A low post with the exact title of a Fear and Loathing article? This isn’t going to help dodge the HST comparisons.

What exactly are the “reputable” news media. Every single one of them, CNN and MSNBC included, routinely feature gossip and speculation about celebrities that used to be found nowhere but the Enquirer magazine. They’ve all lowered their standards so much to get ratings, there’s no one the public can look to for the absolute truth.

Why single out Fox News when they all do this?

Exactly right Tim. Rolling Stone plays the same card as all the other pussy far left. They cry about Fox news only because Fox can smear BETTER than they can. It’s called jealousy.

Tim:

Taibbi’s covered different media (and pseudo-media) outlets in other columns. Unfortunately, the media landscape is such a vast sea of shit that no one can really cover it all in a single article.

It’s all true. Obama is a radical muslim. I served with him on a swift boat in Vietnam. He told me how he hated the aggresor (the U.S.) and that he planned to take out targets in the U.S.

Another thing people don’t know about Barak is that he’s black.

You don’t know anything. You are stupid and dumb. You are the worst of the “american idiot”s. You enjoy bans on smokers but love the blood that drips from abortion beds. Matt…stop breathing.

As far as news sources go, I prefer the BBC. You don’t have to hear the news caster’s opinion, or at least I’ve not, and they cover global news. Not how well you could see Britney’s cooch when she sprawled out of a limo. C-SPAN is also good, because you can’t spin live footage of the House.

aye!!! BBC rocks. Any foreign source is better than what these imbeciles have done with the field of journalism. C-span is great if you can filter through the bullshit.

I noticed there was not one single reference or example of when the Liberals and the Liberal media outlets do this to Conservatives. Where was the example of Dan Rather and CBS? I noticed that the author went all the way back to 1994 to slam someone like Rush but there is no mention of ANYTHING from the Liberal side.

What a bunch of bullshit.

I had a feeling this story was nothing more than a smear campaign at the cost of Barrack Obama. However, I understand Fox News is not “fair & balanced,” but let’s also consider that this may not have come from a conservative or Republican source. For all we know, this could have been a political hijacking from the Hilliary Clinton camp, using Fox News to do the dirty work. Not saying Fox is totally innocent, but don’t think the Democrats aren’t capable of stabbing each other in the back either. Barack Obama has also lashed out at the lack of bipartisanship not just from Republicans, but from his own party. I strongly feel this man could potentially be the President we need. My only doubt I have is how will he handle Iran. Regardless of what you think about the War on Terror, Iran is going to be an issue for the next President. I don’t feel that “diplomatic” solutions or even UN sanctions are going to be enough.

I have heard that Sean Hannity loves it from behind. Seriously.

Lets pull out of Iraq and let the world see how peaceful Islam is. We are not giving Islam a chance to show itself a credible religion like the others.

Hannity is a pompous ass, much like the other neo-clowns.

This whole thing is irrelevant. As Americans finally wake up to truth that Bush is a crook and/or moron, Fox ratings are dropping like a rock. And most Americans know they’re full of hooey.

This next election cycle will mark the internet’s true arrival. All the giant, corporate owned media outlets are on the run, losing money and terrified of the mice (youtube.com, politico, etc.) scurrying around their feet.

By November ‘08, Fox, et. al. will be so anemic and irrelevant in shaping public opinion as to be powerless, picking up stories from blogs and Rush Limbaugh to try to stay afloat.

We’ve only just begun!

It is going to be the ugliest campaign in history.

Hillary has her war paint on and her balls tucked up tight.

Why would anyone stick up fpr Fox News, or any other channel for that matter?

Sorry, I’ll let you get back to your O’Reilly book now.

To Harry – this is OUR country, so why don’t you leave if you don’t like it???

In my opinion, FOX is the only fair news channel out there. I can’t stand the liberal media and their agendas.

Fox put down Edwards anti poverty plan because he has an estate and is rich Franklin Roosevelt was rich he ended the depresson and won ww 2 boycot fox call your cable or satleite provider ask them to drop fox.

Big surprise! Rolling Stone gives one side of the story…..anti republican. Fox news may be conservative but CNN, MSNBC, ABC, NBC, and CBS are definately liberal. Everybody knows that 80% of the media leans left. Rolling Stone mag has no reason to complain about Fox News. There are 3 times as many news organizations doing the same trashing of republicans. “Sean Hannity likes it from behind.” Yea that’s an intelligent statement, full of facts. I get the feeling a lot of you who bash Bush and the administration blindly by following what you think is “hip”…….ie the entertainment arena and hollywood. Not the best sources of information.

Its kinda interesting how the one group of voters that lean democratic the most are young voters. Statistics show that the older the age group the more they lean republican. I hate to say it cause I’m in my mid 20s, but it seems like as people get older and BEGIN TO THINK FOR THEMSELVES, they tend to lean republican.

Ever notice how sooo many republicans seem to have sand chronically irritating their vaginas? I think a little less typing and a little more douching might help with that.

Rawrp is another example of someone who has nothing to say besides making lame ass putdowns. You’re ignorant.

Actually, I found the Obama/Madrassa thing chilling.

It’s deeply annoying to have faux news twist positions, show one side of the story, be rude, interrupt, etc…

This was worse though. Scare tactic racism, it’s almost as if they’re setting up Obama to be assassinated.

Horrible people…

i think there’s a hesitation by politicians to sue for libel because that only creates fuel for the fire.

if obama or mccain were to sue anyone for false remarks made regarding them – a misquote or an uncited source – they would be characterized as “whiners” and “enemies of the press” for suing media outlets and their respective villains.

the only solution is for concerned nonpartisan citizens to sue (that excludes you, aclu).

andy

It has also been reported that Chris loves to receive it deep and dry.

“Hillary has her balls locked up tight”?

Even worse, McCain has had his “balls” removed and his lips implanted to Bush’s ass.

Shall we discuss any other Ripe candidates?

Barack can’t attack Fox, Rush, etc., because its a symptom of the whole “if you fight it and get angry about it its probably true” gambit. My girlfriend works it on me a lot and she’s usually right.

As someone from the UK (Your only true ally in the world right now…)
It is pitiful to see this.

Those who think America has a “Liberal” media should leave the US for a few months and come here, it ain’t perfect by a mile. However, when someone makes a statement such as this Obama incedent they are held to account if it is not true.

It is not a matter of left and right but right and wrong.

And while we’re on about the left wing, where ARE these examples of liberal bias?

Republican/Democrat, from here it don’t look too different…

It amazes me how the only electorate in the world which has a mandate to overthrow it’s leaders is sat there having this discussion while their republic is torn asunder by the Bush family. Enjoy the day.

Winston Churchill – “Any man who is under 30, and is not a liberal, has not heart; and any man who is over 30, and is not a conservative, has no brains.”
And Word as for the “uneducated redneck slur to be true,” maybe look at some of the pathetic, highley uneducated attempts at insults offered by the great minds of Rawrp and Harry Balls. Eloquent and brilliant most definitely.

How funny to hear all the FOX apologists…

Snow is a perfect example of FOX’S tight “Relationship” with the administration of Fools…

Just a hop, skip and, jump from FOX FAIRY TALES to working for Bush, Tony SnowJob is Right at home…

Made up news to cover for the clown administration and exist on fictitious personal slams on Bush’s opponents, is not class journalism-it is Rupert Murdoch going back to his roots with sleaze rags- to- -right “news”…

It is hilarious to watch(Five minutes is all that is tolerable, without wanting to barf)but, it is chilling to think there are actually viewers out there that take anyone on this network seriously(ratings are falling like Bush’s polls).

Blatant and A Sad Commentary on What the Public will Swallow….
Corporate Control can Spread the Disease of Fascist Journalism to any of the networks, and they are…

Yea, Harry Balls has a lot to say……..

It never ceases to amaze me how the left goes nuts because of Fox News, which receives it’s revenues from advertisement, but have no problem with NPR, which is very left, and is supported with tax dollars, which makes it propoganda.

Barack Obama practices voodoo. Hillary Clinton once ate a baby and John Edwards is a flaming, God-hating, murderous homosexual. Listen to me and anyone who backs up my point of view or the terrorists will kill us all and the USA will become an archist country run by homosexuals who lock heterosexuals in cages and unwed teenage mothers who burn Bibles. Listen to me or I will eat your soul.

Winston Churchill – “Any man who is under 30, and is not a liberal, has not heart; and any man who is over 30, and is not a conservative, has no brains.”

So… did Winston Churchill feel that way about that brainless liberal Franklin Roosevelt? Even after the stupid liberal saved Churchill’s ass and country? You’d think Churchill would at least have a passing respect for his savior’s intellect.

And about the redneck slur, how do you explain red state Bush voters who still believe Saddam and Osama were pals? According to this article, they believe all news is bullshit anyway so they might as well watch the most entertaining show (which is entertaining to them because it reminds them of the high school playground, a place most of them never got beyond). That is why they are stupid: they actually have a chance to read and at least get competing perspectives but they don’t. They are lazy, stupid rednecks. Period.

Guys, the reports are true: I need man meat.

NPR is left wing, goverenment sponsored propaganda machine? NOW I’VE HEARD IT ALL!!

Dude, you’re deluded. You figure since that is the tactics your group uses, everyone else must be doing it. what a joke!

I listen to NPR and G. Gordon Liddy, and figure the truth lies somewhere in the middle. The networks are left of center and Fox is right. Unfortunately the days of reporting and not commenting upon the events of the world are long gone. Believe half of what you see and none of what you hear and you’ll be a better man.

Taibbi raises some interesting points. A successful libel plaintiff who is a “public figure” will have to prove that the defendant made the defamtory statements knowing that they were false or with reckless disregard for the truth.

“Pepperdine Cal” is very articulate and correct in his criticism of FOX but, CNN, MSNBC and, ABC have all buckled to Corporate Interests(Military/Pharmaceuti cals/Oil)and, seem to all to Concerned about White House Approval on the stories they air.

Diffusing Bush’s Blundering Policies with celebrity gossip or “catching child/adolescent predators” seem to be an attempt to take the focus off of the lies and attempts to “conquer oil-rich countries” (without warrant, via Bush& Co.)

Many of the new shows on CBS seem to be filled with Republican B-Celebs(”Homeland Security”, Hummers, Military plots) are the order of the day-Caruso, Sinise, Woods, Harmon…

When the News Networks put groups of panelists on, daily, to water-down the subject matter of Cheney and his “Brush with Treason”, Or Rove and his culpability in outting a CIA agent for revenge aginst a Critic of the “Bush War in Iraq”…(Wilson).

Networks who have “Lost their Collective Memories” when it comes to readressing unresolved Issues like Billions that disappeared in Iraq, Billions that have not been Used to Help “Rebuild Iraq or New Orleans”…

Bush’s “Mentions/Photo-Ops” of “Beefing-Up Homeland Security”, “Finding Alternative Fuels”(7 years later-zip), “Immigration Reform”, and, “Stopping those CEOS who are over-paid”…(Under Bush’s Watch, all these Issues have Gone South) and the Networks/News services are doing little to Keep it in the Forefront of Public Attention.

Why? Well, Insurance companies, Pharmaceutical companies, oil companies, military/defense companies are sponsers/owners/Bush Contributors and the News is Censored to Accomodate Corporate-Not Inform the Public…(FCC, where are you-also controlled by Corporate)…

Matthews(upse t about the war, twice-before the ‘04 election-then a total reversal, recently upset and vocal, but still cheerleading for his Republican Party and Bush…(He did go to Vegas(On Network Tab)and judge “Miss America”-perks seem to diffuse the danger and plans of the administration to goad Iran into “jump-starting” a war with our carrier strikes off-shore in the MiddleEast…

News taken with a Big Grain of Salt….

Pepperdine Liberal, I seriously doubt most conservative people at your “conservative” school think Fox News is a joke. If they’re saying that, they’re probably not conservative. I guarantee most of the proffs at your school are liberal, not conservative. Maybe not as much as most schools today, but overall, 80% of college proffs are liberal….and despite Fox News leaning conservative, any informed individual knows that most of the media overall leans liberal and democratic. You can’t deny that! Its amazing that despite the liberal media bias (except Fox News)and mostly liberal college proffs, that we live in a pretty split country. If the media was as right as they are left, and college proffs leaned conservative in general, democrats would not have a chance. Fox News aint perfect, but thank god there is at least one conservative news channel. People that bash on Fox News just aren’t used to seeing the other side of the perspective. You guys bashing Fox News probably don’t even watch their shows, you just believe everything liberals say about Fox. I’m already ahead of you guys cause despite the fact that I lean republican, I still read Rolling Stone from time to time.

“any informed individual knows that most of the media overall leans liberal and democratic.”

You are an idiot. Television “news” shows function to make a profit by getting ratings to attract advertising, they don’t function to tell the truth. They are there to entertain. The real reason people hate fox news is that they’ve broken new ground in that department: they have been so successful in passing off entertaining opinions as news that many people-rightly-see them as dangerous to american democracy.

Mainstream newspapers from the NYTimes to the Wall St. Journal make an extreme effort to differentiate between news and opinion. Fox simply does not do this. In fact, they deliberately hide the fact they are broadcasting opinions and not news. When idiot rednecks out there can’t tell the difference and get all their info from Fox the rest of us get bogged down with an uninformed voting bloc. Even conservatives know how fucked up this is, they just won’t say anything becuase it stokes thier ego (which is funny because most thoughtful conservatives want nothing to do with fox-educated rednecks or evangelical christians…Bush’s own administration referred to the evangelicals as crazies).

The truth is that Fox News runs entertainment programs, not news. The fact that many Americans can’t see this is a testament to thier stupidity and the reason we are bogged down in Iraq.

That’s about as good as you can say it.

Plus, I used to date Sean Hannity. The things he could do with his tongue!

Was that a shot at me? WTF? I actually totally agree with you.

Naaaa braaa, it was aimed at “Word” specifically and other clowns who have nothing to say but insults.

Look, Daddy is a Republican who gives me money, so in turn I support everything Fox News has to say.

Daddy was also fond of the turkey neck.

“Look, Daddy is a Republican who gives me money, so in turn I support everything Fox News has to say.

Daddy was also fond of the turkey neck.”

You got nothing to say “Chris”

No other network is geared toward a political agenda as FoxNews is – aside from the usual pundits, even the “anchors” are extremely right wing (people like the brainless Brit Hume and Guilfoyle). For chrissake, the Bush administration made an ex-Fox anchor their spokesman. Ok, Dan Rather is biased, but nothing like Fox exists on a network-wide scale among the major newsbroadcasters. Most of Fox programming is taken up by O’Reilly, Hannity and the wimpish Colmes, the crime story du jour (always involving sex, of course), and Paris Hilton sightings.

Jim Lehrer’s NewsHour is the closest we have to long form, comprehensive news on television. In fact, I can’t even think of another show which is as no-frills and substantive as NewsHour.

“The fact that many Americans can’t see this is a testament to thier stupidity and the reason we are bogged down in Iraq.”

Oh yea “Word.” It all makes sense now. Thanks for some great knowledge and explaining it all. You’re juvenile.

—————– —-

Are you trying to say it’s juvenile to think Fox news broadcasts opinions and plays them off as news? Are you trying to argue it’s juvenile for me to call Americans stupid for equating a Fox anchor’s opinions with fact? Are you trying to say it’s juvenile to call Americans idiots for believing without question the obvious fear mongering of this administration, Fox News and other “liberal” t.v. networks in the runup to the Iraq war?

Stop impersonating me, fake Chris.

You only wish you were in my position. That is, bent over a bar stool, counting the allowance that mummy & daddy just sent me.

“WORD” You’re juvenile because you are too stubborn to acknowledge both sides. You automatically jump on Fox News when all new agencies do the same thing you are claiming Fox does. When in the big picture, Fox is greatly outnumbered. Keith Olbermann at MSNBC (who once was asked which party he supports said “I side with the correct party”) and Bill Arkin (who’s been broadcasted on NBC as a “military news analyst”) are just two examples. You have heard of Bill Arkin right?

Assuming one side is right and one side is wrong all the time is also juvenile. The reason people don’t respect Fox or realize that the mass media in this country has turned to the left in recent years is due to extreme subjectivity. There is a huge lack of political balance in ideologies of people in America. Because you think one way doesn’t mean all other ways are wrong. Any truely intelligent person could realize that Bill Arkin is liberal military-hating nut AND Sean Hannity is a right-winger trying to push his agenda. If you don’t see the faults within your own ideologies (and those who reflect them) you are as blind as the very people you hate. That’s why I’d never associate myself with a party. The truth ALWAYS lies in the center.

Chris,

You obviously didn’t read my post. If you did you obviously didn’t comprehend it.

You didn’t refute anything I said. You simply said I “failed to aknowledge the other side.” which to me now means I failed to be stupid and think as an idiot does. So I’m gonna try this one last time on your dense ass. See if you can keep up:

I was differentiating between television “news” and print news, saying that print news is much more credible. (Fox News agrees with me, they cite the NYTimes, the AP or the Wall St. Journal whenever it suits them).
I was also saying it is irresponsible to get all your news from a television source. The reason is that the main goal of a t.v. show is ratings; cable news shows must compete with shows like “American Idol” and “Lost” for viewers. This means they must cherry pick the most emotional news stories and slant those stories to entertain thier market. This is probably one of the reasons t.v. “news” isn’t held to the same standard print journalism is: because everyone intelligent knows it’s just entertainment. Unfortunately, people like you are proving them wrong.

The sick thing is that it seems you really can create ideologies in people by entertaining them. Basically all a Fox News anchor or CNN anchor is is a politician trying to get ratings instead of votes. The problem is that people like you confuse television “news” with print news and therefore believe the idiot opinions you got from Bill O’Reilley are somehow legitimate because he packages his program as if it were a real news show.

Oh and Chris, it’s juvenile to think Fox News represents right wing people. It doesn’t. It represents the News Corporation’s shareholders.

props for clearing that up for him word.

Too bad it will fall on blind ears.

strange how the prop sniffer can criticize others for not seeing the faults in their own ideologies while at the same time broadstroking people that don’t agree with his point of view as liberals. what a hipocrite.

“You simply said I “failed to aknowledge the other side.” which to me now means I failed to be stupid and think as an idiot does.”

Yea, looks to me like somebody is biased and stubborn and refuses to even comprehend the other side. Somebody is “stupid” and an “idiot” no matter what if they disagree with you. I DIDN’T CORRECT YOU BECAUSE YOU WERE STATING THE OBVIOUS. Shows like O’Reilly factor are obviously opinion and are not simply news programs. But to say that Fox News is simply entertainment and doesn’t report any news is ridiculous. They report the same daily happenings as any other non-cable news source. Yes, there anchors lean right but no less than the achors of every other news organisation (cable news or not) lean left.

“Mainstream newspapers from the NYTimes to the Wall St. Journal make an extreme effort to differentiate between news and opinion”

Thats all well and good, congratualations! Too bad all their opinions are extremely liberal, which in turn causes “spin” on there “news” stories. The NY Times? Cmon, makin it easy on me.

By the way “WORD,” good job trying to change the argument to “whether or not Fox News differentiates between when they’re reporting “news” vs. when they’re reporting “opinion/entertainment.” This debate started off as the bias of the media. I was simply saying from the beginning that the media in general (cable or not) leans left. I admit, I lean right, but I still check out the big 3 (CBS,NBC,ABC), CNN, and MSNBC to see how they are reporting/slanting stories (much like Fox does). For us “right-leaners,” Cable Fox News is all we have.

Hey Chris – how do you feel about Rupert Murdoch’s recent comments in Switzerland basically admitting that his network tried to push the Bush agenda in regards to Iraq?

That is a serious problem for a channel that promotes being fair and balanced.

Jed Clampett | 2/7/2007, 11:42 pm EST

props for clearing that up for him word.

Too bad it will fall on blind ears.

strange how the prop sniffer can criticize others for not seeing the faults in their own ideologies while at the same time broadstroking people that don’t agree with his point of view as liberals. what a hipocrite.

-

You’re full of shit. I always have and always will advocate for independent thinking. I use “liberals” instead of Democrats because I know a lot of Democrats and most of them are good thinking people that believe in different ideologies than me sometimes. “Liberals” in the way I use it sometimes means the bomb-throwing, mud-slinging, angry, misguided, FAR-left-wing, Secular Progressives (for lack of a better term).

I still find it funny that instead agreeing with the fact that people need to be more objective and find middle ground, you call me a hypocrite. Shows what you really care about.

All the op-ed writers for the Wall Street journal are liberal? You are a moron. All the op-ed writers for the NYTimes are liberal? Try telling that to David Brooks, William Safire or John Tierney.

Tucker Carlson and Joe Scarborough on MSNBC are FAR left aren’t they? Idiot. Scarborough himself denied Bill O’Reilley’s saying MSNBC was moving to the left which should illustrate something for you: THESE NETWORKS ARE COMPETING AGAINST ONE ANOTHER.

We have reached a point where being called a “liberal” is a bad thing in the eyes of cable new’s target market. Fox News and conservative commentators made it a loaded word, and now network news channels will bend over backwards to prove they are not liberal. So when Bill O’Reilly accuses MSNBC of drifting to the left he’s really trying to get viewers away from thier network (God it’s depressing to have to explain this to you).

“But to say that Fox News is simply entertainment and doesn’t report any news is ridiculous. They report the same daily happenings as any other non-cable news source.”

Are you trying to be funny again? Fox News tonight will give maybe 10 seconds of space to “report” the unity agreement between Hamas and Fatah (probably not even that). The NY Times gave it over 500 words. Fox will instead spend hours telling you over and over again how voting against the President’s surge plan undermines the troops. Then it will spend another five to 7000 hours on Anna Nicole Smith’s death and leave out the facts that Kodak plans to cut 3000 jobs, Tim Russert testified in the Libby case, Fox itself plans to launch a new business channel, Jaques Chirac won’t run for a third term, etc…

While Fox will spend hours on Anna Nicole Smith’s anti-traditional values lifestyle, the NYTimes today used over 500 words to report GOOD NEWS out of Iraq: the u.s. crackdown on Iraqi Shiite militias.

And that’s only today.

So it’s now on you to prove every news network and show not on fox is liberal. I won’t hold my breath.

And Chris, you are not an idiot because you disagree with me, you are an idiot because you are an idiot. Try reading for a change, you actually sound more intelligent.

“Word” you’re a real piece of work. 500 words on the good of Iraq? How bout the millions of words they kept printing about Abu Ghrab? If you wanna argue that the NY Times is not extremely liberal(not just liberal), you’re delusional so there’s no point in arguing with you.

“Are you trying to be funny again? Fox News tonight will give maybe 10 seconds of space to “report” the unity agreement between Hamas and Fatah (probably not even that). The NY Times gave it over 500 words. Fox will instead spend hours telling you over and over again how voting against the President’s surge plan undermines the troops. Then it will spend another five to 7000 hours on Anna Nicole Smith’s death and leave out the facts that Kodak plans to cut 3000 jobs, Tim Russert testified in the Libby case, Fox itself plans to launch a new business channel, Jaques Chirac won’t run for a third term, etc…”

Kind of creative and catchy, but absolutely no facts in your rant. By the way, the Anna Nicole Smith story was all over EVERY news channel today, not just fox news. Its funny how you bag on Fox News for covering Anna Nicole Smith’s death without mentioning that EVERY other channel is also covering it tiredlessly. Thanks for proving my point. Were you trying to be funny? Clown.

By the way, MSNBC bringing Tucker on board shows one good example of a very left channel trying to “center” their image. Good for them. Thank god Fox News came along to give them the motivation to improve themselves. MSNBC hired him to TRY AND GET SOME VIEWERS BACK FROM FOX NEWS. Remember, they’re competing with each other. You said it yourself (GOD ITS DEPRESSING TO HAVE TO EXPLAIN THIS TO YOU)

P.S. “Chris…….you are an idiot because you are an idiot.” You really got me there WORD.

Chris, you are hilarious. And obviously just a gimmick.

WORD, I’ll give you David Brooks but Saffire and Tierney? William Saffire hasn’t written for the NY TIMES since 2005! He also voted for Clinton in 1992! Also, Saffire was replaced by John Tierney, who is a Libertarian. I’ll give you 1 out of 3. Go ahead and list all the leftest contributors at the NY Times, it’ll be easier for you.

“William Saffire hasn’t written for the NY TIMES since 2005!”

And Fox news was accusing the Times of being “far left” way before 2005. Nice try.

WORD you’re beat! Fox News was never worried about the William Saffires of the world. Saffire aint near as bad as most of the other contributors to NY Times. The times have always been way left. My point was that you gave the impression that Saffire and Tierney balanced out the NY Times. Nice try……..

Keep up the amazing work, Matt. After reading “Spanking the Donkey,” and every post here on RS, I am now a lifelong fan. I look forward to reading more of your wicked analysis in this upcoming clusterfuck of an election. Cheers, Zach

The burden of proof is on me WORD? You’re exposed. You tried to use Tierney/Saffire to back your argument and I busted you. You lied (use “bent the truth” if it makes you sleep better) to push your propaganda. You’re a disgrace. Word, you read an alleged positive story concerning Iraq in the NY Times and count the words (500 right?) and that’s supposed to give you some kind of credibility? You got no class. Now you can try and say that David Brooks balances out the NY Times……but that would be like me tryin to say that Allan Colbms balances out Fox News. It doesn’t work.

To judge a network, these days, just follow the money…

Pharmaceuticals, Oil, Insurance, munitions are all Controlling the networks.

The Slant Is To The Right(FOX is the Ultimate “example” but MSNBC/NBC, DISNEY/ABC, CNN, CBS) are all Controlled by Corporate and the current “Administration” of Cons, Criminals and, Thieves…

If the networks were serious about Representing both Parties, there would be both liberal and conservative news anchors and, the Content of the News would be “Reporting” and not Propaganda to fill the “News” shows and political shows with News and not Apologies and Apologists to try and convince “Veiwers” “How wonderful and “routine” Bush “Policies” are…

Olbermann is the only political news anchor to Reveal Bush and his Bumbling comrades for what they are…

MSNBC’S ratings have skyrocketed since Olbermann got politically accurate.

All the Bush apologists Over-Run the networks and horribly amateur “political hosts” are allowed to make Fiction, “Fact”…

O’Reilly/Beck/Mat thews/Carlson/Blitzer/Dobbs/Sc arbourough(the light is starting to seep in, Slowly, very Slowly)King, Cooper and, the ratio is Fascistly(new word) Apparent…Creepy Time…

The Libby trial gets Little Coverage, The revelations about “Cooking the Books” to Instigate Immoral and Unethical Wars(War Crimes)is down-played…

Anna Nicole Smith’s death, Nancy Pelosi’s request for a plane(Hello, she is only second in line for the Presidency should Bush take a permanent Vacation-oh, please) and, doing more work in her month as House Speaker than the two duds have accomplished since their Cheat-In to office-6/7 long years ago.

Pelosi deserves a private, secure plane to do the Nation’s Work…(She is commuting from DC to California-much greater distance than the child -predator-hider, Hastert, and I Want Her Safe…

Airplane accidents have befallen two Democratic Senators since 2000(The Disasters since Bush emerged from the Abyss)…

More hard-hitting “news” like Britney Spears Club life continues to Dumb-Down the American people(the pesty rich networks work hard at it).

Let’s demand reporting and not opinion…Let’s demand equal representation and honesty elevates journalism instead of annihilating it…

Content, content, content!

Hey physco, look at the owners these news networks in question and the percent of people who work there that refer to themselves as “liberal” and “conservative”. If you actually cared enough to check what you say, you’d find the statistics diagree with you 100%. No matter how many times you lie to yourself it never becomes the truth. No one thinks the majority of networks are conservative. No one.

Chris,
Apparently your memory is faulty. Here, read:
———————– —
“Mainstream newspapers from the NYTimes to the Wall St. Journal make an extreme effort to differentiate between news and opinion”

Thats all well and good, congratualations! Too bad all their opinions are extremely liberal, which in turn causes “spin” on there “news” stories. The NY Times? Cmon, makin it easy on me.
————————- —
Did you get that? You specifically said “ALL their opinions are extremely liberal”.
I brought up Tierney, Safire and Brooks (not to mention the Wall St. Journal’s op ed page to prove you wrong. Now you have no argument and look like a fool.

And your statement about the op-ed opinions spinning real news stories is bullshit. I’d ask you to prove that statement but you haven’t proven anything else I’ve asked you to so what’s the fucking point? Conversly, when Fox reports daily events they don’t spin them (they are events, how can an event spin itself?). The difference between newspapers and fox is that Fox reports less daily events and more opinion (for the entertainment value) and newspapers report more daily events and less opinions. I’ve said some version of this like 10 times already and you haven’t refuted it.

The real reason you conservatives hate objective reporting is that it can unmask the failures of the Bush administration. And about Abu Ghraib, the nytimes held that story for a year because the chairman of the joint chiefs told them to. You conservatives hate that they reported it anyway because it makes you question yourself. Events like Abu Ghraib force conservatives to think about whether they were right or wrong. This is not thier natural inclination and when forced to think a conservative will fall back on his more natural traits: anger at his own lack of power and to alledge political conspiracies by the other side.

And you saying I’m beaten? That’s just funny.

Hey dickhead, if by no one you mean yourself, then your’e right. As for the rest of us, most of us know the networks are biased and totally unreliable. Mostly biased to the right because they have to pander to the corporations that advertize on them. Remember when FOX was bulied into not showing some episodes of ‘married with children’ because some churchonuts found al’s hand in the pants offensive. P

word

smells………..

…like luv!

Hooo baby!

Hell, we could do this forever. You read sources like Rolling Stone Mag and the NY Times. You’re too far gone. What a waste. You know damn right when I said ALL, I didn’t mean each and every contributor/article was extremely liberal. That would put the NY Times on the same level as Rolling Stone Magazine (which I guess since you can READ it, it must mean its legitimate). I meant as a whole, the NY Times is extremely liberal. Nice try using semantics to bust me. You know deep down you were using people like Saffire and Tierney to give the impression they were conservative and figured you wouldn’t be exposed. That’s what people like you are willing to do. What have you proven?

Anonymous
Ok, maybe .001% of this counrtry think the media is conservative (WTF, that’s crazy). I’ve come to accept that kind of stuff because a quarter of our country is also out of it’s friggen mind.

Oh, but that example sucked balls. For one, Married with Children was on before FOX was even popular (or existed, I have to check the dates). Secondly, that was the FOX NETWORK! They are completely seperate enterprises that don’t affiliated with one another besides the name. What a terrible example, but thanks for making the rebuttal easy.

Stopping talking to them Chris. You’re not going to change their minds at this point. They shut down once they find a viewpoint they like, accurate or not.

Oh man, that’s priceless, Anon is talking about the fact that networks are pandering to corporations because they pay the bills and you focus on an outdated sample about ‘married with children’, undubitably a master of debate… or is that dissembling? and ten you call it a rebuttal? man, In the words of the guiness commercial, BRILLIANT!!!

Chris,

“You know deep down you were using people like Saffire and Tierney to give the impression they were conservative and figured you wouldn’t be exposed.”

Wow. You must know me better than I do! Huh. Here I was thinking I was using people like Saffire and Tierney to make you look like an asshole. My bad.

I have listened to the tubby moron’s radio show. If that is “fair and balanced”, then monkeys can fly. I have tried calling his show, to no avail. Hannity and his producers will only put a liberal on the air if they are completly brain-dead, like Terri Shiavo. If you don’t believe me, try getting on air with a legitimate liberal point. Not possible….

As a follow up, I would love for Barrack to sue Hannity for libel, if he does not get the nomination. I would ask for about 1 billion dollars, based on his unrealized potential.

You got nothing WORD. I pitty you. Keep posting on this site. Most people here are young enough where they don’t know any better than to listen to you. I fucked you, cradle rock style. Smells……..

Jed Clampett
Nice spin on what he said, but no. He would have said THAT if he meant THAT, or would have came up with an example that was better. Nice try.

Now I’m convinced, there’s no way you could have scored very well on the reading comprehension portion of the SAT… have you even taken it yet? Or is that beyond your forsight? Here’s what he said….

“As for the rest of us, most of us know the networks are biased and totally unreliable. Mostly biased to the right because they have to pander to the corporations that advertize on them.”

And THAT is exactly WHAT WAS SAID.

once again… you’re just BRILLIANT!!!

Jed
Except you took out his point on Fox… (hmm). It’s is so incredabily stupid to think that the right is in control of the print and television media (radio, maybe, but their forum is purely subjective and they claimed that medium a long time ago). There are thousands of people who currently study the biased nature of the political media; ask them if they think the right is in control.

Oh Jed, I took the ACT’s. 32, brotha. I’m taking it again in the Spring too.

Propaganda boy,

“It’s is so incredabily stupid to think that the right is in control of the print and television media”
———————- ——

Prove it. List examples. Prove to me that television and print media don’t lean right. Otherwise you’re just another bag of shit spewing nothing but lies.

Here ya go WORD. Some examples of some “proof” you wanted. This is a little more legit than mentioning a “500 word article” in the NY Times.

Back in 1992: Of the 1400 members of the national media who were surveyed:

44% considered themselves Democrats
16% Repubs
34% independents
89% voted for Clinton in 1992
7% voted for Bush in 1992

Also concerning 1992: 89 percent of Washington-based reporters said they voted for Bill Clinton in 1992. Only seven percent voted for George Bush, with two percent choosing Ross Perot

In a survey conducted by the American Society of Newspaper Editors in 1997, 61% of reporters stated that they were members of or shared the beliefs of the Democratic. Only 15% say their beliefs were best represented by the Republican. A survey by the Pew Research Center and Project for Excellence in Journalism in 2004 found 34% of journalists describing themselves as liberal, 54% as moderate, and 7% as conservative.

In March and April 2005, the University of Connecticut’s Department of Public Policy surveyed 300 journalists nationwide — 120 who worked in the television industry and 180 who worked at newspapers and asked for whom they voted in the 2004 presidential election. More than half of the journalists surveyed (52%) said they voted for Democrat John Kerry in the 2004 presidential election, while fewer than one-fifth (19%) said they voted for Republican George W. Bush (21% refused to answer). The public chose Bush, 51 to 48 percent

Word
You can’t ever “prove” the non-existance of something.

For you to say the right IS in control, you would need to provide evidence to show that!

If you want stats, look below, but no one thinks the right is in control of the media, outside of the leftist of the left.

WTF? “Bag of lies?” It’s your opinion on the politics in the media. There’s no fact that says it is this way or the other.

You really get to be a real angry spinster when you know you’re in the vast minority.

Again, if you really want statistics, just view what’s below. Not that facts or statistics ever had any place in your debates.

Chris,
Nice stats. Unfortunately your stats are irrelevant. Your argument is a typical republican response to facts: go after the messanger. Simply proving a reporter is liberal doesn’t prove his reporting biased. You need to go report by report to do this and cite the bias example by example. That is what I did in citing “500 words” by the nytimes.

To say it another way, Fox News employs conservatives, liberals, moderates, etc… Fox News is based in NYC (in 2004 NYC went almost 90% for Kerry) so if fox doesn’t discriminate in thier hiring practices then statistically the majority of people who work there must lean left(as of 2004.) Tell me, do you think this influences thier “reporting?” I thought not.

Your main problem is you believe a person’s political beliefs will always infect thier professional lives when you’re talking about journalists. Do you believe the same thing about doctors, lawyers, architects, etc…? Why not?

And if the nytimes’-for example- reporting is so liberal, why does fox news cite it? Why are the stories the times broke about warrentless eavesdropping, Abu Ghraib, etc… not factually contested by anyone, con or lib?

I say again, conservatives don’t want objective news because it can prove them wrong. I don’t refrain from investing in the stock market because most of the people who work in finance lean conservative, why do you refrain from reading objective reporting simply because the reporters lean liberal?

“You can’t ever “prove” the non-existance of something.”

So you’ve decided to start thinking? WHERE WERE YOU IN 2002, WHEN BUSH WAS TRYING TO FORCE SADDAM TO PROVE THE NON-EXISTANCE OF WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION????

And you want evidence the right is in control of the media? Here: Viacom, Disney, Newscorp.

WORD, yea, you are really struggling.

“Your main problem is you believe a person’s political beliefs will always infect thier professional lives when you’re talking about journalists. Do you believe the same thing about doctors, lawyers, architects, etc…? Why not?”

No, and why not WORD? OK, how about because personal politics have nothing to do with being a doctor, lawyer, archetects, etc. Dumb ass.

“Simply proving a reporter is liberal doesn’t prove his reporting biased.”

OK, but it sure as hell doesn’t make them lean right. Dumbass. You can’t argue the stats. Irrelevent? You think how members of the media vote has nothing to do with how they report political issues?

WORD, pick another argument. You’re arguing a point you cant make. Just shows how stubborn you are. If you wanna argue whether Fox News leans right, I’ll agree with you. However, THE MEDIA IN GENERAL LEANS LEFT.

Oh yea, eat a dick

“OK, but it sure as hell doesn’t make them lean right. Dumbass. You can’t argue the stats. Irrelevent? You think how members of the media vote has nothing to do with how they report political issues? ”

How members of the media vote has nothing to do with how they report on political issues. That’s the argument I’ve made and the point I’ve proven. Since you’re to fucking dumb to understand this I’ll prove it again:

I’m holding a copy of the Washington Post in my hands right now. On the FRONT PAGE there is an article about congressional democrats using iron handed tactics to suppress republican minority opposition. CLEARLY A LIBERAL BIAS THERE.

Oh, and that’s a fact that’s relevant. You can’t argue the facts. Dumb ass.

Reporters do a job and they try to do it as objectively as possible. When they fuck up, they get very harshly repremanded. Fox News does not harshly repremand anyone when they “fuck up” because they do not respect the notion that reporting can be objective.

“No, and why not WORD? OK, how about because personal politics have nothing to do with being a doctor, lawyer, archetects, etc. Dumb ass.”

Now you’re catching on. Dumb ass. Reporting news has nothing to do with personal politics either. Reporting opinions does. The fact that morons like you can’t tell the difference is the reason we are now mired in Iraq. Because shit heads like you decided that the whole media-including objective reporting-was biased left. Now you fucking tools have led us into Iraq and you still cling to the idea that it’s a good thing to slap partisan labels on factual information.

And the media IS biased right because they are OWNED BY CORPORATIONS.

Do you really think a person’s personal political beliefs are going to get in the way of them doing a job for thier boss?

ok you can show my post now

Word
Again, I wasn’t really intelligent enough (age) to offer a viable opinion on that.

However, my current viewpoint on Iraq is this: First off, we probably didn’t have to go there. We should have spent more time in Afghanistan, and then (upon viewing who was more of a threat) looked at what Iran was/is doing. They, in fact, are trying to build WMDs and sponsor much of the terrorism in the Middle East. I do say that in hindsight however.

Secondly, what the problem was after going to Iraq was unpreparedness. We didn’t have a solid post-war plan and didn’t account for the hateful and idiotic behavior of the Shiites and Sunnis (seriously, was is a “Moderate Muslim?”).

What we have to do at this point is find a plan of action that will work and stop playing politics with this war.

I hope that sounds reasonable to you. By the way, thanks for the college advice. I’m actually thinking about Northwestern. I’ve always been a Big Ten guy myself.

Northwestern’s cool. I had a couple friends who went there who loved it. (I’m telling you though, the temperature thing is crazy. I went to school in upstate ny and we had like 3 weeks of bearable weather every fall before it turned into siberia.)

Anyway you should read some on Iran around the time we went into Afghanistan. Iran is obviously nuts but they were bending over backwards to help the u.s. at the time. (It was about eliminating enemies in the Taliban). They didn’t trust us but there were elements there that wanted better relations with the west and the diplomatic groundwork existed for improved ties. That all went to shit when Bush included them in his axis of evil speech. The Iranian people are also not as crazy as their government might lead you to believe. One of the Bush team’s hopes for installing democracy in Iraq was that it would motivate the Iranian student movement and progressive elements within the country to topple the government. It already is a country at odds with it’s political leaders.

As it stands now, Cheney reportedly recently made a deal with the Saudis to keep oil prices low, thereby deflating oil prices marketwide and taking money out of Iranian pockets. The idea-and I wholly agree with it-is to push Iran’s already fragile economy to the point where they throw out their crazy Israel-destroying president. This is the kind of policy we should be pursuing for countries like Iran. Not invading them with hundreds of thousands of troops and putting u.s. lives in danger.

And with Iraq Bush must have known about the sectarian tensions within that county. I read about them myself in Time magazine in 2002 (or 03 I can’t remember) so it would be crazy for the president of the united states not to know about them. You’re right it was a failure to stabilize the country after the invasion. We shouldn’t have gone in the first place but the real crime was screwing up after we did. It’s how Bush will be judged as a president by history.

Please show my post

again, please show my post

seriously, was is a “Moderate Muslim?”.

Are you joking? could you possibly be that biggoted or misinformed? A ‘moderate’ muslim as seems to be the new Fox moniker, is one that actually adheres to the tenets of the religion. This means about 99% of the muslim population. The extremists are a small minority that unfortunatelly are very visible because of their tactics. But you should already know that, being such a smart feller.

“please show my post”

Uuumm, yea! YOU GOT NOTHING.

Jed
Nope… A moderate Muslim wouldn’t go off on killing sprees of their enemies as soon as they see an opening. Did I say all Muslims are extremists? No. Did I say all Muslims should watch Fox and be Republicans? No. HOW DOES WANTING MUSLIMS TO STOP THE IDIOTIC BLOODSHEAD MAKE ME A BIGOT?

You throw those words because you want to fight before knowing where I stand. Get off my back.

What I think: There are too many Muslims who accept the extremist Muslim mentality. 99% of Muslims are not Moderate; that’s complete BS.

Talk about being misinformed. Check out reports about what is being taught at so-call moderate Muslim mosques. The average Muslim living in the middle east isn’t as clear thinking and moderate as we hoped they’d be. Otherwise, we wouldn’t have all the wars and terrorism. Look at the recent history of Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Palastine, Syria, ect. No, I refuse to believe that the people of these countries are “99%” moderate.

Look, I don’t think all Muslims are bad or crazy at all, but there is a serious fraction of people living in the Middle East (often in powerful positions) who are so intent on killing their enemies that they throw any bit of logic or concept of peace out the window.

By the way, I like how you choose one tiny bit of my comment to try and pick a fight. You are so intent on slamming me its unbelievable. AND YOU ACUSE ME OF BEING ANGRY AND INSULTING! Uhgg…

-

Word
Do you have dail-up? Sometimes I think the comments have trouble being posted on weak internet servers. I always copy my comment before posting just in case.

If the billion or so muslims in the world were all, as you wan’t us to believe, extremists then the planet would look much worse and there would be bombs going off in every city on the planet. You tend to generalize and broadstroke groups into your idea of what they should be in order to justify your own views. Read some aristotle or plato and see what they say about people who make generalizations or blindly spew off dogma and ideology.

“If the billion or so muslims in the world were all, as you wan’t us to believe, extremists…”

-

Never said that you spinning fuck.

I said this:

“HOW DOES WANTING MUSLIMS TO STOP THE IDIOTIC BLOODSHEAD MAKE ME A BIGOT?… Look, I don’t think all Muslims are bad or crazy at all, but there is a serious fraction of people living in the Middle East (often in powerful positions) who are so intent on killing their enemies that they throw any bit of logic or concept of peace out the window.”

It’s really clear when you want to argue for the sake of arguing. You are putting words in my mouth so you can go off on me. Read what I say before you generalize me, hypocrite.

I could only stand to read the first half, or so of the comments above.

I find it interesting that we immediately resort to cuss words, personal attacks and name calling when discussing whether the media is liberal or conservative. Are we 8 years old and having a stand off on the playground.

How can we have such downright hatred for other Americans…AMERICANS! Our political process demands that we debate and discuss every issue…it’s call democracy.

Please grow up.

You are totally right and I do apologize for resorting to cussing. It only achieves the purpose of attracting attention and showing anger. For some people that might be all they have, but I’ll attempt to limit it so my points stand for themselves.

It’s all about who has the most $Control$ of the network, newspaper, magazine…

Sometimes it’s a publisher, sometimes a corporation, sometimes an owner, sometimes it’s the majority of sponsers, sometimes stockholders, etc.

No matter how “liberal” journalists are supposed to be, it really depends on who has the Control Factor, and that is usually Corporate.

The more monopolies, also, tends to subtracts from the Independent Voices…(Murdoch & Turner & Disney)…

what if obama is a terrorist is this not exactly the type of thing the terrorist would try to do? What if the lull in major terrorist attacks is because they’re planning something bigger such as planting one of their own as president. they may not fight fair or right but they have intelligent people i would not put something like this past them.

Great! Thank you very much! I always wanted to write in my blog something like that. Can I take part of your post to my site? Of course, I will add backlink? Regards