Re: Rachel Maddow remarks on President Obama's kind words for Bush and avoidance of criticism of the failed architects of the Iraq War.

Morning!

The opening line definitely carries with it assumption and thinly
veiled bias, the focus being on 'criticism/failed' , those conclusions
are highly subjective.

What I'm seeing here is that regardless of Maddow's rant I don't think
it would serve Obama well to spend a large percentage of his speech
time denigrating the Bush administration's debacles in Iraq. That
would define he and his administration in a negative way and leave the
public standing in awe going "Wuh?".

What else I'm seeing is Maddow hijacking the topic and turning it into
a platform for her own agenda which happens to be denigrating the Bush
administration's debacles in Iraq. It seems to push her back in time
with the redundancy. Maybe someone should call her and let her know
it's 2010 getting close to 2011.

News media is news media and all have bias based upon administrative
personal preferences. Political news organizations that stand firm
on opposing political parties don't spend much time praising the
opposition. The idea is to sway the viewers toward their political
persuasions as the ultimate goal is to get the viewers, the voting
public, to influence elections.

If the media can convince people that the Democrats are crap the
people will vote Republican and if the media can convince people that
the Republicans are going to make them eat crap the people will vote
Democratic.

On Sep 3, 6:59 am, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Good Morning Warp Ten,
>
> You bring up some valid points, and in my humble opinion, are right on the
> mark.
>
> Having said that, note that the initial message in this thread is captioned:
>
> "Rachel Maddow remarks on President Obama's kind words for Bush and
> avoidance of criticism of the failed architects of the Iraq War."
>
> The caption, in and of itself is political spin.  President Obama offered no
> "kind words" toward former President Bush, as a matter of fact, President
> Obama's speech several nights ago was at least condescending toward
> President Bush, and at most a slap in the face, considering that it was the
> Bush Administration's surge that seems to be the turning point in the war,
> and considering that President Obama voted against funding such a surge, and
> campaigned mightily against the Bush Administration's "surge policy".
>
> This is not the best example of media bias,  because the media in this case
> is NBC, which I don't believe can be considered as a reputable news
> organization any longer.   There is clearly a left of center media bias in
> most all news reporting, save FOX News these days.
>
> On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 6:25 AM, WarpTen <reallybo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > There must be, in this day of technological achievement read your
> > drivers license from the moon age, some shred of evidence to back up
> > what you are all saying.  Providing some form of validity to a claim
> > lays waste the slag from the rebuttals, ie; the unsupported
> > rebuttals.
>
> > Or is this equally all posters personal bias born from tons of other
> > hearsay?
>
> > It doesn't matter because the real dilemma is having to decipher the
> > validity of opposing
> > evidences.  Whose truth is the truth?
> > This is due to subjective interpretation of the incidents; some say
> > sin and others say so what.
>
> > How about................
>
> > All politicians are to some degree inept and in less technical terms,
> > all BS, and maybe all the people in this room could runs things
> > better.
>
> > In all the years we have been listening to political rhetoric not much
> > has changed, that is except the hands that stand at the helm and the
> > excuses as to why the citizens, who pay these people lot's of money to
> > take charge, are continually in a quagmire.  At every election they
> > get up on the soap box and preach about how they are going to fix the
> > problems the other guy made.
>
> > It's too late to find fault that results in a rectified situation; at
> > this point fault only becomes the fodder for heated debate without
> > resolution, much of which we have here.  Politics is a shouting match
> > and a mud slinging contest and on rare occasions some good shit
> > happens.
>
> >  --
> > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> > * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/<http://www.politicalforum.com/>
> > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.