• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

NBC/WSJ Poll: Obama's Foreign Policy Rating Plummets, Even Without Iraq

Grant said:
I watch Al Jazeera fairly often and despite the occasional propaganda their American version still lacks the bias of the non cable networks and the New York Times, among many others. Without this bias an inexperienced and obviously incompetent Obama would never have been elected, and certainly not re-elected.
Click to expand...

And without a little help from the SCOTUS, Bush would never have been, well never mind. Btw, HC was hitting up congress for additional monies to ramp up US propaganda in the news. Or does everyone believe that only Russia and Iran have state sponsored propaganda. And did you catch how Clinton distanced US media from Al Jazeera as "real news" REAL NEWS, nice.
 
Last edited:
Montecresto said:
And without a little help from the SCOTUS, Bush would never have been, well never mind. Btw, HC was hitting up congress for additional monies to ramp up US propaganda in the news. Or does everyone believe that only Russia and Iran have state sponsored propaganda. And did you catch how Clinton distanced US media from Al Jazeera as "real news" REAL NEWS, nice.
Click to expand...

This thread is about Obama.
 
Grant said:
You tried to to change the subject in post #5. Time to be honest and get back on track..
Click to expand...

It neither dishonest, nor off track to point out polling hypocrisy.
 
As a Liberal, I take offense to this. They are Progressive biased 'news' organizations (propoganda). :)



Grim17 said:
OMG... Another one of the intelectually enlightened who can't do simple math, and doesn't know the difference between news and political opinion. Here's a newsflash... Rush Limbaugh is a political opinion show, not a news program.

Why is it that so many people on the left, including yourself, seem to think that hard news and opinion are the same thing? I mean if us racist, inbread, uneducated, hillbilly rednecks can dissern the difference between the 2, why can't you?

When it comes to news programming, Special Report on Fox News is their most watched hard news show and has around 3 million viewers per night. While 25 to 30 million people per night watch the nightly news on ABC, NBC or CBS, not to mention the more than 12 million who tune into their morning news shows every day. If you want to get into radio news, there's of course NPR, the only nationwide news oriented network in the US that offers 24 hour programming, that is liberal biased beyond belief. As for the most prominent radio news networks that offer top of the hour news, you have Mutual, CBS, ABC and Fox. If you want to get into daily newspapers, the liberal bias there gets ridiculous.

That is what's called a news media dominated by liberal bias.
Click to expand...
 
Grim17 said:
Hey, for real news there's nothing like an anti-American network that's in bed with Islamic terrorists to get the straight scoop... LMMFAO
Click to expand...
Certainly they are based but, unlike the MSM, their bias seems less in your face. Al Jazeera in the ME is very bias, of course, and probably moreso than the MSM in the US.

I missed their reporting on July 4th though I expect they said something along the lines of 'America is a wonderful country but...'!
 
Grim17 said:
Be that as it may, their liberal bias has been well documented for many, many years.



Their 2 main news programs are Special Report and Shep Smith's show. Shep's show if anything leans to the left, and although Special Report leans slightly to the right, it is more centrist that any of the nightly news shows on the big 3, which have 8 to 10 times the viewers Fox does.

Like I said, if the day ever comes when the American news media is dominated by conservative bias, you have my word that I'll raise hell about it.




Hey, for real news there's nothing like an anti-American network that's in bed with Islamic terrorists to get the straight scoop... LMMFAO
Click to expand...

US foreign policy in the ME has been support of militant Islamic groups, for decades, what's the difference?
 
Grant said:
I watch Al Jazeera fairly often and despite the occasional propaganda their American version still lacks the bias of the non cable networks and the New York Times, among many others. Without this bias an inexperienced and obviously incompetent Obama would never have been elected, and certainly not re-elected.
Click to expand...

And you suggesting that CN only became biased in 2008?
 
Montecresto said:
Such undisguised partisanship!! Should we fight against conservative bias too?
Click to expand...

Obviously. Journalists should strive to present an objective and factual reporting and analysis. It is not undisguised partisanship. It is integrity. Journalists should not cover for politicians simply because they agree with general policies.
 
What possible difference does polling a lame duck president make?

I think the guy is a lousy POTUS - but why bother polling a guy that will never run for office again?

He won't care what his numbers are...he will just care about his legacy.

And people are so wishy-washy...no matter how much the POTUS sucks, people almost always think better of most POTUS's the longer they are out of office.

"Gee - he wasn't that bad'.
 
Eric7216 said:
Obviously. Journalists should strive to present an objective and factual reporting and analysis. It is not undisguised partisanship. It is integrity. Journalists should not cover for politicians simply because they agree with general policies.
Click to expand...

There was so much that the news agencies should have put the spot light on in the lead up to the Iraq war, and they failed. It's not a left right thing.
 
Montecresto said:
There was so much that the news agencies should have put the spot light on in the lead up to the Iraq war, and they failed. It's not a left right thing.
Click to expand...

Not real conclusive since most of the left wing politicians supported the lead up to the Iraq War. Were reporters showing a right wing bias or supporting their liberal politicians?
But, yeah, they should have been objective.
 
Last edited:
Eric7216 said:
Not real conclusive since most of the left wing politicians supported the lead up to the Iraq War. Were reporters showing a right wing bias or supporting their liberal politicians?
Click to expand...

They were failing to expose the Bush lies. Another problem with US press is that defense contractors are heavily invested in them, a huge conflict of interest that should never have been allowed, but which receives little attention.
 
DA60 said:
What possible difference does polling a lame duck president make?

I think the guy is a lousy POTUS - but why bother polling a guy that will never run for office again?

He won't care what his numbers are...he will just care about his legacy.

And people are so wishy-washy...no matter how much the POTUS sucks, people almost always think better of most POTUS's the longer they are out of office.

"Gee - he wasn't that bad'.
Click to expand...
I doubt he cares at all about his 'legacy'. He's there for the 'perks', and they'll continue.
 
Eric7216 said:
Obviously. Journalists should strive to present an objective and factual reporting and analysis. It is not undisguised partisanship. It is integrity. Journalists should not cover for politicians simply because they agree with general policies.
Click to expand...

exactly. A journalist shall remain objective and impartial under any circumstances.
 
apdst said:
The Bush scandals were nothing compared to Obama's. Funny how you claim that you're not a Liberal, but you couldn't wait to mention Bush.
Click to expand...

... Abu Graib, Valerie Plame, FEMA's mishandling of Katrina, fake reporters at White House briefings, Halliburton, waterboarding, torture of US soldiers, Lawyergate, Yellowcake forgery, payment of columnists, Abramoff, Scooter Libby, PRISM Surveillance, Walter Reed? Yeah. Nothing. Nothing at all.
 
Hatuey said:
... Abu Graib, Valerie Plame, FEMA's mishandling of Katrina, fake reporters at White House briefings, Halliburton, waterboarding, torture of US soldiers, Lawyergate, Yellowcake forgery, payment of columnists, Abramoff, Scooter Libby, PRISM Surveillance, Walter Reed? Yeah. Nothing. Nothing at all.
Click to expand...

You've confirmed the previous post.
 
Grant said:
You've confirmed the previous post.
Click to expand...

Not really, all of those have mirror images in the current administration. However, you're too much of a Conservative pretending to be an "independent" to see it. :shrug: Now run off, I've got no time for extraneous posters tonight.
 
Montecresto said:
And you suggesting that CN only became biased in 2008?
Click to expand...

Are you talking about CNN or the Cartoon Network?? Hard to tell the difference sometime, although the Cartoon Network probably has higher ratings.
 
the public is very knowledgeable about foreign affairs, so their opinion of how Obama is doing in that regard really, really matters ... please, give me a break ... the GOP even fielded a candidate in 2012 who didn't know squat about international relations other than where to hide his money ... At the end of the day he will be judged principally on how well the country was doing economically when he left office and how much he will be blamed versus the guy who preceded him who took us to the brink of a depression ... :2wave:
 
Presidents tend to get popular after their administrative duties are over...for example, FDR, Clinton, & even Bush to a certain extent. Also, Obama gets a lot of hate, but just one quick reading of Lincoln's administrative unpopularity should be able to boost his morale to do better .
 
Ricatalian said:
the public is very knowledgeable about foreign affairs, so their opinion of how Obama is doing in that regard really, really matters ... please, give me a break ... the GOP even fielded a candidate in 2012 who didn't know squat about international relations other than where to hide his money ... At the end of the day he will be judged principally on how well the country was doing economically when he left office and how much he will be blamed versus the guy who preceded him who took us to the brink of a depression ... :2wave:
Click to expand...

You forgot the little "sarcasm" thingy.....

Every day another one of Romney's predictions on foreign affairs if being proved true.

This president has been a foreign policy disaster, one after another.

Obama Dummy.jpg
 
Ricatalian said:
the public is very knowledgeable about foreign affairs, so their opinion of how Obama is doing in that regard really, really matters ... please, give me a break ... the GOP even fielded a candidate in 2012 who didn't know squat about international relations other than where to hide his money ... At the end of the day he will be judged principally on how well the country was doing economically when he left office and how much he will be blamed versus the guy who preceded him who took us to the brink of a depression ... :2wave:
Click to expand...

The Democrats fielded a candidate in 2008 who didn't know squat about international relations. His name was Barack Obama.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom