Comments on: Anti-Hillary or Pro-Hillary Bias at the WSJ? http://www.dvorak.org/blog/2007/12/27/anti-hillary-or-pro-hillary-bias-at-the-wsj/ General interest observations and true web-log. Mon, 13 Feb 2012 00:19:31 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: RickCain http://www.dvorak.org/blog/2007/12/27/anti-hillary-or-pro-hillary-bias-at-the-wsj/comment-page-2/#comment-943589 RickCain Sun, 06 Jan 2008 09:17:37 +0000 http://www.dvorak.org/blog/?p=15325#comment-943589 Why is McCain even in the race? Have the voting public alrady forgotten he's one of the "Keating Five"? Oh well, so much for integrity in the White House. Why is McCain even in the race? Have the voting public alrady forgotten he’s one of the “Keating Five”?

Oh well, so much for integrity in the White House.

]]> By: ChrisMac http://www.dvorak.org/blog/2007/12/27/anti-hillary-or-pro-hillary-bias-at-the-wsj/comment-page-1/#comment-936264 ChrisMac Sat, 29 Dec 2007 05:41:53 +0000 http://www.dvorak.org/blog/?p=15325#comment-936264 That pick has Jane Fonda's mouth. That pick has Jane Fonda’s mouth.

]]> By: MikeN http://www.dvorak.org/blog/2007/12/27/anti-hillary-or-pro-hillary-bias-at-the-wsj/comment-page-1/#comment-936195 MikeN Sat, 29 Dec 2007 04:51:37 +0000 http://www.dvorak.org/blog/?p=15325#comment-936195 That doesn't strike me as a flattering McCain picture either. That doesn’t strike me as a flattering McCain picture either.

]]> By: Bill Clinton http://www.dvorak.org/blog/2007/12/27/anti-hillary-or-pro-hillary-bias-at-the-wsj/comment-page-1/#comment-936041 Bill Clinton Sat, 29 Dec 2007 01:54:01 +0000 http://www.dvorak.org/blog/?p=15325#comment-936041 I just wonder who she'll have under HER desk. I just wonder who she’ll have under HER desk.

]]> By: Joshua http://www.dvorak.org/blog/2007/12/27/anti-hillary-or-pro-hillary-bias-at-the-wsj/comment-page-1/#comment-936032 Joshua Sat, 29 Dec 2007 01:36:07 +0000 http://www.dvorak.org/blog/?p=15325#comment-936032 This a good pic of Hillary. I have literally dozens of real pic's of her that look a whole lot worse. John McCain looks bad here. He actually has a good side and a frontal like this isn't it. Hillary is trying to show her softer side, so the pic is ok....McCain is usually a serious person, but a smiling pic of him would have been much better. I think you drank a bit of the kool-aid this morning John....it's a non-issue. As someone above said.....listen to what she is saying and don't worry about how she looks. I notice a lot of stories on Hillary's looks, good and bad, but we never see those stories on the male candidates, or on what the men are wearing. I may not vote for her or even support her, but she is a serious candidate (unlike some women in the past) and needs to be treated as such. Stories like I saw in the Washington Post on how she has bag's under eyes and more wrinkle's are just effing ludicrous, you won't see one like that about Obama (who has very dark circles and bags around his eye's that he didn't have 3 months ago) or Huckabee or Romney. This a good pic of Hillary. I have literally dozens of real pic’s of her that look a whole lot worse. John McCain looks bad here. He actually has a good side and a frontal like this isn’t it.
Hillary is trying to show her softer side, so the pic is ok….McCain is usually a serious person, but a smiling pic of him would have been much better.
I think you drank a bit of the kool-aid this morning John….it’s a non-issue.

As someone above said…..listen to what she is saying and don’t worry about how she looks. I notice a lot of stories on Hillary’s looks, good and bad, but we never see those stories on the male candidates, or on what the men are wearing.

I may not vote for her or even support her, but she is a serious candidate (unlike some women in the past) and needs to be treated as such.
Stories like I saw in the Washington Post on how she has bag’s under eyes and more wrinkle’s are just effing ludicrous, you won’t see one like that about Obama (who has very dark circles and bags around his eye’s that he didn’t have 3 months ago) or Huckabee or Romney.

]]> By: Kevitivity http://www.dvorak.org/blog/2007/12/27/anti-hillary-or-pro-hillary-bias-at-the-wsj/comment-page-1/#comment-936021 Kevitivity Sat, 29 Dec 2007 01:24:34 +0000 http://www.dvorak.org/blog/?p=15325#comment-936021 Hillary IS a jackal. Hillary IS a jackal.

]]> By: jbenson2 http://www.dvorak.org/blog/2007/12/27/anti-hillary-or-pro-hillary-bias-at-the-wsj/comment-page-1/#comment-935881 jbenson2 Fri, 28 Dec 2007 22:28:28 +0000 http://www.dvorak.org/blog/?p=15325#comment-935881 #12 Dvorak is the one who used the term <i>Hyena-faced laughing jackal</i> and I agree with him. #12
Dvorak is the one who used the term Hyena-faced laughing jackal and I agree with him.

]]> By: the Three-Headed Cat http://www.dvorak.org/blog/2007/12/27/anti-hillary-or-pro-hillary-bias-at-the-wsj/comment-page-1/#comment-935849 the Three-Headed Cat Fri, 28 Dec 2007 21:49:54 +0000 http://www.dvorak.org/blog/?p=15325#comment-935849 #7 - Dallas "I will NEVER subscribe to the WSJ as they are loaded with Bush lackeys." I see by that comment that you don't actually <i>read </i> the paper, since if you did read it for a week, you would be surprised (as I was myself, many years ago); the newspaper itself, outside of the Money & Investing section, is actually a very good, often-excellent left-of-center, which is to say moderate-liberal newspaper. The <i>WSJ </i> has an effective firewall between news and editorial departments. It's the Op-Ed pages, only, that feature hardcore Republican cheerleading and propaganda. The tone of the news stories are of a distinctly populist bent, and often expose corporate wrongdoing that other papers are scared shitless of touching, for fear of alienating advertisers. It's not as leftist as the <i>NYT </i> (what is?), which means they try to be more even-handed and objective, rather than blindly promoting PC and burying anything that doesn't support it. In fact, a couple weeks spent reading both and comparing how each covers social issues is an eye-opener. No longer will you be able to snicker when you hear the phrase "liberal bias" in reference to the <i>NYT. </i> The details you can't help but notice that the <i>Times </i> plays down, and even totally omits, prove the accusation true. But the GOP-Über-Alles editorials, particularly on the left page, are real pieces of work. Pro-corporatist, pro-theoplutocracy propaganda at it's finest. Fun reading, a lot of the time. #7 – Dallas

“I will NEVER subscribe to the WSJ as they are loaded with Bush lackeys.”

I see by that comment that you don’t actually read the paper, since if you did read it for a week, you would be surprised (as I was myself, many years ago); the newspaper itself, outside of the Money & Investing section, is actually a very good, often-excellent left-of-center, which is to say moderate-liberal newspaper.

The WSJ has an effective firewall between news and editorial departments.

It’s the Op-Ed pages, only, that feature hardcore Republican cheerleading and propaganda. The tone of the news stories are of a distinctly populist bent, and often expose corporate wrongdoing that other papers are scared shitless of touching, for fear of alienating advertisers.

It’s not as leftist as the NYT (what is?), which means they try to be more even-handed and objective, rather than blindly promoting PC and burying anything that doesn’t support it.

In fact, a couple weeks spent reading both and comparing how each covers social issues is an eye-opener. No longer will you be able to snicker when you hear the phrase “liberal bias” in reference to the NYT. The details you can’t help but notice that the Times plays down, and even totally omits, prove the accusation true.

But the GOP-Über-Alles editorials, particularly on the left page, are real pieces of work. Pro-corporatist, pro-theoplutocracy propaganda at it’s finest. Fun reading, a lot of the time.

]]> By: Wolca http://www.dvorak.org/blog/2007/12/27/anti-hillary-or-pro-hillary-bias-at-the-wsj/comment-page-1/#comment-935835 Wolca Fri, 28 Dec 2007 21:18:29 +0000 http://www.dvorak.org/blog/?p=15325#comment-935835 That is the most flattering picture of Hillary I have ever seen. Maybe you should worry more about how she thinks than how she looks. I do. That is the most flattering picture of Hillary I have ever seen. Maybe you should worry more about how she thinks than how she looks. I do.

]]> By: Mister Catshit http://www.dvorak.org/blog/2007/12/27/anti-hillary-or-pro-hillary-bias-at-the-wsj/comment-page-1/#comment-935775 Mister Catshit Fri, 28 Dec 2007 19:55:12 +0000 http://www.dvorak.org/blog/?p=15325#comment-935775 #6, jb <i>A realistic picture would look much worse than the one used by WSJ. </i> Do you feel better now that you said it? Does getting that off your chest make you a better person? Why do you hate America so much? #6, jb

A realistic picture would look much worse than the one used by WSJ.

Do you feel better now that you said it? Does getting that off your chest make you a better person? Why do you hate America so much?

]]> By: OhForTheLoveOf http://www.dvorak.org/blog/2007/12/27/anti-hillary-or-pro-hillary-bias-at-the-wsj/comment-page-1/#comment-935676 OhForTheLoveOf Fri, 28 Dec 2007 17:47:35 +0000 http://www.dvorak.org/blog/?p=15325#comment-935676 #1 - <i>Who cares? There will be another false flag terrorist attack on the anniversary of 9/11 2008. Bush will enact NSPD-51 and suspend the elections. Welcome to the New World Order!</i> The Bush administration is just incompetent neo-cons. They aren't Bond Villains. Don't be so paranoid. #1 – Who cares? There will be another false flag terrorist attack on the anniversary of 9/11 2008. Bush will enact NSPD-51 and suspend the elections.

Welcome to the New World Order!

The Bush administration is just incompetent neo-cons. They aren’t Bond Villains. Don’t be so paranoid.

]]> By: redwolf http://www.dvorak.org/blog/2007/12/27/anti-hillary-or-pro-hillary-bias-at-the-wsj/comment-page-1/#comment-935651 redwolf Fri, 28 Dec 2007 17:21:00 +0000 http://www.dvorak.org/blog/?p=15325#comment-935651 I read the blog in spite of the pointless, idiotic posts that run rampant, just to get to read the occasional thought-provoking post that hasn't been on Fark already. I had to comment on this post because it seems to me that John is flirting with Troll-ism on this one. The responses are totally predictable. If you like Hillary, you'll dislike the picture. If you dislike Hillary, you'll like the picture. To sum up, I will paraphrase my favorite quote of all time: "Mr. Dvorak, what you've just posted is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever read. At no point in your rambling, incoherent post were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone who reads this blog is now dumber for having read to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul." I read the blog in spite of the pointless, idiotic posts that run rampant, just to get to read the occasional thought-provoking post that hasn’t been on Fark already. I had to comment on this post because it seems to me that John is flirting with Troll-ism on this one. The responses are totally predictable. If you like Hillary, you’ll dislike the picture. If you dislike Hillary, you’ll like the picture. To sum up, I will paraphrase my favorite quote of all time:

“Mr. Dvorak, what you’ve just posted is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever read. At no point in your rambling, incoherent post were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone who reads this blog is now dumber for having read to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.”

]]> By: Angel H. Wong http://www.dvorak.org/blog/2007/12/27/anti-hillary-or-pro-hillary-bias-at-the-wsj/comment-page-1/#comment-935607 Angel H. Wong Fri, 28 Dec 2007 16:27:19 +0000 http://www.dvorak.org/blog/?p=15325#comment-935607 John McCain needs some plastic surgery done on his neck. John McCain needs some plastic surgery done on his neck.

]]> By: iGlobalWarmer http://www.dvorak.org/blog/2007/12/27/anti-hillary-or-pro-hillary-bias-at-the-wsj/comment-page-1/#comment-935584 iGlobalWarmer Fri, 28 Dec 2007 15:56:53 +0000 http://www.dvorak.org/blog/?p=15325#comment-935584 It's an exact replica. Hillarius <i>is</i> a hyena-faced laughing jackal (among other things, like the Antichrist) Dallas, I don't know where you're getting 5 chins. I see 1 primary chin, 2 small sub-chins and 1 large sub-chin. It’s an exact replica. Hillarius is a hyena-faced laughing jackal (among other things, like the Antichrist)

Dallas, I don’t know where you’re getting 5 chins. I see 1 primary chin, 2 small sub-chins and 1 large sub-chin.

]]> By: Dallas http://www.dvorak.org/blog/2007/12/27/anti-hillary-or-pro-hillary-bias-at-the-wsj/comment-page-1/#comment-935531 Dallas Fri, 28 Dec 2007 14:40:37 +0000 http://www.dvorak.org/blog/?p=15325#comment-935531 WSJ doctored McCain's picture to look way better than in real life. He normally has 11 chins. On this one he has 5. I will NEVER subscribe to the WSJ as they are loaded with Bush lackeys. WSJ doctored McCain’s picture to look way better than in real life. He normally has 11 chins. On this one he has 5.

I will NEVER subscribe to the WSJ as they are loaded with Bush lackeys.

]]>