Breitbart.tv

What a slime! He knows point blank that the cover is what everyone sees and a small percentage of the people that see the cover in stores by the rag. Put their two cover stories up next to each other~ Obama “Why he is loved by his wife”~ Palin “Babies, Lies and Scandal”. Not for a second did I think that her story was about lies and scandal against her… The knee jerk reaction was that she was lying and she was scandolous. This irresponsible journalism is why the general publics views are so one sided.

He didn’t even have a valid argument to stand up for his magazine.

Any first-year journalism student knows the rules of a responsible press. No accusation gets in print without a defense from the accused, or at least a “no comment”.

At least US Magazine had a chance to defend their slanderous story, even if they couldn’t provide one logical reason to support it.

Boo Hoo Hoo…Fox New shills for the GOP and starts to cry when a tabloids jumps on their new star.

It’s truly funny/sad when the liberal bias of the mainstream media even extends to an absolute, 3rd-grade-reading-level rag like US.

Unfortunately there really isn’t much “responsible” journalism these days. Factual reporting does not sell paper, and with a trend toward sensationalism, things like journalist activism are creeping out of the expose documentary realm (Geraldo), and into what is supposedly bias neutral news (Fox and Friends, or the CNN alternative).

People are stupid – they don’t want to think critically, and can be swayed one cheap slogan at a time.

US magazine owes a huge apology to Sarah Palin and women everywhere. Why do some people fear a successful woman? They did this to Hillary Clinton and many more women. This is nothing new, but it’s getting really old! If the situation were over race, the outrage would be huge, as well it should be! However, if it’s over gender, women are told to stop whining and so very few take it seriously in the media. I appreciate Kelly for being outraged and asking US magazine to explain themselves.

Once again the media exposes their extreme bias for the most unqualified person to ever run for the presidency.
The Obama folks are going to really upset when Obama loses despite this advantage
I wonder what city they will try to burned down first.

watch:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CrG8w4bb3kg

transcript:

Chuck Todd: Mike Murphy, lots of free advice, we’ll see if Steve Schmidt and the boys were watching. We’ll find out on your blackberry. Tonight voters will get their chance to hear from Sarah Palin and she will get the chance to show voters she’s the right woman for the job Up next, one man who’s already convinced and he’ll us why Gov. Jon Huntsman. (cut away)

Peggy Noonan: Yeah.

Mike Murphy: You know, because I come out of the blue swing state governor world: Engler, Whitman, Tommy Thompson, Mitt Romney, Jeb Bush. I mean, these guys — this is how you win a Texas race, just run it up. And it’s not gonna work. And –

PN: It’s over.

MM: Still McCain can give a version of the Lieberman speech to do himself some good.

CT: I also think the Palin pick is insulting to Kay Bailey Hutchinson, too.

PN: Saw Kay this morning.

CT: Yeah, she’s never looked comfortable about this –

MM: They’re all bummed out.

CT: Yeah, I mean is she really the most qualified woman they could have turned to?

PN: The most qualified? No! I think they went for this — excuse me– political b——t about narratives –

CT: Yeah they went to a narrative.

MM: I totally agree.

PN: Every time the Republicans do that, because that’s not where they live and it’s not what they’re good at, they blow it.

MM: You know what’s really the worst thing about it? The greatness of McCain is no cynicism, and this is cynical.

CT: This is cynical, and as you called it, gimmicky.

MM: Yeah.

Bad! Bad! Media-

Funny you should bring that up. I wrote the following rebuttal:

You pathetic old fart. I know you elitist swine have nothing but contempt for those of us that really work for a living, but we are not the intellectual dirt beneath your feet you think we are. Let’s sift through this trash you consider so witty and backhandedly obtuse and see what we find:
“First, we should have stuck to the warm, human interest stuff”. You did, with all the humanity of a loan shark. You are saying that bring up a up a 22 year old DWI conviction her husband received is relevant? To accuse her of belonging to an Alaska separatist group, when even the leader of that organization said repeated this was false? I always wondered where the writers at the Weekly World News went to when it folded. It begs the question, do you ever miss writing about women having a Space Alien’s Baby?

“Second, we should have stuck to the press release stuff like how she opposed the Bridge to Nowhere (after she supported it)”. Oh, you have never looked at something and thought it was a good idea, but decided later it wasn’t? Apparently not, as evidenced by this commentary, which, like the bridge, was misconceived, poorly designed and went nowhere. My friends, meet the Manchurian Columnist!

“Third,Palin is under investigation by a bipartisan state legislative body”. So, not you are defending, but extension, a man that tasered a 10 year old child? How often do you taser your kids? Do you mace your wife if she talks while you are watch a movie? (This is assuming, of course, your inclinations lean in a conventional direction, which is not a given.) You know as well as I do (or you should anyway,) this whole sorry episode was started by a Democrat. Even the man that was replaced says her brother-in-law was not an issue.

“Fourth, we should stop making with all the questions already. She gave a really good speech. And why go beyond that? As we all know, speeches cannot be written by others and rehearsed for days. They are true windows to the soul.” That is just so juvenile it’s not worthy of response.

“Fifth, we should stop reporting on the families of the candidates. Unless the candidates want us to.” If they inject themselves into the campaign, no they are part of the process now, and therefore fair game. But the ravenous, contemptible exploitation of this young woman in the periphery of the spotlight are. At least you in the media found someone you could take on, a 17 year old girl. Where is all this deference shown to Chelsea Clinton, even after she began to campaign for her mother? I run in Democratic circles. I’ve heard the firsthand stories, not the friend-of-a-friend kind, about her SoHo romps. I could bring those up, but, unlike you in the media, I’m not a bottom feeder. I have a daughter, and I know kids do some stupid things sometimes. But to use this 17 year old girl as a surrogate punching bag for her mother, is nothing less than despicable.
Apologize? No. The Media should collectively disembowel themselves.

To sum it up, Mr. Simon, I cannot recall reading any of your past journalistic regurgitations, but it’s apparent to me the only thing you could write that would be worth my time reading would a suicide note.
Oh, one other thing. Don’t be distressed about the future. Bigfoot is making a comeback.

She needs to raise her kids,not be in control of the free world. Once they can somewhat take care of themselves then I’m all for her running.

It is amazing how upset the media get when the question of liberal bias is brought up.

Does thou protest too much?

You are totally correct TruthOnly. Sarah was the surrogate mother for her daughter who was impregnated by the father and Levi, the bf is actually having sex with the youngest daughter that is about 8 years old. I heard this on MSNBC.

##### LEFT WING MEDIA MEAT #####
What else would you expect from ther MoveOn.org, General BetrayUs LEFT WING MEDIA MEAT? Is the sky blue?

Kelly made him look like a fool. Couldn’t answer one of her questions with anything that even resembled the truth. As always the msm takes rumors and tries to weave them as facts. When called on it the sound like Obama: uh, oh, uh, we, well, uh, uh………..

This man had an opportunity to speak to this article and he was not able to adequately communicate why this cover story was factual.. it wasn’t and he appeared foolish. I have bought US Magazine from time to time in the past, never again. Kelly did a great job with getting her point across.

Treat the magazine the way we treat biased news agencies…is sure isn’t accurate!! The editor is a face that seeks attention and nothing more. The cover was biased…period; no balance existed between the 2 varying covers!! THANK GOODNESS I DON’T SUBSCRIBE TO ANY MAGAZINE!!!!

Save the planet! ABORT! Obama, provide for us free and unlimited abortions. People are killing our planet! ABORT! Impeach BUSH! End military rule! Free Health Care for All!

Viva Obama! Viva MSNBC!

from Politico’s Roger Simon:

“Why the media should apologize”

Sarah Palin gave a really good speech. Why go beyond that, asks Simon.
Photo: AP

ST. PAUL, Minn. — On behalf of the media, I would like to say we are sorry.

On behalf of the elite media, I would like to say we are very sorry.

We have asked questions this week that we should never have asked.

We have asked pathetic questions like: Who is Sarah Palin? What is her record? Where does she stand on the issues? And is she is qualified to be a heartbeat away from the presidency?

We have asked mean questions like: How well did John McCain know her before he selected her? How well did his campaign vet her? And was she his first choice?

Bad questions. Bad media. Bad.

It is not our job to ask questions. Or it shouldn’t be. To hear from the pols at the Republican National Convention this week, our job is to endorse and support the decisions of the pols.

Sarah Palin hit the nail on the head Wednesday night (and several in the audience wish she had hit some reporters on the head instead) when she said: “I’m not a member of the permanent political establishment. And I’ve learned quickly, these past few days, that if you’re not a member in good standing of the Washington elite, then some in the media consider a candidate unqualified for that reason alone.”

But where did we go wrong with Sarah Palin? Let me count the ways:

First, we should have stuck to the warm, human interest stuff like how she likes mooseburgers and hit an important free throw at her high school basketball tournament even though she had a stress fracture.

Second, we should have stuck to the press release stuff like how she opposed the Bridge to Nowhere (after she supported it).

Third, we should never have strayed into the other stuff. Like when The Washington Post recently wrote: “Palin is under investigation by a bipartisan state legislative body. … Palin had promised to cooperate with the legislative inquiry, but this week she hired a lawyer to fight to move the case to the jurisdiction of the state personnel board, which Palin appoints.”

Why go there? What trees does that plant?

Fourth, we should stop making with all the questions already. She gave a really good speech. And why go beyond that? As we all know, speeches cannot be written by others and rehearsed for days. They are true windows to the soul.

Unless they are delivered by Barack Obama, that is. In which case, as Palin said Wednesday, speeches are just a “cloud of rhetoric.”

Fifth, we should stop reporting on the families of the candidates. Unless the candidates want us to.

Sarah Palin wanted the media to report on her teenage son, Track, who enlisted in the Army on Sept. 11, 2007, and soon will deploy to Iraq.

Sarah Palin did not want the media to report on her teenage daughter, Bristol, who is pregnant and unmarried.

Sarah Palin thinks that one is good for her campaign and one is not, and that the media should report only on what is good for her campaign. That is our job, and that is our duty. If that is not actually in the Constitution, it should be. (And someday may be.)

The official theme of the convention’s third day was “prosperity,” but the unofficial theme was “the media are really, really awful.”

Even Mike Huckabee, who campaigned for president this year by saying “I am a conservative, but I am not mad at anybody,” discovered Wednesday night that he is mad at somebody.

“I’d like to thank the elite media for doing something,” Huckabee said, “that, quite frankly, I didn’t think could be done: unify the Republican party and all of America in support of John McCain and Sarah Palin.”

And could that be the real point of the attacks on the media? To unify the Republican Party?

No, that is simply the cynical, media view.

Though as Lily Tomlin says, “No matter how cynical I get, it’s just never enough to keep up.”

I couldn’t resist that. For which I am sorry.

Bad! Bad! Media.

The corrected version.

You pathetic old fart. I know you elitist swine have nothing but contempt for those of us that really work for a living, but we are not the intellectual dirt beneath your feet you think we are. Let’s sift through this trash you consider so witty and backhandedly obtuse and see what we find:

“First, we should have stuck to the warm, human interest stuff”. You did, with all the humanity of a loan shark. You are saying that bring up a up a 22 year old DWI conviction her husband received is relevant? To accuse her of belonging to an Alaska separatist group, when even the leader of that organization said repeated this was false? I always wondered where the writers at the Weekly World News went to when it folded. It begs the question, do you ever miss writing about women having a Space Alien’s Baby?

“Second, we should have stuck to the press release stuff like how she opposed the Bridge to Nowhere (after she supported it)”. Oh, you have never looked at something and thought it was a good idea, but decided later it wasn’t? Apparently not, as evidenced by this commentary, which, like the bridge, was misconceived, poorly designed and went nowhere.
My friends, meet the Manchurian Columnist!

“Third,Palin is under investigation by a bipartisan state legislative body”. So, now you are defending, by extension, a man that tasered a 10 year old child? How often do you taser your kids? Do you mace your wife if she talks while you are watch a movie? (This is assuming, of course, your inclinations lean in a conventional direction, which is not a given.) You know as well as I do (or you should anyway,) this whole sorry episode was started by a Democrat. Even the man that was replaced says her brother-in-law was not an issue.

“Fourth, we should stop making with all the questions already. She gave a really good speech. And why go beyond that? As we all know, speeches cannot be written by others and rehearsed for days. They are true windows to the soul.”
That is just so juvenile it’s not worthy of a response.

“Fifth, we should stop reporting on the families of the candidates. Unless the candidates want us to.” If they inject themselves into the campaign, now they are part of the process now, and therefore fair game. But the ravenous, contemptible exploitation of this young woman in the periphery of the spotlight are. At least you in the media found someone you could take on, a 17 year old girl. Where is all this deference shown to Chelsea Clinton, even after she began to campaign for her mother? I run in Democratic circles. I’ve heard the firsthand stories, not the friend-of-a-friend kind, about her SoHo romps. I could bring those up, but, unlike you in the media, I’m not a bottom feeder. I have a daughter, and I know kids do some stupid things sometimes. But to use this 17 year old girl as a surrogate punching bag for her mother, is nothing less than despicable.
Apologize? No. The Media should collectively disembowel themselves.

To sum it up, Mr. Simon, I cannot recall reading any of your past journalistic regurgitations, but it’s apparent to me the only thing you could write that would be worth my time reading would a suicide note.
Oh, one other thing. Don’t be distressed about the future. Bigfoot is making a comeback.

I heard that Palin’s youngest son is not her own. It is too bad that republicans can’t tell the truth. Just tell the truth!

Obama does not lie. We love him. He will care for the people.

Hit them where it hurts – their pockets! Do not buy this issue. If you feel strongly enough and subscribe to their mag, cancel it. They won’t do it again!

The National Enquirer doesn’t like its fellow check-out stand tabloid trashed by the likes of Sarah Palin.

They are in Alaska at this moment digging like Charles Bronson in The Great Escape.

The National Enquirer is in Alaska with bags of cash for Sarah stories.

Before it’s all over, we’ll be watching a video of Sarah, Todd and a moose.

Post a Comment