If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CNN)   "As a conservative, I've long believed and long felt that there is inherent media bias. And I think anybody with objectivity would believe that that's the case"   (politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com) divider line 417
    More: Ironic, vice presidential candidate  
•       •       •

6791 clicks; posted to Politics » on 30 Sep 2012 at 5:51 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



417 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-09-30 07:00:19 PM

MyRandomName: FlashHarry: Study after study shows that the opposite is in fact true. But then facts have a liberal bias.

LOL, please link these plethora of studies. I would love to see your study after study showing the news is right wing.



http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/05/the-charts-that-s h ould-accompany-all-discussions-of-media-bias/257961/

Checkmate.
 
2012-09-30 07:01:02 PM

MithrandirBooga: MyRandomName: FlashHarry: Study after study shows that the opposite is in fact true. But then facts have a liberal bias.

LOL, please link these plethora of studies. I would love to see your study after study showing the news is right wing.


http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/05/the-charts-that-s h ould-accompany-all-discussions-of-media-bias/257961/

Checkmate.


Linkified

/forgot what site I was on for a second. Woops.
 
2012-09-30 07:05:21 PM

intelligent comment below: Mantour: [theredphoenix.files.wordpress.com image 650x483]


Sadly that explains it perfectly. The media is indeed biased, biased to be a corporate whore willing to do anything for ratings. They have always leaned conservative and refuse to give any positive coverage of protest movements like OWS or anti-war, only the Tea Party received such wonderful coverage from the "liberal biased" media.


And while most reporters tend to skew liberal on social issues that doesn't make the media itself liberal. Especially on economic matters. They're owned by huge conglomerates that view them solely as profit centers.


Ambivalence: An that, my friends, is an encapsulation of everything wrong wtih the republican party. They believe something to be true and seek evidence to support that believe, rather than collect evidence and THEN form a conclusion.


Motivated reasoning combined with selective exposure to friendly information sources makes that rather easy.
 
2012-09-30 07:05:28 PM
imageshack.us
 
2012-09-30 07:07:10 PM

tenpoundsofcheese: That is what makes the 2010 shellacking even more of a mandate against the failed policies of the left.


Then we can assume if the Democrats do well in 2012, it's a mandate against the failed policies of the right?
 
2012-09-30 07:07:17 PM
Romney is the result of "Crap, we're not winning, we need candidates that are MORE conservative" and the voters not buying leaving Romney the only 'desirable' option.
 
2012-09-30 07:08:26 PM

Mugato: red230: So Ryan thinks it's biased that someone leaked a video of what Romney says when he thinks that what he's about to say will stay in the room. I think that it's much more telling of who a candidate is as a person (or anyone for that matter) when you can observe how they behave when the think they are anonymous or if they believe their actions won't be made public. The fact that Ryan is crying liberal media bias when a leaked video gets aired is disgusting. It is the job of the media to shine the light.

It's not even like he was talking in front of a mirror, he was speaking to a room full of (admittedly like minded) guests.

The truly damning evidence isn't what he said but that he was so stupid as to not take into account that someone with a camera could be in there shooting. To me, having a President who has contempt for half the populace isn't as bad as a President who doesn't have the common sense to not say how he really feels when someone could be rollng.


Emphasis mine, because I think it's a great point. Honestly, I don't think Obama is some salt of the earth guy who truly cares about low income people. It wouldn't surprise me one bit if he felt exactly like Romney about the "47%". The difference between the two is that Obama isn't stupid enough to say that shiat anywhere he could be recorded. That's the guy I want in charge, the guy who doesn't make basic rookie mistakes in the political arena. Romney's got a laundry list of simple f*ck ups that add up to someone who really is out of his league. Obama's made a few gaffes for sure, but nothing remotely close to the sh*tshow of Romney/Ryan. Those noobs can't even hold Barry's jock in that department.
 
2012-09-30 07:12:07 PM
It's the oldest tactic in the world. If you can't win the game, start working the refs.

The fact that most of the electorate still doesn't see through this idiocy is a real problem.

/Much more of a real problem than windows on planes not rolling down.
 
2012-09-30 07:13:14 PM

joonyer:
Emphasis mine, because I think it's a great point. Honestly, I don't think Obama is some salt of the earth guy who truly cares about low income people. It wouldn't surprise me one bit if he felt exactly like Romney about the "47%". The difference between the two is that Obama isn't stupid enough to say that shiat anywhere he could be recorded. That's the guy I want in charge, the guy who doesn't make basic rookie mistakes in the political arena. Romney's got a laundry list of simple f*ck ups that add up to someone who really is out of his league. Obama's made a few gaffes for sure, but nothing remotely close to the sh*tshow of Romney/Ryan. Those noobs can't even hold Barry's jock in that department..


WTF? Really? This is the guy who was the first black president of the Harvard Law Review, literally one of the top up-and-coming lawyers in the country. Upon graduation, he could have gone to any firm of his choice (and making 6 figure salary) with a path to Supreme Court justice, but instead he chose to work in the inner city as a community organizer.
 
NFA [TotalFark]
2012-09-30 07:14:02 PM
"As a conservative, I've long believed and long felt that there is inherent media bias. And I think anybody with objectivity would believe that that's the case"

Sorry Mr. Conservative but you need to understand that the media isn't biased against you or your political parties, they're biased against your failed policies and destructive ideas.
 
2012-09-30 07:17:13 PM
GranoblasticMan: Then we can assume if the Democrats do well in 2012, it's a mandate against the failed policies of the right?

No, that will be a sign that the American people have been duped by the leftist media and that it's now apparent that those Second-Amendment-solutions should be implemented.
 
2012-09-30 07:19:13 PM
NFA: they're biased against your failed policies and destructive ideas

not even; if they were we'd expect to see all the major media players utterly destroying their arguments and ideas, and instead they mostly provide a soapbox and an open ear.
 
2012-09-30 07:20:23 PM

moralpanic: joonyer:
Emphasis mine, because I think it's a great point. Honestly, I don't think Obama is some salt of the earth guy who truly cares about low income people. It wouldn't surprise me one bit if he felt exactly like Romney about the "47%". The difference between the two is that Obama isn't stupid enough to say that shiat anywhere he could be recorded. That's the guy I want in charge, the guy who doesn't make basic rookie mistakes in the political arena. Romney's got a laundry list of simple f*ck ups that add up to someone who really is out of his league. Obama's made a few gaffes for sure, but nothing remotely close to the sh*tshow of Romney/Ryan. Those noobs can't even hold Barry's jock in that department..

WTF? Really? This is the guy who was the first black president of the Harvard Law Review, literally one of the top up-and-coming lawyers in the country. Upon graduation, he could have gone to any firm of his choice (and making 6 figure salary) with a path to Supreme Court justice, but instead he chose to work in the inner city as a community organizer.


OK OK, that was a bit of hyperbole on my part. I was just trying to say that I'm not someone who thinks that Romney kicks puppies and Obama nurses them back to health. They're both rich, elite guys who run in rich, elite circles. They wouldn't be there if they didn't. However, I do think he cares for the common man more than Romney of course, but I think it's naive to think that any political candidate is as pure of heart and soul as their media image makes them out to be. I admit Obama's my all time favorite politician(I'm 39), but that doesn't make politics any less of a deceitful game. I'm glad you called me out on that though, I felt a bit dirty saying that LOL.
 
2012-09-30 07:21:13 PM
I wish I could just sleep until Nov 7th and President Obama just gets to work
 
2012-09-30 07:21:31 PM
At some point, folks are going to have to take a long, hard look at themselves and the party.

I was hoping that the party would look at McCain's run, and possibly realize that aligning themselves with the Idiot Brigade and the Palin nonsense, might jostle folks awake. I was wrong. The ties to money and the Religious Right still remained strong enough, and the hordes of folks who might have questioned exactly what had been done in their name during the Bush years; and the damage it had done to the economy and our infrastructure and job security, as well as trade; they became enthralled with a MOAR reactionary position, and instead wound up questioning the legitimacy of the President, and grasping further at straws, and shoving more cash at the very folks whose actions quite nearly broke our markets. Faced with not just a defeat, they instead rallied to even more reactionary, partisan voices, as opposed to looking at exactly what had been done. What had actually occurred, and rather than admit that they had not just been mistaken, doubled down on the very things, and with the very people who merrily sold them down river, and then wailed at the cost.

The GOP is going to have to face the reality, that their policies are not working. Not for the majority of Americans, only within strict confines, so long as most folks don't share in the riches, and that the only folks who profit from the continual war parades are those who sell things to the military, and those who film them doing so. The rest of the nation cannot afford this. Not any longer. And complaining that economics, mathematics, and the media are inherently "liberal" when they are simply reporting what is, shows the inherent weakness of basing EVERYTHING on a structure of subjective reality.

Subjective reality, as a concept, is useful. In understanding how people react, how people function, it is an important concept. Whether or not you intend affront to someone, if they perceive your comment or actions as being insulting, it IS insulting to them. Understanding how they could arrive at such a frame of mind IS an important concept. It is useful to understand the concept, to understand human interactions, and how to craft better delivery of information, and understand how folks will react.

Subjective reality doesn't change the acceleration of gravity though. It won't change the course of a hurricane. It won't stop a bullet. It can be used to help stave off economic collapse in helping to manipulate folks into continued confidence, but only for a short period of time, before cruel numbers continue to add up. And that is the problem within the GOP right now. A lot of folks have taken the concept of subjective reality to mean that YOU change the world by strict belief, as opposed to understanding that perception of reality can differ from person to person. GW was one of those. His circle understood the concept, but figured that they could keep the rubes on board for a while longer by selling a LOT of snake oil, and leaving someone else to pick up the tab.

I don't blame folks for being angry. They have a right to be angry. The problem is, they are allowing those who engineered the very conditions that sparked their anger to keep them pointed far and away from themselves, and are asking them for MOAR facts to back them up, and it's getting to be rarefied air at this point. To the point of near vacuum. At some point, the implosion will hit, and when it does, it's going to be very, very, very ugly.

I'm not alone in abandoning the party. I still consider myself fairly Conservative, but the GOP is no longer a Conservative party. It is infested with radicals and idiots, and steering a crew of half wits and criminally incompetents and just plain thieves and reactionaries, and they can call it "Conservative" all they want, but that doesn't make them such. Backing radical positions, and advancing even more radical positions, and branding it Conservative, they might pull off, but it's a losing game at this point. The numbers simply don't work. When Republicans, the party by, of and for the support of the Republic, are calling for an end to the Constitution and its protections, then you have a severe disconnect with reality. Climate change, the President's birth certificate, and the rest? Those are symptoms of a deeper problem, and it comes down to the "Conservative" party backing patently radical positions, and hoping that folks won't notice, and that simply isn't going to work for much longer...
 
2012-09-30 07:21:54 PM

ultraholland: GranoblasticMan: Then we can assume if the Democrats do well in 2012, it's a mandate against the failed policies of the right?

No, that will be a sign that the American people have been duped by the leftist media and that it's now apparent that those Second-Amendment-solutions should be implemented.


Seeing as how this is a possible course of action that many of the more fringe sects will consider, I already ordered enough non-microwaveable (incase the grid gets shutdown) popcorn to last until the next election/end of martial law!
 
2012-09-30 07:23:18 PM

fusillade762: And while most reporters tend to skew liberal on social issues that doesn't make the media itself liberal. Especially on economic matters. They're owned by huge conglomerates that view them solely as profit centers.



And that's the problem. Conservatives mistake having knowledge on a subject for being liberal. That's why they always insult college professors, who are at a professional in their knowledge of a subject. But apparently these professors don't know what conservatives know, and therefore any of their views are just liberal and wrong. By labeling the smartest person in the room, a conservative can throw out all their views and feel comfortable believing they indeed know the truth.
 
2012-09-30 07:24:28 PM

MyRandomName: Ambivalence: An that, my friends, is an encapsulation of everything wrong wtih the republican party. They believe something to be true and seek evidence to support that believe, rather than collect evidence and THEN form a conclusion.

DERRRRPPPP.

Even liberals pollsters are taking notice of the Media "corruption" in this race.

Here, a liberal pollster from the Carter/Biden campaigns. He destroys your bullshiat view that the Media isn't in the bag for Obama. He includes a plethora of examples for you to read. But knowing the fark left, since it's fox news they'll dismiss it. Then I'll laugh my ass off when I point out this is merely the transcript of his speech. Even with me pointing this last part out, I bet I get at least one Faux News DERRRP reply.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/09/29/mainstream-media-threatenin g -our-country-future/


Are you actually interested in debating the link or just wishing to troll?

I believe your position to be tenuous
 
2012-09-30 07:24:55 PM
www.usrecallnews.com

Emphasis on the quote. Replace OxyContin with delusional denial.
 
2012-09-30 07:27:06 PM

pdkl95: "We've had some missteps," said Ryan, also noting many conservatives' concerns that the campaign is failing to project a clear message to voters. "But at the end of the day, the choice is really clear, and we're giving people a very clear choice."

Ok, THAT I can agree with.

Their message to the voters has been received VERY clearly, and it's obvious that, once heard, people also quite clearly understand the choice before them.

It might not be the "choice" that Ryan is thinking about, though: 98%-vs-2% in the "now-cast" is a pretty strong indication of just how clearly that message has been heard


Romney's actually lower than that, but 2% is Silver's margin of error.
 
2012-09-30 07:27:52 PM
As a conservative, you probably didn't notice that in addition to your various subject-verb agreement errors, the word media is a plural form of the word medium. You can use the collective noun form if you wish, but you need to single out the various media outlets for their particular biases and failings. If you're honest, you'll track the ideological creep of the various media outlets across time up to present, just so you understand the continuum of the national march toward fascism.

/Former member of the oh-so-biased "media" so I'm getting a kick, etc.
 
2012-09-30 07:28:14 PM
I bet UFOlogists say the same thing.
 
2012-09-30 07:30:05 PM

hubiestubert: At some point, folks are going to have to take a long, hard look at themselves and the party.

I was hoping that the party would look at McCain's run, and possibly realize that aligning themselves with the Idiot Brigade and the Palin nonsense, might jostle folks awake. I was wrong. The ties to money and the Religious Right still remained strong enough, and the hordes of folks who might have questioned exactly what had been done in their name during the Bush years; and the damage it had done to the economy and our infrastructure and job security, as well as trade; they became enthralled with a MOAR reactionary position, and instead wound up questioning the legitimacy of the President, and grasping further at straws, and shoving more cash at the very folks whose actions quite nearly broke our markets. Faced with not just a defeat, they instead rallied to even more reactionary, partisan voices, as opposed to looking at exactly what had been done. What had actually occurred, and rather than admit that they had not just been mistaken, doubled down on the very things, and with the very people who merrily sold them down river, and then wailed at the cost.

The GOP is going to have to face the reality, that their policies are not working. Not for the majority of Americans, only within strict confines, so long as most folks don't share in the riches, and that the only folks who profit from the continual war parades are those who sell things to the military, and those who film them doing so. The rest of the nation cannot afford this. Not any longer. And complaining that economics, mathematics, and the media are inherently "liberal" when they are simply reporting what is, shows the inherent weakness of basing EVERYTHING on a structure of subjective reality.

Subjective reality, as a concept, is useful. In understanding how people react, how people function, it is an important concept. Whether or not you intend affront to someone, if they perceive your comment or actions as bei ...


Damn, that was beautiful. Seriously, Hubie, that's about as succint of a summary of the last decade of the GOP as I've ever seen. Well done, sir! Plus you like Firefly. Damnit, if only you had boobs.
 
2012-09-30 07:30:07 PM

joonyer: , but I think it's naive to think that any political candidate is as pure of heart and soul as their media image makes them out to be. I admit Obama's my all time favorite politician(I'm 39), but that doesn't make politics any less of a deceitful game. I'm glad you called me out on that though, I felt a bit dirty saying that LOL.


Yeah but I for one know what you're saying though. It's one thing that a politician doesn't give a shiat about anyone who isn't like him and his people but being stupid enough to be recorded actually saying so is not someone I want to have the launch codes.
 
2012-09-30 07:30:11 PM
Back in 1989 when people were still idealistic about politics, Omni magazine printed a Pat Cadigan SS envisaging media being not only unbiased but intervening to control warmongering govts

Link
 
2012-09-30 07:31:38 PM
"I'm not going to go into a tit-for-tat or litigate this thing," said Ryan. "But as a conservative, I've long believed and long felt that there is inherent media bias. And I think anybody with objectivity would believe that that's the case."

I question his objectivity, having watched and listened to him lie his ass off to the American public for months.
 
2012-09-30 07:31:54 PM
Obama, Democrats got 88 percent of 2008 contributions by TV network execs, writers, reporters

Senior executives, on-air personalities, producers, reporters, editors, writers and other self-identifying employees of ABC, CBS and NBC contributed more than $1 million to Democratic candidates and campaign committees in 2008, according to an analysis by The Examiner of data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics.

The Democratic total of $1,020,816 was given by 1,160 employees of the three major broadcast television networks, with an average contribution of $880.

By contrast, only 193 of the employees contributed to Republican candidates and campaign committees, for a total of $142,863. The average Republican contribution was $744.

Link 

Even those employed by News Corp., home of Fox News Channel and controlled by the conservative-leaning Rupert Murdoch, gave the vast majority of their political dollars to Democrats, to the tune of $488,000 compared with $165,000.

Link
 
2012-09-30 07:32:40 PM
intelligent comment below:

Finally (and cumulatively) favorited, as "truth in advertising."
 
2012-09-30 07:33:48 PM
I agree. The media has a major conservative bias.
 
2012-09-30 07:34:06 PM

St Andrew: Obama, Democrats got 88 percent of 2008 contributions by TV network execs, writers, reporters

Senior executives, on-air personalities, producers, reporters, editors, writers and other self-identifying employees of ABC, CBS and NBC contributed more than $1 million to Democratic candidates and campaign committees in 2008, according to an analysis by The Examiner of data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics.

The Democratic total of $1,020,816 was given by 1,160 employees of the three major broadcast television networks, with an average contribution of $880.

By contrast, only 193 of the employees contributed to Republican candidates and campaign committees, for a total of $142,863. The average Republican contribution was $744.

Link 

Even those employed by News Corp., home of Fox News Channel and controlled by the conservative-leaning Rupert Murdoch, gave the vast majority of their political dollars to Democrats, to the tune of $488,000 compared with $165,000.

Link



And that obviously didn't affect the content of their reporting.
 
2012-09-30 07:36:22 PM
I see they've decided who to blame already.
 
2012-09-30 07:37:54 PM

St Andrew: Obama, Democrats got 88 percent of 2008 contributions by TV network execs, writers, reporters

Senior executives, on-air personalities, producers, reporters, editors, writers and other self-identifying employees of ABC, CBS and NBC contributed more than $1 million to Democratic candidates and campaign committees in 2008, according to an analysis by The Examiner of data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics.

The Democratic total of $1,020,816 was given by 1,160 employees of the three major broadcast television networks, with an average contribution of $880.

By contrast, only 193 of the employees contributed to Republican candidates and campaign committees, for a total of $142,863. The average Republican contribution was $744.

Link 

Even those employed by News Corp., home of Fox News Channel and controlled by the conservative-leaning Rupert Murdoch, gave the vast majority of their political dollars to Democrats, to the tune of $488,000 compared with $165,000.

Link


So a bunch of white collar, well-educated, wealthy people are skewed towards Obama? Astonishing
 
2012-09-30 07:39:49 PM
i1162.photobucket.com
 
2012-09-30 07:40:48 PM

St Andrew: Obama, Democrats got 88 percent of 2008 contributions by TV network execs, writers, reporters

Senior executives, on-air personalities, producers, reporters, editors, writers and other self-identifying employees of ABC, CBS and NBC contributed more than $1 million to Democratic candidates and campaign committees in 2008, according to an analysis by The Examiner of data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics.

The Democratic total of $1,020,816 was given by 1,160 employees of the three major broadcast television networks, with an average contribution of $880.

By contrast, only 193 of the employees contributed to Republican candidates and campaign committees, for a total of $142,863. The average Republican contribution was $744.

Link 

Even those employed by News Corp., home of Fox News Channel and controlled by the conservative-leaning Rupert Murdoch, gave the vast majority of their political dollars to Democrats, to the tune of $488,000 compared with $165,000.

Link


I'm sure you thought your post was self explanatory. It's not.

Why would you donate to a political party that continually sh*ts on you, your integrity and your entire industry?

Also, and most importantly: what is your solution to this? If this is as bad of a problem as conservatives say it is, why is there no proposed solution for it?Seriously, do you want to go down that road? Do I have to Godwin this f*cking thread to explain this?
 
2012-09-30 07:46:03 PM

joonyer: Seriously, do you want to go down that road? Do I have to Godwin this f*cking thread to explain this?


Looks like you were beaten by 59 seconds on that one.
 
2012-09-30 07:47:53 PM

St Andrew: Even those employed by News Corp., home of Fox News Channel and controlled by the conservative-leaning Rupert Murdoch, gave the vast majority of their political dollars to Democrats, to the tune of $488,000 compared with $165,000.


Does that prove Fox reporting has a liberal bias? If not, what does that prove of other media outlets?
 
2012-09-30 07:50:03 PM
Ryan is right.

"I employ like 1 conservative and 24 liberals." -Fox News Prez Roger Ailes
 
2012-09-30 07:52:12 PM
These grades aren't my fault, Mom! Teacher hates me!
 
2012-09-30 07:52:47 PM

GranoblasticMan: joonyer: Seriously, do you want to go down that road? Do I have to Godwin this f*cking thread to explain this?

Looks like you were beaten by 59 seconds on that one.


Holy sh*t. Whiskey Pete get out of my head! ;)
 
2012-09-30 07:53:56 PM

joonyer: GranoblasticMan: joonyer: Seriously, do you want to go down that road? Do I have to Godwin this f*cking thread to explain this?

Looks like you were beaten by 59 seconds on that one.

Holy sh*t. Whiskey Pete get out of my head! ;)


:D
 
2012-09-30 07:55:26 PM
MSNBC doesn't have a liberal bias?

You libs really are delusional.
 
2012-09-30 07:56:02 PM

Emracool the Aeons Hip: So a bunch of white collar, well-educated, wealthy people are skewed towards Obama? Astonishing


Exactly. The fact that a news corporation scrupulously reports the news without regard to the political opinons of its employees is what matters. Indeed, serious news organizations have a responsibility to ensure that their reporters' opinions do not color their reporting. I believe that news organizations with a centrist or liberal editorial stance are far more likely to do this than those with a conservative stance, mainly because the conservative stance news organizations include Fox News.

Look, every president of the United States has been a man. You can claim this reflects a patriarchal attitude and you can even complain that such an attitude is bad. What you cannot claim is that the preponderance of male presidents reflects a deliberate policy of denying women the presidency. It simply doesn't follow. The majority of newspeople may be liberals, but if they're doing their jobs right, and outside the Fox News orbit I'd generally say thyey are, it doesn't matter because part of their job is dispassionately reporting the news.
 
2012-09-30 07:57:09 PM
Positive or negative press??

waynedemocrats.org 

To say the Liberals get more media coverage OK. Now to say it is positive not so much.

"Our data does not support the thesis of a liberal media bias as it relates to Election 2012 coverage. If anything, our analysis suggests a media bias towards both Mitt Romney and Republicans. There are multiple data points included in our analysis. In news stories and broadcast transcripts that we analyzed over the last 3 months, newsmakers appearing in the media as partisan Republicans are quoted at a 44% higher rate than partisan Democrats. Additionally, the ratio of positive to negative coverage was 17.1% more critical of Obama than Romney. We processed 717 articles and 15,357 quotes collected between May 1 and July 15, 2012."

The citation you were look for

Specifically towards the Pres. Campaign.

www.4thestate.net

Then again "We're not going to let our campaign be dictated by fact-checkers." - Neil Newhouse
 
2012-09-30 07:58:14 PM

evoke: MSNBC doesn't have a liberal bias?

You libs really are delusional.


MSNBC has a liberal bias from about 5 pm to 2 am. That's not even half the day. And Scarborough poops on Obama and gets housewives to strongly assert their defecation skills on him, too.

//of course MSNBC has a liberal bias
//MSNBC != all media
//MSNBC doesn't claim to be fair and balanced
///how many more ways do you want your argument raped legitimately?
 
2012-09-30 07:59:11 PM

joonyer: Why would you donate to a political party that continually sh*ts on you, your integrity and your entire industry?


Why would anyone donate to a political party that continually and conspicuously sh*ts on things such as rationality and facts, while being backed up by a huge array of Conservative noisemakers to provide validation in the public forum (Talk Radio, Opinion Shows, RW Blogs)? Being employed under the auspice of journalism, its no surprise that the industry employees leans Democratic. In fact, most college-educated people lean Democrat, probably because their better ability to critically analyze events going on around them drives them in droves from the lunacy of the Right.

The Conservatives in all honesty are now simply the party of the very greedy and the very gullible, this is a party where most of their policy makers will refuse an even 1-10 ratio of tax increases/spending cuts and say so to the entire country with a straight face. The programs (healthcare, pell grants, NPR, planned parenthood, etc) that they want to cut at a ratio of 10-1 didn't cause the economic troubles, lack of regulation and oversight on Wall Street did, but that's the plan they are seriously espousing to fix the economy.

Oh, and don't dare cut the Military! In an Ideal Conservative America, we spend many times more than the rest of the industrial world on our guns, yet won't care for the poorest and most infirm among us EVEN AS relatively poor countries can do and do well. This is the America conservatives want, the "utopian" vision has also been realized in Somalia, where I hope many of them decide to travel after this election, as we are much less socialist than literally any other 1st world nation and that would be the only place they can "escape the socialism" to without looking like a complete farking hypocrite.
 
2012-09-30 08:01:20 PM

evoke: MSNBC doesn't have a liberal bias?

You libs really are delusional.


While covering Romney's "47%" remark, three MSNBC hosts on three separate morning programs brought up Obama's "clinging to guns and religion" comments from the '08 primary, despite the point of each remark being completely different and Obama's remark not significantly hurting him, despite constant media coverage of it at the time, as well as constant coverage of Rev. Wright, as well as frequent discussions of Birthers.

Also there's this, and a dozen other studies of positive/negative media coverage.

The bias in media isn't toward the left or right, it's toward sensationalism and ratings.
 
2012-09-30 08:05:50 PM
coeyagi: ///how many more ways do you want your argument raped legitimately?

you could have pointed out that almost nobody around here seriously says what he claimed, and in fact do note MSNBC's left-leaning viewpoint. Seriously, nobody here, save the trolls and right-wing idjits, claims that MSNBC is not biased in any way.
 
2012-09-30 08:07:00 PM
The funny thing is that people think that there is anything resembling a large-scale "liberal" news agency or channel in the US. You want "liberal"? Find a podcast of Democracy Now. At the absolute outside, MSNBC leans center-left. ABC/NBC/CBS are corporate center. Fox is the broadcast wing of the GOP.
 
2012-09-30 08:07:32 PM

coeyagi: Ryan is right.

"I employ like 1 conservative and 24 liberals." -Fox News Prez Roger Ailes


Ailes is being perfectly truthful. However, the scripts have all the liberals playing Conservatives on TV
 
2012-09-30 08:08:07 PM
"Asked to cite a specific example of media bias, Ryan demurred, instead asserting that most people who work in the media have liberal political affiliations and, therefore, would want a president who is a Democrat to win."
Cocksucking, motherf**king, lying piece of shiat.
 
Displayed 50 of 417 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report