60 minutes demonstrates complete bias in Obama/Biden interview.

Look at this interview on 60 minutes between Obama and Biden.

www.cbsnews.com...

Sun. 8/31/08

* (To Obama backstage at the Convention last week: ) "Did you ever doubt it (your nomination) was going to happen?"
* (To Biden backstage at the Convention: ) "Were you surprised to be up there (on stage with Obama)?"

The sit-down:
* (To Obama: ) "What do you think of Sen. McCain's vice presidential choice?"
* (To Obama: ) "Does the fact that he (McCain) chose as his vice president someone who has less experience than you take away that weapon out of his arsenal?"
* (To Biden: ) "Have you two talked, have you spoken specifically, about what your role would be in an Obama administration?" (Obama jumped in to answer, and Kroft didn't stop him!)
* (To Biden: ) "What's your role in the campaign? Can you make a difference in this race? And how do you do that?"

Notice every question is meant for Obama to knock out of the park. None of them are are meant to question his competence or polices. None of them push him on things hes said or his experience. They are only meant to make Obama look good. One of the questions asserting opinion as fact (Obama more experienced than Palin?) Now compare that the the coverage of Palin, where every question is meant to put her or McCain on the defensive.

There is more:

# (To Obama: ) "You've just come through a very historic week. I mean, politically, this was a real milestone in American history. But yet there was almost no mention made of it." (Apparently Kroft didn't pick up a newspaper or turn on a television in the last week.) "You made no mention of it, and the Democratic Party made no mention of it, almost no mention of it. Why is that? You're the first black person ever to be nominated by a major party."

(Obama's response: "I think people noticed that.") (Great question, Steve ...)

# (To Obama): "You are running against the record of an administration that is one of the most unpopular in history of the country." (Hey, Steve. Exactly what position does McCain hold inside the Bush administration?) "And there are people that believe that you should be much farther ahead in the polls than you are. What do you say to that? And are you comfortable with the way this race is going and where you are right now?"

Oh man, that's some hardball. Than this gem:

KROFT: There was an issue in 1988 involving plagiarism, which I'm sure the Republicans are working on a campaign commercial now.

Once again, Republicans characterized as mustache twirling villains. Even though going after something like that would be completely legitimate. Again, the media trying to inoculate Obama/Biden from criticisms. I challenge ANYONE here to show me an instance where the media interviews McCain or Palin this way.

Obama/Biden: Uplift, remove doubts.
Mccain/Palin: Cast doubt, demonize.



[edit on 1-9-2008 by Dronetek]

I was highly disappointed in the 60 minutes interview. It was a joke! It really didn't have any substance to it.

Did you notice at the beginning when Obama was talking about how he didn't know that he would get that far that Biden came in and interrupted and Obama was highly annoyed! Watch it again.

Also, I love it when Politicians say 'yes' when they are shaking their heads 'no'. LOL

Jemison

Did you really expect anything else?

60 Minutes launched Bill Clinton's presidency in case you forgot.

And remember the whole Dan Rather fiasco with the Bush National Guard records?

CBS is a partisan network. Has been as long as I can remember.


[edit on 1-9-2008 by jamie83]

please see next post.. pardon.

[edit on 1-9-2008 by mental modulator]

Originally posted by mental modulator


YES but youtube is messed up from me...
All day yesterday FOX news (fox and friends for example) were talking up Palins
experience and foreign policy experience as many here have regurgitated line for line, logic and all.

This was an attempt to inoculate the GOP VP choice from criticism from people like me who feel she is under-qualified. Fox had all the "bases" covered in regards to all my criticisms,' based upon this particular issue.

This was a clear preemptive attempt to discredit my line of opinion and my intellectual argument. I know this is the case because they were exactly in tune with my -CON- argument as I was forming them.

The talking heads even played out the arguments. ONE slyly presenting the question to the other, in which the other speaker would say, "glad you brought up that point,,, did you know that ALASKA boarders RUSSIA a foreign nation... yada ya"

SO YES!

You yourself have argued the exact same logic as my TV presented to my arguments.
Similar words and you brought up Obama's contrasting "lack" experience with the same points and logic as FOX presented.

I have yet to here one new acclamation on PALINS experience that I have not heard first on FOX.

[edit on 1-9-2008 by mental modulator]

reply to post by mental modulator


Fox has to, since every other network is downplaying and even dismissing her experience. While at the same time, downplaying the importance of Obama's experience. How does that make sense to you? You seem to be arguing that Fox is wrong, for reporting a side of the story that EVERY OTHER NETWORK refuses to report. Which is probably why Fox has the most balanced demographics for views.

This was an attempt to inoculate the GOP VP choice from criticism from people like me who feel she is under-qualified. Fox had all the "bases" covered in regards to all my criticisms,' based upon this particular issue.

Perhaps, but again its the onlyt network thats willing to give her a fair shot. All of the other networks do their best to innoculate Obama and attack Mccain/Palin.

Please explain to me how your brain figures a single network is equal to 7 left wing networks and several major left wing print medias? Without Fox, it would just be, "Obama experience doesn't matter, Palins experience does matter". Which doesn't even make sense since Obama is running for the presidency. All you're doing is justifying this blatant propaganda, by attacking Fox for giving a different perspective.

I'm a little confused on how we went from the CBS 60 minutes interview to a discussion on Fox.

Will McCain/Palin be on 60 Minutes this coming Sunday?

reply to post by Jemison


I sure hope so. It will give a very good contrast to how the media treats Republicans and Democrats. In fact, I plan on making a video showing this contrast.

Originally posted by Dronetek
reply to post by mental modulator

 

Fox has to, since every other network is downplaying and even dismissing her experience. While at the same time, downplaying the importance of Obama's experience. How does that make sense to you? You seem to be arguing that Fox is wrong, for reporting a side of the story that EVERY OTHER NETWORK refuses to report. Which is probably why Fox has the most balanced demographics for views.

This was an attempt to inoculate the GOP VP choice from criticism from people like me who feel she is under-qualified. Fox had all the "bases" covered in regards to all my criticisms,' based upon this particular issue.

Perhaps, but again its the onlyt network thats willing to give her a fair shot. All of the other networks do their best to innoculate Obama and attack Mccain/Palin.

Please explain to me how your brain figures a single network is equal to 7 left wing networks and several major left wing print medias? Without Fox, it would just be, "Obama experience doesn't matter, Palins experience does matter". Which doesn't even make sense since Obama is running for the presidency. All you're doing is justifying this blatant propaganda, by attacking Fox for giving a different perspective.

Ok you have good point as far as a different perspective...

I have said it before... people in broadcasting tend to be liberal. This career is a spin off of acting after all.

I do agree with you from the angle that seems many in the media prefer Obama as a candidate. I'm certain you will not "see" this, but from a liberal point of view GW era has been a very hard period for many. I think you are observing a break down of objectivity or professionalism in response to the past 8 years.

On the other hand I do not agree with FOX's approach either. I hold a very deep grudge in regards to fox because of the broadcasters equating a differing opinion to the war as UNAMERICAN and UNPATRIOTIC. This was NOT professional and not responsible
for this entity to actively inject it influence into homes of many. Instead of arguing the merits of debate and intellectual discourse, they helped fan a very bitter devision
by attacking character not facts or options.

Anyhow I'm sorry the world is the way it is in this regard.

Goodluck to your candidates and may they receive a fair shake.

BACK to me being an A hole of sorts...

Originally posted by Jemison
I'm a little confused on how we went from the CBS 60 minutes interview to a discussion on Fox.

Will McCain/Palin be on 60 Minutes this coming Sunday?

Because DT ask if anyone could find an example of a media outlet providing biased coverage... well actually

I challenge ANYONE here to show me an instance where the media interviews McCain or Palin this way.

Unfortunately I failed the last 9 words carefully... I did not...

In regards to an interview.

However once youtube stops acting so funny I will get on the case.

reply to post by mental modulator

On the other hand I do not agree with FOX's approach either. I hold a very deep grudge in regards to fox because of the broadcasters equating a differing opinion to the war as UNAMERICAN and UNPATRIOTIC. This was NOT professional and not responsible
for this entity to actively inject it influence into homes of many. Instead of arguing the merits of debate and intellectual discourse, they helped fan a very bitter devision
by attacking character not facts or options.

The irony is, all the other networks paint anyone not supporting liberal causes as unamerican or stupid. If you support the war, you're labeled a warmonger and they claim you don't care about he troops. Or they call you a "neocon", as if to imply you are some sort of Nazi out to destroy america. How is that any different? Is it another case of "its ok when democrats do it"?

It goes both ways buddy. The only difference is one side has a lot more influence and power. Plus, we don't bitch about it as much because WE KNOW we aren't unpatriotic in our hearts. Why the left gets so defensive about it is up for interpretation.

[edit on 1-9-2008 by Dronetek]

Originally posted by Dronetek
reply to post by mental modulator

 

On the other hand I do not agree with FOX's approach either. I hold a very deep grudge in regards to fox because of the broadcasters equating a differing opinion to the war as UNAMERICAN and UNPATRIOTIC. This was NOT professional and not responsible
for this entity to actively inject it influence into homes of many. Instead of arguing the merits of debate and intellectual discourse, they helped fan a very bitter devision
by attacking character not facts or options.

The irony is, all the other networks paint anyone not supporting liberal causes as unamerican or stupid. If you support the war, you're labeled a warmonger and they claim you don't care about he troops. Or they call you a "neocon", as if to imply you are some sort of Nazi out to destroy america. How is that any different? Is it another case of "its ok when democrats do it"?

It goes both ways buddy. The only difference is one side has a lot more influence and power. Plus, we don't bitch about it as much because WE KNOW we aren't unpatriotic in our hearts. Why the left gets so defensive about it is up for interpretation.

[edit on 1-9-2008 by Dronetek]

Like I said I think you fail to recognize the human aspect right or wrong as it may be.

1. These past eight years have not been very good in many peoples OPINIONS.

2. Once again, right or wrong, this has created a great deal of animosity towards
the GOP at this point in history.

As we both know political winds change.

I can list many instances, decision, statements and tactics that have PISSED many many people off.

I think because of your partisanship and ideals, you do not hold the same opinions
as many of these same people who are so PISSED off, myself included.

it is mearly a subjective
difference...

3. Unfortunately at this point in time the winds are not in your ideologic favor.
This is not an accident and the "bad will" is not without reason as I have tried to
explain.

4. There are several things that I BELIEVE are creating this bias you our observing. Media folks are actors, actors are in general ( liberal ), these same actors
also humans who do have opinions and I believe this gets translated in the reporting.

I think it boils down to this point in history, this specific time.

I recall a time after 9/11 where CNN, MSNBC, FOX and every single major station was
completely behind the president and the GOP platform. Do you not recall seeing GENERALS on every single network actively promoting and talking stategy on the initial
IRAQ strike???

Every single night on every station you would have voices ALL in concert supporting the PRO BUSH - PRO GOP doctrine of PREEMPTIVE WAR?

On rare occasion you would have a voice NOT IN FAVOR of the war. In which these
voices were quickly chastised and marginalized. I remember because it made me furious!

On another note: I remember a time when ALL people who were against the war were called and leveled as UNPATRIOTIC, UNAMERICAN, TERRORIST LOVERS, LIBERAL TERRORIST LOVER, PRO TERROR...Once again I remember this vividly because it ANGERED me to no end.

I even remember CHRIS MATHEWS of all people actively INSULTING " these callow voices of decent". TUCKER and the other guy?

FOX would actually and actively imply that having a differing opinion on the war was UNPATRIOTIC and UNAMERICAN.

So I understand YOUR frustration, but I also understand that the wind are changing.
MAybe if you didn't use the word liberal as an adjective to insult people this animosity would not have grown so strong and powerful. All of the LIBERAL name calling did nothing for good will.

HAve you ever noticed how many times you and other here on ATS have used the word liberal as an adjective? Much like the way the words retarded, stupid, simpleton would be
used!

Pay attention to it... Also pay attention how many times the word conservative is used in this same manner. There is a huge difference, probably 20-1...

Shall I also post the source clips of FOX introducing the public lexicon, OBAMASIAH???

HOW about introducing the term ELITIST???

HOW about Rush and LORD OBAMA.

If most MSM is PRO OBAMA then it is certain that FOX is ANTI OBAMA.

THERE is even a difference in this - ONE PROMOTES - THE OTHER DESTROYS two different energy's all together...

I don't know what to tell you... Its rough I've been there.

Plus, we don't bitch about it as much because WE KNOW we aren't unpatriotic in our hearts. Why the left gets so defensive about it is up for interpretation.

Remnant of the time I was in your shoes???

By the way I will now be calling SARAH PALIN GODDESSARAH in protest of the MESSIAH reference.

If you will stop using the word liberal as a an adjective I will not engage in the GODDESSARAH bit as an act of good will.(that will probably be a no huh?)





[edit on 1-9-2008 by mental modulator]

Man, let me tell you, I have cable but only watch the one true channel for all my news and I only listen to one radio broadcast because that's where I get the truth and nothing but the truth.

Actually it's probably because I live in a cave and have forgotten to think for myself.

If you want to get an unbiased opinion, try the BBC. Kind of makes Fox, and Rush, and all of the corporately controlled media in this country look pretty silly.

"Your mind is like a parachute; it works best when open"

"Ditto" that, good buddy. (By the way, I've always wanted to know...where does Rush go to church? I'd like to shake his hand sometime)

Originally posted by zlots331
Man, let me tell you, I have cable but only watch the one true channel for all my news and I only listen to one radio broadcast because that's where I get the truth and nothing but the truth.

Actually it's probably because I live in a cave and have forgotten to think for myself.

If you want to get an unbiased opinion, try the BBC. Kind of makes Fox, and Rush, and all of the corporately controlled media in this country look pretty silly.

"Your mind is like a parachute; it works best when open"

"Ditto" that, good buddy. (By the way, I've always wanted to know...where does Rush go to church? I'd like to shake his hand sometime)

Ya I'd like to shake Rush alright!!!

Your right, all of the USA MSM is biased one way or the other

reply to post by zlots331

If you want to get an unbiased opinion, try the BBC. Kind of makes Fox, and Rush, and all of the corporately controlled media in this country look pretty silly.

Are you serious? The same BBC that calls terrorist freedom fighters? The same BBC that docterd photos in the Lebanon war? The same BBC that did a study on itself and found "extreme left wing bias"?

www.timesonline.co.uk...

HE BBC is institutionally biased, an official report will conclude this week. The year-long investigation, commissioned by the BBC, has found the corporation particularly partial in its treatment of single-issue politics such as climate change, poverty, race and religion.

reply to post by mental modulator

Pay attention to it... Also pay attention how many times the word conservative is used in this same manner. There is a huge difference, probably 20-1...

I find this so laughable. You seriously think the people here don't constantly label us "neocons" "conservatives" "right wing nuts"? Or do you think youre as pure and white as the wind driven snow?

The media also likes to ignore the liberal label and constantly stick people with the neocon/conservative label. For example the other night when NBC detailed both VPs, but only labeled one a conservative. No liberal label for Biden.

newsbusters.org...

ust as my colleague Brent Baker found on Friday night, the big broadcast networks on Saturday morning showed no shyness about labeling Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin a “conservative,” with NBC Today co-host Amy Robach calling her “a staunch conservative,” CBS’s Chip Reid tagging her “reliably conservative,” and ABC’s Kate Snow finding Palin to be “quite conservative.”

But seven days earlier, as those same programs reacted to the Obama campaign’s text message heralding Joe Biden as the Democratic vice presidential candidate, none of those broadcast found a moment to call him “liberal,” in spite of Biden’s lengthy record of liberal votes as determined by the nonpartisan National Journal.

Do you not recall seeing GENERALS on every single network actively promoting and talking stategy on the initial
IRAQ strike???

So, showing generals explaining whats happening in the war makes it biased?

Every single night on every station you would have voices ALL in concert supporting the PRO BUSH - PRO GOP doctrine of PREEMPTIVE WAR?

At the time, most everyone was in favor of the war. Including democrats. Which is why it had such a high approval rating. I also remember dissenters being put on MSNBC and CNN. As I watched every second from a USAF hanger in Texas, waiting for the call.

On another note: I remember a time when ALL people who were against the war were called and leveled as UNPATRIOTIC, UNAMERICAN, TERRORIST LOVERS, LIBERAL TERRORIST LOVER, PRO TERROR...Once again I remember this vividly because it ANGERED me to no end.

You mean all the same things we are called for supporting the war? Yeah ok...

Shall I also post the source clips of FOX introducing the public lexicon, OBAMASIAH???

Sure and I'll show you the media quotes, Obama campaign quotes and fliers that made people start calling him obamessiah. I mean, it just didnt come from thin air. It was a response to the way people treated and characterized Obama.


[edit on 2-9-2008 by Dronetek]