Jump to content

State of the Union


LowerCaseRepublican

Recommended Posts

QUOTE(YASNY @ Feb 3, 2005 -> 03:32 AM)
You guys just cannot stand that there is a television station that gives the conservative viewpoint.  For the first 30 or so years of my life, you could not get this point of view from radio or TV unless it was on "Meet the Press" or similar show.  Of course, you'd had to listen to the liberal rhetoric as well.  I think it's about damn someone started putting it out there and making all the left wing dings squirm.

YES! :notworthy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 50
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

QUOTE(mreye @ Feb 3, 2005 -> 08:53 AM)
YES! :notworthy

 

I'm sorry exactly where am I getting that liberal viewpoint on fake news tv shows like O'Reilly and HANNITY and colmes? I'm not. CNN has got the closest to any of that - and that's called Crossfire where there's balance between a left wing hack and a right wing hack. MSNBC has Scarborough Country and didn't they just hire Tucker Carlson - who has his own show on PBS, for Christ sakes. CNBC has Dennis Miller. The so called "liberal media" doesn't have a liberal voice on it worth a damn as far as I can see.

 

BTW: I didn't watch the State of the Union. I was too busy working.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(winodj @ Feb 3, 2005 -> 11:37 AM)
MSNBC has Scarborough Country and didn't they just hire Tucker Carlson - who has his own show on PBS, for Christ sakes. CNBC has Dennis Miller. The so called "liberal media" doesn't have a liberal voice on it worth a damn as far as I can see.

 

BTW: I didn't watch the State of the Union. I was too busy working.

All after the fact of Fox News becoming number 1. Personally, I can't stand Hannity. He likes to hear himself talk too much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To tell you the truth, I have absolutely no problem with having a conservative network. They can have as many as they want. It's when they try and sell it as "fair and balanced" unbiased news coverage that makes it lose its credibility. Same goes for the liberals and whatever network they have (can't think of one at the moment).

 

FoxNews, in and of itself, is good at doing their thing. But it simply doesn't live up to being the legit news source that it claims to be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(winodj @ Feb 3, 2005 -> 04:37 PM)
The so called "liberal media" doesn't have a liberal voice on it worth a damn as far as I can see.

 

 

It could be because the liberals don't have an idea worth a s*** to talk about.

 

Maybe.

 

:P

 

(Winodj, I had to, the door was wide open and I had to shut it)

 

/door slams in background

Edited by kapkomet
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Dems start sobbing uncontrollably:

 

GOP: point and laugh, Dems: join them, Both: 2 shots

Greens & Independents: No drink for you! :lolhitting

 

So how many drinks do we got for the sobbers here? :D

What surprised me the most about the networks was CNBC. After the election it really became the conservative voice of network tv. FOX News made millions on fair & balanced which really was nothing more than extending the Crossfire plot to just about every show they air. But CNBC's slogan should be biased & Reaganesque. I was really surprised.

 

As for there being no liberal voice, well you still got the loudest mouth when it comes to print news. Though that's shrinking for you as well.

You're left out in the cold because you don't have an issue to rally people behind. The GOP has abortion, school prayer, religion, morality,

etc. These are things people appear to care about & tune in to listen & watch. What do the democrats have? Gay-marriage? What the democrats need is to stop selling their souls for profits & make unions their core issue. They should never appear on tv or radio news w/out mentioning the need to grow unions both here & abroad but especially abroad. Teach the American people what is at stake, paint the GOP as the union killers, & watch it trump all other issues.

 

They'll never do it though. Gephardt tried in 2000. He was silent on the issue in 2004.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(YASNY @ Feb 3, 2005 -> 02:32 AM)
You guys just cannot stand that there is a television station that gives the conservative viewpoint.  For the first 30 or so years of my life, you could not get this point of view from radio or TV unless it was on "Meet the Press" or similar show.  Of course, you'd had to listen to the liberal rhetoric as well.  I think it's about damn someone started putting it out there and making all the left wing dings squirm.

 

No, its more the fact that the vast majority of FOX (or should it be Faux?) News anchors are Michael Moore-esque partisan hacks of the extreme right wing.

 

I have no problem with conservative views and find myself in agreement with a lot of foreign policy of the Old Right. I don't know if you've read anything by Murray Rothbard but I agree with a lot of his views, not all but a lot.

 

The problem with FOX News is that their anchors have been caught with their proverbial pants down numerous times regarding having incorrect information and at times blatant lies (O'Reilly making up the Paris Business Review for instance). The right wing for the most part gets angry at Moore for lying and distorting the truth when in actuality FOX does the exact same thing.

 

Its not about squirming its more along the lines of the fact that Hannity and the rest of the hacks that thrive on throwing out two diametrically opposed positions that can see no compromise in order to keep their ratings up, their book sales up, their radio ratings up, etc. etc.

 

"The candidate can choose one of two platforms, but remember - no substitutions. For example, do you support universal health care? Then you must also want a ban on assault weapons. Pro-limited government? Congratulations, you are also anti-abortion. Luckily, all human opinion falls neatly into one of the two clearly defined camps. Thus, the two-party system elegantly reflects the bichromatic rainbow that is American political thought." - Jon Stewart :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cry me a river. FOX News has never denied any liberal the right to appear or speak on an issue. That is essentially what Fair & Balanced is. It doesn't take an IQ of 150 to realize the network is essentially conservative. It follows a pattern of conservativism that it's founder Murdoch aspires to. It didn't grow it's audience on the belief that it was non-partisan.

 

If the liberal left doesn't have the balls to appear & challenge a viewpoint presented on FOX News then whose fault is that? That's why Fair & Balanced has been so successful. Conservatives had to put up with Turner's liberal vision expressed in just about every CNN show with the exception of Crossfire. His arch-rival decided to challenge that vision & was successful in doing so.

 

Liberals should be crying over MSNBC & CNBC. There you see the makings of non-partisan news being molded to a conservative bias for the sole purpose of ratings growth. People turn to MSNBC for what they percieve as the middle ground perpsective of the news. But in the last year they seem to be moving further to the right.

 

There is an easy & obvious solution for liberals on this: tune into CNN. The less you watch CNN the less influence you will have in American politics. If you could make CNN #1 again then MSNBC would lean to the left.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(winodj @ Feb 3, 2005 -> 10:37 AM)
I'm sorry exactly where am I getting that liberal viewpoint on fake news tv shows like O'Reilly and HANNITY and colmes? I'm not. CNN has got the closest to any of that - and that's called Crossfire where there's balance between a left wing hack and a right wing hack. MSNBC has Scarborough Country and didn't they just hire Tucker Carlson - who has his own show on PBS, for Christ sakes. CNBC has Dennis Miller. The so called "liberal media" doesn't have a liberal voice on it worth a damn as far as I can see.

 

BTW: I didn't watch the State of the Union. I was too busy working.

 

 

For the last time. Hannity and Colmes, Oreilly.......anything like them are NOT NEWS SHOWS!!! They DISCUSS the news. They provide COMMENTARY!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(winodj @ Feb 3, 2005 -> 03:57 PM)
You act as though Cable News Networks are the be-all end-all.

 

If you put the audience of FOX news CNN MSNBC all together on an average night, you have half the audience, if that, of the CBS Evening News.

 

I REAAAAAALLLLLLLLLY doubt thats true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Feb 3, 2005 -> 04:07 PM)
For the last time.  Hannity and Colmes,  Oreilly.......anything like them are NOT NEWS SHOWS!!!  They DISCUSS the news.  They provide COMMENTARY!

 

Just looking at the Fox News schedule they're on half the time from 6-12pm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Feb 3, 2005 -> 05:08 PM)
I REAAAAAALLLLLLLLLY doubt thats true.

 

On a good night for O'Reilly, he has 2.5 million viewers. At the same time span, CNN might have a million, MSNBC - usually around 500,000.

 

That's a total of 4 million viewers.

 

CBS has the lowest rated network news program. It has, on a bad night, 7-8 million viewers.

 

I never said anything about O'Reilly or HANNITY andcolmes being a real news show. I called it a fake news show. Just like crossfire, scarborough country, the daily show and entertainment tonight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(winodj @ Feb 3, 2005 -> 04:59 PM)
On a good night for O'Reilly, he has 2.5 million viewers. At the same time span, CNN might have a million, MSNBC - usually around 500,000.

 

That's a total of 4 million viewers.

 

CBS has the lowest rated network news program. It has, on a bad night, 7-8 million viewers.

 

I never said anything about O'Reilly or HANNITY andcolmes being a real news show. I called it a fake news show. Just like crossfire, scarborough country, the daily show and entertainment tonight.

 

 

It's not any kind of a news show. It's a discussion forum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Iran and Syria respond to State of the Union

 

courtesy cbc.ca

 

Last Updated Thu, 03 Feb 2005 18:55:09 EST

 

WASHINGTON - Syria and Iran have both lashed out at comments made by U.S. President George W. Bush in his state of the union address.

 

U.S. President George W. Bush is applauded on Capitol Hill by Vice-President Dick Cheney, left, and House Speaker Dennis Hastert. (AP photo) 

Bush accused Syria of letting "terrorists" use its territory to destroy peace in the Middle East.

 

"To promote peace in the broader Middle East, we must confront regimes that continue to harbour terrorists and pursue weapons of mass murder. Syria still allows its territory, and parts of Lebanon, to be used by terrorists who seek to destroy every chance of peace in the region," Bush said in his speech.

 

Syria called the accusation "baseless."

 

Iran is dismissing both Bush's charge that it is developing pursuing nuclear weapons and his description of the country as the "world's primary state sponsor of terror."

 

Bush also told Iranians that "as you stand for liberty, America stands with you."

 

The U.S. president's remarks particularly enraged Iranian leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. "The Islamic Republic of Iran, because of supporting the oppressed and confronting oppressors, is being attacked by the global tyrants," state-run media quoted Khamenei as saying.

 

Bush was also accused of trying to seize Middle East oil under the pretext of promoting democracy.

 

Meanwhile, an exiled Iranian opposition group told a Paris news conference on Thursday that Iran has conducted successful experiments on a crucial triggering mechanism for a nuclear weapon.

 

The National Council of Resistance of Iran wants to depose Iran's clerical rulers. It has given accurate information on Iran's nuclear sites in the past.

 

The group says Iran is close to producing the neutron initiators that spark the chain reaction in a bomb.

 

The Iranian government is dismissing the accusations and says its atomic ambitions are limited to the peaceful generation of electricity.

 

I wonder if they are telling the truth. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...