When in fact his opponent, Albert Gore, was also a C student and also an ivy leage grad but went on to fail 5 of 8 classes in grad school? Why did the bleeding hearted liberal media insist over and over that Gore had won Florida when he hadn't, and after 5 total recounts Bush won Florida every time and THIS wasn't reported? Why when Bill Clinton invaded his foreign country to oust his pet peeve dictator, Milosevic, not one bleeding hearted liberal put on their sandals to march for peace, yet when Bush invaded his country to oust HIS pet peeve dictator, the bleeding hearted liberal rage was white hot, every sandal in town was marching, and all the bleeding hearted liberal networks were on board?
No bias? Hardly. What do you think?
2007-09-22 07:56:46 · 22 answers · asked by dagiffy 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
I suppose this is a rhetorical question brought on by a revisionist history article about Al Gore in Vanity Fair in which attempts to rewrite his political career as one falsy reported and mistreated by the bleeding hearted liberal media. It made me laugh, that's all, because I remember such liberal extremists as Barbara Walters and Katie Couric vilifying Bush in interviews but treating Al Gore as if he was an intellectual giant before whom there were priviledged to breathe the same are. I remember Bush's C average was proof he was stupid while Gore's C average was completely ignored, as was the fact that he flunked out of grad school. I remember ad nauseum reporting up to the present day that Bush stole the election with the Florida scandal while it goes UNreported that he won every official and unofficial recount they did. I remember Clinton marching into and destroying a nation and ousting a dictator and not a word said, not a movie made, not an article written, no liberal rage.
2007-09-22 08:21:00 · update #1
Did yo really expect them to go against one of their own? They are going to bash the right any chance they get.
2007-09-22 08:04:11 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
The part that really makes me chuckle is that Clinton didn't even campaign for Gore and then neither of ther Clintons lifted a finger to help Kerry. So if Bush was a C Student and Gore was a C student, and we know that Bush had higher grades than Kerry, does that mean old Herman-Munster-Head is a D student?
Another laugh-inducing fact is that, with only 16 month left to go before he leaves Office, The Clintons, Gore, Kerry and the rest of the idiots on the left ARE STILL RUNNING AGAINST BUSH.
2007-09-22 09:45:12 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
The liberal media has exercised a desensitizing campaign for the last several years in pursuit of further misleading the already dumbed down public that the liberal media isn't liberal but that there IS no liberal media. No, the dominant media culture in this country is conservative and is biased toward conservativism, and to think otherwise deserves nothing less than mockery and derision.
I suppose this is why when Hilary writes a book, Hilary is on every network. When Kerry writes a book, Kerry is on every network. When Albert Gore writes a book, Albert Gore is on every network. When hayseed Jimmy Carter writes a book, hayseed Jimmy Carter is on every network. Yet, when Rush Limbaugh, Pat Buchanan, O'Reilly, Sean Hannah or any number of conservatives write a book, they are at most on Fox and nowhere else.
Bias? Ha! No bias in THIS country's media...and if there were, they'd tell you!
2007-09-22 09:45:36 · answer #3 · answered by russkilove 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Where are you still hearing about this? I haven't heard this come up in the media for some time.
To answer your question: The media is a business. No more no less. As such they will report what sells. If they keep talking about Bush's grades, then it must mean that people want to hear about it. Otherwise people would change the channel or turn the page and the media would go out of business.
2007-09-22 08:09:43 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
Didn't Bush get to stay in the white house for 8 years?
I never heard that said about him and I can tell you a lot of other things I did hear were a lot worse than that.
You keep gripeing about clinton get over it.
Bush kills a small country every day and no one says anything what more do you want?
2007-09-22 08:17:50 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 3⤋
Point... Al Gore is not our president.. Bush is.. and the fact that he was a less than great student shows in the way he talks and the way he is leading this country to ruin.... If he could be president then I should be.. I was an A student... I guess i just didn't have the nerve to cheat my way into a presidency!!
2007-09-22 08:30:01 · answer #6 · answered by Debra H 7 · 1⤊ 3⤋
I support conservative ideology - but your argument is flawed in so many ways. First of all, the media didn't remind us of Bush's academics as much as it did his National Guard Service. There is a difference between "mainstream" media and partisan blogs.
The Yuguslavian initiative was positioned as a humanitarian/peace keeping mission. There's no comparison between that and Iraq. (there were plenty of people opposed to that action on both sides of the aisle - many fearing that it would lead to another - larger scale war in Eastern Europe - being the birthplace of WW1)
2007-09-22 08:04:55 · answer #7 · answered by wigginsray 7 · 3⤊ 3⤋
The mainstream media hates Bush. They want to spread anything that is perceived as a negative.
2007-09-22 08:17:04 · answer #8 · answered by David_the_Great 7 · 3⤊ 2⤋
Politicians and media just do that. It's simple. They just attack their opponents by any means necessary. It's nothing personal and you shouldn't take it as such. Neocon media do just the same every single day.
2007-09-22 08:06:06 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
C stands for Crap, Cruel, Coward, when it comes to the Bush report card.
2007-09-22 08:06:12 · answer #10 · answered by gypsyworks 3 · 3⤊ 2⤋