The MSM is Not Happy: Obama Exposing them for the Whores That They Are

[SuperTrouper]

Watch the MSM reaction when Obama makes the results of his Blago investigation available. The MSM has been hounding Obama (and trying to smear Rahm Emanuel) and the contact that his transition team had with embattled and ethic-challenged Governor Blago. They are behaving like ravenous whores, just like when they piled it on during Pastorgate, Bittergate, and Ayersgate. So when Obama announces that at most there were 5 or so conversations, Joe Scarborough, Mike Brzenzski, Pat Buchanan, George Steph, Charlie Gibson, Katie Couric, Sean Insannity, and all the Corp. whores will be angry and disappointed. Once again they have been played like a cheap violin by Obama. Once again "that one" has exposed their biases..so now back to Carolinegate, Biden vs. Cheney, Warrengate, etc etc.

[lamp_shade]

1. You're so right. I can sense their "disappointment" already. Can't wait til tomorrow. n/t

[Radical Activist]

2. "questions remain"

Questions will always remain about Obama's involvement no matter how many questions are answered and even if they can't tell us what those questions are. Someone needs to slap every reporter who falls back on that bullshit line.

[napi21]

4. Unfortunately you're right. Unless they actually HEAR the tapes of the actual conversations,

SOME reporters will refuse to believe the denials and claim there's a cover-up.

[Radical Activist]

5. That won't even do it.

"Are there more tapes yet to surface?" They'll ask questions like that based on nothing but conjecture. Reality has no relevance. Questions will always remain.

Obama was already cleared by the tapes previously released. Blago said Obama wasn't willing to give him anything for the Senate seat. Obama has been distancing himself from Blago for years. That should have been enough.

[napi21]

9. Fitz actually opened that door when he read the part if the tape

transcript where Blogo was cursing the Obama team out for "Not giving him anything but appreciation." ANY decent reporter would aske the question"Who told him NO to the request for $$?" I can't fault the reporters for that one. I fault them for continuing to hammer Obama for days AFTER he said I will give you the info next week. The US Attorney asked that we hold off releasing any info for a week. I think at that point they should have backed off until the week was up!

[Shiver]

6. "Questions remain" is code for

"We didn't get the answer we want."

[Radical Activist]

7. Yes, and. "We're not ready to give up this witch hunt yet."

[SuperTrouper]

25. They'll never be happy with Obama's response

[HEyHEY]

3. Whatever

That campaign coverage was very pro Obama.

[gcomeau]

8. And the campaign *reality* was *excessively* pro-Obama.

So... what's your point?

[HEyHEY]

12. That all this "media conspiracy" against Obama crap is BS

[gcomeau]

16. Probably.

As I've pointed out at other times in threads on this subject, the media "conspiracy" is for ratings. Plain and simple. It's why they went after Obama like rabid dogs over Wright (awesome eye-grabbing video = ratings so flog it as long and hard as possible), it's why they ripped Palin to pieces (new = interesting = ratings), and it's why they'll desperately try to associate Obama with Blagojevich on a regular basis (new president + dirty scandal = interesting = ratings). They care about interesting first because that effects the balance sheet... and informative or conscientious or responsible are all a very, very distant second because they generally speaking, don't.

[lamp_shade]

10. Good thing too.

[quakerboy]

14. In what regard, charlie?

In fairness, reality was about a +7 for Obama. The reporting was about a +2 for Obama. He may have gotten more coverage, but he still got continually shorted compared to what the reality on the ground justified.

And its not because he is Obama. Its because he is a liberal. The idea that the us has a liberal media is shite.

[HEyHEY]

17. I don't think you guys do have a liberal media, I think you have a bad one

Which is where Canada is headed too. But, I just get sick of the bashing as if the media is out to get Obama.

[quakerboy]

24. Its a fair criticism

in my opinion. They were out to get Obama. They are out to get everybloodyone. But as a multiracial person, a democrat, and "pack leader" he was extra under the gun.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

18. So you're saying there was substance to the media attacks against Obama?

Ayers? Wright? Farrakhan? Plagiarism? Joe the Plumber? Raising taxes?

[HEyHEY]

20. It all depends who said it. Pundits and commentators are not reporters

And people here always act as if they are and point to them and scream and yell. Then they forget about shit like Couric's slaying of Palin and such.

It's like the people who call me at work in the metro Vancouver newsroom and accuse me of being pro-israel five minutes after I've got calls from people saying I'm pro-palestine after listen to the same report. People are more bias than any reporter.

[katandmoon]

11. They are all politicians. That means they all have dirty hands. Rahm Emmanuel is no dainty flower.

I have no trouble believing he totally put the screws to Blago to pick Obama's preference for his former seat.

The Obama team has been VERY unforthcoming with the details of their contacts with Blago. They are acting exactly like people who DO have something to hide and will keep stonewalling just as long as they can. Hasn't been a pretty spectacle.

[SuperTrouper]

13. And if he had spilled the beans you would have been saying: "See, he

did not respect the wishes of Attorney Fitz, Obama thinks he is above everyone"

[IsItJustMe]

15. They will just come up with more bull shit questions. That's what they do. Then they will demand

answers to those questions. This will go on until something really big happens, at that point they will find a new toy.

[JimboBillyBubbaBob]

19. Hey...........

This analogy is unfair to whores!

[SuperTrouper]

22. My apologies to Heidi Fleiss, Mata Hari and Ashley Dupre

[Tutankhamun]

21. If the media indiscriminately ran stories on scandals, simply

for ratings sake is nonsense. They ignored eight years of actual scandals from the Bush Admin. but ran endless stories on nonexistent scandals during the Clinton years.

[SuperTrouper]

23. And the sad part, they smeared JJJ unnecessarily

[TheKentuckian]

26. The scandals aren't indiscriminate

they won't bite the hand that feeds them until that person has been thrown to the dogs.