BoatShoes wrote: Sean Hannity and Keith Olbermann make people dumber and dumb down discourse. Glenn Beck is dumb and luckily won a radio dj contest and is a failed comedian who now gives his opinion on political ideology.

I commented on another thread (the Harry Reid thread) on a post you made. You mentioned a Juan Williams commentary concerning the matter. You heard it on O'reilly, I heard on Hannity's radio program. Were they dumbing us down? If these media outlets were not available would we have heard it elsewhere? Maybe. But the volume of political commentary available to us allowed both of us with different political ideologies to catch it in different places. We both were able to intelligently discern the political commentary.

Are there "dumb" Americans that would believe black was white if a certain commentator said so? Sure there are. But I believe that the vast majority of Americans are intellegent and able to discern the vast media and political commentary available to them today. I say the more options the better.

Personally I find Beck to be an idiot. But at times he has brought valuable things into light through his commentary. As with Olberman and Maddow. Also idiots IMHO.

BoatShoes wrote: There was a time in America when a leading liberal voice in America was the great Bertrand Russel...or when conservatives could learn about the "freedom to choose" from Milton Friedman. That world is gone because a boring drab like say, Peter Singer, wouldn't get MSNBC the ratings (I know, what ratings?) that Rachel Maddow would.

I never heard the words of Milton Friedman until the age of the internet. To say that world is gone is not true. In fact his words are available to more people than anytime in history.

BoatShoes wrote: As long as their are smart, rational people; debt, wars and social issues, etc. can be solved, thought out and fixed.

I agree. There are many out there. If only we could find a way to elect such people.

BoatShoes wrote:I'm not denying liberal media bias...but I just don't think it'll affect you if you just listen to the news, hear what's reported or read it in the AP and then think about it yourself.

Really? So you admit there is a liberal bias in the news, but suggest that if we "would just read or listen" to AP and "think about it" we'll come away with a balanced point of view?

One of the chief reasons Fox News and AM talk radio came to being is because of the liberal bias in the news including AP. Conservative views were nearly non-existent prior to Fox News and AM talk radio and when those views were aired they were milk toast conservative views and subject to ridicule.

When the 4th Estate in this country begins to embrace TRUE journalism - the kind that investigates and reports all sides of an issue in an objective manner - then we won't need to spend time on FREE Huddle pointing out the bias of Fox News, CNN, or any other source of news and commentary.

Keith Oberman's head just exploded.

^^^AW don't tease me!

zhon44622 wrote:

Writerbuckeye wrote:

Well at least one study backs them up...

http://www.cmpa.com/releases/07_12_21_Election_Study.pdf

The media watchdog group Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR) has challenged CMPA's non-partisan claim, based on the argument that much of its funding has come from conservative sources, and that its founder, Dr. S. Robert Lichter, once held a chair in mass communications at the American Enterprise Institute and was a Fox News contributor.[18][19] After a Washington Post article referred to CMPA as "conservative," the Post published a "Clarification," which concluded, "The Center describes itself as nonpartisan, and its studies have been cited by both conservative and liberal commentators."[20]
Progressive organization MediaTransparency (now run by Media Matters for America, itself a liberal organization[21]) documented that between 1986 and 2005 CMPA received 55 grants totaling $2,960,916 (unadjusted for inflation). The organization, which collated information from returns filed by numerous conservative foundations, found that 86% of CMPA's total funding came from conservative-leaning foundations.

So what? You people bring forth the same whine about Rasmussen and where he gets his money...yet he still manages to be the most accurate poll out there. Unless you can produce an actual study by FAIR that disproves the numbers in the CMPA study, your post is a fail.

zhon44622 wrote: Again - Does anyone think that this multi year contract means Palin has ruled out 2012?

She probally has a clause in her contract similiar to Sports Coaches that if their "dream job" (The Presidency) comes available they can opt out of contract.
In 2012 her "Dream Job" would be available.

majorspark wrote:

zhon44622 wrote: So this adds Palin to Huckabee, Rove, Cheney (Liz), as well as Hannity, Beck, O Reily, etc..... so where exactly is the balance they claim?

Don't forget:

Bob Beckel, Pat Caddell, Alan Colmes (Fox Radio), Lany Davis, Susan Estrich, Mort Kondracke, Juan Williams

I notice no one read this post or cared to comment.

Can someone please give a list from MSNBC or similar, of similar length as this, of conservatives on those stations?

Everyone he mentioned is DEFINITELY a liberal, and on Fox News.

I know that during the day, FOX is nothing but news. And it seems pretty fair and balanced to me.
I don't watch the evening shows because I don't really like them people.

But as far as news goes, FOX/daytime is really good.

Can somebody tell me what ISN'T fair and balanced about FOX during the day??????

jmog wrote:

majorspark wrote:

zhon44622 wrote: So this adds Palin to Huckabee, Rove, Cheney (Liz), as well as Hannity, Beck, O Reily, etc..... so where exactly is the balance they claim?

Don't forget:

Bob Beckel, Pat Caddell, Alan Colmes (Fox Radio), Lany Davis, Susan Estrich, Mort Kondracke, Juan Williams

I notice no one read this post or cared to comment.

Can someone please give a list from MSNBC or similar, of similar length as this, of conservatives on those stations?

Everyone he mentioned is DEFINITELY a liberal, and on Fox News.

Scarbourough. That's it.

The only reporter on any of the broadcast networks who is even remotely close to balanced is Jake Tapper.

I don't know why anyone gets up in arms about this, anymore. Not worth it.

By this point, we've all found sources that we prefer. Just leave these others to spew their nonsense, and pay them no heed.

I don't go near MSNBC, Fox News, etc., etc. I get my news and commentary elsewhere, and i'm completely satisfied with it. MSNBC commentators disgust, as do Fox News commentators because, by and large, they don't do any good whatsoever. Simply continue the horrendous partisan divide in our country.

Olbermann and Maddow are douches. Beck is a douche. As will be Palin...a douche.

That partisan divide is not new.

It's been around basically since the country was founded.

And I also don't believe it's any more pronounced now than it was then -- we just hear about it more now because of the efficiency of mass media that didn't exist until the Internet.

Writerbuckeye wrote: That partisan divide is not new.

It's been around basically since the country was founded.

And I also don't believe it's any more pronounced now than it was then -- we just hear about it more now because of the efficiency of mass media that didn't exist until the Internet.

This is a true statement. If one takes a closer look at our history it actually becomes quite clear. In fact about 150 years ago it brought us to blows.

Good point.

I always find it humorous when conservatives want to rant on & on about the news. Fox News is a Conk outlet. Purebred. However, the Conks then line everyone else up as a "liberal" outlet. Really ?? No moderate news outlets ?? How about because all the others AREN'T conservative that makes everyone else liberal, whether they are or aren't. This site has a high number of malcontents. To I.D. MSNBC or a Mother Jones as liberal is fair. But you I.D. everone else as liberal too. How about calling it like it is........ lots of news outlets who provide just news without an obvious slant. Sure a story now & then may come off as not to your liking, but hardly a liberal weasel oragnization reporting. Just not a conservative one or pontificating conservative positions. Thus, all conservatives write off news organizations as all liberal. The reason the news media is called the "Mainstream" media is because they are presenting news in as neutral a fashion as they can while telling you of the latest R scandal ( news) or an obvious lie told by an R ( with a tape of his actual comments to prove it), which is also news. The same happens to Ds as well. But since the reporters don't use a hammer & 3 nails on the Ds , somehow they are "biased". The mainstream media serves the vast majority of the country because that where most are, even with slight leans , left or right. Thats doesn't satisfy the Far Right, beacuse FAR is where they are at and if you aren't there you can't be moderate, you must be liberal. And becasue of that, the R party itself is shrinking as they purge the moderates from the party. Malcontents & misfits.

Paladin wrote: I always find it humorous when conservatives want to rant on & on about the news. Fox News is a Conk outlet. Purebred. However, the Conks then line everyone else up as a "liberal" outlet. Really ?? No moderate news outlets ?? How about because all the others AREN'T conservative that makes everyone else liberal, whether they are or aren't. This site has a high number of malcontents. To I.D. MSNBC or a Mother Jones as liberal is fair. But you I.D. everone else as liberal too. How about calling it like it is........ lots of news outlets who provide just news without an obvious slant. Sure a story now & then may come off as not to your liking, but hardly a liberal weasel oragnization reporting. Just not a conservative one or pontificating conservative positions. Thus, all conservatives write off news organizations as all liberal. The reason the news media is called the "Mainstream" media is because they are presenting news in as neutral a fashion as they can while telling you of the latest R scandal ( news) or an obvious lie told by an R ( with a tape of his actual comments to prove it), which is also news. The same happens to Ds as well. But since the reporters don't use a hammer & 3 nails on the Ds , somehow they are "biased". The mainstream media serves the vast majority of the country because that where most are, even with slight leans , left or right. Thats doesn't satisfy the Far Right, beacuse FAR is where they are at and if you aren't there you can't be moderate, you must be liberal. And becasue of that, the R party itself is shrinking as they purge the moderates from the party. Malcontents & misfits.

Correction:

Malcontents and Misfits with several reputable studies fully backing our position...all of which have been posted ad nauseum.

Cool rant though.

Paladin wrote: I always find it humorous when conservatives want to rant on & on about the news. Fox News is a Conk outlet. Purebred. However, the Conks then line everyone else up as a "liberal" outlet. Really ?? No moderate news outlets ?? How about because all the others AREN'T conservative that makes everyone else liberal, whether they are or aren't. This site has a high number of malcontents. To I.D. MSNBC or a Mother Jones as liberal is fair. But you I.D. everone else as liberal too. How about calling it like it is........ lots of news outlets who provide just news without an obvious slant. Sure a story now & then may come off as not to your liking, but hardly a liberal weasel oragnization reporting. Just not a conservative one or pontificating conservative positions. Thus, all conservatives write off news organizations as all liberal. The reason the news media is called the "Mainstream" media is because they are presenting news in as neutral a fashion as they can while telling you of the latest R scandal ( news) or an obvious lie told by an R ( with a tape of his actual comments to prove it), which is also news. The same happens to Ds as well. But since the reporters don't use a hammer & 3 nails on the Ds , somehow they are "biased". The mainstream media serves the vast majority of the country because that where most are, even with slight leans , left or right. Thats doesn't satisfy the Far Right, beacuse FAR is where they are at and if you aren't there you can't be moderate, you must be liberal. And becasue of that, the R party itself is shrinking as they purge the moderates from the party. Malcontents & misfits.

Mr. Paladin, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone on this thread is now dumber for having read it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

Thats O.K. Many will agree with me. I'll continue to find the humor here as the malcontents and misfits drone on. Just think......... of all our news media, none( according to the "experts" here,) are moderate. Just all liberal. Except for Faux News. The Conk darling.

Hilarious !!

Good Lord, I think a few brain cells actually died reading that screed.

For the record: "mainstream" media does not refer to any ideological bent by those giving us the news.

It refers to where that form of media lies in context to today's media world. Mainstream media are those that most Americans are familiar with and watch/read/listen to.

To think it has ANYTHING to do with what viewpoint the news is coming from only shows all of us -- very clearly -- you have no clue what you're talking about.

jmog wrote: Mr. Paladin, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone on this thread is now dumber for having read it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

Nice reference, FT@RH, good one!

i guess they needed a cleaning lady

KnightRyder wrote: i guess they needed a cleaning lady

Good one, dude. Your wit should be registered as WMD.

Personally I can't wait to see more of Palin on Fox News.

Paladin wrote: I always find it humorous when conservatives want to rant on & on about the news. Fox News is a Conk outlet. Purebred. However, the Conks then line everyone else up as a "liberal" outlet. Really ?? No moderate news outlets ?? How about because all the others AREN'T conservative that makes everyone else liberal, whether they are or aren't. This site has a high number of malcontents. To I.D. MSNBC or a Mother Jones as liberal is fair. But you I.D. everone else as liberal too. How about calling it like it is........ lots of news outlets who provide just news without an obvious slant. Sure a story now & then may come off as not to your liking, but hardly a liberal weasel oragnization reporting. Just not a conservative one or pontificating conservative positions. Thus, all conservatives write off news organizations as all liberal. The reason the news media is called the "Mainstream" media is because they are presenting news in as neutral a fashion as they can while telling you of the latest R scandal ( news) or an obvious lie told by an R ( with a tape of his actual comments to prove it), which is also news. The same happens to Ds as well. But since the reporters don't use a hammer & 3 nails on the Ds , somehow they are "biased". The mainstream media serves the vast majority of the country because that where most are, even with slight leans , left or right. Thats doesn't satisfy the Far Right, beacuse FAR is where they are at and if you aren't there you can't be moderate, you must be liberal. And becasue of that, the R party itself is shrinking as they purge the moderates from the party. Malcontents & misfits.

Scary post...After you get some therapy come back and let's talk. lol

she'll get high ratings because she's hot. don't know how much substance she will bring.

Everyone should be grateful for this. It will destroy any shot she ever had at running again (not that it was that realistic to begin with).