Media ignore 912 protesters until they can't & smear with lies, But cover

omegahpla

New member
violent G20 protesters respectfully? Why the insane disparity in coverage and denial of the facts, and an obvious animosity to the point of defamation of the peaceful 912/tea party protesters?
 
News Doubter: You've got it right. That is just the way things were and still are. What I can't understand is how so many can be fooled for so long.

Still the Republicans aren't totally without blame. Both parties are only interested in getting reelected and are corrupt.

I've never understood why the main media is so biased for the Democratic party. But, I guess they are liberal to the core.

Thank goodness for Fox News, the only conservative tv news station that actually shows both sides.
 
Media have been Heavily biased toward Democrats for decades. I was a Democrat even in Clinton's first term, when I finally figured out there Had to be another side of all the news stories. Bush vilified about Katrina, yet Obama gets a free pas when he say New Orleans doesn't need more money. ABC edits the Path to 9/11 series in response to Clinton pressure.
ABC, NBC, CBS show strong anti-Nixon stories in the 1968 election. The news carried strong anti-Reagan stories in favor of Mondale. Clinton's Berger destroyed national documents and gets a free pass. Scooter Libby forgets parts of a conversation a year earlier and gets jail.
Clinton inherited an economy from Reagan that was growing at 4%, yet press says Clinton responsible for strong economy. The economy was shrinking by 0.5% at the end of Clinton's term, yet the press says Bush destroyed the economy. The unemployment rate over Bush's 8 years was (slightly) lower than during Clinton's 8.
In February 2007, after 6 years of Bush, unemployment was 4.5%.
However, Democrats controlled Both Houses of Congress, and employment is now over 9% Republicans controlled Congress during the Clinton years.
 
Back
Top