Wednesday, March 26, 2008
Running Out of Land-Fill Space
Bill, those lies and contradictions of yours are getting ridiculous. You're saying what now, that the media ISN'T covering those nastier aspects of that testy intramural between Clinton and Obama? NOT COVERING IT!! Are you frigging out of your mind there, bro? It's wall to wall coverage of that fiasco on all the major cable-news networks. And I'm telling you, too, me-bucko, this extensive coverage comes complete with all the lurid details..................................I mean, just take Dan Abrams's show alone. He reserves a segment every night to Clinton and Obama cheap-shotting each other. And Chris Matthews is all over it, too, for Christ's sakes - providing with excruciating details in fact, analysis of every single example that you claim was being ignored. So, yes, you're wrong again, O'Reilly, big-time, 110% and counting.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
So, O'Reilly's complaining that there's not ENOUGH airtime devoted to this skirmish? And he's on what planet? Sorry, I just can't bear to watch this guy. I'll get the recaps here. Thanks for this public service! :)
So as to not make myself look like a total loser/glutton for punishment, I must specify here that I don't watch the entire program; just the "talking points memo" and maybe another segment or two. That's usually enough. And, besides, I have to tune in for Keith Olbermann's "worst person" feature....which usually features O'Reilly anyway!
Some would argue that the candidates fighting it out to prove who is the best is the way our democratic process works. A few more would argue that this process is working too: more democrats have come out to vote in record numbers and that the electorate is passionately involved in this election cycle. But that isn't spin or bad news reporting is it?
O'Reilly's point, I gather, is that the mainstream media is sugar-coating the nastier elements of the nomination struggle. Part of his conspiratorial framework, evidently.
Post a Comment