Barack Obama had published two autobiographirs before actually accomplushing
anything of significance for anyone besides himself. In his first book, he
recounted years of using recreational drugs of various kinds for years of high
school. Since he has never released his college and law school transcripts, we
really have no idea what his academic achievement was. When you are buying drugs
on a regular basis, you are giving money to criminals every week. His confessed
activities as a young adult could have put him into jail if he had been arrested
back then, and jeopardized his receiving a license to practice law. His actions
were reckless and stupid.
If you don't think there's an anti-Romney/Republican bias in
America's mainstream media, you've been watching TV and reading
internet articles with your eyes closed.
there is no story herehas anyone ever heard of Pres Obama having a
black father who was unable to get a birth certificate for his son? thousands
of articles on that one, when there have been even hundreds on the bullying then
there should be complaints.the real story was picked up in one of
the responses to this article and noted that Mr. Romney's economic plan
will increase the deficit in excess of 2 trillion.If there were
votes to be had by saying he was a bully Romney would admit it.Neither Pres Obama nor Mitt will be able to accomplish anything with the
current Congress, thus out of control spending will continue, each party blaming
the other.Neither candidate has a plan that will effectively stem
the callous spending or waste in government or bring jobs to the economy.I like Mr. Romney and what he stands for but I do not want to put him in
the white house for that reason alone. If he wants my vote stop pandering, get
a backbone and tell me how you will fix the finances, otherwise he is just
another face on the campaign trail
@OHBU - literally everything mentioned by you and dumprake came out from Fox
News during the 2008 election, and was given brief passing mention, if at all,
by other news outlets before being quickly dismissed as irrelevant or
ridiculous. They successfully tagged everyone who worried about those things as
kooks and racists, and mockingly shut down any dialogue. They sorely abandoned
their role in vetting the candidates, except for Sarah Palin, who for some
reason needed to demonstrate more qualifications as a VP candidate than Obama
had to show as a potential President. Anyone who believes any Republican
candidate would have fared as well with the media with a similarly empty resume,
has drunk the Kook-Aid and completed the lobotomy.
Yes I heard all the anti-Obama stuff in 2008 as well. And to say the media is
all liberal and biased against Romney is wrong. Those of you living in a left vs
right, republican vs democrat world aren't seeing what's going on. Ron Paul has been barely recognized or mentioned by the media this whole
campaign yet he's taking over GOP states AND the attendance at his speeches
(while he was still actively doing them) was much larger than at Romneys.Theory is Democrats, or liberals as some of you instantly think (just
like all Atheists are communists, right?), own the media and know Romney
can't beat Obama. They do fear Ron Paul however has he has the ability to
convert and gain democrats, republicans, minorities, majorities, and even third
party votes. By keeping him out they can ensure defeating Romney.
re: dumpdrakeWere you here for the 2008 election? Literally
everything you mentioned came out during the election. Obama was accused of
"paling around with terrorists" (remember that one from former VP
candidate Palin?), and a litany of other things. Do you not remember
McCain's rallies spiraling out of control? (Old lady: "He, he's a
Arab!"). To say he was given a pass is patently false. Like Romney, he was
subjected to both a bitter primary battle, and a nasty general election
firstamendment said:The media is claerly biased against Mitt Romney. How
many times has anyone mentioned Obama's bullying; his lying (about almost
EVERYTHING-RANGING from his religion and the economy to misslies, genocide, and
declaring war) and so on and so on and so on......and, the stories they tell
about Mitt are typically fabricated, embelished, untrue and so on (the hair
cutting story for example). Bullying, please enlighten me I did miss
that article?Lying about his religion, No, that was the republican bias
media that told you he was a muslim.Genocide, Really I'm gunna need a
reference here too?Declaring War? when was that?Mitt Did bully
that kid, just not according to right wing spinmasters who don't understand
heresay vs eyewitnesses.Seem like the truth eludes you at every
turn. Good Luck!
Like the supporters of Rick Perry, Newt Gingrich, or Santorum have no axe to
grind...no score to settle...no chip of their shoulders.I'm
sure they just went quietly away.I'm sure ther are the very 1st
one's out smiling, cheering, and waving the Mitt Romney for President signs
and banners.I'm sure they had nothing to do with it then, and don't have anything to do with it now.Give me a break.
Ironhide SAID: "Why are people commenting on Romney being a bully and
leading posse's of horror when the parents of the proposed victim refuted
the story and stated it's not true? Pull your heads out and comprehend what
you're reading! Good grief, these comments prove that no matter what the
facts are, people will block out what they want and conclude whatever satisfies
their leanings."The incident was recalled similarly by five
students, who gave their accounts independently of one another. Four of them
— Friedemann, now a dentist; Phillip Maxwell, a lawyer; Thomas Buford, a
retired prosecutor; and David Seed, a retired principal — spoke on the
record. Another former student who witnessed the incident asked not to be
identified. So 5 eyewitnesses give the same story independently, but
the parents who were NOT there don't remember it, so that's your proof
it never happened. Ever heard of heresy vs. eyewitness? talk about blocking out
what you want and concluding whatever satisfies your leanings."
Media bias against the right in favor of the left? I thought this was a
newspaper. Media bias against the right is not news, it is common knowledge!Williary,I guess you didn’t bother to read the article; it
was not Fox. But hey, if they are your favorite, and only, foil, go ahead and
Why are people commenting on Romney being a bully and leading posse's of
horror when the parents of the proposed victim refuted the story and stated
it's not true? Pull your heads out and comprehend what you're
reading! Good grief, these comments prove that no matter what the facts are,
people will block out what they want and conclude whatever satisfies their
leanings. I'm not even a republican. I just get weary of misinformation
being perpetuated by biased emotional readers
The media is claerly biased against Mitt Romney. How many times has anyone
mentioned Obama's bullying; his lying (about almost EVERYTHING-RANGING from
his religion and the economy to misslies, genocide, and declaring war) and so on
and so on and so on......and, the stories they tell about Mitt are typically
fabricated, embelished, untrue and so on (the hair cutting story for example).
And, his biggest supporters (the liberal activists, who write the
articles and comment on the articles, many of whom have been hanging out here
there and everywhere for a long time promoting anti-religious bigotry) are also
clearly dishonest. Apparently this is what the left has to offer.
The Times and the Post denying a left-leaning pro-Obama bias is like an
astronomer denying the sun came up this morning. They may protest all they wish
but Politico has this one spot on.
To wit, Obama was given a complete pass during the 2008 campaign, nobody, and I
mean nobody, dug into Obama's past, his philosophy, his associations with
radicals, nor his 20 year coziness with Reverend Wright. That stuff all came
out, conveniently, after the election. And nobody discovered that Obama is a
born again Marxists, and intends on killing capitalism and replacing it with a
Marxist economy--"please, please, just give me 4 more years, and I'll
transform America into the gulag." I am so disgusted with the press I could
spit. They are completely untrustworthy, politicized, and shallow. None of them
are worth a plug nickel.
There aren't any pro romney biases in the media, are there? Not even here?
@EsquireSpringville, UT"I read Politico almost every week, and I
have long considered it to tilt Republican. It's not as bad, though, as the
Romney campaign newspaper we are reading here."I agree.
I've learned that every paper is biased in some fashion. Whether its at
the corporate level or from the reporters. The DNews is probably the most
biased and heavily slanted paper I've ever come across. It's up there
with Huffington Post in my eyes.I'm conservative and republican
when it comes to money. I'm socially and civilly liberal. I look for
unbiased, objective reporting when I can find it. I do find humor
in how hard this paper pushes Romney, porn is the devil, and other questionable
issues down it's readers throats though. Some of it is rather ridiculous.
Some of it, like the unofficial endorsement of Romney (from the paper and the
church) is blatantly obvious.
Ah the " Main Stream media controlled by Liberal,Leftist, Socialist,
Democrats conspiracy theory." Now that's original. And nothing about
the theory or the people that buy into it seems out of touch with reality.
This is rich. Romney's campaign has been one of the most negative,
"anti-" campaigns in recent memory. And now the Romney media is trying
to sling the muddy accusation that all the other media is "anti-Romney!?
Furry, try considering that what you read from your approved sources may
actually be biased. Scary thought, I know.So when you say that printing
the "truth" about Romney is justified then you have to ask who said it
was true or could they be stretching things a bit.And if Some of
Obama's history has to be brought up again during this election, then so be
it.They're going back 50 years on Romney!They did it with
Romney during the last election, though what they are coming up with now is
pretty pitiful if you ask me.Those complaining that the DN gives a lot of
positive space to Romney most assuredly don't complain in the SL Tribune
for it's daily bashing of him. So what does that say about the critic?
WACPaddingOurSchedule:"Great talking points Blue. That's a perfect
example of how the left and media distort things."Really? Mitt _doesn't_ pay a far lower tax rate in his income than middle
class Americans?He _didn't_ offer a $10,000 bet to Rick Perry
during a debate?He _doesn't_ have off-shore tax shelters?But, ultimately, Roland Kaysen nailed it - we in fact are allowing
ourselves to be distracted. Romney's budget proposals will
baloon the debt, not reduce it. Romney's proposals involve gutting programs
for the poor, children, and the elderly, and will accelerate the deterioration
of our already crumblilng national infrastructure, all in order to keep billions
of tax dollars flowing to defense contractors maintain tax breaks for oil
companies and private jet owners.You can dismiss those as
"talking points," but that doesn't change the fact that those
points are true.
The media is corrupt with bias in both directions. My wife wrote a college paper
on this two months ago and it was shocking. She took the same news stories about
both Mitt Romney and President Obama and then compared how they were reported
from different media outlets. Some put a spin on the stories in favor of Repubs.
and other in favor of Dems. and they were consistent in their bias for every
story. If you are going to get all your inforamtion from the media,
beware that you will get it with a heavy bias. If you stick to just one media
source, you are probably more likely to be swayed in your own opinions.BTW, the LEAST bias reporting came from CBS although it still had some stories
that leaned a bit in one direction. The most bias reporting came from NBC/MSNBC
Why is this news?Of course their is anti-Romney bias.1.
He is a Mormon.2. He is a RepublicanThat is about all
you need to know in order to realize their will be huge anti-Romney bias.Its the same every election.Between 80 and 80% of the press
declare themselves as liberal democrats. Oh yes, and we all know they are
objective in everything they report (wink wink).Hardly news at all
but rather old established news/fact.
I read Politico almost every week, and I have long considered it to tilt
Republican. It's not as bad, though, as the Romney campaign newspaper we
are reading here.
Mitt Romney revealed to the media that Obama is a crony capitalist with his
executive friends at Solyndra taking huge bonuses out of the taxpayer working
capital as the company went bankrupt.Wheres the headline story on
this at the Deseret News?Marxist big government theorists such as
Obama are loved by crony capitalists since the note on the national debt is
owned by the ultimate monopoly of crony capitalists, the banking dynasty of
Europe that owns the Federal Reserve.
BlueSalt Lake City, UTTo equate smoking marijuana in college with
leading an assault on a gay kid while in high school is beyond belief.If you have six-figure hobbies, off-shore tax shelters, personal car
elevators, make $10,000 bets, and pay an effective tax rate that is far lower
than most Americans, while telling us you know how to identify with average
middle class Americans, you are exhibiting a level of cluelessness and hypocrisy
that is in fact highly newsworthy.--Great talking points
Blue. That's a perfect example of how the left and media distort things.
The Washington Post TRIED at a 'story' that happened 50 years ago,
hoping something would stick to Romney. It turns out the family of the guy he
'bullied' said it never happened.Then the L.A. Times TRIED
at a story about Ann Romney and her expensive horse-riding habit. It went
nowhere.Then the New York Times delved back 150 years ago to the
Mountain Meadows Massacre in an effort to 'examine' Romney's
religion.The point is that if these major news outlets are having to
dig and scratch for such ridiculous stories, Mitt Romney must be pretty clean.
At the same time they try to find anything they can on Romney, there is a whole
mountain of material to be examined on Obama. He is the first president who
admitted to using Cocaine. It's in his book. He has been involved in
questionable real estate dealings with Tony Rezko. We still don't know the
extent of his involvement with the hate-monger Jeremiah Wright.And
the old media wonders why it's dying.
I don't care if Anne Romney rides expensive horses, and I don't care
if President Obama smoked pot in college. Let's talk about Romney's
tax plan which almost every economist says will increase the deficit. Let's
talk about Obama's drone war, which many foreign policy experts say is
creating more terrorists than it kills.Our elections are rarely
about anything that matters, this is why.
The media is biased. Which is why CNN is losing viewers in some cases 50% on
some shows. Along with newspapers losing readers, that is why Oprah's show
is going down the drain etc.We're not interested in fluff. We
want accurate and real information, not what some editor or writer thinks we
should know and help us to make up our minds.We can think without
you and we don't need the media. There are plenty of other outlets and ways
for us to communicate without the networks.If I want fluff I would
go to the white house web page or listen to the spokesperson for the
candidate.It's interesting that the media has a lower approval
rating than of congress or even of President Bush that they berated. Yet they
never show that number to the people. Why not? Why not tell the people that they
are disgusted with Bush, but, even more disgusted with the program they are
getting that information from?
To equate smoking marijuana in college with leading an assault on a gay kid
while in high school is beyond belief.If you have six-figure
hobbies, off-shore tax shelters, personal car elevators, make $10,000 bets, and
pay an effective tax rate that is far lower than most Americans, while telling
us you know how to identify with average middle class Americans, you are
exhibiting a level of cluelessness and hypocrisy that is in fact highly
The Deseret News itself swings between pandering to Romney and dissing him as
much, sometimes worse, than media throughout the nation. The DesNews appears to
be schizophrenic. The strong anti-conservative liberal bias typical of most
media comes out in the DesNews. It is much like the liberal thread of show hosts
over at KSL. One need not suppose because both organs are owned by the LDS
Church that there are not a lot of strongly liberal leaning personnel in both
organizations. Quite to the contrary.With the SLTrib, one expects
them to typically be anti-Mormon, and anti-Republican. But even they will
surprise with their own pro-LDS and pro-conservative suck up stories to
conservative LDS readers.And, I would not call the average, then, of
DesNews stories to be balanced. Cutting the baby in half and slapping it back
together again, and repeating this process, does not bode well from the baby.Of course, some of the bias appears at times mostly in the headlines. So
the headline writer/s show their schizophrenic swings, between pandering and
Everyone grab your tin foil hat, lock the doors, close the blinds, and turn on
Fox News, the only real unbiased news source on Earth. The evil Liberal media
is coming, the evil Liberal media is coming!Just more whinning from
the Repubs. I think just about every voter in the country knows who the
President is. They've made their evaluations about him, no need to get
into the misinformation that has shaped those evaluations. It's Mitt
Romney that voters need to know. He's the "new" guy, only natural
to see more stories about him.I don't recall any of these
whiners speaking up when ever day brought out a new story on candidate Obama,
while we rarely heard anything about McCain, the guy who had been around for
decades. Then once the Palin mess showed up, more whinning about the vetting of
her, who no one had ever heard of.
I agree with John. It matters more to me that Mitt held a boy down and cut his
hair off for being "different" and then refuses to acknowledge it (when
his fellow tormentors do) than it does that President Obama (admittedly) smoked
marijuana in college. I guess it's because I tried marijuana in high
school, but never led a posse to chop a kids hair off for looking different. And
I have a hard time understanding the mindset of a person who would do something
like the latter and then not have the courage to own up to it. If both stories
are true, is there anyone out there who disagrees with this and thinks the
bullying thing is okay, but the marijuana thing is just way too much to handle?
If so, I would like to respectfully tell you to seek help.
Whatever sells newspapers will be on the front page. It appears Romney being a
bully as a minor is more shocking than Obama smoking marijuana in college. And
frankly, I agree. It is more shocking.
Apparently it is pretty difficult to find anything to discredit Romney. The
Democrats are probably spending millions investigating his past looking for
anything that could possibly be used against him. I wonder what they are
finding out that they don't publish that makes Romney look good?
Case in point to why the media is a waste to our society. He who is without
sin, cast the first stone (i.e. every person has dirt, especially as a kid).
Yes, lets base everything Mitt Romney is as a person on something he did some 30
years ago. Does anyone else see something wrong with this? How about we focus
on the person he is today and not who he was as a kid.
If the national media has covered Obama so well, why are we only learning now
about his connection in Chicago (thanks to Breitbart) and other things published
in books about Obama? If there wasn't a bias, we would have seen the media
microscopically dissect Obama's past as they have Romney's.
The point is that the truth about both candidates should be covered with equal
treatment. Whether or not the marijuana use was mentioned in 2007 or not it
resurfaced and should have been on the same page as the whoopty doo
'bullying'. The point is also that the liberal media does play unfair
and unbalanced favorites with the Democratic party. How this can be with all the
destruction of our country is indeed a mystery.
All journalism is business. Whether they lean left or lean right, it comes down
to the fact that it's business. Both sides are seemingly becoming more like
a gossip page, presenting "SCANDAL" on it's front page, whether it
is reporting a non-issue story of a woman riding horses or a very real issue of
media coverage bias.
Anyone can see this is true. This is where Pagen gets his quotes. The Washington Post had an eleven page article of Mitt bullying a boy in high
school, which the parents said was not true.Then there were the
steel mill lay-offs which occurred two years after Romney left.
Why is telling the truth about Romney an "anti-Romney" bias. Should the
media just gloss over his defects and paint a rosy picture of him? They
wouldn't be doing their job if they did that.
Why would Obama's marijuana experimentation make front page news? We
already learned about it and went over it in 2007. In other words, it's
not news, its olds.