Editorials & Other Articles

KoKo

(84,711 posts)

41. My reply to you still stands, though...........

Mon Mar 16, 2015, 07:17 PM

Mar 2015

If "Media Matters" is to be an "Impartial Fact Checker" (even though we know they are working for "Hillary for President&quot then we should take that into consideration going forward. Particularly, those of us wanting OTHER Dem Candidates to be HEARD in Democratic Primary where "All Voices can be heard for the spectrum of Dems" (which is getting broader than before) ...and WHY would you be against it? It isDemocracy in Action! ..where different voices within a Party have a Right to be heard.

Anointing Hillary as the ONLY possibility, at this point, when she hasn't even Declared her Run...but the MSM is WITH IT and Democratic Operatives are lining up the money and Positioning Themselves into her Campaign and Both Parties and the MSCorporate Media are "On Board" for the Fun & Money it brings in....But, for this Democracy...It is Too Early. The People's Voice needs to be heard and NOT Manipulated...

I've always found you reasonable, even when I don't agree with you. ...but, I will speak my voice as a Democrat back at you!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

47 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

The Numbers Behind Maureen Dowd's 21-Year Long Campaign Against Hillary Clinton [View all] Spider_Mann Mar 2015 OP

Dowd is a vicious, mendacious tool. MADem Mar 2015 #1

Or else paid like Rush was. Same time frame she began attacking. Part of the huge RW con job. freshwest Mar 2015 #3

She has this bad habit of trying to portray herself as some kind of "sex goddess hottie." MADem Mar 2015 #4

She's stuck in the high-school "mean girl" mode. Very nasty and full of herself. n/t pnwmom Mar 2015 #6

Yes, that's it exactly--she reserves most of her bile for women. MADem Mar 2015 #9

very true, pnwmom. nt brer cat Mar 2015 #11

She's no Helen Thomas? ha ha!Very true, but very unfair DFW Mar 2015 #8

I posted that in tribute to Helen, DFW, not to compare her in any way. Thomas went after criminals. freshwest Mar 2015 #10

I figured DFW Mar 2015 #12

Haha! Score 1 for Hillary! delrem Mar 2015 #2

No. Maybe there's a reason only 8% of the statements were positive. NYC_SKP Mar 2015 #37

Wish she'd be the nominee.... dirtydickcheney Mar 2015 #38

If she's in the whitehouse, the Senate will only become more Republican in response. NYC_SKP Mar 2015 #40

A journalist critical of an elected official.. .. hmmm the_sly_pig Mar 2015 #5

Criticism is one thing. Personal attacks are another. n/t pnwmom Mar 2015 #7

She started when Hillary was not an elected official Spider_Mann Mar 2015 #13

She's not a journalist. She's a columnist, a pundit. MADem Mar 2015 #20

Ugh... Mike Nelson Mar 2015 #14

If this was a legitimate analysis, MannyGoldstein Mar 2015 #15

sore-butt syndrome Man from Pickens Mar 2015 #16

I hadn't seen it - an amazing piece of work MannyGoldstein Mar 2015 #17

"Media Matters" pushes hard for Hillary 2016, putting its nonprofit status in question... KoKo Mar 2015 #18

How special! OilemFirchen Mar 2015 #19

The Washington Examiner is a right wing rag. Now that I read it i Must take a shower. DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2015 #27

Eddie Scarry of the Washington Examiner...? MADem Mar 2015 #31

The point is..... KoKo Mar 2015 #34

No, the point is, your source is dreck, a wingnut, hyperconservative outlet that has one purpose-- MADem Mar 2015 #35

My reply to you still stands, though........... KoKo Mar 2015 #41

In what way is Media Matters "anointing Hillary as the ONLY possibility"? muriel_volestrangler Mar 2015 #42

My reply to you still stands, though........... KoKo Mar 2015 #43

You are using a right wing publication to defend a falsehood. You've screwed up, here. MADem Mar 2015 #44

Let us put it this way, again........ KoKo Mar 2015 #45

Huh? I'm not "venting on you." You are bringing a wingnut source here and expecting us to take you MADem Mar 2015 #46

So why don't you 'speak as a Democrat', rather than posting Washington Examiner hitpieces? muriel_volestrangler Mar 2015 #47

You want "legitimate analysis?" MADem Mar 2015 #21

Post #18.... n/t KoKo Mar 2015 #30

Post #31. nt MADem Mar 2015 #32

Lol, irony. nt geek tragedy Mar 2015 #23

Your attention is flattering! MannyGoldstein Mar 2015 #24

What is nonsense is that those who produce geek tragedy Mar 2015 #25

Exactly. She produces 'hit pieces' for a living. MannyGoldstein Mar 2015 #26

Media Matters seems a bit defensive. They did, after all, get a mention in Dowd's article. NYC_SKP Mar 2015 #39

Dowd is a tiresome BORE. BigDemVoter Mar 2015 #22

Nah! See Post 18....about Media Matters........ KoKo Mar 2015 #29

Don't see post 18....see posts 27 and 31--they will explain what kind of "source" is at post 18. nt MADem Mar 2015 #33

She must think Hillary is something special, huh. Thinkingabout Mar 2015 #28

Honestly libodem Mar 2015 #36