Some may consider Murdoch's Fox news to lean to heavily to the right.

I think it's fine to have a counter to the other news outlets.

And apparently there are a lot of conservative types who agree, since Fox delivers solid ratings.

-- Modified on 1/10/2005 10:22:02 PM

there you go again...

The real far Left find the mainstream press quite conservative.  I see them as pretty centrist.

If you think CBS is Pink- you are pretty far to the right.

That is why we need something other than the 6 big media companies (of which FAUX is included) that control almost everything. They all skew to the right, FAUX just more so than the others. So, I agree, we need a big network (like Faux) that is as Liberal as FAUX is conservative. You would be in favor of that, right JBIRD?

Perhaps everyone hates Fox because they offdet the left leanings of the other "mainstream" media.

Regrettably, it seems that the concepts of JOURNALISM have been lost.

They (all the networks) don't "report" the news, they EDITORIALIZE the news.

And stamina, take your pathetic attempts at to put down the right elsewher, or come out from behind your cowardly alias and post under your regular ID.

The plethora of stupid aliases used by a few to appear as more posters than really exist is childish.

What are all of the aliased posters afraid of? The ladies, I can understand, there are some who's political views I find offensive and I will not see. Which is actually beneficial to both of us. But if you fall under the classification of a "hobbyist" and you use an alias for a political post, that's BS. (And posters from both side of the political spectrum would probably claim that using an alias is typical of the opposition-Lib & Cons alike.)

I don't even have a problem if FOX wants to be right-wing central, all I ask is that they have the guts to admit it, not proclaim this fair & balanced non-sense......

They should change their name to FOX News Right & their slogan should be "the red states #1 source for news".......Least that would be honest.....

Consider this.....

To those of you on the left... well, this is an easy one....
imagine someone like Rupert Murdoch being the absolute controller of anything and everything presented to the mass public audience. Forget journalism standards, forget anything but one mans point of view being the only perspective represented, and represented as hard news.

Now... to those of you on the right... imagine if it were Micheal Moore instead of Rupert Murdoch. Not to much of a mental strain if you think about it... surely you can see the diametric opposition to their points of view.

This isn't about fair and balanced,  its about checks and balances! This is about power and control. This is about Big Brother taken to the next level beyond Orwell.

And that, friends, is my honest opinion.

... I am sure we can too.  Maybe they will soon have tapes of large busted nude women advertising the network shows.    I'm sure the people who will control the network after Murdoch retires will program for ratings rather than politics.

Red State Couch Potatoes need love and affirmation too.  

I have 20+ stations where I can get news when I want to watch tv news.  The people will judge.  FNN doesn't control the media by a long shot.

but he already has controlling interest, so I do not see what the difference is...

Exactly.  Were you to read a real communist paper like the one in Italy (forget the name) you would see how timidly centrist/conservative CNN is .

Only in America THAT HAS NO REAL LEFT WING- do social democrats seem "liberal".

A) NOBODY in TV editorializes like FOX

B) THERE is NO real lefty news org except for Pacifica- who does not have a TV arm.

You can think we have a spectrum here but we DO NOT.  Just slightly left of Center, Center, slightly right of center, Fox, and then the Moonies stuff. (Washington times Et al.)

When Guys here say Kerry is a leftist- it just shows their proto-fascist leanings.  (and yes, I am exagerating- but only a little bit)

neener neener neener

-- Modified on 1/11/2005 6:08:32 PM

You can trust me when I tell you this, if you listen to Rush for one week straight-------YOU'LL BECOME---- A LOVER OF THE FREE MARKET---LOVER OF LIBERTY-----LOVER OF THE GOOOD OLD U.S.A.!!!!!

As an experiment, you should listen to Rush for one week straight and then do an analysis of your perspective on things.

You might not be able to listen regularly  BUT  I bet you'll have a different perspective!

You stated that you can tell the diff between opinion shows and news casts. Then you whip out the El Rushbo card when someone mentions Gunga Dan?  

RLTW

an opinion wether they like Rush or not IF THEY HAVE LISTENED TO HIM.  He is painted unfairly with a broad brush by the left.  Yes, he's admitted to a drug addiction.  Do you think calling him a "pill-popping drug addict" might be just a little bit insensitive?  Do you think the millions of stupid Packer fans would consider their hero, Brett Favre, to also be an addict because he became addicted to his pain medication?  Do you think that the hundreds of thousands of Americans who get hooked on pain meds are all "pill-popping addicts"??

Can you show AND prove any of Rush's statements or examples of hyprocracy??

-- Modified on 1/11/2005 10:47:19 PM

Who started his career as a LIBERAL talk ahow host before going to work for the Kansas City Royals for several years before getting hired by a conservative talk radio station to do an ENTERTAINMENT based talk show espousing the GOP platform.
Don't believe me, please. Look it up for yourself.

You hot air windbag GOP sycophants are real quick to bash liberal Hollywood types like Streisand, Penn and Moore, but you absolutely shut your pie holes when it comes to acknowledging that Rush Limbaugh is ALSO an entertainer... one with far more influence and sway over the right wing conservative mass unwashed than any Hollywood liberal could ever enjoy anywhere... unless you include Tupac Shakur as role model for the Thuglife Gangsta Criminal lifestyle.

And GOP Geezer.... you just parrot other conservative pundits with your blind fealty. Wanna cracker?

And you will realize your indignation is out of context.

Here is GOP Geezers eloquent comment:

I think Dan Rather is a real Shithead. eom --- GOPGeezer® (1/11/2005 5:27:55 PM) (7 reads)

Here is my response:

But EVERYONE knows Rush Limbaugh is a pill popping drug addict. And a hypocrite.-nt --- Myster E® (1/11/2005 6:08:01 PM) (10 reads)

Yes, Dan Rather is a newsman. Yes Rush is an entertainer/pundit.
But Dan Rather does not claim to, nor does he expect to be looked upon as a legitimate mouthpiece for the DEmocratic Party. I just wish he hadn't been the pawn of CBS executives with an agenda.( Although those records may have been forgeries, the continued question of GWB's National Guard service has never been answered properly. Obfuscation and deception... the hallmark of the Rove-designed GOP methodology for the 21st Century.)
Rush has positioned himself to be viewed as a legitimate avatar of the conservative GOP wing by a vast majority of his (admittedly ignorant) audience, and the official interaction between Rush and the GOP, RNC, and most especially RNC fund raising have given rise to the perception among many of his listeners (especially in the Bible Belt and Deep South) that he does indeed speak with authority. Whether its true or not, the facts are there. Irrefutable, and indelibly etched in the records of polling organizations, the news, as well as the bottom line.

Limbaugh's drug addiction is well documented. His earlier stated posiiton on drug addicts is also well stated. Limbaugh is a hypocrite. And a drug addict.

Dan Rather, on the other hand, has never been seen eating naughty meals, or wearing feces on his head. At least not in public.

If GOPGeezer hadn't opened his piehole to blurt his utterly unnecessary and buffoonish comment, I would not have felt the need to call him on his bullshit. This time.

I could give you hundreds of illustrations of the utter blatant hypocrisy of Rush Limbaugh specifically, going back to the mid-80's.
But they would all be defended as being merely "entertainment exaggeration".

Besides, you won't believe it even if its in black and white and slapped across your face.

Thats the problem with the right wing. You think just because you are right, you are correct.

Dan may have screwed up. But Rush is a blow-hard, lying, full of complete bull crap, bigoted, hipocritical, drug addicted, propaganda "ho" of the extreme right-wing. Talk about dirt. Rush is lower than dirt. He is shit -- probably worse. I can't believe you guys actually believe his bull-crap. I kinda makes me laugh that you do. His whole deal is such unsubstantiated babble & nonsense. I thought you guys wanted sources & concrete information? (And, for the record, I DO believe he has every right to broadcast and NOT be sensored -- just like me with this post. It does not mean he is being honest with the truth and is an honorable broadcaster.)

Just remember, what was in those fake CBS memos was true and has been corroberated in other documents and peoples testimony! Again the right has successfully diverted from the issue by creating a scandal about someone else. How can you guys on the right not see this? It is SO obvious.

No joke. They have made at least one financial deal I know of to the tune of $500 mil (in savings to Time Warner Magazines in postage)through 2007 with the Republicans -- trust me, they are not going to spoil that gravy train.

Hense, Bush is TIME Mags Man Of The Year twice in four years. When was the last time that happened?

Rush is certainly entertaining, and intelligent.  But to claim with a straight face that everything he says is true is simply an ignorant comment.  He is notorious for claiming, on NUMEROUS occassions prior to his own legal troubles, that ALL drug addicts deserved jail time.  Perhaps he simply meant all poor drug addicts, or all addicts except those who abused Oxycontin.

Where did I say that Rather is worse than Limbaugh?

I don't even listen to Rush. You are expert at making knee-jerk, ignorant assumptions. If you bother to re-read my posts, maybe you'll figure out that it's about differentiating between news casts and opinion shows, not about who's worse than the other.

Pull your head out of your ass long enough and you might realise that just because someone supports Bush, it doesn't necessarily mean that they fit your narrow-minded stereotype.

RLTW

and I saw the hyprocricy and was stabbed in the back bigtime. SD you'll see it too but don't let them stab you in the back.  I became a Republican in 1980 and an ardent one in 1984.

And Rush is a drug addict.  He avoided that topic cause he felt bad. He was not a hypocrit.  And now he a recovered clean addict.

And you should read democraticunderground.com for one week, every article, ok....I think it will open new doors for you & perhaps we can get you thinking like a liberal!.....

Listen to Rush for one week, I'll admit I couldn't do it....It would be like that MTV show "Boiling Points", & I wouldn't last 15 minutes before I'd toss radio out the window.....When it comes to people like Rush, Ann Coulter, sports talk show host Jim Rome, etc., I can only take them in extremely small doses at a time.....




-- Modified on 1/13/2005 8:33:07 AM

perhaps you should reconsider somewhat.

Specifically, you said "EVERYONE" knows.

In reality, you cannot be certain that "EVERYONE" knows anything.

A minor, perhaps picky (some might even say "petty") point, however, you have seemed to indicate that you enjoy language usage-so I would expect you to be sensitive to the use of the broad stroke term of "EVERYONE".

-- Modified on 1/13/2005 10:49:14 AM

And he never avoided the topic of prosecutiong illegal drug users BEFORE he got caught being one himself.  That is the DEFINITION of being a hypocrite.

As for being stabbed in the back,  I am neither a Democrat nor a Republican.  I am a Libertarian who votes for the less noxious candidate at any given time.