January 17, 2009
Very interesting. The Washington Times actually printed a letter to the editor about barry’s eligibility. Guess they’re starting to cover themselves. AOL had one of it’s nonscientific poll that showed 48% thought it needed investigating – 45% no merit. That was back in December. Wonder what folks think now…especially after the bizarre double swearing in with no video of the second. Have you even known barry not to want to be on video? His “radio addresses” are on video. It was like a blago tape without the eff words. And then there’s VP Biden’s joke about Justice Roberts’ memory and his wife revealing Biden had a choice between Secretary of State and VP. One heck of a first week.
“Supreme Court accountablity”
by LONNIE LECZO
Statistically sound polls:
IFC/Zogby poll (11-5/6)
73% believed media is biased in general
93% thought barry got more coverage
75% believed media bias influenced the outcome of the presidential election.
Rasmussen Poll (11-5-08)
51% felt reporters tried to help obama (44% polled in June)47% believed most reporters would hide information
55% media bias more of a problem than big campaign donations
74% thought media reported more on negative campaigning than the issues
Which directly goes to proobama media bias considering his opponents universally polled more negative. What was hidden will eventually be revealed. It wasn’t as much hidden as it was intentionally not covered.