Is This True???

[TSA]

CNN President Virginia Moseley is married to Hillary Clintons Deputy Secretary Tom Nides. CBS President David Rhodes is the brother of top Obama official Ben Rhodes. ABC President Ben Sherwood is the brother of Obama Special Advisor Elizabeth Sherwood. Chief Editor of NBC is married to a white house staffer.

[boutons_deux]

ah, the debunked "liberal media conspiracy" LIE. GFY

[johnsmith]

ah, the debunked "liberal media conspiracy" LIE. GFY

Hey dummy, he asked if it was true....he didn't state it as fact.

God you suck.

[TSA]

So none of these connections are true?

[clambake]

marriage doesn't mean anything here. go check the duncan divorce thread.

[boutons_deux]

Hey dummy, he asked if it was true....he didn't state it as fact.

God you suck.

I have no doubt where he or she was going with the "if it were true".

[TSA]

So is it or is it not true?

[TSA]

No alternet.org article debunking it boutouns?

[TSA]

PS- what is your username on democraticunderground?

[sjacquemotte]

2137SCq6R5Y
krauthammer had a good take on this kind of thing. Don't know if I really agree.

[ElNono]

CNN President Virginia Moseley is married to Hillary Clintons Deputy Secretary Tom Nides. CBS President David Rhodes is the brother of top Obama official Ben Rhodes. ABC President Ben Sherwood is the brother of Obama Special Advisor Elizabeth Sherwood. Chief Editor of NBC is married to a white house staffer.

I'm pretty sure Virginia Moseley isn't CNN's president... the rest looks right

[TSA]

I'm pretty sure Virginia Moseley isn't CNN's president... the rest looks right

I stand corrected. Deputy bureau chief.

I thought boutons was going to debunk this? Paging think progress, paging think progress.

[BradLohaus]

http://www.journalism.org/print/2304

October 6, 2006

The American Journalist: Politics and Party Affiliation

In findings likely to fuel the raging debate over the issue of media bias, a new book concludes that the nation’s journalists have moved a bit to the right since the 1990s, but are still considerably more liberal than the general public...
==============================================
It's a short article and there's a good graph in the middle that compares far left, left, middle, right, and far right between journalists and the public in 2002. Journalists are more leftwing, at least a decade ago. I guess I could have just asked if anybody has ever met many journalism majors, LOL.

[boutons_deux]

true career journalists are generally more educated, more literate, more broad-minded than the "general public"

right-wing hack paid political hatchet men are simply paid to spew bullshit, slander, propaganda. It's a job, not a vocation.

and of course, the news media are for profit corporations, where their mgmt is part of the 1% and never interested in challenging the status quo, corporate corruption, their Establishment of which they are part.

[BradLohaus]

Always fun to see someone say that something isn't true, and then come right back and say, well, it is true but it's good and here's why.

Didn't 9 out of the 10 richest counties in the country vote for Obama? The 0.001% laughs at the 1%; far, far more than the rest of the 1% could ever hope to control the 99%. People never seem to grasp this. The Left on the ground never do.

[exstatic]

Always fun to see someone say that something isn't true, and then come right back and say, well, it is true but it's good and here's why.

Didn't 9 out of the 10 richest counties in the country vote for Obama? The 0.001% laughs at the 1%; far, far more than the rest of the 1% could ever hope to control the 99%. People never seem to grasp this. The Left on the ground never do.

Are you asking or telling, and if it's the latter, what's your source material?

[BradLohaus]

My bad, 8/10

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/obama-wins-8-10-wealthiest-154837437.html


In an election that often focused on debates about class warfare, President Barack Obama was favored over multimillionaire businessman Mitt Romney in eight of the nation's 10 wealthiest counties.

And his margin of victory in all eight counties was greater than that of the national vote, in which Obama was leading by 50 percent to 48 percent with 97 percent of precincts reporting.

The findings are based on a CNBC.com analysis of Census Bureau numbers on average annual household income from 2006-2011 and results from Tuesday's elections. (Read More Below the Chart)


The 10 richest counties accounted for 1,337,700 votes, or about 1.1 percent of the national popular vote.

In the richest, Massachusetts' Nantucket County, where average annual household income is over $137,000, Obama won by 63 percent to Romney's 36 percent with all precincts reporting. The richest county in Romney's home state is also where, just prior to accepting the Republican nomination, the former Massachusetts governor held a $75,000-per-person dinner fundraiser.

In none of the richest counties was the margin of victory wider than in California's Marin County, just north of San Francisco, where the president won by 74 percent to 23 percent, with all precincts reporting. In Marin, the average annual household income is $128,544.

The two richest counties where Romney won were in New Jersey: adjacent Hunterdon and Morris counties in the northern part of the state. Romney won in Morris by 55 percent to 44 percent and in Hunterdon by 59 percent to 40 percent. However, Somerset County, which abuts Hunterdon and Morris, went to Obama by 53 percent to 47 percent.

[BradLohaus]

It's a myth that the super elite just vote Republican; that's the bourgeoisie party.

[boutons_deux]

It's a myth that the super elite just vote Republican; that's the bourgeoisie party.

the 1% votes for/buys whatever politician is most likely to win office AND pay them back with tax expenditures, favors, etc. The 1% went with Barry in 08 because they knew dubya/dickhead Reign of Error had screwed the Repug chances and McLiar/pitbull bitch made their chances even less. In 2012, the 1%, esp the finance sector, dollars went like 10:1 for Bishop Gecko, thinking they could buy their 0.1%er the WH and get financial regulation killed.

It's not really left vs right, it's 1% vs 99%, wealth Class Warfare that has been won by the 1% and who are now unbeatable, meaning the 99% are huge losers with no recourse.

[BradLohaus]

I agree that the elections are bought in the primaries. This 1% cliche just drives me nuts. There are nowhere near 1/100 people really steering the country with money. They can run for city council, maybe.

By the way the real masters are having their annual meeting:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10102168/Bilderberg-Group-No-conspiracy-just-the-most-influential-group-in-the-world.html

Bilderberg Group? No conspiracy, just the most influential group in the world
Conspiracy theorists claim it is a shadow world government. Former leading members tell the Telegraph it was the most useful meeting they ever went to and it was crucial in forming the European Union. Today, the Bilderberg Group meets in Britain.

[boutons_deux]

This 1% cliche just drives me nuts. There are nowhere near 1/100 people really steering the country with money.

:lol

1% doesn't refer the NUMBER of people, but to the miniscule number of people who hold wealth, and use the power of that wealth to buy themselves more wealth, more privilege, more protection, to rig the game in their favor, which is automatically against the 99%.

1% as number of people? as 3.3M out of 330M :lol holy shit, that's stupid.