Jump to content

Ron Paul only allotted 89 seconds in 90 minute debate


natedogg624

Recommended Posts

I think the awful thing is going to sites like infowars for information.

You can sorta judge the kind of idio...err... people that go to those sites by the kind of advertising on them. --------vvvvvvv

MidasBookDVD_340x64.gif

1317747973

But, to be fair... it is a shame that candidates aren't given equal treatment in the media, unless they're batsh*t crazy and just tell lies, like Bachmann does.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/11/gop-candidates-blast-cbs-news-for-disgraceful-bias-at-south-carolina-debate/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see why it's so awful; it's their venue and format why shouldn't they be able to sell their entertainment how they chose? Consumers and sponsors can change the product by demands but R.P. supporters must be in the minority or they would change the system. It’s not supposed to be fair it’s an entertainment business that wants’ to appeal to the largest audience possible to maximize revenue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see why it's so awful; it's their venue and format why shouldn't they be able to sell their entertainment how they chose? Consumers and sponsors can change the product by demands but R.P. supporters must be in the minority or they would change the system. It’s not supposed to be fair it’s an entertainment business that wants’ to appeal to the largest audience possible to maximize revenue.

Because the media is supposed to be unbiased.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the awful thing is going to sites like infowars for information.

You can sorta judge the kind of idio...err... people that go to those sites by the kind of advertising on them. --------vvvvvvv

MidasBookDVD_340x64.gif

1317747973

But, to be fair... it is a shame that candidates aren't given equal treatment in the media, unless they're batsh*t crazy and just tell lies, like Bachmann does.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/11/gop-candidates-blast-cbs-news-for-disgraceful-bias-at-south-carolina-debate/

What websites do you visit for your political news? Please tell. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When it's a private company in the business of making money... how can it be unbiased?

NPR is the closest thing you're going to get to being unbiased, and you know where they rate in the public eyes.

What websites do you visit for your political news? Please tell. :D

Way too many to list, but the ones that don't cite sources or back up information with credible numbers I take with a grain of salt.

Truth be told, one of my favorites is crooksandliars.com, which is admittedly biased towards many of my views, but I don't take every article as gospel... especially some of the gun stuff, which is emotion-based and not fact-based. I also read digg.com, which is a whole MESS of political articles from different areas -- some credible, some not-so.

Edited by JRMMiii
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because the media is supposed to be unbiased.

Is that what you think or what you wish to be true? From where did you get this notion? Why would you think that a business is supposed to be unbiased, it is ran by people who are most definitely biased. It's not a government run propaganda machine and has no obligation to give you what you want. It would go out of business very quickly if it didn't present the majority of likely viewers with a product that they wanted to see. I would be willing to bet they have researched who is a viable entertainment package for them to sell and that crazy anti military un-American isn't on the chart in that venue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes they are, especially for something such as a political debate. By not doing so they sway public sentiment and the decisions they make.

I'm sure that CBS missed the memo that when they put together the format for a political debate that they needed to give everyone equal time. What authority over that business is in place to make sure they don't do that again?

So you R.P. supporters changed your minds because he didn't get enough time and you can't support someone you don't know enough about?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure that CBS missed the memo that when they put together the format for a political debate that they needed to give everyone equal time. What authority over that business is in place to make sure they don't do that again?

So you R.P. supporters changed your minds because he didn't get enough time and you can't support someone you don't know enough about?

Common sense just seems to pass you right on by, doesn't it? LOL :nono:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When it's a private company in the business of making money... how can it be unbiased?

NPR is the closest thing you're going to get to being unbiased, and you know where they rate in the public eyes.

Way too many to list, but the ones that don't cite sources or back up information with credible numbers I take with a grain of salt.

Truth be told, one of my favorites is crooksandliars.com, which is admittedly biased towards many of my views, but I don't take every article as gospel... especially some of the gun stuff, which is emotion-based and not fact-based. I also read digg.com, which is a whole MESS of political articles from different areas -- some credible, some not-so.

Buwahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I seriously hope you're just trolling at this point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the awful thing is going to sites like infowars for information.

You can sorta judge the kind of idio...err... people that go to those sites by the kind of advertising on them. --------vvvvvvv

MidasBookDVD_340x64.gif

1317747973

But, to be fair... it is a shame that candidates aren't given equal treatment in the media, unless they're batsh*t crazy and just tell lies, like Bachmann does.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/11/gop-candidates-blast-cbs-news-for-disgraceful-bias-at-south-carolina-debate/

the thing with linking to stuff like washingon times or infowars, is that if its legitimate news, its going to be somewhere thats reputable, and that link is going to be posted anyway when someone verifies the story, so why not just post the good link in the first place?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the thing with linking to stuff like washingon times or infowars, is that if its legitimate news, its going to be somewhere thats reputable, and that link is going to be posted anyway when someone verifies the story, so why not just post the good link in the first place?

eeeeehhhh... All the "reputable" places took like 2 weeks to report on Occupy Wallstreet... and half of 'em buried it as back page news.

Even if a news site is shitty, they still might carry a true/good story... Like the fact that a presidential candidate was allotted 30 seconds of time during a 90 minute debate.

I don't care how crappy a news outlet is that reports that story, it's outrageous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

eeeeehhhh... All the "reputable" places took like 2 weeks to report on Occupy Wallstreet... and half of 'em buried it as back page news.

Even if a news site is shitty, they still might carry a true/good story... Like the fact that a presidential candidate was allotted 30 seconds of time during a 90 minute debate.

I don't care how crappy a news outlet is that reports that story, it's outrageous.

The ABC news link (aka "mainstream media") I posted is dated Nov 12th, the Infowars one is dated Nov 13th. :confused:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...