Speakeasy forum

General discussion

If you can't see the media bias now ...

... you really are blind!

War stories

The mask is off. Further denials are useless. After the events of the past seven days the ingrained leftist, pro-Democratic Party bias of the nation?s mainstream media has been fully exposed. All it took was for a certain Vietnam veteran to write a book daring to question the war hero status of Democratic presidential hopeful John Kerry. Media lips are now drawn into a permanent snarl; the knives are out and the scent of blood is in the air. Circle the wagons and may the effort to protect the Democratic candidate proceed.

To make this scenario as clear as possible, I ask you to remember one basic difference between George Bush and John Kerry. George Bush is not running on his record of military service during the Vietnam War. John Kerry is. John Kerry is not running on the basis of his recent service as an elected official. George Bush is...


Why is it that those vets that support Kerry are honorable without question. Those that question him are considered dishonorable with impure motives. I personally would prefer Kerry had a career of public service on which to run. Oh yeah, he does, but he doesn't want us to judge us on that if the Boston D Party is any indication Sad

Evie Happy

Discussion is locked
You are posting a reply to: If you can't see the media bias now ...
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Please refer to our CNET Forums policies for details. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Track this discussion and email me when there are updates

If you're asking for technical help, please be sure to include all your system info, including operating system, model number, and any other specifics related to the problem. Also please exercise your best judgment when posting in the forums--revealing personal information such as your e-mail address, telephone number, and address is not recommended.

You are reporting the following post: If you can't see the media bias now ...
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
Collapse -
Personal opinion of veteran status

In reply to: If you can't see the media bias now ...

I could say I am a Vietnam war "era" veteran myself. I was in the USAF from '69 to '73 and, like many draft eligable males considered the alternatives to combat duty when my number came up. I "fled" to the Air Force like a coward, it could be said. I had orders to Vietnam but these were recinded when Nixon began the pullout. I was spared but had some high school friends die or receive wounds in the war. When it was Dan Quayles turn to endure the scrutiny of the opposition party for his alledged attempts to avoid combat service, I could only look at myself..."Hey, I did the same"....and I could be understanding and forgiving. It almost seems unfair to ask young people to put their lives on the line in defense of this great country when they have not been able to yet experience the full benefits of freedom that is ours. So now, we have the Bush/Kerry Vietnam service "thing". My bent is to let such an issue drop the same way I was willing to do so with Quayle on the hot seat. In fact, I would expect that both Bush and Kerry could have completely different attitudes about their thoughts and behavior at this younger age and there is no need for the press to harp about it any longer. The issue to me is that, if one candidate uses his military service time as a matter of pride and accomplishment, he must be willing to endure the scrutiny of those who would challenge. If that candidate is better known for having another stance on his war time service, he must be willing to address this as well. Therefore, if John Kerry wants to express pride in his Vietnam war service, he should also be willing to express pride in his anti Vietnam war stance or suggest that he has had a change of heart for his later posture and actions. MHO

Collapse -
Re: Personal opinion of veteran status

In reply to: Personal opinion of veteran status

If Kerry has had a change of heart regarding his anti-Vietnam public and hearing statements, then he would have to back-pedal, I would think, on his 'first supporting attitude and then attacking Bush stance' regarding the Iraqi situation. He is having a difficult time either making up his mind on where and what he stands for or defending his flip-flopping. Either way, a Presidential candidate who either can't make up his mind or defend why he has changed it, isn't Presidential material. How can anybody possibly have any faith in what he says now, when he can change his mind again tomorrow after he's elected? Kerry is as unsure about what this country needs as he is with his memory of his own history. Definitely not leadership material...he cannot be trusted to know what the truth is anymore since he rewrites it every time he opens his mouth, so how can he be trusted to protect and serve not only the country, but the people within it when he appears to have no real grasp on how to do it. I don't want anybody leading me who is having mental hand-wringing conversations with himself over what he should do or say next in an attempt to make himself more important within his mind. The man's ego and his own opinion of himself seems to be more important to him than anything else.

TONI

Collapse -
It's worse than that.

In reply to: If you can't see the media bias now ...

The charges being made by the vets are far worse than being AWOL. The media is failing the national interest by refusing to investigate, and the charges are coming from most of the vets rather than a few isolated individuals.

Collapse -
Another visible indication of the bias is...

In reply to: If you can't see the media bias now ...

that NONE of the major media sources (and this includes Fox except for one brief mention) have bothered reporting that three of the five crewmen on Kerry's boat, Bill Zaldonis, Steven Hatch, and Steve Gardner, deny that they or their boat were ever in Cambodia (the two highlighted are his ardent supporters). The rest simply "aren't sure" DESPITE Kerry making the claim although his own journal records indicate he was not within 50 miles of the border.

Why do you suppose the media isn't making note of this? Possibly because it points out too clearly that Kerry will willingly lie repeatedly if it seems to further his goal?

Someone among his "blind followers" should be questioning exactly HOW he got rice embedded in his derri

Collapse -
Re: Another visible indication of the bias is...

In reply to: Another visible indication of the bias is...

Hi Ed,

I'm not one to defend Kerry. IMO he doesn't know when
he is telling the truth or "making history". He doesn't
care. He's just hoping he can shout his way to the White
House.

As far as the guys "knowing" if or not they were in Cambodia,
I think is problematical. On a small boat on a small
river, I doubt there were any signs welcoming people to
Cambodia along the river banks.

Army troops who made incursions far enough inside the
country to encounter people, and their language, is
another story. But Navy guys on a small boat who were
not on an "over-nighter", ????????

Collapse -
Neal Boortz's uncomfortable question:

In reply to: If you can't see the media bias now ...

Why haven't the elite press badgered John Kerry for HIS service records the way they did President Bush? When and only when they do - and I'm not holding my breath - will you even be able to begin making a case against the presence of a pervasive leftist bias in the establishment press.

Collapse -
Re: If you can't see the media bias now ...

In reply to: If you can't see the media bias now ...

The mask has been off for a long time, and the public is tired of that leftist bias. That's the single biggest reason that Fox News is now #1. They saw an unfulfilled need for fair and balanced news, and met that need.

The attitude of the "Bush was AWOL!" "Release those military records!" Borg-like crowd then is a heck of a lot different from their attitude now, isn't it? Hypocrisy personified, by the collective.

DE

Collapse -
Re: 'media bias'

In reply to: If you can't see the media bias now ...

Hi, Evie.

Right-wing definition of "bias:" it doesn't agree with my view, regardless of the truth or falsehood of what's said.

-- Dave K, Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

The opinions expressed above are my own,
and do not necessarily reflect those of CNET!

Collapse -
Re: 'media bias'

In reply to: Re: 'media bias'

Right-wing definition of "bias:" it doesn't agree with my view, regardless of the truth or falsehood of what's said. (Emphasis mine)

IOW. Dave, "My mind's made up; don't try to confuse me with the facts"?

IMHO, and with all due respect, that's really sad, Dave.
Collapse -
Re: 'media bias'

In reply to: Re: 'media bias'

Hi, Paul.

No, Paul, it's not a matter of "my mind's made up." It's that the charges are highly suspect, obviously politically motivated (wrt the politics of VietNam, as much as those of the current election), and have been condemned by John McCain. So the bias shown is by the poster, not the media. BTW, this is my last contribution here, as otherwise it'll be "did not, did so..."

-- Dave K, Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

The opinions expressed above are my own,
and do not necessarily reflect those of CNET!

Collapse -
Re: 'media bias'

In reply to: Re: 'media bias'

Wasn't much of a contribution Dave as it was purely your personal bias speaking.

You have assigned it to the "political motivation" drawer DESPITE the simple fact that O'Neil and other Swift Vets have been saying these same things since
before the O'Neil vs. Kerry debates in 1971 in which Kerry was soundly trounced.

The only "political motivation" is Kerry's own in long ago admitting he was trying to emulate his hero JFK and in telling crew members that he would be president.

Of the number of SwiftVets against Kerry it is STATISTICALLY IMPOSSIBLE for all to be Republicans or even Conservatives in general. Even you, a PhD, should readily recognize that simple but plain fact.

Collapse -
(NT) (NT) You really are that blinded huh?

In reply to: Re: 'media bias'

Collapse -
The thing that bothers me the most

In reply to: If you can't see the media bias now ...

is that nothing ever seems to come out about political candidates until AFTER it's down to two to choose from.

I am convinced that every possible candidate that wishes to run for political office should be required to have every nook and cranny divulged within days of the announcement and long before any caucus in order for the PEOPLE to know what and who they might have to deal with later on.

There are enough reporters in the US to take on the job of digging it all up long before we get down to only two to choose from, and I think that any candidates who can keep standing in that line of fire as the smoke clears would be worthy of running for the top spot. Rumors, lies, etc. should be investigated thoroughly and either laid to rest or brought to the front before anybody can get on the ballot and stop wasting not only our time but our money on investigations AFTER they are already in office. After all, if you're going to ruin somebody's political career, do it BEFORE they can do harm to the country as a whole for crying out loud.

I'm sick to death of this crap. Why did it take over four years for the Dems to question Bush's military record? I can't understand the utter desperation that has the Democratic party spinning so far out of control. Why wasn't Kerry's record ever questioned before the last few months? Surely the Dems can't be so desperate for a candidate that Kerry is the ONLY puppet they could find that would be this stupid since honesty and integrity doesn't seem to be some of his best qualities.

I'm not trying to Kerry-bash....I think the guy has a real huge problem that is larger than his shady and vague military record. I honestly don't believe he can be trusted with anything important to this country, and that's based on the last 30 years of his own personal political record and what he does/doesn't stand for with regard to the people's best interests. He can't be trusted to do what he claims he can and will do....and if he gets in, we will need that petroleum from around the world to process for huge amounts of Vaseline to make it a little easier to take that treatment he'll be giving us.

I just can't understand why it's not a requirement to have ALL of the information about somebody considering running for political office BEFORE we get that screwed for a change.

TONI

Collapse -
Re: The thing that bothers me the most

In reply to: The thing that bothers me the most

Hi Toni,

To listen to the left, Bush is the worstest President in this century if not of all time. He's just a stupid cowboy idiot puppet for the neocons if they are to be believed. Europe hates him, therefore us.

If this were true, then it should be a cinch to beat him. So why then was the Democrat field so weak this year? One would think anyone with Presidential aspirations would have thrown their hat in the ring for the cakewalk to the Presidency.

But Dean, for all his popularity, was never a strong candidate with wide appeal to win a nationwide general election. The Democrat primary debates were a JOKE. They were anti-Bush infomercials where the candidates were very reticent to criticize one another. Kerry's war record -- and the questions thereof -- have been around at least since his 1996 race against Gov. Weld (the only hard fought election he ever endured to win). It was his competitors that SHOULD have brought them to the fore during the primaries, but once he was dubbed "Mr. Electable" he became off limits. The liberal media, by their own admissions, supports Kerry over Bush by a 12:1 margin. They shirk their duty to the public in not pursuing questions over Kerry's record.

Since military service is not a prerequisite for the office of the Presidency, I am not sure we should require such records be made public for all candidates. But, inasmuch as Bush was hounded over his, and inasmuch as Kerry essentially demands we base his fitness for office on his 4 month in Vietnam, we should be given the whole scoop. His fellow Democrats should have vetted him on this issue in the primaries, they owe that to the voters and bear the responsibility if this bites their party in the butt now.

Which brings me back to wondering if Bush is so weak, why Kerry is the best they could come up with. My thoughts are that Bush is really not as bad as they lead us to believe or higher caliber Dems would not be holding on to their warchests for '08.

Evie Happy

Collapse -
Re: The thing that bothers me the most

In reply to: Re: The thing that bothers me the most

Hi Evie,

Which is also why they're so scared of Nader. If their guy was so great, they wouldn't be so worried about fringe candidates.

--Cindi
Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email the mods

Collapse -
Re: The thing that bothers me the most

In reply to: Re: The thing that bothers me the most

Collapse -
Re: The thing that bothers me the most

In reply to: Re: The thing that bothers me the most

You'd think someone would be digging from the day they had their name entered on the first primary list wouldn't you?

Laziness? wait and see who will make a bigger splash of news if you find dirt? why bother to do the work for someone that will wash out anyway? don't know.

On the other hand, the same digging, twisting, and exaggeration of every possible defect in a candidate's (or even winner's past) may also contribute to a narrow choice.

It may be only those that want the power/fame/headrush of winning so bad will be the only ones that will endure the attempts to use every peccadillo from their past to crucify them.

RogerNC

click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

Collapse -
Re: The thing that bothers me the most

In reply to: Re: The thing that bothers me the most

Hi Roger,

Points well taken as to the degree of scrutiny currently applied and how that might dissuade better candidates from seeking office.

But I'm still perplexed that Kerry wasn't more well vetted. I could see with Edwards -- not much of a career or public record to speak of. But Kerry's testimony against the war is what launched his career. I guess the Democrats figured they had what they had to work with and concentrated on tearing down GWB for his Vietnam era service. It seems to be backfiring and still doesn't explain why they went through the pains to puff up his war record. Like I said, this stuff has been known for many years now. Weld had apparently generated a veritable doctoral thesis of opposition research on Kerry in 1996. His campaign was anemic until the great scream. It just seems the Bush haters were so blinded by their hate they got all caught up in the whole electable thing and figured with a willing press they could gloss over the problems with Kerry. If they hadn't made such a big deal of his service record as his defining qualification he might have gotten away with it ... but I'm getting ahead of myself here, he may well still, but even the most biased of media can't ignore this too much longer IMO.

Evie Happy

Collapse -
Re: The thing that bothers me the most

In reply to: The thing that bothers me the most

"I'm sick to death of this crap. Why did it take over four years for the Dems to question Bush's military record?"

I think they did bring it up, plus every other thing they could think of, four years ago. They just couldnt get any traction.

Collapse -
Re: The thing that bothers me the most

In reply to: Re: The thing that bothers me the most

And this flip flop makes the current obsession over that war by Kerry's campaign even more disturbing.

Evie Happy

Collapse -
Re: The thing that bothers me the most

In reply to: Re: The thing that bothers me the most

Just relax, maybe the Kerry campaign will change their focus from the war to Kerry's leadership experience since then. Oh wait, there isn't any.

Collapse -
I hear they might have to really drop a bomb

In reply to: Re: The thing that bothers me the most

Nothing like a good gay outing to divert attention Wink

Evie Happy

Collapse -
Re: If you can't see the media bias now ...

In reply to: If you can't see the media bias now ...

Is it just me? It seems to me that earlier, many of the polls included Nader. Lately, they have only been Kerry/Bush.

Popular Forums

icon
Computer Newbies 10,686 discussions
icon
Computer Help 54,365 discussions
icon
Laptops 21,181 discussions
icon
Networking & Wireless 16,313 discussions
icon
Phones 17,137 discussions
icon
Security 31,287 discussions
icon
TVs & Home Theaters 22,101 discussions
icon
Windows 7 8,164 discussions
icon
Windows 10 2,657 discussions

REVIEW

Sublime suburban chariot

High on style and technology, the 2019 Volvo XC90 is an incredibly satisfying everyday crossover.