It's like this: The MSM CRAVES political conflict...

[MrScorpio]

Hence, the GOP now looks "poised" to retake back Congress.

The reason why? "The Gulf disaster, the gubmint is spending too much money, the country is on the wrong path and the deficit and debt are just too high."

Hmmm.

Maybe I'm dreaming, but aren't Republicans and their policies initially responsible for causing everything that's on that list in the first place?

Surely, it's completely obvious to everyone that two years isn't sufficient enough time for the hampered Democrats to turn the GOP's near catastrophic collapse into some kind of shiny, glorious prosperity, you know. (Especially, with GOP obstruction at every turn, Bush's entrenched wars, and the ongoing struggle to deal with Cheney's eight year long, deep-seated conversion of the US Government into a wholly owned subsidiary of Corporate America)

We all know that that's true, right?

So, why isn't the MSM pointing that out?




Oh yeah, how could I forget? It's like this: The MSM CRAVES political conflict...

Ad infinitum, baby.

[malaise]

1. I disagree

They crave the advertising money and those political ads are lucrative

[MrScorpio]

3. Well, yeah..

But really, what's the point of advertising at all if there's nothing to report except fresh air and sunshine?



If it bleeds, it's leads, baby.

[treestar]

2. Exactly, good times would not bring in ratings

They noted how people are glued to the TV in times of crisis, so therefore they try to create times of crisis at all times.

[BeFree]

4. Yet they ignore the elephant

Diebold counting the votes.

Wherever there is a Diebold counting votes, the elephant shits a pile.

That's a fact.

Why do they ignore that? That is about as controversial as you can get, eh?

[AnArmyVeteran]

5. Actually all the media loves conflict or creates it when it doesn't exist...

The media loves division because that's what sells. If enough people in the media had just asked the right questions Bush would have been prevented from starting his two wars. Not once from anyone in the media asked "How could Iraq (or Afghanistan) possibly attack the United States?" But the media never told Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld and the rest that they were lying when they said Iraq could attack the US "within 45 minutes in the form of a mushroom cloud". The media loves conflict so much they seemed to have facilitated both of Bush's wars by not even asking any relevant questions that could have stopped the wars from starting. The White House Press Corp isn't a fact-gathering organization. For the most part it's a damned exclusive club of political hacks who have no journalistic abilities at all. They don't give a damn about the truth. All they do is regurgitate what they are told without trying to confront blatant lies with more questions. And they are mostly afraid if they ask a tough question they will not be allowed in the 'club' anymore.

[Frustratedlady]

6. I agree. In fact, they fall all over each other trying to get someone to break.

Not that I care if they hound everyone about the Barton apology, but that story should have died several days ago. It still has legs.