Is it just me, or are many people in the media becoming pukes? It seems like every time you turn around, they're demonstrating that they are just a bunch of negative, insolent children.

How about this one. Our astronauts our up in the shuttle

right now, one of whom recently completed a daring spacewalk rescue attempt. The stuff heroes are made of, right? Well, not really. CBS News thinks this is a good time to run a poll showing drifting support for NASA and the space mission. We all know people like this. You get a new jet boat, they prefer outboard motors. You get a promotion, and they talk only about how much more work you'll have. My wife has a term for me when I act like this: Little Black Rain Cloud. (p.s. It's not a term of endearment.)

Or this. Bush nominates John Roberts, an apparently moderate, credible candidate to sit on the US Supreme Court. First, the media bashes his wife because she is "pro-life." (Sidenote: Don't you like how the media will treat particular political positions as if they are just flat wrong. So what if she's pro-life. That position is no more "right" or "wrong" than pro-choice.) Now, the media is investigating his children's adoption records. What do they think they'll do with those? Are they going to be willing to trash his kids' lives over their political beliefs?



ZenPanda said...

OK...since when has the new ever had anything positive to say about anything? I only watch the occational cnn or foxnews when I am bored or can't sleep.

I am baffled by the whole investigating the adoption thing too. Does the media validate the births of children who are not adopted?

Very annoying those media guys...BIG BLACK RAINCLOUDS...(little ones remind me of winnie the pooh)

5 said...

The NASA program is a waste of money. Yeah, we are going to Mars real soon.
As to Roberts, he he heh, he is an idealogue and every one knows it.
After Clinton, every one is fair game, the kids, the wife, all of them. The Repukes set the bar, we just follow thier lead. Now, do the right thing and enlist.

GeeGuy said...

Well, Tony, if you just "follow thier [sic] lead" I guess it makes you guys pukes too.

The Raving Norseman said...

I was reading the other day about a Minnesota reporter who penned an editorial asking why the media focuses only on the bad news from Iraq when there are actually good things happening on occasion over there. He got raked over the coals by his colleagues for questioning the editorial decisions made by the national media. It's interesting when you distill it down to its essence: he was asking why the reporting isn't more balanced, and they savaged him for daring to think it should be.

And, Tony, while I should know better than to engage anyone who uses words like "Repukes" and pretends his position is still superior (disclosure: I think the same thing about people who think "Dumb-o-crat" is intellectual discourse), I do have to ask why you say everyone's fair game after Clinton. Surely you meant Clarence Thomas. Or is it your contention that all that stuff about pubic hairs on Coke cans was a reasoned critique of Thomas' legal positions?

David said...

Weird post. CBS News has been conducting its NASA poll for nearly 20 years. You're saying that the poll should be suspended, or at least the results not disclosed, while astronauts are in space? Makes no sense to me.

Then you say the media are bashing John Roberts' wife. Who, exactly? When? Where?

And finally, you say "the media" are investigating Roberts' adoptions when in fact, apparently only the New York Times is. To use "the media" and "The New York Times" as synonyms is like using "blog" and "Electric City Weblog" as synonyms.

GeeGuy said...

Fair criticism, David. I did paint with too broad a brush.

That being said, I think that it would have been reasonable to hold off on the NASA stuff until these guys made it back alive.

I will try to be more specific from now on.

Jim Rohrich said...

Gee Tony... yet another bitter Democrat chimes in. Why don't you have another beer.

GeeGuy said...

And David, in fairness, maybe "bashes" was too strong a word, but why is it even relevant?


Is calling her political position "misleading" bashing her?