Monday, October 06, 2008

OK, Someone's Lying To Us
Bias in the media? Noooooo...... *sarcasm off*

Either those in The Service overwhelmingly love McCain and hate Obama, or love Obama and hate McCain. It simply can't be both at the same time. Ya think maybe we're being lied to by someone? Nahhh...

Here's some of the article from The Military Times; (The key words and phrases I think should be given special attention are in bold in both articles.) Military Times poll: Troops backing McCain

Sen. John McCain enjoys overwhelming support from the military’s professional core, though race appears to be a decisive factor for career-oriented black service members, a Military Times survey of nearly 4,300 readers indicates. (Notice the poll wasn't at random. The Military Times is upfront about that.)

McCain, R-Ariz., handily defeated Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., 68 percent to 23 percent in a voluntary survey of 4,293 active-duty, National Guard and reserve subscribers and former subscribers to Army Times, Navy Times, Marine Corps Times and Air Force Times. (Again, notice that they admit this isn't a random survey, and look how many responded vice the below listed poll that USA Today cited.)

The results of the Military Times 2008 Election Poll are not representative of the opinions of the military as a whole. The group surveyed is older, more senior in rank and less ethnically diverse than the overall armed services.
(The honesty is uncharacteristic for the American media. How refreshing.)
The Military Times readily admits that this is far from a scientific poll. They come right out and point out the weak-points of their poll, warts and all. BTW, The Military Times, despite their name, is a civilian publication that is not affiliated with the Department of Defence.

And on the other side of the coin... here's some of an article from USA Today;
Military donations favor Obama
WASHINGTON (AP) — U.S. soldiers have donated more presidential campaign money to Democrat Barack Obama than to Republican John McCain, a reversal of previous campaigns in which military donations tended to favor GOP White House hopefuls, a nonpartisan group reported Thursday. (Are soldiers the only ones who donate? I find it hard to believe that Marines, sailors, airmen, or Coasties don't kick in a buck or two. Either that, or the good folks at USA Today don't know there's a difference between soldiers, Marines, sailors, airmen or Coast Guardsmen.)
Troops serving abroad have given nearly six times as much money to Obama's presidential campaign as they have to McCain's, the Center for Responsive Politics said. (Now it's been narrowed even further. From only soldiers, to only soldiers serving overseas. I guess "abroad" also includes Okinawa, Germany, Korea, etc.? Hmmm... you think USA Today is trying to give the impression that "abroad" automatically equates to Iraq or Afghanistan?)

The report tracked donations of $200 or more. It found that 859 members of the military donated a total of $335,536 to Obama. McCain received $280,513 from 558 military donors.
(And a further narrowing of only those who gave $200 or more? And why were so few polled, and compared to the Military Times voluntary poll? And with so few polled, I can't help but be suspicious of the criteria for this poll.)
Among soldiers serving overseas at the time of their donations, 134 gave a total of $60,642 to Obama while 26 gave a total of $10,665 to McCain. That was less than the amount received by Republican Ron Paul, who collected $45,512 from 99 soldiers serving abroad, the report said. (Ron Paul!!?? It's pretty obvious that the results of this poll were skewed so that the liberal media could paint the picture THEY wanted. But it made for a good headline.)

7 Comments:

Blogger Christine said...

I am Catholic and I am voting for Obama. I am looking at them both with a well rounded view of all they stand for. After eight years of nonsense I cannot take anymore. I am truely grateful for a church that doesn't tell me who to vote for. If I burn in hell for wanting health insurance for the first time in my life then so be it. Plus the idea of President Palin gives me the willies...

7:45 AM  
Blogger Vir Speluncae Catholicus said...

Christine,
The Church does tell you who you can't vote for. Obama falls into that category.

I find it amazing that you desire "health care", but unborn children don't deserve such. But if you want to vote for a baby-killer, that's your call.

8:24 AM  
Blogger Dad29 said...

It's also important to remember that Obama will NOT RELEASE information about those who contribute less than $200.00 to his campaign (which is why the AP "analysis" cuts off at that number.)

It's reasonable to speculate that those giving >$200.00 are officers, not EM's.

One wonders how it might look if smaller-than-$200 contributions are counted.

1:04 PM  
Blogger deb said...

I admit, I dislike both candidates but I can't in good conscious vote for Obama. His stance on abortion is very troubling. And although health care for all sounds wonderful, anything that the goverment puts its hands into, will end up messed up. Do we really want bureaucrats messing with our health?

2:08 PM  
Blogger Vir Speluncae Orthodoxae said...

Well Christine you're certainly entitled to your opinion. The Church may not tell you which person to vote for, but it does tell you what you can and can't support, namely 5 non-negotiables, many of which Obama supports.

Universal healthcare is a red-herring. Sounds nice on paper but it would be run by the same people who caused this current crisis and bankrupted social security. I do find it disturbing that you'd risk being cut off from God just so that you can get socialized medicine for a few years, which would involve waiting for weeks to see a doctor.

I'm not telling you what to do. Just make sure you're doing God's will and not your own.

3:35 PM  
Blogger Former Altar Boy said...

Christine,
Thanks (not) for your defense of the unborn and for expecting the rest of us to foot the bill for your health insureance. I was in Canada last year and spoke to them about their national health insurance. It's a joke. I suggest you find a Canadian or a Brit to talk to.

7:30 AM  
Blogger Claire said...

Christine

Burning in hell is not something which should end with the words "so be it"! I have to say that I cannot comprehend how any Catholic could consider, under any circumstances, putting in power such a raving abortionist. Now THAT gives ME the willies.

Regarding health care; I don't know if you think it's free over here (UK) but I can assure you that it is very expensive, and the money is taken right out of your pay packet so there's no choice in the matter. My money pays for abortions, and there's absolutely nothing I can do about it. As to standards of care, don't get me started.

I pray that you will reconsider.

1:49 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home