http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081030/ap_on_el_pr/palin_21;_ylt=AuT0S3.kAWIq5qDml9wqOudh24cA "Palin received a smattering of boos when she said she was glad to be in the home state of the World Series-champion Philadelphia Phillies. Northwestern Pennsylvania baseball fans favor the Cleveland Indians or Pittsburgh Pirates." OK, I'm being facetious- but maybe not. Could you imagine if the Dallas Mavericks had won the championship last year and she said in a rally in Houston: "....glad to be in the home state of the NBA champion Dallas Mavericks"? Ouch.
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/JhE3pSW05sk&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/JhE3pSW05sk&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object> Palin has said dumber things. not that big of a deal for a person that doesn't follow sports.
It's true that it isn't a big deal ...but you'd think she would have run that by somebody before saying that. yawn.
No dissing the Pirates. They suck now, but they have a long and storied history. The Pirates used to be my second favorite team next to the Astros and Roberto Clemente is my favorite player of all time. I also liked the Family.
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/kjX2MKaZ-rg&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/kjX2MKaZ-rg&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
6-1 in favor of media chiding McCain/Palin vs. Obama/Biden. When the repubs screw up, all over the airwaves. When the Dem's screw up, not so much. Par for the course. It's not over yet, but I actually would love to see the gaffe that Obama will bring. Every promise he brings is a lie. Whether America will swallow it in 4 years is doubtful. EDIT: And I'm fully expecting the "rabble rabble" comments to follow.. <object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/HdjFKDrK1vY&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/HdjFKDrK1vY&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
I was in Erie today. Too bad I didn't see her. I would have loved the opportunity to BOO the CRAP out of her.
Obama said basically the same thing here in August when the Twins and White Sox were going down to the wire for the AL Central. He said he was a White Sox fan but still had some love for the Twins.
http://www.236.com/news/2008/10/30/study_media_is_tough_on_john_m_9914.php Old man's media coverage negative cuz media covering negative old man Liberals have long laughed off any suggestion of liberal media bias, but this week, Politico.com reveals that the perceived media slant against McCain is absolutely real. They cite a study by the Project for Excellence in Journalism that shows that over the last six weeks, John McCain got four times as many negative stories as positive ones while Barack Obama received more than twice as much positive coverage as McCain. Why? The McCain campaign is a shambles. It has failed to achieve any of its goals and its steady collapse may spell trouble for the future of the GOP. No reasonable person would disagree. Yet, is that any reason for such negative coverage? The media's continued insistence on reporting the facts about the disgraceful McCain campaign is liberal bias, pure and simple. And it's not just politics. Liberal media bias is everywhere. For example, let's take a look at coverage of the new movie, Saw V. As of this writing, Metacritic.com, which aggregates music and film reviews and assigns them a weighted score based on the severity of criticism, currently gives the film a score of 20 out of 100. A similar site, RottenTomatoes.com, reports that Saw V has received negative reviews from 86 percent of critics. What gives? Just because the movie is by all accounts a ponderous, contrived mess, is that any reason for the press to so blatantly showcase its bias? It's this kind of treatment that links the Saw V and the McCain campaign. Sure, one is a disappointing and gruesome spectacle filled with blood-spattered bodies and shocking images that force viewers to turn away in disgust, and the other is a bad film. But they have more in common than you might think. Similarly, consider the case of the Idaho child molester whose probation was revoked after he gained access to the Internet. The media's attitude toward this sexual deviant has been almost uniformly negative. Whatever happened to telling both sides of the story? Isn't that the media's job? Instead, we get a completely lopsided account that makes this convicted sex offended look like a monster, simply because the facts of the story bear that out. Remember that the next time you read another smear piece about how infighting, mismanagement and bad decision making put John McCain's presidential dreams in the toilet. Just because it's true is no reason to ignore the other, untrue side of the story. We urge the media, for once, please stop doing your jobs, and let's get back to the kind of evenhanded-at-any-cost journalism we all enjoy.
We didn't talk about reverend wright enough in april. i have never heard the words joe and socialism in the media.
I guess that's why he kicked off the media that didn't endorse him off of his plane today, huh? Classy guy.
You're saying it's not true? I guess that Monica Lewinsky scoop wasn't inaccurate as well. Where do you get your news? Huffington Post?
