obama!Quote:
Originally Posted by Blade Wielder
How long will the media be so twitterpated with him :confused:
http://laurenmbaker.files.wordpress....humper0261.jpg
I wasn't looking at message boards during that presidency and I am not sure what was meant in the comparison with Lincoln's but if you want to see partisan attacks take a look at the political cartoons published during Lincoln's presidency. Some seriously vicious stuff.Quote:
Originally Posted by sparq
A) Message boards like to attack political figures.
B) Abraham was a political leader
Even though Lincoln is regarded highly now, A + B = one side attacking lincoln and the other side complaining about it.
This is nothing new. People need to stop fretting over keyboard warriors bashing obama/bush/etc...
Cui bono? ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by hoglahoo
Btw this is an interesting article about the subject: RealClearPolitics - The Obama Infatuation
Unlike Bush and Clinton, Obama received favorable coverage in both news columns and opinion pages. The nature of stories also changed. "Roughly twice as much of the coverage of Obama (44 percent) has concerned his personal and leadership qualities than was the case for Bush (22 percent) or Clinton (26 percent)," the report said. "Less of the coverage, meanwhile, has focused on his policy agenda."
...
The idea of a "critical" Obama story is a tactical conflict with congressional Democrats or criticism from an important constituency. Larger issues are minimized, despite ample grounds for skepticism.
...
Perhaps the preoccupation with the present economic crisis has diverted attention from the long-term implications of other policies. But the deeper explanation may be as straightforward as this: most journalists like Obama; they admire his command of language; he's a relief after Bush; they agree with his agenda (so it never occurs to them to question basic premises); and they don't want to see the first African-American president fail.
.. and this one is related, too: RealClearPolitics - What's Keeping Obama Up?
The poll question was whether the current problems "are due to the recession that began under the Bush administration or to the policies Obama has put in place since taking office." In other words, who's to blame, Bush or Obama?
By 62-27, voters say Bush is still the culprit.
...
But it will become increasingly obvious that the large deficit Obama has incurred while pursuing his cure for the recession is, on its own, causing more problems than it solves. As high interest rates and, most likely, inflation, begin to set in - with no relief in unemployment - it will be obvious that Obamanomics isn't working and is, in fact, aggravating the economic trouble.
Obama, recognizing the danger, has recently begun to speak out - without even cracking a guilty smile - against the huge budget deficit he created. He is trying to blame the deficit, too, on Bush. But voters will not overlook the huge spending sprees of January and February, when Obama quadrupled the 2009 deficit. They will come to see that spending as a huge mistake and will shift their blame to the new president who proposed it.
IMO, his massive cult of personality will deflate and the media love fest will end only when the economical reality sets in again. I wonder, when will that happen and what will America be like when that happens?
So the 8 years of the worst president in the history of the USA has nothing to do with it. The fault lies in the last 5 months of the new President's policies ? Give me a break.Quote:
Originally Posted by sparq
I agree with you, not necessarily because I think Obama will screw up on an unprecedented scale or that he'll fall flat on his face, but because the media who IMO is lionizing him at the moment, if history repeats, will love turning and attacking him even more.Quote:
Originally Posted by sparq
I know what you're saying, Jimmy. But if quadrupling the deficit since he's taken office is true, IMO that's like pulling the pin on a grenade and running away. That sucker's probably going to blow up and blow up......BIG!!Quote:
Originally Posted by JimmyHAD
Chris L
The fact that you don't like George W. Bush, doesn't make Him the worse President in the history of the USA.Quote:
Originally Posted by JimmyHAD
That's the spirit! The eight years of a nightmare are over, so now you can finally accept everything the new government is serving you without critically thinking about it and you can light-heartedly dismiss any new potential risks with the liberating thought that it cannot be any worse than when we had Bush.Quote:
Originally Posted by JimmyHAD
Unlike you, I have my doubts; and you are free to dismiss me as an aggressive pessimist. But there is something odd about not having any serious debates about those risks in the media, do not you think? Or are you 100% convinced that all Obama's policies will be successful in the long run?
Correct me if I am wrong, but didn't the wall st. bail out begin with Paulson under the Bush administration ? The house was on fire and the hose was running before Obama took office. I am not qualified to judge whether either administration has made the right decisions in responding to the crisis. Naturally I hope that the current guy is going to succeed and I think that is why most Americans still support him. At least are hoping he, and therefore we, succeed.Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisL
There is hope and there is blind hope. By not critically evaluating a politician's motives and actions (and by discouraging others from doing so), you eventually create a monster.Quote:
Originally Posted by JimmyHAD
As previously stated I am not qualified to judge whether the economic policies that Obama's administration is pursuing are correct. I can only hope they will be successful.Quote:
Originally Posted by sparq
As for the media, for what little it is worth, they lost credibility with me in the runup to the Iraq war for example. There were journalists such as the two from the Philadelphia Inquirer who were exceptions but by and large they allowed themselves to be cheerleaders. Speaking now of 'serious' journalists. Not the sensationalists who are on a level with paparazzi,AFAIC, which is most of them.
Jimmy, I find it a little odd when someone says they are not qualified to judge the actions of one president while calling another president the worse president in history. A little less emotion and a little more discernment might be in order.
There are similar opinions for Obama but I don't see you jumping on that bandwagon.Quote:
Originally Posted by JimmyHAD
All I am saying is that we can not let emotion make our minds up for us. In these times especially. when every news source has there own agenda and uses tactics designed to get you emotional instead of think critically, it is very important not to let emotion move us, rather we should be our own master.
I agree. Had you already read those articles or are you a speed reader ? I think the second of the two is a reasoned assessment without a partisan agenda. Just the facts.Quote:
Originally Posted by JMS
You're right, it doesn't. Bush himself provided all the proof that was necessary.Quote:
Originally Posted by Navaja
I also happen to think that the hysteria over Obama was, and is, pretty ridiculous. Still, every day in this forum there's a sarcastic thread titled something along the lines of, "Obama's BRLLIANT Decision to Investigate (insert hot-button issue)!" Gun control, abortion, stem cell research, foreign policy, Iraq, etc, etc.
I mean, the horse isn't just dead from the beating...it's pulp. Sing a different tune already.