Why the press is an organ of the Democrat Party and why that will change.

[Le Jacquelope]

Go back to the initial op-ed piece in the New York Times that started the whole smearapalooza and find one, just one, error of fact.

You can't.

Ishmael can't hear you. There's too much sand in his ears.

 

[Le Jacquelope]

What is the Left's fascination with everything Nazi?

9/11. Reichstag fire. Compare. Discuss.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

It’s the same reason that Dan Rather tossed Saddam Hussein softball questions in his interview prior to the run-up to war; because it allowed Dan continued access to power. The press has been siding with the Democrats for many years now because it garnered them access to power. It is also why they never ask Democrats tough questions as they do with Republicans. It has become an ingrained habit.

But, the Democrats lost the House, then the Senate, the Governorships, and then the White House and now stand to lose the Court as well. So to maintain access, they will soon start trending Republican when they see that the stunts, like the one they are currently pulling down on the ranch, not only backfire on them, but cause them to lose access to power and thusly losing their power with it.

And they ain’t gonna give up power, so they will gradually and quietly become a tool of the Republican Party.

So you're saying Rupert Murdoch is a bleeding heart liberal? & what about when Dan Rather publicly supported GW Bush on the air?

 

[Cap’n AMatrixca]

What's Murdoch's beat?

I don't know if Rather ever praised Bush, but he did say something to the effect of, even if the documents are forgeries, the story is true.

Here's something I posted earlier:

Brokaw, Jennings, and Rather have been supplanted by Boortz, Hannity, and Limbaugh in the mountain-sea change of how Americans get their news...

 

[overthebow]

What's Murdoch's beat?

I don't know if Rather ever praised Bush, but he did say something to the effect of, even if the documents are forgeries, the story is true.

Here's something I posted earlier:

Brokaw, Jennings, and Rather have been supplanted by Boortz, Hannity, and Limbaugh in the mountain-sea change of how Americans get their news...

Boortz, Hannity and Limbaugh don't bring news, they bring Republican talking points.

Clue in.

 

[Gringao]

Boortz, Hannity and Limbaugh don't bring news, they bring Republican talking points.

Clue in.

They're opinion shows and never pretend to be anything but. It's the organs of the port side that purport to be unbiased professional journalists and Newspapers of Record all the while peddling leftist pablum (while ignoring salient data damaging to leftist causes du jour).

 

[RobDownSouth]

They're opinion shows and never pretend to be anything but. It's the organs of the port side that purport to be unbiased professional journalists and Newspapers of Record all the while peddling leftist pablum (while ignoring salient data damaging to leftist causes du jour).

That's your opinion, albeit one not backed up much in the way of facts.

 

[Gringao]

That's your opinion, albeit one not backed up much in the way of facts.

Let's take a couple of recent incidents, for example. It was reported on a number of blogs and in one smaller NYC newspaper that Air America's previous manager had "loaned" AA several hundred thousand dollars from the coffers of a charity (publicly-funded, no less) on whose board he sat at the precise time AA was in financial straits, saving the fledgling left-wing radio lineup. The NYT didn't even mention the story for over two weeks, and then soft-peddled the most damning aspects of the story.

IOW, the NYT sanitized the story.

In other news, has any major news outlet published any of Official Victim Mom Cindy Sheehan's outrageous pronouncements, either from her digs in Crawford or, say, when she was defending convicted terrorist-enabler Lynne Stewart SFSU in April? Why no mention that she's cuddling with a terrorist bag-babe? Not fit the narrative?

 

[Hooper_X]

"Thusly" isn't a real word.

 

[Ham Murabi]

"Thusly" isn't a real word.

It would like to be.

 

[isthisdesire]

Brokaw, Jennings, and Rather have been supplanted by Boortz, Hannity, and Limbaugh in the mountain-sea change of how Americans get their news...

and you still think the majority of news is from Democrats? makes no sense.

 

[Ham Murabi]

and you still think the majority of news is from Democrats? makes no sense.

Though their numbers have dropped dramatically, ABC, NBC, CBS and CNN are considered liberal. The first three are the dominant force in evening news.

 

[Ishmael]

and you still think the majority of news is from Democrats? makes no sense.

You have a point in a sense. But his point is subtle as well. Brokaw, Jennings, Rather were in the "views" business as well. All of them have been since Cronkite.

Hmmmmmmmmm, let me try this example and observation. The major networks should never send their achors to political conventions or allow them to do "investigative" reports. They get into the business of editorializing. Once that line has been crossed all distinction between 'news' and 'views' is blurred. They began to not only give us the news, but interpreted it for us as well. No one had to think anymore.

Limbaugh, Hannity, and the other commentators have never pretended to be anything other than what they are. Partison commentators/editorialists. You may not like what they say but you do know exactly where they're coming from. What they did was to take the 'news' as reported by the MSM and recast it in a different light. They could do this because the MSM was telling the public how to interpret the news. Facts don't need to be interpreted, people can think for themselves. However, now those that read the 'news' were now presented with a different way of looking at that same news. It caused people to think for themselves.

The MSM opened themselves up for this and actually "made" Limbaugh and the others the day they allowed editorials to appear in the news pages.

Ishmael

 

[Gringao]

Let's take a couple of recent incidents, for example. It was reported on a number of blogs and in one smaller NYC newspaper that Air America's previous manager had "loaned" AA several hundred thousand dollars from the coffers of a charity (publicly-funded, no less) on whose board he sat at the precise time AA was in financial straits, saving the fledgling left-wing radio lineup. The NYT didn't even mention the story for over two weeks, and then soft-peddled the most damning aspects of the story.

IOW, the NYT sanitized the story.

In other news, has any major news outlet published any of Official Victim Mom Cindy Sheehan's outrageous pronouncements, either from her digs in Crawford or, say, when she was defending convicted terrorist-enabler Lynne Stewart SFSU in April? Why no mention that she's cuddling with a terrorist bag-babe? Not fit the narrative?

And let's not forget the ideological jihad called on some poor editor because he had the temerity to suggest that Iraq coverage was not exactly balanced. The imam issuing the fatwa? Managing Editor at the Columbia Journalism Review.

 

[Wrong Element]

Though their numbers have dropped dramatically, ABC, NBC, CBS and CNN are considered liberal. The first three are the dominant force in evening news.

The only people who "consider" them liberal are those who think that the absence of an obvious conservative bias is the same as a liberal bias. It isn't, and they aren't. Where's the liberal equivalent of John Stossel on ABC or any other network?

 

[Gringao]

The only people who "consider" them liberal are those who think that the absence of an obvious conservative bias is the same as a liberal bias. It isn't, and they aren't. Where's the liberal equivalent of John Stossel on ABC or any other network?

Ever hear of Mike Wallace? Ed Bradley? 60 Minutes II and their memo debacle?

 

[Ham Murabi]

The only people who "consider" them liberal are those who think that the absence of an obvious conservative bias is the same as a liberal bias. It isn't, and they aren't. Where's the liberal equivalent of John Stossel on ABC or any other network?

You probably never read the stats where about 85 percent of the Beltway and New York journalists are registered Democrats and/or voted for Kerry.

 

[phrodeau]

89½% of Washington D.C. voted for Kerry.

So that makes the journalists comparitively less liberal.

 

[RobDownSouth]

Ever hear of Mike Wallace? Ed Bradley? 60 Minutes II and their memo debacle?

Anectdotal "evidence" sure beats posting hard facts, doesn't it, college boy?

Ever notice how the Bush regime never disavowed the CONTENT of the memo, just the FORMAT?

Of course you didn't.

 

[Cap’n AMatrixca]

Wow, Throb...

That's Dan Rather's line. You are projecting your desires.

Why not win elections?

 

[Cap’n AMatrixca]

The only people who "consider" them liberal are those who think that the absence of an obvious conservative bias is the same as a liberal bias. It isn't, and they aren't. Where's the liberal equivalent of John Stossel on ABC or any other network?

ABC admitted it had a liberal bias on it's own website. There's a thread here, check it out. Their defense was that liberal is mainstream in America and conservative is radical, or at least outside of the mainstream. We're not just pulling this stuff out of our asses.

Alan Colmes co-anchors his own show on FOX.

Is the the part where we're informed he's a liberal in name only?

 

[RobDownSouth]

Because your side owns Diebold, thats why!

Seriously, I think its funny that you moonbats cling so tenaciously to the outdated concept of a "librul press".

Hasn't been one in years.

 

[RobDownSouth]

ABC admitted it had a liberal bias on it's own website. There's a thread here, check it out. Their defense was that liberal is mainstream in America and conservative is radical, or at least outside of the mainstream. We're not just pulling this stuff out of our asses.

Alan Colmes co-anchors his own show on FOX.

Is the the part where we're informed he's a liberal in name only?

Nah, just an incredibly ineffective liberal. Hannity wipes the floor with him daily.

Now, as to your other assertation, would you please be so kind as to post a link to ABC's "admission"? Try as I might, I can't seem to locate anything of the sort there.

 

[Cap’n AMatrixca]

I am not making it up. Try searching on keys like "liberal media bias." The conservatives will remember the issue, we discussed it here, on this board, and I doubt that that admission is still on ABC's website.

Who does fit your definition of liberal?

 

[Cap’n AMatrixca]

Post Script...

I'll lay ya dollahs to EU's that Ruddy still has the 4-11 over on Newsmax. He never throws anything away...