Self Editor

Forum: pol
Page 3196
Subject: Endorsements

Posted by: Perm Dude - [109562010] Mon, Oct 20, 2008, 12:00

For Obama:

Bryan/College Station (TX) Eagle

Every 20 or 30 years or so, a leader comes along who understands that change is necessary if the country is to survive and thrive. Teddy Roosevelt at the turn of the 20th century and his cousin Franklin Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan -- these leaders have inspired us to rise to our better nature, to reach out to be the country we can be and, more important, must be.

Barack Obama is such a leader. He doesn't have all the answers, to be sure, but at least he is asking the right questions. While we would like more specificity on his plans as president, we are confident that he can lead us ever forward, casting aside the doubts and fears of recent years.

boikin
ID: 532592112
Mon, Oct 20, 2008, 13:37

Oh man what has happened to college station? Or to the conservatives that they would endorse Obama.

C1-NRB
ID: 588421510
Mon, Oct 20, 2008, 14:08

The "Screaming Eagle" has never been the voice of the B/CS people. Anyone who lives there gets their "real" news from either Houston or Dallas, both of which deliver their dailies to town.

Building 7
ID: 471052128
Mon, Oct 20, 2008, 14:13

I live in College Station. Almost every position state and local is held by a Republican. Except for district attorney and I think that dude is fixin' to lose.

That's like the 200th largest paper, an odd one to cite. I cancelled my subscription about 10 years ago, a couple days after I got on the internet.

Perm Dude
ID: 109562010
Mon, Oct 20, 2008, 14:30

That is an extremely conservative paper, and College Station is deeply red--as I recall, it still holds very tightly to old ag school conservativism.

It is worth noting simply because it typically just sits out an election (i.e., doesn't endorse) when the Republican isn't worth endorsing.

Building 7
ID: 471052128
Mon, Oct 20, 2008, 15:06

College Station is not Communist (deeply red).

And I'm on pins and needles awaiting the New York Times endorsement.

DWetzel at work
ID: 278201415
Mon, Oct 20, 2008, 15:22

Obama 112, McCain 39

In a real shocker, two solid Bush papers in 2004, the Houston Chronicle and Austin American-Statesman, also came out for Obama today. So did the more traditionally Democratic the News & Obsever in Raleigh and the Orlando Sentinel, both in key battleground states.

Obama's lopsided margin, including most of the major papers that have decided so far, is in stark contrast to John Kerry barely edging George W. Bush in endorsements in 2004 by 213 to 205.

Perm Dude
ID: 109562010
Mon, Oct 20, 2008, 15:24

#5: "Red" as in "red state vs blue state." College Station is deep in the heart of Texas conservative land.

Most endorsements (like the NY Times, which already endorsed Obama, and the Post) don't really matter. What I'm interested in highlighting are those papers who would not otherwise endorse a Democrat, and their reasoning.

Just like Colin Powell, a Republican with solid cred.

boikin
ID: 532592112
Mon, Oct 20, 2008, 15:31

i like how they had to remove most of the comments for being abusive.

Building 7
ID: 471052128
Mon, Oct 20, 2008, 15:40

Whoever assigned those map colors got it backward. Red (communist) should be Democrat.

Although Texas is conservative, Austin is quite liberal.

Perm Dude
ID: 109562010
Mon, Oct 20, 2008, 15:49

Uh, Demcrats aren't communists. But you aren't interested in that fact, are you?

Austin is an awesome town. Liberal, of course, but great food and music.

Boldwin
ID: 44916136
Mon, Oct 20, 2008, 16:39

Just like Colin Powell, a Republican with solid cred.

If it ever was it's a thing of the past now. PD is sure no gage of Republican cred.

This is the year MSM died. While the MSM started bleeding when their bias was exposed during Watergate, half of America noticed this time how 'in the tank' they were this election. Why anyone who votes republican would ever buy or watch MSM ever again, other than for giggles is beyond me.

Perm Dude
ID: 109562010
Mon, Oct 20, 2008, 16:41

This is all about the media for you, isn't it? Complete denial for you? Even Lou Dobbs (who I watch every few days) has the balls to put blame where it is supposed to be.

DWetzel at work
ID: 278201415
Mon, Oct 20, 2008, 16:54

So, the 49% of newspapers that endorsed Bush four years ago... were they part of the mainstream media? I really need to know the answer to that question.

It seems that "the MSM" is defined by you as "anyone that doesn't like my guy". Typical demonization tactic. Don't think sensible people don't recognize it for what it is.

Tree
ID: 13714198
Mon, Oct 20, 2008, 16:55

Baldwin, don't ever change. you're too cute for words in your crotchety old ways, as the world passes you by.

when the Republican Party started putting all its eggs in the Conservative Christian basket is when things started to change. When the Republican Party decided to appeal to its "base", without trying to expand with a broader coverage, is when things started to change.

but keep blaming others - because until you look within, you're not going to be able to change a damned thing.

Razor
ID: 545172413
Mon, Oct 20, 2008, 17:13

Boldwin's posts have jumped the shark for me. I don't know why anyone bothers to responding when the poster does not ever seem concerned with staying on topic or addressing points raised. I would bet that 98% of Boldwin's posts blame (and these are not mutually exclusive groups) the media, the globalists, the Democrats, the Communists, environmentalists, secularists, RINO's, ACORN, PETA, hippies, the Clintons, Barack Obama, or Nancy Pelosi. 2% have some valid arugments raised.

boikin
ID: 532592112
Mon, Oct 20, 2008, 17:15

when the Republican Party started putting all its eggs in the Conservative Christian basket is when things started to change. When the Republican Party decided to appeal to its "base", without trying to expand with a broader coverage, is when things started to change.

you can add to that forgetting that conservatism does not just mean i go to church, on the bright side they will realize that in the coming years, or maybe they wont.

Building 7
ID: 471052128
Mon, Oct 20, 2008, 17:17

IMO Democrats are closer to socialists/ communists than Republicans and thus should be the red states.

But you aren't interested in that fact, are you? Why do you have to put something like that in there?

Boldwin
ID: 44916136
Mon, Oct 20, 2008, 17:21

Look a little deeper, Razor.

The bifurcation between those who give the MSM any credence and those who don't is going to explode and probably be a generational thing.

It is a real factor that everyone who cares enuff to post here will not be able to ignore. This election for the media is a game changer. This isn't just about the convenience of the internet or about the legacy media's slowness afoot to adjust to the times. People are really going to turn against the MSM in numbers you aren't expecting.

Boldwin
ID: 44916136
Mon, Oct 20, 2008, 17:23

Maybe a stock play involving Fox News would be worth looking into.

Perm Dude
ID: 109562010
Mon, Oct 20, 2008, 17:28

B7: And Republicans are closer to the Nazis so we should use little swastikas?

The comparison for the US parties and extreme parties is, at best, distracting. Calling Dems "closer to communism" is like saying, of the numbers 5 and 10, that 10 is closer to 100.

Pancho Villa
ID: 51546319
Mon, Oct 20, 2008, 17:37

Maybe a stock play involving Fox News would be worth looking into.

Since Fox News is part of the MSM, your entire arguement seems flawed.

Boldwin
ID: 44916136
Mon, Oct 20, 2008, 18:41

Fox is the counter to the MSM.

Pancho Villa
ID: 51546319
Mon, Oct 20, 2008, 19:24

Fox is the counter to the MSM.

The world's largest media conglomerate by market capitalisation isn't mainstream? You just make things up as they suit you.

DWetzel
ID: 33337117
Mon, Oct 20, 2008, 20:18

But, they agree with him, therefore they can't possibly be part of the faceless group that he demonizes.

Duh.

Tree
ID: 389152019
Mon, Oct 20, 2008, 20:19

This election for the media is a game changer.

whatever. what changed the game with your so-called biased media was turning a blind eye to all of Bush's lies - lies that have cost the deaths of tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands.

if the media had any f*cking balls 5 years ago, they woulda seriously questioned bush and his fellow criminals, but people like you would have been so quick to call them anti-american.

You just make things up as they suit you.

i'm so glad there wasn't a question mark at the end of that statement.

Boldwin
ID: 44916136
Mon, Oct 20, 2008, 22:03

PV

You can't tell any difference between Fox, and ABC/CBS/NBC/CNN?

Of course you can, when it doesn't suit your purpose to be dense about it.

Pancho Villa
ID: 51546319
Mon, Oct 20, 2008, 22:28

You can't tell any difference between Fox, and ABC/CBS/NBC/CNN?

They're more bias, but they're still mainstream media, as is Clear Channel, which owns Premiere radio networks, which either owns or syndicates almost every right wing radio show. Or did you really think there was an EIB network?

Boldwin
ID: 419402022
Mon, Oct 20, 2008, 23:42

They need an exit strategy even more than they know.

Perm Dude
ID: 109562010
Mon, Oct 20, 2008, 23:43

As do you, B. As do you.

Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915
Thu, Oct 25, 2012, 11:45

Let's resurrect this old thing.

Colin Powell re-ups with Obama.

Detroit News endorses Romney, while ripping him a new one on his bailout stance.

Forum: polPage 3196Subject: Endorsements

Forum: pol
Page 3196
Subject: Endorsements