Remember when Bush the Idiot would give his daily speeches?

[NNN0LHI]

All the cable networks would cover every second of every single speech. And then there would always be a panel of 4 or 5 "experts", who were in actuality Bush sucks, waiting to discuss what he had just said for another hour or two?

Now we get little snippets of President Obama's speeches. Just a few seconds of his speeches is all we get. Usually just the parts where President Obama slightly misspeaks or mispronounces something. And that is it.

Does anyone else remember that and notice the difference?

Don

[JoePhilly]

1. Yup. Now they cut away so 2 or 3 pundits can talk down whatever he might be ...

talking about.

[bluerum]

2. Expected behavior. The media are water boys for the 1%.

[BlueCaliDem]

3. Oh I remember, and I've noticed the difference is glaring

I just hope other people see it, too. I know the TeaBaggers will never see it since they're so blinded by hate, but I hope the majority of America out there, will.

Corporate news media, aka, America's corporate propaganda media, has been hard at it to "hold this president to account", translation: discredit President Obama every which way they can. They're hoping for another Republican President and Republican congress.

[GoCubsGo]

4. No. I try to block those years out of my mind.

It's bad enough that I'm still having to watch my life go down the toilet as a consequence of that huge mistake. I don't want to have to re-live the events that put me here. ;-)

Funny how the Bush sucks still make up all these panels of "experts" they put in place to judge our current President. I refuse to watch any of it.

Another thing I noticed is that the networks, online news pages (e.g., Huffington Post), and newspapers rarely printed unflattering photographs of Shit-for-Brains, his wife, or anyone in his administration. Not so at present. It's sickening. No only do they give President Obama more negative press than any of his predecessors, they also include, along with the negative stories, the most unflattering photographs they can find of him. And, it's not just him, either. The do the same to his wife, to Hillary, to Nancy Pelosi, and anyone else with a "D" behind their names.

[Enthusiast]

5. kr.....It's not just how they treat Obama, as if that isn't bad enough.

It is basic media unfairness. And it runs DEEP! Every issue is framed and discussed to favor a right wing perspective.

Right now Jonah Goldberg is on C-Span's Washington Journal telling us how horrible the Occupy Wall Street movement is. As if we can't hear enough of this bullshit on 'regular' TV. This is just the example I thought of because it is right now, right in my face. Ol' Jonah is lying his ass off and the host is asking him to elaborate further, as if he has ANYTHING valid to say.

[BlueCaliDem]

6. C-Span is the worst offender simply because many people believe they're fair

and balanced. I've never seen any proof of that other than a few Democrats, and all rightwingers calling in, saying so.

Their coverage is 95% rightwing, giving the GOP and their rightwing cohorts ample time to spew their propaganda. In spades and unchallenged.

I got so disgusted with them when Bush the Dumber "won" reelection in 2004, and all the idiot rightwingers were calling in to gloat, and feeling as disgusted as I did, I noticed that every time I turned to any C-Span, I saw Republicans, Republicans, Republicans, so I scrapped them as a news source again.

Even today, just flip through the three C-Span channels at any given time, and you're most likely to find some Gooper's mug looking back.

Just the other day, on Sunday, when I couldn't find Obama at the MLK tribute, I went to C-Span, and lo and behold, Heritage Foundation, and some other Rightwing conference was on. But no Obama.

C-Span is a milder Faux News Channel. They've lost ALL credibility with me.

[Enthusiast]

7. I agree.

On all counts.