- Home
- Premium Memberships
- Lottery Results
- Forums
- Predictions
- Lottery Post Videos
- News
- Search Drawings
- Search Lottery Post
- Lottery Systems
- Lottery Charts
- Lottery Wheels
- Worldwide Jackpots
- Quick Picks
- On This Day in History
- Blogs
- Online Games
- Premium Features
- Contact Us
- Whitelist Lottery Post
- Rules
- Lottery Book Store
- Lottery Post Gift Shop
The time is now 9:48 am
You last visited
May 11, 2024, 9:48 am
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)
Goose and Gander.
Published:
Updated:
What is good for the goose is good for the gander?
Not when it comes to a fair, unbiased, neutral 1st. amendment reporting by the mainstream media, what a bunch of wussies (the mainstream media kool aid drinkers). They are so in the bag for this lying maybe on the next go round I'll keep some of my campaign promises...................
The current media definitely without a doubt smoked dope, drank shooters, snorted coke, and graduated with liberal arts, communications degrees, to ultimately be used as pay back by the sorry ass liberal machine that created these morons. They are incapable of original thought or intellectual honesty.
Failure is in the eye of the beholder.
Read this, not a lie, but the truth. Why is this not being reported throughout channels 2 thru 50 and all newpapers to put things in perspective, you know to be fair and present all sides of an issue without prejudice.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/03/11/carville-wanted-bush-fail/
Comments
People like to point fingers at the "liberal media." I've been called a Liberal so many times on this board, it makes me chuckle. I'm blonde, but if I agree with a brunette down the road or a redhead on the next block, does that mean I'm really not a blonde? It just means I don't have a myopic point of view and listen to all sides and use logic & reason to sort things out without a personal agenda.
Remember there are over a 150,000,000 people in the US that didn't vote last time, when they start having Obama's policies affecting them negatively.................they might start voting for real change. Cause you ain't going to be able to blame Bush anymore, sooner than you think.
Only your hairdresser knows for sure.
Once it is printed and on the streets there is no pullback on what has been written. You see many news articles on the het that is too easily controlled by the delete button.
Newspapers rely on advertising to survive. When retailers are struggling, they no longer place full page ads in the paper. Craig's List has had a big impact on classified too. I've seen major corporations advertising in the jobs section. Look at car insurance. Years ago, everyone wanted to go into their local insurance office and buy auto insurance. Now you can't turn on the TV for an hour without seeing a Geico.com or Progressive.com commercial. In fact, the TV ad for Progressive tells you they offer discounts to people who buy online.
In 2008 the Christian Science Monitor, not exactly a bleeding heart liberal newspaper, went online and discontinued its printed newspaper. After 100 years they decided that people would rather sign onto the internet or turn on their TV sets than buy a newspaper. Here is the article from last September, about a month before they went completely online.
http://www.csmonitor.com/centennial/events/monitors-stories/2008/09/newspapers-arent-dying-off-theyre-evolving/
So who is the idiot now?
"Computers are in every school and library, and they are free to use. There isn't a college that doesn't require a student to own a laptop."
That is exactly the point I am trying to make thru a sarcastic comment, as like wake up and "READ" what I am saying. Things aren't as bad as they are made out to be. JX you say "they are everywhere! Everybody in America is connected from the poor to the rich!
I am essentially AGREEING with you. Let me refer to what I wrote,
" they weren't beat by the technology as they have it also, they are losing because it ain't the news that is fit or true to print the bias of NYT was made clear in competition for the truth in any distribution means."
What I saying is that, a publication like Christian Science monitor (as you point out) has a viable profitable business model as an on-line service because it can get advertising and a large subscriber base. When you get a username and password on a web site and visit it, it is documentable and valuable to people or companies that might buy advertising if the (subscriber base) numbers are high. Lotterypost has this business model solely from on-line exposure, worldwide audience, kicking ^%*% notice the ad spots cranking.
The NYT subscriber base overall print AND online is dwindling because the virtual or paper versions are the same biased, skewed, and suspect prose.
I don't think I called you an idiot.
Post a Comment
Please Log In
To use this feature you must be logged into your Lottery Post account.
Not a member yet?
If you don't yet have a Lottery Post account, it's simple and free to create one! Just tap the Register button and after a quick process you'll be part of our lottery community.
Register