Gore boo-hoos

[Penn]

No Liberal Bias?

Originally posted by demsformd
There is not a liberal media bias. Have you ever watched the O'Reily Factor and its "conservative spin-zone"? Or maybe Hannity and Colmes in which the conservative Hannity receives much more speaking time than his liberal counterpart. On the radio we have Limbaugh and Liddy and no prominent liberal talk show hosts on radio. The only liberal TV host is Phil Donahue if you ask me but well he's a dumbass. Conservatism and its hatred inciting qulaity is what sells so the media pushes forward. So, tell me how is the media liberally biased? You know, Bush received more endorsements from publications than Gore last election.

When was the last time you tuned in to NPR?

penncam

 

[Heretic]

The first time I saw Fox news I said to myself "Wow an unbaised news channel" I thought this because they had a democrat and republican on both stating their views.

I never saw O'Reiley as a conservative show, he bashes people for not using common sense. Ever see the episode where William Baldwin come on the show because his brother Alec wouldnt come on? O'Reiley was quite impressed by Williams guts for coming on the show while all Alec could do was bash O'Reiley behind his back.

About the liberal bias in higher education go to engineering and medical schools and tell me what the bias there is. Most of these people are rather conservative.

I found some of academia so far out of touch with the real world that it is obscene. In my freshman year of college I had a Sociology professor that was basically a communist he came flat out and said no matter what someone does everyone should get paid the same amount. A couple years later he checked himeself into the funny farm lol.

 

[Bruzilla]

I agree with Vrai... more people should read "Bias."

One point that Goldberg makes is that FNC "appears" to be Conservative because they are ballanced. They have 13 Conservative personalities and 13 Liberals. People are so used to seeing an abundance of Liberals that when they see equality they see it as being too Conservative.

The Libs prefer to wag fingers at O'Reilly and Hannity... as if the rest of the network didn't exist.

 

[Kyle]

Originally posted by Bruzilla
... The Libs prefer to wag fingers at O'Reilly and Hannity... as if the rest of the network didn't exist.

You'd be hard pressed to convince me O'Reilly is "conservative"

 

[MGKrebs]

So here's the original post for this thread

Originally posted by vraiblonde
Here's the headline on Drudge right now:

"Al Gore attacks FOX NEWS, Rush Limbaugh and the WASHINGTON TIMES... MORE... He calls them a 'fifth column' in the ranks of the media, and says that the RNC uses them to inject 'daily Republican talking points' into mainstream media coverage as a whole... "

You can dance around it all you want, but you can't deny that his statement is true.

Regardless of any bias, or Fox's overall balance, I think the statement is true on it's face. I doubt if limbaugh would deny it.

Not that I care. The machine has been set into motion, and we will find out soon enough whether we like it or not, no matter what anybody in the media says.

 

[Bruzilla]

I think that one point that is overlooked is why there is so little Liberal representation in the Talk Radio market. There are plenty of opportunities for Liberal commentators to get out on the airwaves, so why aren't they out there duking it out with Limbaugh? If there are so many people who disagree, hate, despise, etc., Limbaugh, O'Reilly, Liddy, etc., the airwaves sgould be over-run with Liberal commentators, but they aren't. Could it because there aren't a lot of people who disagree with these guys, and there aren't enough listeners who want to hear what Liberals have to say to keep a show profitable?

 

[SmallTown]

Originally posted by Bruzilla
Could it because there aren't a lot of people who disagree with these guys, and there aren't enough listeners who want to hear what Liberals have to say to keep a show profitable?

One thing is republicans always like to say things to get pats on the back.. This is a real "feel-good" feeling for listeners so they tune in.. But then you have to wonder about these people who do listen to people like Rush.. I remember years ago when Rush would air his show on TV (does he still do that??).. Being young and having ideas that are pretty close to the republican side, I thought he would be fun to watch.. He just rubbed me the wrong way.. Then they would pan the camera out to the crowd when he would say something he thought was funny.. Looked like the short bus took a wrong turn and ended up on the set.. That is when I first began to distance my self from being called a "republican".. If he was their spokesman, and these people were the typical followers, I KNEW I had to find another avenue..
And even to this day, though many of my views still fall on the left, I couldn't imagine calling myself a republican.. To circle the wagons here and tie this into the subject at hand, I think the democrats are benefited by not having many talk shows on the air since these people normally lean towards the extreme side which would scare away many moderates, much like I was led away from the republican side by Rush.

 

[Bruzilla]

Smalltown, you bring up some good points, but you miss a major point. We live in a Capitalistic society, and guys like Rush, O'Reilly, Liddy, North, etc., are really on the air for one reason... they bring in dollars to the stations that carry them. Radio stations have been the poor cousins to the media market ever since TV came along, so they have to do everything they can to gain listeners... which explains shock jocks, tuesday twofers, and the other gimmicks. If radio stations could make a dollar on Liberal commentators, they would be. There is no shortage of Libs who want their face on TV, but so far only Sam Donaldson has tried to make it on the radio, and I think his show has already been cancelled. Meanwhile, Conservatives are lining up at the door to get their shows. Why is this? It has to be because their are more people who want to hear the Conservative point of view than the Liberal.

TV stations have entertainment operations that can counter the losses incurred by news/talk operations, so Liberals can get away with a lot more on TV. Talk radio does not usually have any entertainment sustainment. They have to get by on their product alone, and I don't think Liberals on the radio are capable of staying afloat outside of places like San Francisco and NYC.

 

[Kyle]

Following all the flack Bore and Dashole brought up I started tuning in to a Rush station when possible. I'd heard him years ago but didn't enjoy the format.

The show hasn't changed much that I can tell, he still lectures on many of the same points... And he's right about them.

JMHO, but I think that's what gets under their skin so much. Not that his rhetoric is hateful, divisive or inciting violence, but that he's delivering a reasonable position to a particular subject they would rather obfuscate with

He's still just as hard to listen to for extended periods. (I had to change stations in 20)

But since he really pisses them off so badly... Rush!

I'll go back to Hannity, Liddy, WMAL and Fox. Hmmm I think Ann Coulter needs a show too. She might drive the Lefties to suicide!

 

[Tonio]

Originally posted by Bruzilla
I think that one point that is overlooked is why there is so little Liberal representation in the Talk Radio market. There are plenty of opportunities for Liberal commentators to get out on the airwaves, so why aren't they out there duking it out with Limbaugh? If there are so many people who disagree, hate, despise, etc., Limbaugh, O'Reilly, Liddy, etc., the airwaves sgould be over-run with Liberal commentators, but they aren't. Could it because there aren't a lot of people who disagree with these guys, and there aren't enough listeners who want to hear what Liberals have to say to keep a show profitable?

My suggestion is that liberal movements doesn't seem to be as personality-driven as conservative movements. I think that comes from the attitude among old-time liberals that personality politics is against the whole spirit of democracy. Read Sinclair Lewis' novel Elmer Gantry, or any number of a books on Huey Long. Historians used to suggest that Long had the makings of a dictator.

Also, Limbaugh and Hannity don't see themselves as competing with the likes of James Carville. They see themselves as noble warriors fighting the great gray mass known as the "liberal media." I think that's funny, because that's the same victim mentality that they criticize in liberals.

I think the media wants to side with the little guy against an uncaring conglomerate or against an uncaring bureaucracy. It's the "comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable" credo. There's definitely a desire to see government take action to attempt to solve problems. That looks like liberal bias to those consevatives who believe in limiting government power.

 

[Frank]

Re: I don't deny a liberal media bias.

Originally posted by MGKrebs
if the most informed and the most educated segments of our society are liberal, i would count that as a reason to take liberalism seriously.

Oh brother, not this again. Ya ever notice how many of them are also Marxist, Communist and espouse a lot of other discredited social ideas? (And by the way - this rule of most educated doesn't seem to apply to other segments - say for example, in the more technical sciences). I could just as well state that since the LOWEST educated segments of society tend to be liberal also, that that would tend to *discredit* them. Let's not drag this one up again - it is NOT a logical argument.

 

[SmallTown]

Originally posted by Kyle

JMHO, but I think that's what gets under their skin so much. Not that his rhetoric is hateful, divisive or inciting violence, but that he's delivering a reasonable position to a particular subject they would rather obfuscate with

I wouldn't go as far as to say he has a reasonable position on things.. He says things people want to hear.. People like Rush really talk up the good things the right side does, and really comes down hard on the left when they do something wrong, which is exactly what right wingers want to hear.. The problem the dems have is they focus solely on the bad parts of the republicans, and don't focus enough on what they have done.. Although one of the things I hate about the right is they gloat way too much, the left doesn't do it enough. Replublicans are much better "politicians" (Working the voters and the media with their talk and speeches. EVERYTHING they do they want to make sure the voters know about it, where as dems try to keep a low profile until election time then it is too late)

A good example of the republicans wanting to talk about themselves a bit too much was the episode I saw of Rush's show where he answered the question of how he lost so much weight. It was so funny to watch, because he took extra time to try and show it REALLY pained him to discuss it.. He was like " Well.. I don't want to sound like I'm above the common man.. But.. Well. Uhm.. Well, Ok, I have a personal chef and he fixes good food that has allowed me to lose this weight.. Didn't do any excercise to get this way, just ate the healthy food my chef made"

He could have just said "I changed my diet, and I love the way I look and feel".. But no.. He had to make it into some elaborate speech, and then act as if he felt sooooo guily he had a personal chef.. I actually think that was the last show I watched, and haven't turned him on the radio since then either.

Has Rush ever been a politician himself?? Seems like the one person that has all the answers would make a good leader. Pay isn't as good, but he says money isn't that important to him.

 

[Frank]

Originally posted by Tonio

There's definitely a desire to see government take action to attempt to solve problems.

I can never quite wrap my mind around this idea, though - I've heard from others, and seen with my own eyes the unending parade of governmental stupidity and ineptitude when it comes to rectifying problems of all kinds, ranging from the MVA to the police to the court system to the IRS to just about anything I can think of. More often than not it seems the best way to solve problems is for the government to get out of people's way, or minimally to assist them in solving their own problems.

I saw something on the news the other day where a remark was made that ever since the 'war on poverty' began, no significant statistical dent has been made over the long term. Government should assist people, but it can't be relied upon to solve social problems for us.

 

[Kyle]

Originally posted by SmallTown
... The problem the dems have is they focus solely on the bad parts of the republicans, and don't focus enough on what they have done.. Although one of the things I hate about the right is they gloat way too much, the left doesn't do it enough. Replublicans are much better "politicians" (Working the voters and the media with their talk and speeches. EVERYTHING they do they want to make sure the voters know about it, where as dems try to keep a low profile until election time then it is too late)
.

That's hysterical!!! That's the opposite of what's been demonstrated time and again.

BUBBA, Dashole, Shrillery, Ge-b-hart, Bagdad Bonior and the list goes on... "Kept a low profile" and failed to claim appropriate credit? Bubba took credit for so many things he had nothing to do with it isn't possible to enumerate them without causing myself Carpel-Tunnel... And the rest are far worse.

Republicans have been beat up by the left over thousands of things they never did. i.e. My personal favorite...

Bubba Veto's the funding bill for several federal agencies and the GOP gets blamed for shutting down the government.

Thanks for the laugh, ST.

BTW... This election cycle was the first time I remember when Republicans were gloating. Even Lott and Hastert were decent and resigned when talking about he post election result. They should have gloated though... It felt so good for a change.

 

[Kyle]

Originally posted by SmallTown
... He could have just said "I changed my diet, and I love the way I look and feel".. But no.. He had to make it into some elaborate speech, and then act as if he felt sooooo guily he had a personal chef.. I actually think that was the last show I watched, and haven't turned him on the radio since then either...

And if he'd done that some Left-wing loonie would be screaming he was hiding the fact he has a personal cook for criss-sake.

... Has Rush ever been a politician himself?? Seems like the one person that has all the answers would make a good leader. Pay isn't as good, but he says money isn't that important to him.

He may not want to be in politics. I, you and others talk about what should be done all the time. Does that mean you have to run or shut-up?

And he's giving out all that free advise for both sides to take advantage of... Too bad it conflicts with their campaign contributers donations.

 

[SmallTown]

Originally posted by Kyle
He may not want to be in politics. I, you and others talk about what should be done all the time. Does that mean you have to run or shut-up?

His entire life and well-being is because of politics, and you say maybe he doesn't want to be in politics??? We may talk about what is right or wrong, but our whole life doesn't revolve around it like his...

 

[SmallTown]

Originally posted by Kyle
And if he'd done that some Left-wing loonie would be screaming he was hiding the fact he has a personal cook for criss-sake.

Republicans assume way to much...

 

[vraiblonde]

Merciful heavens! SmallTown, there are so many inaccuracies and blatant partisanship in your arguments that I don't know where to begin. You too, Tonio, although it pains me to point this out.

One thing is republicans always like to say things to get pats on the back.. And the Democrats don't? What about all the feel-good legislature they favor that doesn't really solve a problem? Gun bans, Patient's Bill of Rights, environmental wackery, affirmative action, Hate Crimes legislation, etc, etc, etc?

these people normally lean towards the extreme side I don't find Rush Limbaugh extreme at all. Not nearly in the same league as, say, PETA, NOW, NAACP, GLAD, Rainbow/PUSH, etc, etc, etc. Explain to me what is so extreme about Limbaugh - just give me one or two examples. Real ones, please, not fake crap that you heard some lefty say or read somewhere.

My suggestion is that liberal movements doesn't seem to be as personality-driven as conservative movements. Did you forget about Bill Clinton, James Carville, Alan Dershowitz, Jesse Jackson, etc, etc, etc? Hell, Bill Clinton was ELECTED on his personality! It sure wasn't based on his experience or his dismal record as Governor of Arkansas!

I think the media wants to side with the little guy against an uncaring conglomerate or against an uncaring bureaucracy. Hello? They ARE the uncaring conglomerate! Do you honestly think they care about anything other than viewership and advertising dollars?

The problem the dems have is they focus solely on the bad parts of the republicans, and don't focus enough on what they have done Guess why? Because they haven't DONE anything!

EVERYTHING they do they want to make sure the voters know about it, Imagine that - wanting the voters to know what you've accomplished as an elected representative.

This stuff boggles my mind - I find it hard to believe that you all are either so blind or so brainwashed that you buy into this crap.

 

[SmallTown]

Originally posted by vraiblonde

EVERYTHING they do they want to make sure the voters know about it, Imagine that - wanting the voters to know what you've accomplished as an elected representative.

This stuff boggles my mind - I find it hard to believe that you all are either so blind or so brainwashed that you buy into this crap.

Actions are louder than words.. Goes back the old saying like "Act like you have been there before" and "Don't take extra credit for things you are SUPPOSED to do in the first place"

Kinda like when you hear these fathers bragging about how they pay child support to help their kids.. That is what you are SUPPOSED to do! Why are you bragging about it??? Do something we aren't expecting you to do, then we'll give you credit.

 

[vraiblonde]

Small, you can't possibly be serious. So now you're complaining that the Republicans like to remind their constituents of what they've done in office?

Do you also feel the same way when Democrats brag and try to take credit for things they had nothing to do with? Did you not vote for Gore because he "bragged" too much about the economy, his invention of the Internet, his discovery of Love Canal, etc?

Pettiness and nitpickery are NOT legitimate political positions - just so you know.