tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3098264341625381422.post5577974264678886499..comments2024-03-18T17:01:07.165-07:00Comments on The Provocateur: President Obama Vs. Fox Newsmike volpehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02999118519606254362noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3098264341625381422.post-79017959680620997552009-06-17T21:00:06.565-07:002009-06-17T21:00:06.565-07:00I'm not sure why you commented in this piece. ...I'm not sure why you commented in this piece. That said, where to start. <br /><br />First, isn't the Sec of Def a holdover? How important is the Sec of Def during a time of war though?<br /><br />How much evidence were you looking for since Johnson settled and paid about 400k?<br /><br />Did you read the report? it's pretty detailed. <br /><br />There was no difference of opinion. McCaskill flat out accused him of circumventing the law. This is truly tortured logic.mike volpehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02999118519606254362noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3098264341625381422.post-23565586210029633652009-06-17T20:36:19.206-07:002009-06-17T20:36:19.206-07:00Walpin wasn't covered because frankly, there&#...Walpin wasn't covered because frankly, there's still not enough evidence to suggest wrongdoing by either Johnson or Obama.<br /><br />At the same time, I don't remember anybody saying anything about Joseph Schmitz or Janet Rehnquist.<br /><br />In all likelihood, Obama just plain doesn't trust any Bush appointed inspectors general. So I don't necessarily think it was specifically because of KJ (as a Pistons fan, I rooted hard for that guy because I hated the Bulls with a fiery passion). As for McCaskill, the most you can deduce from that is a difference in opinion. Its not like she cited the law, all she did was declare that Obama's conduct didn't conform to her personal opinion of what he should have done.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3098264341625381422.post-47938076983749943902009-06-17T16:59:43.744-07:002009-06-17T16:59:43.744-07:00First, I get the Alinsky stuff from my conversatio...First, I get the Alinsky stuff from my conversations with ACORN insiders though I don't know where the readers get it. <br /><br />While, some may not believe in bias there is plenty there. You'll notice that the story of Gerald Walpin has pretty much not been covered. It may just take some media sophistication to understand media bias. there's no doubt that most of the press is mostly adoring toward Obama. <br /><br />As for Juan Williams, he is a liberal, a supporter of Obama, and a fairly consistent defender of his policies. If NPR doesn't think he is liberal enough, that says more about them than him.mike volpehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02999118519606254362noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3098264341625381422.post-33864152846927524122009-06-17T16:26:32.409-07:002009-06-17T16:26:32.409-07:00you got that Alinsky rule stuff from watching Bill...you got that Alinsky rule stuff from watching Bill O' ReillyAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3098264341625381422.post-50439446200465232092009-06-17T15:41:44.349-07:002009-06-17T15:41:44.349-07:00Perhaps you've forgotten that NPR has asked Ju...Perhaps you've forgotten that NPR has asked Juan Williams to stop associating himself with them when he goes on O'Reilly's show. Apparently NPR considers Williams an embarrassment. Guess they don't consider him very liberal then.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3098264341625381422.post-9897813687659551402009-06-17T15:35:01.125-07:002009-06-17T15:35:01.125-07:00I'll admit, it does appear that a side-effect ...I'll admit, it does appear that a side-effect of the personality politics the Democrats engage in is their standard bearers are very self-absorbed.<br /><br />That being said, the talk about bias is really what you make of it. I've never really believed in media bias because the vast majority of the charges of bias tend to sound like "you are biased because you do not use my catchphrases and talking points." After all, media bias does not affect the person alleging media bias. If it did, you wouldn't know it was bias. What media bias is really about is what you want people to believe. And when someone is espousing an idea that isn't what you want people to believe, it threatens you because its harder to convince those people you're right because "they saw it on the news."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3098264341625381422.post-42729949595893129652009-06-16T20:44:04.293-07:002009-06-16T20:44:04.293-07:00Is he following one of the Alinsky rules here - th...Is he following one of the Alinsky rules here - the one about marginalizing?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com