Geeky Weekly

14 Comments Add your own

• 1. kurtiigeek  |  September 4th, 2008 at 9:15 am

  Absolutely sickening. BTW, I liked her speech last night.

• 2. Rachel  |  September 4th, 2008 at 10:02 am

  I was disgusted when I got that Obama issue in my mailbox.

  And where’s the question about whether or not Obama will still be a good father to his girls if he’s president? I seem to hear a whole lot about Palin and how she can’t possibly balance motherhood with the White House.

• 3. Padfoot240  |  September 4th, 2008 at 10:22 am

  That is terrible.

• 4. Angelo Alberico  |  September 4th, 2008 at 11:22 am

  Saw that a few days ago, crazy but I’m not surprised… what’s coming next?

  All the sexist comments… stuff like ‘how her hair is 20 years out of date’ or how she “shrills” when she speaks…

  I like her for a lot of reasons and more so than McCain but I do think there’s a bit of a strategy to having her as a running mate. It’s much easier/acceptable to spin / use sexism in the media than to spin / use racism.

  Last night after CNN finished their RNC broadcast, yes CNN it was in HD so I had to. All their reporters were praising her speech and her tenacity. Then someone mentioned about Reid’s “Shrill” comment and then CNN when into MEGA spin mode… all the panelists were offended (especially the women) and that was the attention for the remainder of the night, they even had a BLACK WOMAN offended.

  So maybe the McCain team found a way (in Palin) to use the media bias / spin machine to their favor… we all know Obama’s has the race card in his pocket and now it’s useless.

• 5. Andrew  |  September 4th, 2008 at 11:40 am

  Giuliani’s speech supposedly ripped the Democrats a new one. I only caught the end of it so I’ll have to go back and watch it. If you find a higher quality version feel free to share it.

  http://wcbstv.com/campaign08/rudy.giuliani.rnc.2.809396.html

  I ended up watching it on CBS, NBC had annoying graphics up the whole time, ABC’s surround mix was super muffled and PBS’s audio was way off. They were all in HD though.

• 6. Angelo Alberico  |  September 4th, 2008 at 12:21 pm

  CNN replayed all the speeches after (annoying) Larry King Live… it was nice to re-watch them. Guiliani seemed to have fun during his speech, he’s a goofy guy.

  What sucks is during the DNC dish was the official provider of the HD satellite feed of the pool cameras, so they gave us that channel w/o any graphics or commentators… it was nice to have and so much sharper than ANY of the others who were rebroadcasting it. So to be fair for the RNC they are also proving a channel but only in SD! LAME!

  So for quality sake I ended up watching CNN as their image was the sharpest and the audio was good (what was the deal with ABC). What’s even more amazing is the difference in video quality between the major OTA networks broadcast, stations need to learn how to use their equipment.

  For the Rudy speech CNN has it also (though it’s stretched, WHY?)
  http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/politics/2008/09/03/sot.rnc.giuliani.entire.cnn?iref=videosearch

• 7. nathan118  |  September 6th, 2008 at 9:14 am

  I’m still waiting for an in depth look into his drug years as a young adult.

• 8. Rachel  |  September 6th, 2008 at 9:44 pm

  So I got this issue in the mail the other day. Already disgusted with the bias, I open it up and the third page (and the first with any content) is a 2 page spread on Michelle Obama’s campaign style. Seriously - it shows 5 pics with comments about how she “possesses a natural and unpretentious sophistication”, “has the grace and beauty of a dancer”, and how she “glowed in a silk radzimir kimono dress.” Sickening.

  Turning to the coverage of Palin we see pictures of Bristol holding little Trig saying how she’s “hiding her baby bump”, little boxes with “anatomy of a scandal”,”other Palin controversies”, and a description of “her offbeat career.” And of course, the picture of her hunting with a dead caribou in the shot is included. Why wouldn’t it be, right?

  I am so disgusted by this magazine. I wasn’t planning on renewing my subscription this year because of the cost, but this makes the decision that much easier.

• 9. Andrew  |  September 7th, 2008 at 9:17 am

  Could make an even better statement and call them to cancel your subscription early and site this specific issue.

• 10. Mike  |  September 8th, 2008 at 11:39 am

  I’m glad someone (Rachel) was willing & able to discuss the issues of the magazine with some level of detail and compare them.

  Let’s compare the circumstances. Michelle Obama actively put herself under a greater microscope by speaking to the public. She’s gotten flack for things she’s said publicly, but she’s well liked and people like hearing about her relationship with her family, just like people like hearing about Palin’s family.

  While Palin also made her family a major focal point of her own campaign, they are, unfortunately, not being scrutinized on their own terms. Like Michelle Obama, the family is being scrutinized — they just have more that’s of interest, at the moment! When Palin is running on messages of embedding conservative Christian ways into our public policy, it’s completely relevant to ask questions like “does her daughter being pregnant not exemplify the exact reason why experts oppose ‘abstinence-only’ sex ed.”

  You can cite “bias” all you want, but the media went nuts for the Reverend Wright stuff, they should likewise go crazy about Palin’s pastor (they’re probably still getting their facts together and will do so), and it’s all pretty “balanced” politically. Unfortunately, the main bias in the media is toward the most shocking and easy to understand stories, as opposed to those which may actually reveal information about a person’s character, or their policy goals, or discussing outright lies made while campaigning (like that Obama is going to raise your taxes, or that Palin refused to accept earmarked funds).

  Please don’t feed the media’s tendency for oversimplification by simply claiming “Obama coverage good, Palin coverage bad.” That’s not the level of insight we need.

• 11. Andrew  |  September 8th, 2008 at 3:12 pm

  I’m actually getting tired of all the back and forth about ultimately insignificant issues because it takes away the focus from the real issues and what each candidate wants to do. Not trying to dismiss the issue I brought up, but it wasn’t suppose to expand into specifics of the presidential debate, just the dismal state of the media.

  So far the media coverage isn’t hurting the Republicans considering today’s polling data so who cares. From now on any of my politically oriented posts will be firmly targeted at the issues.

  And the previous comment wasn’t from the Mike we all know.

• 12. Jamie  |  October 24th, 2008 at 7:34 am

  “Drudge” is a right-winged Zealot, so of course he is going to spin it his way.
  The fact of the matter is, Palin does have a baby whose birth is murky, she has LIED about the bridge to nowhere and several other things and she does have several ongoing SCANDAL, Troopergate for example where she tried to strongarm her brother in law cos he dumped her Sister’s sorry ass !
  So go get the facts right before gleefully believing what you want to believe !

• 13. Jamie  |  October 24th, 2008 at 7:36 am

  @Andrew, Giuliani is a shameless adultrous man who has taken full advantage of 9/11 for his career.
  Like Joe Biden rightly said, Giuliani always has 3 words in every sentence he utters.

  “A Noun, A Verb and 9/11″.

  The people who saved New York City were the Firefighters and the common men and women of the City, not Giuliani ! Go Figure !

• 14. Andrew  |  October 24th, 2008 at 9:17 am

  So you attack Matt Drudge without even addressing the difference in treatment US Weekly gives to politically important females? Is there a gushing US Weekly cover story about Palin and her husband’s love missing from this little expose? Just because you don’t like the truth doesn’t make it spin. You should be happy the media is in the tank for Obama, it will probably help tilt the election in his favor.

  And thank you for clearly displaying your liberal hatred towards Palin. “Murky” birth? What’s with the left and conspiracy theories. She flipped on support for the bridge, the earmark was removed and Alaska still received the money to improve their infrastructure. Why complain about Palin when Congress was the one handing out our hard earned money. And if she truly did something illegal in dealing with her brother-in-law, wouldn’t she get booted out of office. For that to happen it would have to be a whole lot worse than perjury right?

  If you listen to Giuliani’s speech he was witty and tore into the Democrats, did he just hit a little too close to home?

  Funny how the Washington Post even recently covered the bias in the media towards Republicans, Study: Coverage of McCain Much More Negative Than That of Obama. Is the Washington Post part of the vast right-wing conspiracy that requires the reimplementation of the Fairness Doctrine?

Leave a Comment

Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed