That doesn't surprise me.
The left is demonized by the right.
Oh, like the opposite isn't true.
So name one.
Speaking as a former member of the media, I can easily state that the modern American media is an utter disgrace. The free press was intended to be the watchdogs of the truth. But except for a very few who are trying to get the truth out there as objectively as possible--and ALL of these a regularly trashed by the others, on message boards, etc.--the rest are total lapdogs for the Democratic party.
If the person is conservative or Republican, any hint of scandal or anything they can pretend is a scandal or any statement they can twist to make into something attackable leads their newscasts or is prominent on their front pages, as often as not for days and days. But if it is Obama or Hillary or anybody on their side, oh they didn't mean it that way or they were misunderstood--it gets a bare mention if any mention at all and then it is buried never to see the light of day again. It is shameful, and hateful, and serves us poorly.
They do both demonize one another.
Trans bathroom usage.
Gay marriage.
Pro-choice.
Welfare.
NOT invading Iraq.
Greetings, AlbqOwl. :2wave:
:agree: I've found that I get more honest information from foreign newspapers, and that is not only shocking, but eye-opening! That's why it's been so interesting to read the "leaks" put out by unknown persons, since we probably would have never known the truth otherwise.
As you know, in the business world it is essential for success to know what is going on - why has it been decided that it's not important in politics? The typical comeback these days, when things that a person sees going on and begins to question them, is "you fell for another 'conspiracy' theory", which belittles the people who ask, while implying they're just too stupid or naïve to know better. Oddly, that line doesn't ring true to many people lately, since the "leaked" emails have shown otherwise! And both parties are guilty of lying to the people who pay their salaries! :!:
Quoted for truth. Authoritative as AlbqOwl was "a former member of the media". Well done.
I too am concerned about the 4th estate's role, holding government accountable to the people, and their failing in that important role for our system of government to work properly.
Not really a core issue. You think that's even top 10?
ZOMG! HATE HATE HATE! Gays being dragged behind cars!
Back-alley abortions, coathangers, women bleeding to death, women shackled up in kitchens, etc.
Everyone starving to death.
Is it 2002 where you are? That would explain much.
Uhhh...
You can make any argument hysterical, therefore all arguments are hysterical.
And you don't see the problem there ?
I didn't make them hysterical.
Surely Roger Ailes your conservative journalistic hero - great choice.
You lumped all liberals together and then tried to project your liberal strawmen on them.
I gave you valid examples.
I did no such thing. I mentioned "core issues of the Left." You listed some; of those which actually fit the criteria, I gave you things said frequently by mainstream people on the left.
I'd say that fear is more a part of the Democratic message: fear of imaginary racists, sexists, bigots, homophobes, etc. Fear of losing welfare payments, government subsidies, and the like. And envy, of course. Fear that someone else might do better in life than you.
So because they don't share your bias, nothing they say is the truth? Fascinating.Speaking as a former member of the media, I can easily state that the modern American media is an utter disgrace. The free press was intended to be the watchdogs of the truth. But except for a very few who are trying to get the truth out there as objectively as possible--and ALL of these a regularly trashed by the others, on message boards, etc.--the rest are total lapdogs for the Democratic party.
*cough*If the person is conservative or Republican, any hint of scandal or anything they can pretend is a scandal or any statement they can twist to make into something attackable leads their newscasts or is prominent on their front pages, as often as not for days and days. But if it is Obama or Hillary or anybody on their side, oh they didn't mean it that way or they were misunderstood--it gets a bare mention if any mention at all and then it is buried never to see the light of day again.
Roger Ailes doesn't pretend to be a journalist. He's a businessman. Your journalistic hero, Dan Rather, is in the process of being restored by the leftist media. That should make you happy.
Speaking as a former member of the media, I can easily state that the modern American media is an utter disgrace. The free press was intended to be the watchdogs of the truth. But except for a very few who are trying to get the truth out there as objectively as possible--and ALL of these a regularly trashed by the others, on message boards, etc.--the rest are total lapdogs for the Democratic party.
If the person is conservative or Republican, any hint of scandal or anything they can pretend is a scandal or any statement they can twist to make into something attackable leads their newscasts or is prominent on their front pages, as often as not for days and days. But if it is Obama or Hillary or anybody on their side, oh they didn't mean it that way or they were misunderstood--it gets a bare mention if any mention at all and then it is buried never to see the light of day again. It is shameful, and hateful, and serves us poorly.
No, mainstream people on the left do not fight for gay marriage by screaming about hate and gay people being dragged by cars.
I'm sorry Harshaw, but you are genuinely mistaken if you think that either side always uses fear while the other doesn't.
This fellow is a typical NRO patrician who is unhappy that Fox News and other conservative media don't have the right kinds of conservatives. He goes through a laundry list of problems Fox News has but fails to place those observations in context. Yes, Fox News has a viewer-ship that is largely confined to ideological soul mates. Now, which of the other media outlets appeal to the public broadly? None of them, I suspect. The entire news media establishment has problems with credibility and low prestige, not to mention a shrinking viewer-ship.
To read this one would think that Republicans were a minority of the American political establishment and can't get their message out to the people. But it's not true. Republicans have both houses of congress and the majority of state legislatures and governorships. Republican ideas do appeal to the people, and the people know about them.
So because they don't share your bias, nothing they say is the truth? Fascinating.
*cough*
Bill Clinton
Blagojevich
Jon Edwards
Elliot Spitzer
Anthony Weiner, aka "Carlos Danger"
Charles Rangel
Solyndra
Jon Corzine blowing up MF Global
Jesse Jackson Jr
Jim McGreevy
Lots of the above got national attention.
Well, thats freedom. No one is forced to look at it.
There were indeed such arguments.
Can you be in ANY conversation without claiming the other said something s/he didn't?
I've seen you in many threads, now, and I haven't seen that you can. Why is that?
Actually, I'm hard-pressed to come up with a single core issue on the Left which ISN'T based in fear.
Actually, I'm hard-pressed to come up with a single core issue on the Left which ISN'T based in fear.
Quoted for truth. Authoritative as AlbqOwl was "a former member of the media". Well done.
I too am concerned about the 4th estate's role, holding government accountable to the people, and their failing in that important role for our system of government to work properly.
I was educated and orientated into the 4th Estate when there were strict standards. You checked, double checked, verified, and verified again before printing ANYTHING that could call a person's honesty, reputation, or ethics into question. Most news stories were without byline and if we wrote one with the least bit of bias or intentional slant, we would get a severe knuckle rapping from the editor. And even those with a byline offered precious little wiggle room for any kind of opinion. Evenso, the media could get it wrong and often did. But such was ethically followed with a retraction and explanation when it was exposed. When is the last time you saw the MSM apologize for any heavily slanted or provocative headline or for deliberate and obvious bias re what they offer and what they don't? It is disgusting, reprehensible, and shameful.
I dunno, I was a "member of the media" for I guarantee as long or longer than AlbqOwl, and I think his assessment is a pile of horse manure.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?