The Outhouse - The Greatest Comic Book Forum

[achilles]

I'm not nuts...I'm awesome!

Read my sig! I have backers!

Hmmm... this is true, you do appear to have backers. I'm going to have to take their word for it, after all, no one on the internetz lies!

But you should know that I am also awesome...nuts maybe, but awesomely nuts! This is true, BatWolverine would vouch for me, if he were here...just don't believe anything CatScratch says about me...it's all vicious lies! Well, most of it...

[Guest]

Hmmm... this is true, you do appear to have backers. I'm going to have to take their word for it, after all, no one on the internetz lies!

But you should know that I am also awesome...nuts maybe, but awesomely nuts! This is true, BatWolverine would vouch for me, if he were here...just don't believe anything CatScratch says about me...it's all vicious lies! Well, most of it...

What's a BatWolverine?

And does anybody ever listen to catscratch.....he is addicted to cookies

[achilles]

I know I'm only a couple of years off from voting, and I know of the Keating 5, but when I tried to read about it, I did not understand exactly what went on.

To make a long story short, it was your basic pay for play thing, much like we're seeing today. They were accused of intervening on Keating's behalf (for Lincoln Savings and Loan) by interferring with an investigation of said Savings and Loan, in exchange for campaign contributions.

Two of the five, John Glenn, and McCain, were essentially cleared of the charges, but criticized for judgement problems. They both won re-election.

The others were essentially found guilty, but no punishment was handed down apart from a senate reprimand to Cranston.

[achilles]

What's a BatWolverine?

And does anybody ever listen to catscratch.....he is addicted to cookies

A BatWolverine is a mythical creature much like Bigfoot who is rumored to hang out at the Rama dispensing pictures of scantily clad female comic book characters, (or not clad at all). His existence is debated at many major cryptozoology conventions, and some people have even tried to trap him by using naked pictures of Power Girl as bait, but to date none have succeeded in getting anything other than grainy, long distance pictures of something large and hairy.

As for Catscratch, apart from cookies, he like pictures of nuns in bondage outfits. This is a little known fact about him---he is deeply disturbed by this horribly perverted urge he feels. This is why he eats the cookies, to sublimate his lust for nuns in an orgy of sugar.

[Doc Jon]

Well, as mentioned before, Palin's the one who thrust her kids into the national spotlight. She's the one who uses her kids to showcase her platforms (support of the war, pro-choice, "family values", etc.). She (or her daughter, not 100% sure) just made a deal to sell pictures of the new baby for 300,000 dollars! And now she's the one who keeps bringing them up, long after the media's lost interest.

Shhhhhh...

It's the liberal media. It has to be. They've placed Democrat after Democrat in power and have consistently tried to destroy the Republican Party. Oh, those poor Republicans. Look at what they did to Dubya, clearly one of the greatest Presidents this country has ever seen. They edited his footage to make him seem like an idiot!

And it's the same thing with Palin. That Couric interview was a blindside! How dare that bitch ask questions like, "what qualifications do you have in the realm of foreign affairs?" or "what newspapers do you read?" No candidate could answer those questions.

And it sucks for Palin, who was so lambasted on SNL, that she was left with only one option. That's right, go on the show a couple times... and... oh...

I got nothing.

[Strict31]

Or they could have figured that most Americans already knew about that, considering it was a huge scandal and all...

When we still know almost nothing about Obama, but trusted him with the keys to the country because he can speak from a teleprompter well, wears nice cloths, and someone in his campaign came up with a snappy slogan.

I mean it would have been nice if the media had looked into ANYTHING about the guys deeply, without the taint of "thrills running up" their legs. As opposed to say big exposes on how the manly sweat runs down his body while he works out in the gym, and how the reporter has just fallen in love with him because he's so full of hope and change, and his pecs are so manly...

Well, they really actually didn't ever dig too deeply into Mccain's associations with Keating. Or his wife's. At the time, McCain and Glenn were determined to be only marginally associated in the scandal, but McCain had a close friendship with Keating in the 80s, taking a number of trips to a retreat Keating had in the Bahammas on Keatings dime. McCain did not disclose these trips or their expense until seven years later, when the scandal came to actual light.

Further, Cindy's associations with Keating were never fully disclosed, but it is known she and her father invested in one of Keating's strip malls.

The press didn't really want to stir up that business again, because of the widely held perception that McCain had left all that stuff behind him. it would have been dirty laundry that no one was really terribly interested in giving any play to. Obama might have wanted to press the issue, but it didn't get anywhere.

The left leaning media, deemed so insidious by the right said, "Thanks, we'll pass."

Now, I'm not sitting here trying to say McCain is a bad dude. I'm saying instead that the liberal bias of the media failed to pounce on that story. And if they were so totally biased as folks like to claim, the facts wouldn't have stopped them. The mere mention of it would have been enough to bog McCain down. Even if only for a single news cycle. They didn't consider it fair game, however.

But they spent many weeks wondering if some words some other guy said outside of Obama's presence meant Obama hated America.

And that was just Rev. Wright. That's not even considering Rev Phleger.

They didn't give him a pass on these things, and it constituted what anyone in their right fucking mind would call "bad press."

But because that press is considered to be eternally and irrevocably left-leaning, the right looks at this evidence and dismisses it out of hand. It even refuses to acknowledge all the time the media spent on Bill Ayers.

Hey, do you remember the "presidential seal" story? That got play for about a week. I mean, it's not like it had shit to do with shit, but it still got play. The sycophantic leftists in the media did not ignore it because that is also bad press for their star-bellied golden boy. No, they dug into it with abandon.

Shit, I actually remember an incident on CNN when they totally took a quote by Wes Clark out of context, and edited it to make it seems as if he was bad-mouthing McCain's military service. And as an Obama supporter, CNN spent at least the next whole week lambasting Clark and by extension, the Obama campaign on it. It didn't last long because anyone who'd actually seen the interview knew the full context of the statement. But CNN bent over backwards to spin that into an attack from an Obama supporter on McCain.

Conservatives don't mention that shit though, because it is dreadfully inconvenient to their premise, or because they are simply or willfully ignorant of it.

So no, I don't buy the standard toothless argument that the press unilaterally gave Obama a pass. Even other democrats brought on the news shows as talking heads weren't unilaterally giving him a pass until he got the nom.

[Doc Jon]

When we still know almost nothing about Obama, but trusted him with the keys to the country because he can speak from a teleprompter well, wears nice cloths, and someone in his campaign came up with a snappy slogan.

I'm not really sure what you're saying here. Most of Obama's life is a matter of public record. His time at Harvard, his time as a community organizer, and his record as a Senator. Even his youth is well documented

What exactly do you want to know about the man? If you want to know more about him, there are plenty of ways to read about his past.

Or are you just disappointed there aren't more scandals? People keep saying they don't know anything about him, but have they ever taken the time to read about him? If you're counting on the media (any media) to truly give you a well rounded picture of a candidate, then you are in for disappointment.

What did I learn about McCain from the media during this election? Well, he was a POW, and a maverick who worked on both sides of the aisle. That's about it.

That pretty much goes for any candidate.

[Thunderstorm]

I'm not really sure what you're saying here. Most of Obama's life is a matter of public record. His time at Harvard, his time as a community organizer, and his record as a Senator. Even his youth is well documented

What exactly do you want to know about the man? If you want to know more about him, there are plenty of ways to read about his past.

Or are you just disappointed there aren't more scandals? People keep saying they don't know anything about him, but have they ever taken the time to read about him? If you're counting on the media (any media) to truly give you a well rounded picture of a candidate, then you are in for disappointment.

What did I learn about McCain from the media during this election? Well, he was a POW, and a maverick who worked on both sides of the aisle. That's about it.

That pretty much goes for any candidate.

Whether you know it or not, you're highlighting our points. Sure, we could dig up information on Obama from books written by and about him, but we didn't have to do that with anyone else. Every little thing was scrutinized on every other candidate in the media except Obama. Anything remotely scandalous that came out about Obama was and is dismissed. Amazingly, he's the first politician in Earth's history who has absolutely no controversial skeletons in his closet.

[Doc Jon]

Whether you know it or not, you're highlighting our points. Sure, we could dig up information on Obama from books written by and about him, but we didn't have to do that with anyone else. Every little thing was scrutinized on every other candidate in the media except Obama. Anything remotely scandalous that came out about Obama was and is dismissed. Amazingly, he's the first politician in Earth's history who has absolutely no controversial skeletons in his closet.

Really?

What scandals came out about McCain during this campaign? Besides his track record of voting for Bush, I didn't see the Obama campaign, or the media for that matter, focus on any.

When McCain ran against Dubya, the con5ervative press was much more vicious. McCain was accused of being a Manchurian candidate, his wife was accused of having a drug habit, and he was accused of fathering a illegitimate child. The Obama campaign ran a relatively clean campaign and didn't even bring any of these things up.

As for Obama, did you not read about Rev. Wright, William Ayers or Khalidi, hell even ACORN? You never read about his possible ties to radicals? You never saw or read anything regarding Obama's candidacy being welcomed by Middle Eastern leaders, as if it was a tacit accusation that he supported radical Muslims?

More 'scandals' came out about Obama than they did about McCain. You're pissed because he managed to defuse those situations?

[Thunderstorm]

Really?

What scandals came out about McCain during this campaign? Besides his track record of voting for Bush, I didn't see the Obama campaign, or the media for that matter, focus on any.

When McCain ran against Dubya, the con5ervative press was much more vicious. McCain was accused of being a Manchurian candidate, his wife was accused of having a drug habit, and he was accused of fathering a illegitimate child. The Obama campaign ran a relatively clean campaign and didn't even bring any of these things up.

As for Obama, did you not read about Rev. Wright, William Ayers or Khalidi, hell even ACORN? You never read about his possible ties to radicals? You never saw or read anything regarding Obama's candidacy being welcomed by Middle Eastern leaders, as if it was a tacit accusation that he supported radical Muslims?

More 'scandals' came out about Obama than they did about McCain. You're pissed because he managed to defuse those situations?

I do remember those scandals, and I remember how not one of them held any weight with the media. Maybe FoxNews, Limbaugh, and others like them brought them up, but that kinda also proves the bias point.

They didn't really have to say anything about McCain. He was near-death, running against a young, attractive, eloquent, Democrat who kept saying CHANGE over and over and over.

[Doc Jon]

I do remember those scandals, and I remember how not one of them held any weight with the media. Maybe FoxNews, Limbaugh, and others like them brought them up, but that kinda also proves the bias point.

Whoa, wait a second. The fact that those scandals held no weight is not some indictment of the media. Maybe it's because they were bullshit. Just like the Trig thing for Palin was bullshit. The media never took that seriously, nor did the voters.

The Ayers thing was bullshit, as was the Khalidi thing. There was plenty of news coverage on both those stories.

You don't think that the Republicans weren't looking for scandals in Obama's past since it became painfully obvious that he was going to be the Democratic nominee? Maybe there truly wasn't much to find.

This is where I get confused. Do you think the media had stuff on Obama and didn't pursue it or do you think they didn't dig at all?

Because I'm pretty sure that if they had a story that he had slept with a hermaphrodite, they would have published it.

You seem to point to media bias simply because there weren't more scandals tied to Obama, when there were NO scandals at all regarding McCain. That seems like bias right there.

[Doc Jon]

They didn't really have to say anything about McCain. He was near-death, running against a young, attractive, eloquent, Democrat who kept saying CHANGE over and over and over.

The fact that McCain allowed himself to be portrayed as a man out of touch with America is his own fault. If that's media bias, I call bullshit.

McCain spent his campaign trying to portray Obama as a radical with ties to terrorists, whose ascendancy to the Presidency would mean attacks on our way of life. McCain was the one slinging the most mud, and took every opportunity to take shots at Obama.

I heard about Ayers on every major news network. I heard about Khalidi from every major news network. Same with Reverend Wright.

[Strict31]

I do remember those scandals, and I remember how not one of them held any weight with the media. Maybe FoxNews, Limbaugh, and others like them brought them up, but that kinda also proves the bias point.

I keep telling you guys, and you keep ignoring me, that CNN did bring that shit up, and they did run with it. It wasn't just Limbaugh and Fox.

[Doc Jon]

I keep telling you guys, and you keep ignoring me, that CNN did bring that shit up, and they did run with it. It wasn't just Limbaugh and Fox.

It wasn't just CNN either. I usually watch CBS news and Ayers was a constant fixture for quite some time.

[Thunderstorm]

Whoa, wait a second. The fact that those scandals held no weight is not some indictment of the media. Maybe it's because they were bullshit. Just like the Trig thing for Palin was bullshit. The media never took that seriously, nor did the voters.

The Ayers thing was bullshit, as was the Khalidi thing. There was plenty of news coverage on both those stories.

You don't think that the Republicans weren't looking for scandals in Obama's past since it became painfully obvious that he was going to be the Democratic nominee? Maybe there truly wasn't much to find.

This is where I get confused. Do you think the media had stuff on Obama and didn't pursue it or do you think they didn't dig at all?

Because I'm pretty sure that if they had a story that he had slept with a hermaphrodite, they would have published it.

You seem to point to media bias simply because there weren't more scandals tied to Obama, when there were NO scandals at all regarding McCain. That seems like bias right there.

The Republicans hyped up the scandals, but it didn't seem to go beyond them other than Olberman raising hell about the nerve of those people to dare say anything bad.

The Muslim thing was an issue briefly, then openly mocked. I think he was a Muslim, and I'm 100% OK with him being Muslim and being President... I don't care. I do care if he's lying about it, even if it was in the past. I know his motivation for joining *A* Church was more political initially, but beyond that I can't tell if he has real faith from the contradictory things he's said about the Bible.

The issues with Wright were scandal-worthy, absolutely. Had McCain gone to a Euro-Centric Church that promoted White Values ONE TIME... well you have just stopped right there, never recorded the preacher on some racist tirade, much less spent 20 years there... he'd be buried and people would still be hating him. Not Obama, it's not an issue.

There were two gay men from Obama's Church murdered execution-style just weeks apart who were claiming links to Obama, but the media didn't bother to cover that. Whether Obama had anything to do with it or not (and I will say he did not), given the coverage of the Church, you would THINK this would be newsworthy, but it wasn't.

And I honestly do not see how anyone who lived through 2008 could not see how the media portrayed Obama in a very positive light compared to everyone else. There were newscasters literally gushing over him, saying they felt 'electrified', and even FoxNews called him the next JFK early on.

Bottom line, I have my opinion on this based on what I saw. I did not support McCain, and I certainly wasn't keen on 4-8 more years of Bush policy. Yet I still saw an overwhelming amount of favoritism for Obama, and a disproportionate amount of hate for Palin. I still do. Period.

My biggest concern isn't with Obama himself. It's with his supporters. I fear we will see a Democrat version of the blind faith given to Bush. Despite the fact that Democrats HATED that, screamed out against the idiocy of it, they didn't learn a damn thing from it. Considering the condition our country is in, it's absolutely sickening the amount of praise being given to an untested leader.