View Single Post


April 28th, 2007, 03:02
A few quick points, as I have to run…

Originally Posted by roqua View Post
I couldn't disagree more. And Fox has hands down the best guests. Juan Wlliams, Dick Morris, these are my type of people. Dick Morris is a political genius. Watch him on Hannity And Colmes, they both have to agree with him because he doesn't see things from a perosnal perspective, he sees it from a national perspective. He doesn't look at the American People, he looks at the American voter. He sees the big picture, and not his norrow, slanded view of the picture.

And I've seen Juan, being the only D on a show with 2-4 others, just run circles around them without once spouting a party talking point.
What's this got to do with FoxNews' political slant? All the best guests in the world plus Juan don't change the fact that the network continues to present it's news with a decidedly conservative bent. The guests and Juan don't report the news on that station. They just do the "talking head" stuff. Tony Snow, for God's sake, used to wrap up their Sunday show with his conservative editorials. Now's his been paid handsomely with the White House Press Secretary post.

Originally Posted by roqua View Post
And you are 100% wrong about O'Rielly. He's in it for himself. His agenda is the one that will get him more ratings. Look at the curve, the biggest chunk of the population is what he's going for. You will never see him say anything too outlandish, or take a solid stance that isn't a popular stance.
Don't disagree he's in it for numero uno, but I'll repeat: I don't think he's a far right wing nut, but he's solidly conservative. Are you saying he's a centrist? 'Cause that's just crazy talk…

Originally Posted by roqua View Post
Now, lets look at this objectively. On one side you have Howard Dean and Michael Moore, on the other Pat Robertson. Who is the media kinder to?
If you really mean Pat Robertson rather than Pat Buchanan, then I'm perfectly comfortable with the media treating Pat Robertson more harshly because the guy is flat out crazy! Didn't he just say a few months ago that AIDS was God's judgment on gays? Nice. Thanks, Pat, but I'll be skipping any worship of that particular God.

If you mean Pat Buchanan, then again, I've seen fair coverage. When was Pat ever roasted by the media? The media has not hesitated to call Michael Moore on his manipulative approach to "documentaries". I've read the mass-distributed AP stories myself. Don't you remember the recent stories about how an edited out clip from one of his films surfaced showing him getting all chummy with the CEO of Nike and then the story about how he really did get to meet Roger of the famous "Roger and Me" that started it all, and yet he still produced the film as if he never had? And I don't know where you were during the 2004 primaries, but for a while you could not escape the replays of the "Screech Heard 'Round the World" that effectively ended any hope Dean had at the nomination. Also, once he became DNC chair, he was quickly grilled by the media for some comment about why Republicans couldn't connect with blacks as well as Democrats because they're all a bunch of fat, rich, white guys, or some such. He had to spend the next couple of days apologizing. So, again, your claim that the media is biased is bunk. It's just a ploy used rather effectively by conservatives to make martyr's/victims of themselves in an attempt to seem more credible.

My narrative is freedom. And at this point in time the left isn't the one supporting that.
Huh? Based on what? The Imus affair? Methinks you're stretching that a bit far…

I voted for nadar in 00 because he was the only candadite that was honest in my opinion. He really wants to serve the public.
Well. Politics really does make strange bedfellows. My vote in 2000 as well.

I truelly believe people that pick a side get blinded. The don't know what their platform is, they just know they hate everyone who doesn't have the d or r they are loking for in front of their names. Its a stupid way to see things.
Absolutely agree.

If Dean or Moore were on the right the media would pick them apart, just like they do with Ann Coulter. Ann Coulter can barley open her mouth before every journalist in the nation is ready to pounce.
Ann's an absolute idiot and deserves any thrashing she gets, all politics aside. She peddles trash and divisiveness and has nothing useful, or even remotely factual to say. She's as about as cynical an opportunist as you can have. She's found a hateful and baseless little money and fame making niche and she's milking it for all it's worth. I can't believe you feel sorry for her.

Both sides definitely don't have an equal platform. And if you think fox is pure conservative you are insane. The far right has no traction with fox, or anyone, because they are insane. The only insanity permitted and accepted in this country is the insanity of the far left, who controls the left somehow. Pat B has to constantly lie or hold back his real oppinion in order not to be torn to pieces, the left can just let go and its okay.
I'm afraid this borders a bit on paranoia. There is no oppression of the great, unheard yet reasonable conservative masses in this nation. I'm not sure what you think the "insane liberals" are running, but as far as I can see it ain't much more than a few biodiesal VW eurovans, Co-Ops and fading communes. Nobody is talking about the power of the "insane liberal lobby". All the media accounts I hear and read are about the voting power of soccer mom's, NASCAR dad's and mega church congregations. Hardly sounds like a liberal crowd to me…
chamr is offline


chamr's Avatar
Mounted Highborn


Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: CA, USA
Posts: 850