• 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!

Flashback: In 2009, Networks Slobbered Over Obama’s ‘Sacred Event’

chuckiechan

chuckiechan

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 2, 2015
Messages
16,568
Reaction score
7,253
Location
California Caliphate
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Flashback: In 2009, Networks Slobbered Over Obama?s ?Sacred Event?

As Donald Trump is inaugurated the 45th president today, it’s not likely that the three networks will suggest that seagulls were “awed” by the “sacred” event, one that “pilgrims” trekked to Washington to see. But that happened on January 20, 2009 as Barack Obama became the 44th president. ABC, CBS and NBC reporters were beside themselves and compared the event to a religious experience.

Then-CBS host Harry Smith saw the inauguration as where “the secular and the religious” merged. He gushed, “So it was that as many as two million pilgrims made their way to Washington and the Mall to witness this most sacred event.”
Click to expand...

It's hard to fathom that the MSM is so FOS, and so partisan they don't think anyone will notice they are pouting like little children. Not to mention that they are incouraging violence by the left, and their silence is an indication of complicity.

I think the IRS should audit them all up and check to see that they are paying taxes on the money they were paid as "casual labor" to be anarchists at the inauguration.
 
The whining continues.
 
chuckiechan said:
Flashback: In 2009, Networks Slobbered Over Obama?s ?Sacred Event?



It's hard to fathom that the MSM is so FOS, and so partisan they don't think anyone will notice they are pouting like little children. Not to mention that they are incouraging violence by the left, and their silence is an indication of complicity.

I think the IRS should audit them all up and check to see that they are paying taxes on the money they were paid as "casual labor" to be anarchists at the inauguration.
Click to expand...

On the January 20, 2009 World News, Bill Weir thought that even the animals would be amazed: “From above, even the seagulls must have been awed by the blanket of humanity.”
Click to expand...

Uhhh, seagulls just eat, fly around and **** on stuff. I don't even think they vote.
 
Obama had a massive crowd at his inauguration. That probably has something to do with them being caught up in the moment.
 
MrPeanut said:
Obama had a massive crowd at his inauguration. That probably has something to do with them being caught up in the moment.
Click to expand...

I would suspect that they recognized the historical event of us electing our first black president in the history of the country as well.
 
Kobie said:
The whining continues.
Click to expand...

Let's tally it up up.
Whines by the left about Trump=10000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
Whines by the right about the media coverage of Trump- 1000000000000000000000000000000
*-figures taken from Facebook
lol
 
President Donald Trump tells American people in his inaugural address, 'This moment is your moment. It belongs to you'
Click to expand...

That kind of says it all. And of course the democrats are against this. :roll:

But democrats can change when they educate young democrats on "How it used to be" before we gave our country away to cheap labor and rubber dog **** from China.
 
The media certainly liked Obama more. There is no denying that. But Obama's inauguration had a HUGE crowd and was watched by the masses all around the world. And it being the first black President added an extra historical element to it, which contributed to the increased audience.
 
chuckiechan said:
Flashback: In 2009, Networks Slobbered Over Obama?s ?Sacred Event?


It's hard to fathom that the MSM is so FOS, and so partisan they don't think anyone will notice they are pouting like little children. Not to mention that they are incouraging violence by the left, and their silence is an indication of complicity.

I think the IRS should audit them all up and check to see that they are paying taxes on the money they were paid as "casual labor" to be anarchists at the inauguration.
Click to expand...

That's stupid. I've said it before and it bears repeating "Most eligible voters did not vote for Trump." He is beginning his presidency with a polled approval rating of 40%. That's low. How low you ask? It's about the same level of Bush II's rating after Katrina. Rather sucky, innit?

It isn't about partisanship. YOU ARE, it isn't.

Trump has to advertise on Facebook to try to get people to go to his inauguration. Trump's cabinet picks are nothing if not the über-establishment and ultra-wealthy he promised to work against. Trump has promised to release his taxes and now refuses to. Trump promised to remove business conflicts of interest and now is attempting to wiggle his way out of that. Many people who voted for Trump did so only because they could not vote for Hillary. That does NOT mean those voters support Trump. I could go on and on.

I realize none of the above bothers you at all. You should realize that all of the above and more bothers one hell of a lot of people. Masses of Americans have voiced their non-support of Trump by not showing up today. You want the MSM to fawn over empty chairs?

It has been reported that the big event in DC this week is NOT the inauguration but the Women's March. They have taken more hotel rooms and 3 times the number of buses than the Trump inauguration. That should tell you something.

If you want to be honest with yourself you'll realize that one hell of a lot of Republicans did not show up for Trump's inauguration. That's fact. Whose fault is that? MSNBC? FoxNews? The Washington Post?

C2oNZZZUQAAkmHq.jpg
 
Risky Thicket said:
That's stupid. I've said it before and it bears repeating "Most eligible voters did not vote for Trump." He is beginning his presidency with a polled approval rating of 40%. That's low. How low you ask? It's about the same level of Bush II's rating after Katrina. Rather sucky, innit?

It isn't about partisanship. YOU ARE, it isn't.

Trump has to advertise on Facebook to try to get people to go to his inauguration. Trump's cabinet picks are nothing if not the über-establishment and ultra-wealthy he promised to work against. Trump has promised to release his taxes and now refuses to. Trump promised to remove business conflicts of interest and now is attempting to wiggle his way out of that. Many people who voted for Trump did so only because they could not vote for Hillary. That does NOT mean those voters support Trump. I could go on and on.

I realize none of the above bothers you at all. You should realize that all of the above and more bothers one hell of a lot of people. Masses of Americans have voiced their non-support of Trump by not showing up today. You want the MSM to fawn over empty chairs?

It has been reported that the big event in DC this week is NOT the inauguration but the Women's March. They have taken more hotel rooms and 3 times the number of buses than the Trump inauguration. That should tell you something.

If you want to be honest with yourself you'll realize that one hell of a lot of Republicans did not show up for Trump's inauguration. That's fact. Whose fault is that? MSNBC? FoxNews? The Washington Post?

View attachment 67212664
Click to expand...

Well it is a work day remember, so there's that. ;)

Tim-
 
chuckiechan said:
Flashback: In 2009, Networks Slobbered Over Obama?s ?Sacred Event?



It's hard to fathom that the MSM is so FOS, and so partisan they don't think anyone will notice they are pouting like little children. Not to mention that they are incouraging violence by the left, and their silence is an indication of complicity.

I think the IRS should audit them all up and check to see that they are paying taxes on the money they were paid as "casual labor" to be anarchists at the inauguration.
Click to expand...

I'd much rather the IRS were shrunk so they didn't have time to audit for political purposes, which is a gross distortion of their mandate and the opposite of what this country should be about.
 
OpportunityCost said:
I'd much rather the IRS were shrunk so they didn't have time to audit for political purposes, which is a gross distortion of their mandate and the opposite of what this country should be about.
Click to expand...

Nah. As long as they are going after the "other guy", I'm fine with that!
 
Risky Thicket said:
That's stupid. I've said it before and it bears repeating "Most eligible voters did not vote for Trump." He is beginning his presidency with a polled approval rating of 40%. That's low. How low you ask? It's about the same level of Bush II's rating after Katrina. Rather sucky, innit?

It isn't about partisanship. YOU ARE, it isn't.

Trump has to advertise on Facebook to try to get people to go to his inauguration. Trump's cabinet picks are nothing if not the über-establishment and ultra-wealthy he promised to work against. Trump has promised to release his taxes and now refuses to. Trump promised to remove business conflicts of interest and now is attempting to wiggle his way out of that. Many people who voted for Trump did so only because they could not vote for Hillary. That does NOT mean those voters support Trump. I could go on and on.

I realize none of the above bothers you at all. You should realize that all of the above and more bothers one hell of a lot of people. Masses of Americans have voiced their non-support of Trump by not showing up today. You want the MSM to fawn over empty chairs?

It has been reported that the big event in DC this week is NOT the inauguration but the Women's March. They have taken more hotel rooms and 3 times the number of buses than the Trump inauguration. That should tell you something.

If you want to be honest with yourself you'll realize that one hell of a lot of Republicans did not show up for Trump's inauguration. That's fact. Whose fault is that? MSNBC? FoxNews? The Washington Post?

View attachment 67212664
Click to expand...

People thought Obama was the answer to slaying the racist monster that is God's punishment for slavery.

But then again, Obama walked away from it.
 
chuckiechan said:
People thought Obama was the answer to slaying the racist monster that is God's punishment for slavery.

But then again, Obama walked away from it.
Click to expand...

Intimidation? I wasn't going to the rally at the state capital and getting my ass kicked. We won, that is good enough.
 
Last edited:
Risky Thicket said:
That's stupid. I've said it before and it bears repeating "Most eligible voters did not vote for Trump." He is beginning his presidency with a polled approval rating of 40%. That's low. How low you ask? It's about the same level of Bush II's rating after Katrina. Rather sucky, innit?

It isn't about partisanship. YOU ARE, it isn't.

Trump has to advertise on Facebook to try to get people to go to his inauguration. Trump's cabinet picks are nothing if not the über-establishment and ultra-wealthy he promised to work against. Trump has promised to release his taxes and now refuses to. Trump promised to remove business conflicts of interest and now is attempting to wiggle his way out of that. Many people who voted for Trump did so only because they could not vote for Hillary. That does NOT mean those voters support Trump. I could go on and on.

I realize none of the above bothers you at all. You should realize that all of the above and more bothers one hell of a lot of people. Masses of Americans have voiced their non-support of Trump by not showing up today. You want the MSM to fawn over empty chairs?

It has been reported that the big event in DC this week is NOT the inauguration but the Women's March. They have taken more hotel rooms and 3 times the number of buses than the Trump inauguration. That should tell you something.

If you want to be honest with yourself you'll realize that one hell of a lot of Republicans did not show up for Trump's inauguration. That's fact. Whose fault is that? MSNBC? FoxNews? The Washington Post?

View attachment 67212664
Click to expand...

How did so many people show up when the economy had just crashed and nobody had any money?
 
Mason66 said:
How did so many people show up when the economy had just crashed and nobody had any money?
Click to expand...

... In a nation of 330 million .... finding ~100,000 people with money to travel isn't that hard in any economy.

People with money showed up to support Obama, people without money saved up to travel in case he won, others asked relatives for money.

Again, finding 100K to 200K people willing to travel for what was a historical event isn't hard in any economy.
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
I would suspect that they recognized the historical event of us electing our first black president in the history of the country as well.
Click to expand...

Well, also, Obama was Sort Of Like God, so....
 
OpportunityCost said:
I'd much rather the IRS were shrunk so they didn't have time to audit for political purposes, which is a gross distortion of their mandate and the opposite of what this country should be about.
Click to expand...

501(c)(4) non-profit social welfare status prohibits political activity, so the IRS is legally obligated to discriminate with respect to politics.
 
Hatuey said:
... In a nation of 330 million .... finding ~100,000 people with money to travel isn't that hard in any economy.

People with money showed up to support Obama, people without money saved up to travel in case he won, others asked relatives for money.

Again, finding 100K to 200K people willing to travel for what was a historical event isn't hard in any economy.
Click to expand...

100,000? The report was that there were 2 million there.
 
Absentglare said:
501(c)(4) non-profit social welfare status prohibits political activity, so the IRS is legally obligated to discriminate with respect to politics.
Click to expand...

Only you could confuse equal application of law to both parties with political discrimination. Those folks likely are not non profit organizations. Keep following your rabbit hole.
 
Mason66 said:
100,000? The report was that there were 2 million there.
Click to expand...

So... 2 million people... showed up. Liberals have money too you know.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom