• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

No Bias at the NYTimes

That is typical of the NYTimes...

And people slurp it up as fact when they don't even know the whole story...

There's probably a whole lot of people who read that and thought Jeff was a soldier who was anti-war, which was not the case...it just furthered the newspaper's agenda...
 
Disgusting, to use the death of this soldier to advance some agenda, have they no honor, no respect?
 
Deegan said:
Disgusting, to use the death of this soldier to advance some agenda, have they no honor, no respect?

You're making a joke about the Republicans politicising Pat Tillman as a war hero during the 2004 election right? Very clever! :mrgreen:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4815441/

Of course Pat Tillman was killed by friendly fire, which was withheld from his family. Tilman was against the war in Iraq, a big fan of Noam Chomsky, and hoped to meet him on his return.
 
hipsterdufus said:
You're making a joke about the Republicans politicising Pat Tillman as a war hero during the 2004 election right? Very clever! :mrgreen:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4815441/

Of course Pat Tillman was killed by friendly fire, which was withheld from his family. Tilman was against the war in Iraq, a big fan of Noam Chomsky, and hoped to meet him on his return.

Politicians Politicizing something?

how does that pertain to an 'Unbiased news source' falsely reporting *coughs* lying *coughs* to the people
 
DeeJayH said:
Politicians Politicizing something?

how does that pertain to an 'Unbiased news source' falsely reporting *coughs* lying *coughs* to the people

It doesn't, he's just trying to defend his fellow leftists, and that just proves the point here. You only have to wait for those on the left to come charging in to defend this, to Know you have them dead to rights.:doh
 
hipsterdufus said:
You're making a joke about the Republicans politicising Pat Tillman as a war hero during the 2004 election right? Very clever! :mrgreen:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4815441/

Of course Pat Tillman was killed by friendly fire, which was withheld from his family. Tilman was against the war in Iraq, a big fan of Noam Chomsky, and hoped to meet him on his return.

Hipster! Thank you! I was just about to address this very issue. To me, the Pat Tillman scandal was so much worse.....so much worse.

Assuming this story is true, that is very disappointing that the NYT would not provide the whole story. That newspaper is definitely liberal, but for the most part, I find them to be thorough. So I am wondering if this is true.
 
Oh Puleeze.

According to Michelle Malkin, this is what the NYT said:

Another member of the 1/5, Cpl. Jeffrey B. Starr, rejected a $24,000 bonus to re-enlist. Corporal Starr believed strongly in the war, his father said, but was tired of the harsh life and nearness of death in Iraq. So he enrolled at Everett Community College near his parents' home in Snohomish, Wash., planning to study psychology after his enlistment ended in August.
But he died in a firefight in Ramadi on April 30 during his third tour in Iraq. He was 22.

Sifting through Corporal Starr's laptop computer after his death, his father found a letter to be delivered to the marine's girlfriend. ''I kind of predicted this,'' Corporal Starr wrote of his own death. ''A third time just seemed like I'm pushing my chances.''

She stated that this is what Starr wrote:

"Obviously if you are reading this then I have died in Iraq. I kind of predicted this, that is why I'm writing this in November. A third time just seemed like I'm pushing my chances. I don't regret going, everybody dies but few get to do it for something as important as freedom. It may seem confusing why we are in Iraq, it's not to me. I'm here helping these people, so that they can live the way we live. Not have to worry about tyrants or vicious dictators. To do what they want with their lives. To me that is why I died. Others have died for my freedom, now this is my mark."

http://michellemalkin.com/archives/003793.htm

To me, by them stating that Starr "believed strongly in the war," they did not misrepresent the content of the letter.
 
The Liberal media strikes again

The Liberal media strikes again........This is disgusting.How low can the NY Times sink?

http://newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/11/4/161021.shtml


The New York Times cut patriotic comments from a letter written by a U.S. Marine before he was killed in Iraq.

The family of Cpl. Jeffrey Starr slammed the Times for selectively excerpting the letter he wrote to his girlfriend, intending for her to read it in the event of his death.

A November 2 Times story about soldiers killed while serving multiple tours of duty mentioned 22-year-old Starr, who was serving his third tour of duty when he died, and included this excerpt from his letter:

"I kind of predicted this ... A third time just seemed like I’m pushing my chances.”

In fact, the letter read in its entirety (emphasis added):
"I kind of predicted this, that is why I’m writing this in November. A third time just seemed like I’m pushing my chances. I don’t regret going, everybody dies but few get to do it for something as important as freedom. It may seem confusing why we are in Iraq, it’s not to me. I’m here helping these people, so that they can live the way we live. Not have to worry about tyrants or vicious dictators. To do what they want with their lives. To me that is why I died. Others have died for my freedom, now this is my mark.”

Starr’s mother Shellie told the New York Post that the "part of the letter about freedom and dying for it was much more important for him than what they wrote from the letter.”
 
Mod Note

Merged threads

/Mod Note


Personal note

What the NYTimes did is pretty scuzzy

/Personal note
 
aps said:
Hipster! Thank you! I was just about to address this very issue. To me, the Pat Tillman scandal was so much worse.....so much worse.

Assuming this story is true, that is very disappointing that the NYT would not provide the whole story. That newspaper is definitely liberal, but for the most part, I find them to be thorough. So I am wondering if this is true.

it is very true
it is in numerous sources online, in print and on tv
what happened to tillman was a disgrace
but it was done by the military and the politicians NOT the so called unbiased media who is supposed to report 'just the facts ma'am'

and believe it or not, there is a ton of liberals who do NOT see a liberal slant in the rubbish known as the NYTimes
 
DeeJayH said:
it is very true
it is in numerous sources online, in print and on tv
what happened to tillman was a disgrace
but it was done by the military and the politicians NOT the so called unbiased media who is supposed to report 'just the facts ma'am'

and believe it or not, there is a ton of liberals who do NOT see a liberal slant in the rubbish known as the NYTimes

The editorials are totally biased, but I am not sure about the news articles. I personally don't see a bias, but I'm sure republicans don't think that Fox News is biased.

To everyone who is saying that NYT was scuzzy and wrong, please see my prior post. The NYT said that Starr "believed strongly in the war." How is that not informing the reader that he believed in what he was fighting.
 
aps said:
The editorials are totally biased, but I am not sure about the news articles. I personally don't see a bias, but I'm sure republicans don't think that Fox News is biased.

To everyone who is saying that NYT was scuzzy and wrong, please see my prior post. The NYT said that Starr "believed strongly in the war." How is that not informing the reader that he believed in what he was fighting.

while i do not know every rep/con
i have yet to find a single one that thinks Fox is neutral
they all see Fox as slanted right
and thanking god that finally we have something, other than all the others that Slant Left
it is the lefties that fail to see the bias in the MSM
 
The NYT dropped the ball on this. It's not a paper i tend to read very much of late. I just like to get the news. I thinbk we are all capable of forming our own opinions if and when we have the facts. But that is a different subject.

On the other hand once a media whore like Malkin gets mixed up in something you know you have another kind of problem. I can't give this woman much creedence after hearing her speak and rerading her book. Here's a review that is pretty much on the money.

http://www.reason.com/0412/cr.em.indefensible.shtml

Once we are able to get the carpetbaggers, charlatans, mountbanks and robber barons out of the media maybe we will get the real news. A good start would be fpr example if the NYT would say "Yes we are liberal and proud of it." or if FNC would just come out and say "We are the flagship for conservative thinking on cable TV." I can respect that but these clowns want the whole 9 yards and that can't ever happen. I have no respect for the media at all anymore. it's as i said on another thread, $$$$ and to hell with the people. I read better editorials on this web site than i read in the newspaper. At least here people are honest and don't try to throw too much "newspeak" around.
 
Inuyasha said:
The NYT dropped the ball on this. It's not a paper i tend to read very much of late. I just like to get the news. I thinbk we are all capable of forming our own opinions if and when we have the facts. But that is a different subject.

On the other hand once a media whore like Malkin gets mixed up in something you know you have another kind of problem. I can't give this woman much creedence after hearing her speak and rerading her book. Here's a review that is pretty much on the money.

http://www.reason.com/0412/cr.em.indefensible.shtml

Once we are able to get the carpetbaggers, charlatans, mountbanks and robber barons out of the media maybe we will get the real news. A good start would be fpr example if the NYT would say "Yes we are liberal and proud of it." or if FNC would just come out and say "We are the flagship for conservative thinking on cable TV." I can respect that but these clowns want the whole 9 yards and that can't ever happen. I have no respect for the media at all anymore. it's as i said on another thread, $$$$ and to hell with the people. I read better editorials on this web site than i read in the newspaper. At least here people are honest and don't try to throw too much "newspeak" around.

I agree with you that the NYT is a pretty liberal paper. It also serves a very liberal city - New York. What separates them from Fox is that I can also get the Right's side of events by reading David Brooks, Kristoff etc. There is no one on Fox that gives a counter-balance to stories. Especially not the mother of milk toast Allan Colmes.

Members of the NYT also publicly criticized Judith Miller for her shabby reporting on the build-up to the Iraq war. Judy Miller eventually retired after serving jail time for protecting a source.
 
hipsterdufus said:
I agree with you that the NYT is a pretty liberal paper. It also serves a very liberal city - New York. What separates them from Fox is that I can also get the Right's side of events by reading David Brooks, Kristoff etc. There is no one on Fox that gives a counter-balance to stories. Especially not the mother of milk toast Allan Colmes.

Members of the NYT also publicly criticized Judith Miller for her shabby reporting on the build-up to the Iraq war. Judy Miller eventually retired after serving jail time for protecting a source.

Hmm, I would consider David Brooks at best a moderate.........How about Juan Williams, Greta Vanstrusen, Mara lyason., Geraldo Rivera.....They are all regular contributors to FOX..........

I do agree that FOX leans somewhat to the right but it is not near as bad as the left makes it out to be.....
 
Navy Pride said:
Hmm, I would consider David Brooks at best a moderate.........How about Juan Williams, Greta Vanstrusen, Mara lyason., Geraldo Rivera.....They are all regular contributors to FOX..........

I do agree that FOX leans somewhat to the right but it is not near as bad as the left makes it out to be.....

I don't have a problem with them leaning to the right. I do have a problem that they often report innuendo and rumors without any respect of the facts or checking sources.

Greta Van face lift - every time I listen to her she's dealing with missing white girls or sensationalised trials like Michael Jackson.

Whoraldo is a laughing stock, no one takes him seriously.

Mara is usually pretty restrianed on Fox. My guess is that she would get the heave ho if she spoke out more.

Juan Williams - I like his reporting for NPR, but on Fox News Sunday, he allows Brit Hume to dress him down verbally on national television. Williams will play the mealy mouthed Alan Colmes role for Brit Hume as long as they’ll have him.
 
hipsterdufus said:
I don't have a problem with them leaning to the right. I do have a problem that they often report innuendo and rumors without any respect of the facts or checking sources.

Greta Van face lift - every time I listen to her she's dealing with missing white girls or sensationalised trials like Michael Jackson.

Whoraldo is a laughing stock, no one takes him seriously.

Mara is usually pretty restrianed on Fox. My guess is that she would get the heave ho if she spoke out more.

Juan Williams - I like his reporting for NPR, but on Fox News Sunday, he allows Brit Hume to dress him down verbally on national television. Williams will play the mealy mouthed Alan Colmes role for Brit Hume as long as they’ll have him.

Wow hips, I am shocked that you would put your fellow libs down like that.can you name me any Conservatives that appear on a regular basis on CNN?
 
I will just say it again. I don't really care if a TV channel or a newspaper is conservative or liberal. We need both points of view, but I just wish they would have the guts to say it instead of trying to BS their way to ratings or what not by telling the viewer or the reader how inpartial they are. To me it's an insult to suppose that we, the people, are incapable of telling the difference. To me their position is weakened by not stating the obvious. We might even ask, "What, are they ashamed of taking a stong position?"
 
hipsterdufus said:
I don't have a problem with them leaning to the right. I do have a problem that they often report innuendo and rumors without any respect of the facts or checking sources.

Greta Van face lift - every time I listen to her she's dealing with missing white girls or sensationalised trials like Michael Jackson.

Whoraldo is a laughing stock, no one takes him seriously.

Mara is usually pretty restrianed on Fox. My guess is that she would get the heave ho if she spoke out more.

Juan Williams - I like his reporting for NPR, but on Fox News Sunday, he allows Brit Hume to dress him down verbally on national television. Williams will play the mealy mouthed Alan Colmes role for Brit Hume as long as they’ll have him.

This post does really expose your hatred, and arrogance, and it's you, and others like you on the left, that have made "liberal" a bad word, shame on you. "Whoraldo" "Greta Van face lift" who the hell are you to talk about these people like that, I hope you're not teaching your students to be so hateful and arrogant.
 
Deegan said:
This post does really expose your hatred, and arrogance, and it's you, and others like you on the left, that have made "liberal" a bad word, shame on you. "Whoraldo" "Greta Van face lift" who the hell are you to talk about these people like that, I hope you're not teaching your students to be so hateful and arrogant.

Why does this bother you so much? They are essentially celebrities. I could see you getting this upset if he was talking about your family or friends. Personally, I didn't think there was any evidence of hatred. The names he used are used widespread when people are criticizing him. He didn't invent those names. Sheesh.
 
aps said:
Why does this bother you so much? They are essentially celebrities. I could see you getting this upset if he was talking about your family or friends. Personally, I didn't think there was any evidence of hatred. The names he used are used widespread when people are criticizing him. He didn't invent those names. Sheesh.

They are people are they not? My Aunt happens to be a friend of Greta's, and her surgery was done because of a slight paralysis, not out of vanity. I also respect the job that Geraldo does for Fox, he puts himself on the line in every story he does, and the a**holes at the NYtimes lied about a story recently, and refused to acknowledge that fact for weeks. It may not bother you, but it bothers me, it also says a lot about the author, and how partisan they can be, no matter who it hurts, smears, or destroys.:roll:

I had been trying to find a article about her surgery, and I couldn't, so I called my Aunt, and I was wrong, I confused her case with someone else. I felt I should correct this, but I still think it's unacceptable to write the womans entire career accomplishments off because of a surgery that made her feel better about herself.
 
Last edited:
Deegan said:
They are people are they not? My Aunt happens to be a friend of Greta's, and her surgery was done because of a slight paralysis, not out of vanity. I also respect the job that Geraldo does for Fox, he puts himself on the line in every story he does, and the a**holes at the NYtimes lied about a story recently, and refused to acknowledge that fact for weeks. It may not bother you, but it bothers me, it also says a lot about the author, and how partisan they can be, no matter who it hurts, smears, or destroys.:roll:

I had been trying to find a article about her surgery, and I couldn't, so I called my Aunt, and I was wrong, I confused her case with someone else. I felt I should correct this, but I still think it's unacceptable to write the womans entire career accomplishments off because of a surgery that made her feel better about herself.

I very much appreciate your honesty. I see why that upset you, based upon what you believed at the time.
 
Pehaps you, like i, interpreted some of aps' remarks as an attempt at humor which didn't work out too well but in some ways he is justidfied in arttitude if not in his manner of expression. The people who go on TV live and die, eat and sleep on the backs of the viewers so they often come under crticzim and often rightly so.

Geraldo Rivera, for example, has always been a sensationalist and he has continued so in his efforts to be a war correspondent and an investigative reporter. He certainly is not a Joe Galloway let alone an Ernie pyle. As an investigative reporter he is a sensationalist without the talent of a Walter Winchell. His fame is that of a Jerry Springer type and he hasn't changed that much. He gets flak because he asks for it. Remember his going away of troop positions? Do you think Ernie Pyle would have done that?

Greta Van Sustren - I liked her on Court TV and I still like her.She has a sharp legal mind. What she looks like is an act of God and we don't really need to comment but some will and so be it. Her present problem is, I believe, that the neetwork has forced her to "overwork" the Aruba thing" and viewrs are sick of it so she is getting a lot of flak on that count. Some of her work on that case is causing the bloodhounds to call for a boycott of Aruba which is just as sill as calling for a boycott on Texas because there are 100 or so unresloved dissapearences of teenagers on the books in that state. You are safer however condemning a foreign country because they can't do much to you. If the FBI got as much flak on a case as the Aruban police are getting the repercussion might be a hell of a lot greater for American reporters and more so today with the vindictive and defensive attitude that government officals have developed in the past few years.


The FNC faces you see are under the command of Rupert Murdoch and he is a master at exploiting the sensational aspects of the news along with hi second in command Roger Ailes. It is their MO and obviously it is working well for them because they are making millions and that's the purpose of private run media.
 
Deegan said:
They are people are they not? My Aunt happens to be a friend of Greta's, and her surgery was done because of a slight paralysis, not out of vanity. I also respect the job that Geraldo does for Fox, he puts himself on the line in every story he does, and the a**holes at the NYtimes lied about a story recently, and refused to acknowledge that fact for weeks. It may not bother you, but it bothers me, it also says a lot about the author, and how partisan they can be, no matter who it hurts, smears, or destroys.:roll:

I had been trying to find a article about her surgery, and I couldn't, so I called my Aunt, and I was wrong, I confused her case with someone else. I felt I should correct this, but I still think it's unacceptable to write the womans entire career accomplishments off because of a surgery that made her feel better about herself.

i saw Greta admit publically that she got the plastic surgery specifically because she was getting a tv show
what afflictions she had that caused the need for corrective surgery, i do not know
but i do know for a fact that she looked the way she looked before surgery for a long time, and only got the surgery because she got a tv show
 
Back
Top Bottom