I assume 'we' is the Washington media circle...

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=De_1aIrkfXI

AH , The Royal We !!!!!

Just goes to show the media idiots can't always push their agenda.. Many of us already knew long ago he was nothing more than a part time senator who hasnt really done anything in his past to deserve the office. The media was blinded by the thought of a black president to end ll racismm in this country andd thought if he was elected then all their past transgressions would be erased. They also were enamored by his ability to read the written word in speeches and actually thoughht because one can deliver a good speech meant he could be a great leader.

Give me a thinker anytime over a someone who can only read from a teleprompter. Give me an idealist over someone soley out for his own gain.

 

Obama never once came off as a great leader to me, nor a great thinker. I dont vote for politicians based on color, I vote on them based on their ideas.

Yet so many still believe he is the greatest.

I wouldn't say many. Not now.

Yet so many still believe he is the greatest.

 

"It is easier to fool people than to convince them they have been fooled"......Mark Twain

"People will believe a big lie sooner than a little one; and if you repeat it frequently enough people will sooner or later believe it."

I'm confused. What was the "big lie"? As I recall, Obama campaigned on ending combat missions in Iraq, reining in Wall Street "gambling," immigration reform and instituting universal health-care. Was he successful in all these areas? Not really, but no president ever is. The country had a chance to deny him a second term, but instead gave him four more years.

I'm confused. What was the "big lie"? As I recall, Obama campaigned on ending combat missions in Iraq, reining in Wall Street "gambling," immigration reform and instituting universal health-care. Was he successful in all these areas? Not really, but no president ever is. The country had a chance to deny him a second term, but instead gave him four more years.

 

Barrack (Jimmy Carter Jr.) Obama was at the right time at the right place...an unprepared outsider who could effectively bear the torch of a democratic party that saw the opportunity to band together multiple special interest groups...plus get >95% of the black vote plus the liberal dems. who self declared will vote liberal dem. no matter who/what runs on the ticket. The platform he spews is all the right populist sounding ideals that sound great, but in the end lack substance and finally rely upon the usual tax-paying suspects to fund any chance of reality. The down side is that the number of the "usual suspects" is diminishing because of these plans.

I'm confused. What was the "big lie"? As I recall, Obama campaigned on ending combat missions in Iraq, reining in Wall Street "gambling," immigration reform and instituting universal health-care. Was he successful in all these areas? Not really, but no president ever is. The country had a chance to deny him a second term, but instead gave him four more years.

I guess it easy to be confused.. Lets see... He lied about Fast and furious, the IRS scandal, ObamaCare, Benghazi, the NSA... The list goes on and on..

It has been said that America is politically 'middle-right'. Obama and more importantly those around him are not 'middle-right'. They are mostly well 'left' and very much big centralized government backers. The 'big lie' was the media covering up this fact. If, as a group, the MSM believed he was 'the next Messiah' - and Ms. Walters as an apparent spokesperson says that was the case - then how can their reporting be objective? Would they - the MSM - be willing to lie to get 'the next Messiah' elected?

 

Did they call out the lies in the supposed auto-biography of 'Dreams'? The 'father abandoned the family when he left for Harvard' has been thoroughly dis-proven. But Time and others propogated that particular lie with no true journalistic investigation. And it is only one of the lies and half truths of that particular book. They ignored that mentor 'Frank' in the book was Frank Marshall Davis. Frank Mashall Davis was a well known communist party member (CPUSA number 47544). They ignored that Mr. Davis published a book under a pseudonym titled 'Black Sex Rebel'. In this diary of his (and his wife's) true sexual exploits in Hawaii that included the rape of a 13-year old girl.

 

The press ignored the fact that Obama his wife had very close connections to domestic terrorist Bill Ayers and his wife Bernadine Dohrn at law firms in Chicago and sitting on the same boards for very liberal non-profit organizations. It was, incorrectly, portrayed that Ayers was 'some guy in the neighborhood'.

 

The press ignored the fact that Obama had the most liberal voting record in the Senate. And they ignored that he voted 'present' on numerous controversial votes.

 

The press ignored that Valerie Jarrett's father in law, Vernon Jarrett, was also a communist party member and an associate of Frank Marshall Davis when both were active in CPUSA activities in Chicago in the late 1940s.

 

Is Obama a radical leftists? Maybe, maybe not. Did he have deep associations with radical leftists and anarchists? The answer there is yes. But these were, at best, glossed over and minimized. At their worst the press covered up the relationships and their potential impact on how this administration would govern - or as Valerie Jarrett said - rule.

 

I posted this because it points out how the press is more a cheerleader and less of an objective and serious information source. Vetting? Hardly. Almost nothing about this administration has been seriously vetted or investigated by the MSM. And if Obama is (or was) their (the press's) 'Messiah' are they willing to do the serious journalism about the serious scandals and failures? Probably not.

It has been said that America is politically 'middle-right'. Obama and more importantly those around him are not 'middle-right'. They are mostly well 'left' and very much big centralized government backers. The 'big lie' was the media covering up this fact. If, as a group, the MSM believed he was 'the next Messiah' - and Ms. Walters as an apparent spokesperson says that was the case - then how can their reporting be objective? Would they - the MSM - be willing to lie to get 'the next Messiah' elected?

 

Did they call out the lies in the supposed auto-biography of 'Dreams'? The 'father abandoned the family when he left for Harvard' has been thoroughly dis-proven. But Time and others propogated that particular lie with no true journalistic investigation. And it is only one of the lies and half truths of that particular book. They ignored that mentor 'Frank' in the book was Frank Marshall Davis. Frank Mashall Davis was a well known communist party member (CPUSA number 47544). They ignored that Mr. Davis published a book under a pseudonym titled 'Black Sex Rebel'. In this diary of his (and his wife's) true sexual exploits in Hawaii that included the rape of a 13-year old girl.

 

The press ignored the fact that Obama his wife had very close connections to domestic terrorist Bill Ayers and his wife Bernadine Dohrn at law firms in Chicago and sitting on the same boards for very liberal non-profit organizations. It was, incorrectly, portrayed that Ayers was 'some guy in the neighborhood'.

 

The press ignored the fact that Obama had the most liberal voting record in the Senate. And they ignored that he voted 'present' on numerous controversial votes.

 

The press ignored that Valerie Jarrett's father in law, Vernon Jarrett, was also a communist party member and an associate of Frank Marshall Davis when both were active in CPUSA activities in Chicago in the late 1940s.

 

Is Obama a radical leftists? Maybe, maybe not. Did he have deep associations with radical leftists and anarchists? The answer there is yes. But these were, at best, glossed over and minimized. At their worst the press covered up the relationships and their potential impact on how this administration would govern - or as Valerie Jarrett said - rule.

 

I posted this because it points out how the press is more a cheerleader and less of an objective and serious information source. Vetting? Hardly. Almost nothing about this administration has been seriously vetted or investigated by the MSM. And if Obama is (or was) their (the press's) 'Messiah' are they willing to do the serious journalism about the serious scandals and failures? Probably not.

 

Well spoken. The press has been giving Obama a "media Lewinsky" for 6+ years now.

Well spoken. The press has been giving Obama a "media Lewinsky" for 6+ years now.

The notion that there's a "mainstream media mindset" is fiction.

And that's a liberal talking point that's almost as big a lie as If you like your doctor... PERIOD

And that's a liberal talking point that's almost as big a lie as If you like your doctor... PERIOD

Perhaps you and your pals would like to define who or what is "the mainstream media." It's time for a definition of terms ... specifics please ... as opposed to simply dispensing generalities.