CNN - Hilarious

[KB1KIX]

In an entry titled "Black women voters face tough choices".

There is part of the caption that reads...

Quote[/b] ]Analysts say black women never have held such power in determining the Democratic nominee for president. Black women are expected to make up more than a third of all Democratic voters in South Carolina's primary in five days. These women face a unique dilemma: Should they vote their race, or should they vote their gender?

Should they vote their race or gender? Whatever happened to voting for the candiate that had the better ideology towards your own views!

CNN is pushing hype. Fluff with no substance.

Sad.

If I said I want to vote For fred because he's a white guy, I'd be making a racist statem ent - but not the other way around.

Sad indeed.

CNN Linkster (http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/01/21/blackwomen.voters/index.html)

Jonathan

[K0RGR]

The news agencies there have probably convinced most of the voters that Obama is a Muslim by now.

Have you noticed how much the winner of the Republican caucus in Nevada resembles your avatar?

[KB1KIX]

Quote[/b] (K0RGR @ Jan. 21 2008,18:46)]The news agencies there have probably convinced most of the voters that Obama is a Muslim by now.

Have you noticed how much the winner of the Republican caucus in Nevada resembles your avatar?
That "winner" does not have slack!

Jonathan

[KB9YCO]

My guess would be that the difference is that this is a group of voters that been historically disadvantaged in terms of rights and voting choices. That's the reason that I always hear to justify minority or women's 'pride' type of groups. Of course if we were to have a white pride group it would be deemed racist, which most of them are; not exactly evening the playing field but I understand the differentiation.
As far as CNN and politicians serving up the fluff and hype I am not surprised. I thought the same thing a couple of weeks ago when Fox News had some thing about if people should vote for someone based on their religiosity. Whatever happened to voting based on record and issues instead of race, gender, religion, etc? I can understand not wanting to vote for someone if they're an extremist in terms of their perspective, but it seems to me that many of the issues are being forgotten in all this hype.

[G0GQK]

Don't most voters make their choice because they like like "the cut of his jib ".

G0GQK http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[KB9YCO]

Wow, board must have glitched again since I replied in this thread and there were a couple of others.

[And, upon further edit, it's all back. Maybe it's me, when I clicked on it a moment ago it wasn't all there. I even checked my settings to make sure, freaky.]

Either way, most of the major news outlets really, really, really, really, suck in the last 10 years or so. Too bad, so much for 'free' speech.

[KG4JYD]

Simple - vote for the old conservative white guy with gray hair who talks about smaller government, low or no taxes, gun rights and has a 25+ year record to back up his positions.

RON PAUL

[al2n]

Vote with Oprah. Go Obama.

[KB1KIX]

It seems my critique of CNN wasn't unique.

I've never seen them post critique of an article on their front page - but here it was:

"CNN readers respond angrily to 'race or gender' story"

linkster (http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/01/21/emails.race.gender/index.html)

Quote[/b] ]# Story Highlights
# Readers offended by idea that black women must choose between gender or race
# Many readers upset that the story did not delve into issues more
# E-mails flooded CNN.com shortly after the story went on the home page

Jonathan

[K1CJS]

Quote[/b] (KB9YCO @ Jan. 21 2008,20:18)]Either way, most of the major news outlets really, really, really, really, suck in the last 10 years or so. Too bad, so much for 'free' speech.
Oh, but they consider it free speech---In that they're free to lie and pad their stories so they come out the way the news media wants.