By Liquid Amber 8/14/08
It is expected that a democrat would work for a democrat not cross party lines. However, I've learned recently that some Hillary staffers have crossed over to work for McCain.
People don't work for the "other" party because they are getting paid for it. Is it because they cannot work for someone who they don't see fit for the white house? ~ or perhaps they see a bigger threat here. That threat being George Soros.
Here's the thing... George Soros and his filthy cronies are funding Obama. Soros is an evil man. At age 14, he worked for the Nazis during WWII -- some of which included extracting gold from the teeth of dead jews in concentration camps. He learned how to profit from the demise of others (even though he himself is a jew). This is his thing. He has no remorse in doing it then nor doing it now.
Soros is responsible for collapsing the economy in Indonesia and other SE Asian countries as well as descrating Italy's lire. How he does this is through financial speculation. He influences Wall Street and the public in turn responds to Wall Street.
Think about it. All he has to do is say there is an oil shortage, and gee, we now have higher gas prices. Why would he does this? One might conclude that its the perfect set up to make the public panic at the voting booth.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2008/05/26/cnsoros126.xml
Now our currency is taking a hit due to Soro's dirty deeds and we are blaming the republicans? So that we all panic and make sure we do not vote republican.
We are blaming the economy on the war? Guess who's making money on the war? Soros. Soros critized Halliburton for profitting on the war which drove their stocks down then, in turn, 2,000,000 shares for himself ~ ceased critisism and the stocks went up.
We are on the brink of a terrible recession and Soros is pulling the strings. Why? So we will vote for Obama.
Think about it. Soros has given MoveOn.org nearly $6,000,000 (though I've heard that amount is even more, but to error on the conversative side, we'll say $6 Mil). Move.org then developed a grassroots campaign to support Obama. And the press gives credit to Obama's phenomenal leadership.
Soros works in billions of dollars on a regular basis and has no real heart in what happens in America. He is all about power and control.
What's my source? Just google him and you don't have to look that far. And don't be fooled by his so called charity work. They are frought with schemes.
Where is Obama getting money to pay off superdelegates. Look no further than Soros and his goones.
We have on record how much money Obama has been giving superdelegates where Hillary won their constituents.
Think about it... why else would these long time loyal Clinton friends and allies unceremoniously dump Hillary during the primaries? ie.., Richardson (who said 4 times he wouldn't do what he did).
Why did Edwards come out and endorse Obama the day after Hillary won West Virginia by 41 points (when his wife voted for Hillary?) He was likely blackmailed with his affair. We all knew he was having an affair and Obama's peeps had him by the balls. However, they knew something we didn't. Edwards was financially supporting his mistress and his campaign finance guy. This is serious fraud that Edwards was cornered into it. What dumb ass.
We are clear that Chicago style politics is not limited to Chicago.
I want what you want for this country AND the truth is we are in bad shape and don't need another unqualified president in the white house ~ Bush was a disaster.
Lastly, I hope you don't take any of this personally. In the past, I have worked in politics with another Senator and learned that its very important to know who we are voting for and be clear about what they can deliver.
Obama is not scrutinized close enough by his supporters because people are so hungry for hope and change. I don't blame them. Bush sucks and Soros is amplifying that as best as he can to get you to vote for Obama.
However, if we get desperate, we will get in huge trouble. Obama will go down in history as the most foolish and desperate move Americans have made.
Thursday, August 14, 2008
Tuesday, April 8, 2008
LET’S TALK ABOUT THE MEDIA,
Somebody asked me why I think there is media bias against Hillary Clinton in her quest to the White House. My answer was a resounding, “Are you kidding me?”
Look up media bias and Wikipedia will tell us that Media bias is a term used to describe a real or perceived bias of journalists and news producers within the mass media.
I’ve always come to rely on the news to deliver the day’s events just as I rely on my mailman to deliver my mail. Never did it occur to me that our news media would abuse its power in the way I’ve witnessed in this election process.
The media is the most powerful force in the world. Now you might find this obvious, but let me provide more depth to my thinking process.
There is nothing in this world that is not given by language. Language shapes everything we experience. It shapes our view of the world and the people in it. Nothing has more influence on us than language.
In short, there is nothing more powerful in the world than language. Not money, not status, not our looks or our popularity that has more power than the power of language. Yes, you and I and the average Joe have tremendous power in the palm of our hand. Without language, nothing can be accomplished.
Now I’m talking about language used in all forms. Yes, there is speaking and writing but there is also the language of a raised eyebrow, the roll of the eyes, the gasps with hand over mouth and any other gestures that translate to another a communication that can alter another’s point of view. And we can “spin” our language to get agreement from others. The illusion is that the more agreement I get in the world, the more it IS the truth.
According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_bias#Sources_of_media_bias, The news is a product not only of deliberate manipulation, but of the ideological and economic conditions under which the media operate.
Have you ever noticed that the more agreement we get from others, the more it occurs like the truth? Let’s face it, if I come across with enough authority and articulate my claims as if I already have agreement, you will either dismiss my claims or take the time to prove me wrong or you’ll accept it as truth and go about your day. The latter is what concerns me.
Not all of us have the time or resources to look into the claims we hear about. It can be taken as truth if a claim is on the news or an ad slick. It’s important to remember that just because something is in print or on the air doesn’t mean it’s the truth.
According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_bias#Sources_of_media_bias
While appearing independent, the news media are institutions that are controlled or heavily influenced by government and business interests experienced with manufacturing of consent/consensus.
In an interview with Clinton in November, 2007, Katie Couric of CBS asked Clinton “if its not you, then how disappointed with you be?” followed by “I know your confident it’s going to be you, but there is a possibility that it won’t be”. In another interview this past February, Couric asked Clinton again if she considered the possibility that she may not win. I’m curious what Couric wanted from Clinton by asking her in two interviews if she entertains the possibility of not winning the election. At the end of the interview Couric asked the former first lady if her high school nickname was “fridgidaire”.
This is when I realized that the media is not in support of Clinton. I then got online to post a complaint of the obvious bias when I noticed that I wasn’t alone in my view. A majority of the comments posted on CBS.com reflected my thoughts on the matter.
From here I began to look at every political link I could find online just to study the comments. Sure enough, it seems many people see right through the media bias while others posted comments that reflected they were sold, hook, line and sinker, or agreed with the media.
Recently I watched Keith Olbermann’s Special Comment on MSNBC.com where he lays into Clinton for her “tepid” response to Ferraro’s comments. Personally, I thought he sounded like a small dog with a napoleon complex. I watch him barking at the camera the way a mentally impaired dog would bark at peach fuzz floating to the floor. I could not hear a word he was saying except… “yap yap yap Clinton, yap yap yap Ferraro.” I was waiting for the foam to ride down the sides of his mouth. I got the message but I felt the raging tone to not be a match for the content of his report. Yet I didn't see any special barking comments by Olbermann over Obama's grand standing speech on top of America's outrage with Reverend Wright's special brand of American hatred. Now there’s icing on a mud pie.
Back to language and the affect it has over the way we view our world. Let's look at Blog and News Captions. It took me less than 1 minute to find these captions online. Notice these key words that can affectively skew our view:
According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_bias#Sources_of_media_bias
Sources of media bias include framing devices are employed in stories by featuring some angles and downplaying others
“Senator, you must correct the wrong done to Obama” – Olbermann March 12, 2008
“Media Won't Stick Fork in Clinton Bid”
– Political Machine, By Tommy Christopher March 22 2008
"Why can't Hillary's 'Tough' campaign beat Obama's 'Hope'
-- Wonkette's Ken Layne, March 2008
“Clinton Dirty Laundry Aired” AOL Video, March 2008
“Hillary Clinton's Campaign Finished?” AOL Video, March 2008
“Undecided: Hillary keeps shifting slogans” - Ben Smith - Politico.com
The bottom line is this. In spite of the media bias against Clinton, she is thriving. Why? Because, I know from personal experience that you cannot keep what is possible down. As I write this I am fighting Stage 4 cancer and have been frustrated by the constant fight it has put me through. But when I watch Hillary triumph over all the odds, I am filled with unshakeable resoluteness. Hillary can overcome the odds the media stacks against her, just as she’ll overcome the odds that our current President will leave behind when she becomes the President of the United States.
This media bias game she is dealing with is just tidily winks for her. And, I might add, a great training ground as a leader of the powerful country in the world.
So WORD UP people because Clinton is not going anywhere but to the oval office.
~ Rockin Robin
March 24, 2008
Look up media bias and Wikipedia will tell us that Media bias is a term used to describe a real or perceived bias of journalists and news producers within the mass media.
I’ve always come to rely on the news to deliver the day’s events just as I rely on my mailman to deliver my mail. Never did it occur to me that our news media would abuse its power in the way I’ve witnessed in this election process.
The media is the most powerful force in the world. Now you might find this obvious, but let me provide more depth to my thinking process.
There is nothing in this world that is not given by language. Language shapes everything we experience. It shapes our view of the world and the people in it. Nothing has more influence on us than language.
In short, there is nothing more powerful in the world than language. Not money, not status, not our looks or our popularity that has more power than the power of language. Yes, you and I and the average Joe have tremendous power in the palm of our hand. Without language, nothing can be accomplished.
Now I’m talking about language used in all forms. Yes, there is speaking and writing but there is also the language of a raised eyebrow, the roll of the eyes, the gasps with hand over mouth and any other gestures that translate to another a communication that can alter another’s point of view. And we can “spin” our language to get agreement from others. The illusion is that the more agreement I get in the world, the more it IS the truth.
According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_bias#Sources_of_media_bias, The news is a product not only of deliberate manipulation, but of the ideological and economic conditions under which the media operate.
Have you ever noticed that the more agreement we get from others, the more it occurs like the truth? Let’s face it, if I come across with enough authority and articulate my claims as if I already have agreement, you will either dismiss my claims or take the time to prove me wrong or you’ll accept it as truth and go about your day. The latter is what concerns me.
Not all of us have the time or resources to look into the claims we hear about. It can be taken as truth if a claim is on the news or an ad slick. It’s important to remember that just because something is in print or on the air doesn’t mean it’s the truth.
According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_bias#Sources_of_media_bias
While appearing independent, the news media are institutions that are controlled or heavily influenced by government and business interests experienced with manufacturing of consent/consensus.
In an interview with Clinton in November, 2007, Katie Couric of CBS asked Clinton “if its not you, then how disappointed with you be?” followed by “I know your confident it’s going to be you, but there is a possibility that it won’t be”. In another interview this past February, Couric asked Clinton again if she considered the possibility that she may not win. I’m curious what Couric wanted from Clinton by asking her in two interviews if she entertains the possibility of not winning the election. At the end of the interview Couric asked the former first lady if her high school nickname was “fridgidaire”.
This is when I realized that the media is not in support of Clinton. I then got online to post a complaint of the obvious bias when I noticed that I wasn’t alone in my view. A majority of the comments posted on CBS.com reflected my thoughts on the matter.
From here I began to look at every political link I could find online just to study the comments. Sure enough, it seems many people see right through the media bias while others posted comments that reflected they were sold, hook, line and sinker, or agreed with the media.
Recently I watched Keith Olbermann’s Special Comment on MSNBC.com where he lays into Clinton for her “tepid” response to Ferraro’s comments. Personally, I thought he sounded like a small dog with a napoleon complex. I watch him barking at the camera the way a mentally impaired dog would bark at peach fuzz floating to the floor. I could not hear a word he was saying except… “yap yap yap Clinton, yap yap yap Ferraro.” I was waiting for the foam to ride down the sides of his mouth. I got the message but I felt the raging tone to not be a match for the content of his report. Yet I didn't see any special barking comments by Olbermann over Obama's grand standing speech on top of America's outrage with Reverend Wright's special brand of American hatred. Now there’s icing on a mud pie.
Back to language and the affect it has over the way we view our world. Let's look at Blog and News Captions. It took me less than 1 minute to find these captions online. Notice these key words that can affectively skew our view:
According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_bias#Sources_of_media_bias
Sources of media bias include framing devices are employed in stories by featuring some angles and downplaying others
“Senator, you must correct the wrong done to Obama” – Olbermann March 12, 2008
“Media Won't Stick Fork in Clinton Bid”
– Political Machine, By Tommy Christopher March 22 2008
"Why can't Hillary's 'Tough' campaign beat Obama's 'Hope'
-- Wonkette's Ken Layne, March 2008
“Clinton Dirty Laundry Aired” AOL Video, March 2008
“Hillary Clinton's Campaign Finished?” AOL Video, March 2008
“Undecided: Hillary keeps shifting slogans” - Ben Smith - Politico.com
The bottom line is this. In spite of the media bias against Clinton, she is thriving. Why? Because, I know from personal experience that you cannot keep what is possible down. As I write this I am fighting Stage 4 cancer and have been frustrated by the constant fight it has put me through. But when I watch Hillary triumph over all the odds, I am filled with unshakeable resoluteness. Hillary can overcome the odds the media stacks against her, just as she’ll overcome the odds that our current President will leave behind when she becomes the President of the United States.
This media bias game she is dealing with is just tidily winks for her. And, I might add, a great training ground as a leader of the powerful country in the world.
So WORD UP people because Clinton is not going anywhere but to the oval office.
~ Rockin Robin
March 24, 2008
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
