Carol asks…What is your reaction to this headline? Democrats Push for ‘Truth Commission’?Mine is:
HOW ABOUT WE WORRY ABOUT THE GODDAMN ECONOMY!! Both political parties are total garbage, and need to be revamped. My little cousins don’t bicker as much as the Republican and Democrat party do. I’ll vote third party for as long as I live from here on out. I will give it up to Obama though, saying “Generally speaking, I’m more interested in looking forward than I am in looking back,”. Both parties need to grow up and worry about more important things. Here is a link to the article if you’re interested:
http://news.aol.com/?feature=334722Political News Writer answers:They are going to rip bush until he dies. Dems are so unbelievably stupid anyways. I can’t wait until they are held responsible for all our problems. One day the american people will wake up and realize that they are responsible for these problems. We elected these douches and its our fault for not paying our house notes. Seriously fuck the majority of americans. I like the physical landmass and founding documents but most americans are too god dammed stupid to deserve all the wonderful things we take for granted.Ruth asks…Is Fox News to blame for Olbermann’s lunacy?Time Magazine Critic: Blame Fox News for Olbermann’s Lunacy
Posted by Rich Noyes on October 6, 2006 – 18:01.
In an article posted Friday on Time.com, the magazine’s critic James Poniewozik suggests the Fox News Channel, which he sees as tilted to the right, is also responsible for the multi-minute rants that MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann has lately been emitting. Time also dismisses the idea that the rest of the mainstream media (presumably including itself) is tilted to the left, with Poniewozik parenthetically noting that “the MSM really slant toward the institutional, establishmentarian center, which is a bias as dangerous as any other.”
Poniewozik’s theory on Olbermann is that Fox’s climb to the top of the ratings has led to changes at other TV news outlets, including at MSNBC, although he paints Olbermann as the party most likely to be embarrassed by the link to Fox News: “Keith Olbermann ranting at George W. Bush and O’Reilly on MSNBC’s Countdown: that’s Fox through and through, whether Olbermann would like to admit it or not.”
But even the talk shows on Fox, which Poniewozik tags as “blatantly right,” routinely feature liberal guests to argue their point of view with hosts like Sean Hannity or the less-conservative Bill O’Reilly. MSNBC’s Countdown rarely, if ever, sees Olbermann engaged in any kind of debate with conservatives; instead, his program’s political stories are all designed to validate a conspiratorial worldview typically seen on left-wing blogs.
Here’s the relevant part of Poniewozik’s article, “What Hath Fox Wrought,” posted October 6, which looks like it’s part of the upcoming print version of the weekly newsmagazine:
Even with its ratings down, Fox remains the network against which competitors define themselves. And not just news competitors. After Bill Clinton got off an on-camera harangue against Fox News Sunday anchor Chris Wallace, for an aggressive line of questioning about his administration’s anti-terror efforts, the New York Times reported that prominent Democrats, from Howard Dean to Paul Begala, had begun an open campaign of attacking Fox as a covert Republican shill….
So is Fox a covert Republican shill? Shill, yes, sometimes. Its opinion shows blatantly tilt right. The news plays straighter, though as I write I’m looking at a Fox News chyron that reads, “If Rumsfeld left amid criticism, would America be at risk?” Covert, not so much. The network famously calls itself “fair and balanced,” but “fair and balancing” would be a better description: Roger Ailes repeatedly describes his news network as a counterweight, on the right, to the rest of the news media. His argument that nearly every other mainstream media outlet slants left is self-serving and mostly wrong. (The MSM really slant toward the institutional, establishmentarian center, which is a bias as dangerous as any other.) But while “fair and balanced” may be propaganda, it doesn’t seem to be fooling anyone. Conservatives see Fox as a comfortable haven for their worldview; their opponents pretty much agree. The balance here is that Fox winks just as broadly to both sides.
In the end, that wink—that is, the Fox gestalt of insouciance, attitude, and even playfulness—has had a bigger effect on the news media than any Bill O’Reilly rant. Fox taught TV news that voice, provocation and fun are not things to be afraid of. And for better or worse, probably every TV news program outside of PBS has been Foxified by now. The explosive graphics on your newscast: that’s Fox. The “freeSpeech” opinion segments on the new CBS Evening News: that’s Fox, too. Anderson Cooper yelling at a FEMA official or crusading in Africa: that’s Fox. Keith Olbermann ranting at George W. Bush and O’Reilly on MSNBC’s Countdown: that’s Fox through and through, whether Olbermann would like to admit it or not.Political News Writer answers:Obviously, you have watched the news enough to have a valid opinion. Fox news has changed the news reporting,for the better, I might say. They ARE, when news is reported, fair and balanced. If not, why do the liberals accuse them of being conservative and the conservatives accuse them of being liberal? To answer your question—no, Fox news is not responsible. That’s the same as saying the messenger carrier is responsible for the bad news in the message.Chris asks…What do you think?I saw a news article and later it reported on a news channel about using children as pawns and how the democrats have been using the children and the childrens health bill as pawns to try and hurt republicans even more since noone wants to hurt children. Anyways both parties use things as pawns its sad that the democrats have choosen children and the military to try to push its evil but what I thought was funny and want your feelings on is a picture and then a video of Reed sitting down then reaching for a boy about 7 and thoughts of Saddam and the first gulf war and the British civilians Saddam held as guests. Doesn’t it seem fitting Reed and Saddam using a child as a political pawn & to try to save their own butts? D is Democrats who = the Decepticons…. All children should have health insurance but why can they use children as pawns like Infamous dictators and we turn a blind eye?Political News Writer answers:Both parties have histories of using children as “pawns”. No Child left behind act is an example from the Republican party. (yah, that was a failure) Berry Goldwater’s commercial is the best example of using children as a pawn. Http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daisy_(television_commercial)
But what does Reed sitting a child have anything to do with Saddam? It isn’t like Reed is some over powered dictator that “sits with the boy” then kills them behind the scene. They see and hopes to fix by being president. Saddam would say one thing and do another.Michael asks…Was a Democrat lawmaker turned in by his fellow Dems?Democratic lawmakers in New Jersey who share office space with Assemblyman Neil Cohen found kiddie porn on his computer which they promptly turned over to law enforcement.
Like Mark Foley before him, Cohen sought immediate hospitalization for psychiatric treatment. He has resigned from his Assembly job.
So… is there a difference here between Democratic response to crimes that endanger children and Republican response to same? Which response – thus, which political party – acts quickest in the best interests of children? Voters need to know. This is an election year, after all.
SEE THE ARTICLE: http://rawstory.com//news/2008/NJ_lawmaker_resigns_amid_child_porn_0728.html
fdm215 – I am amused that you would think I am a Republican.
Do you not recall all the hemming and hawing and excuse-making done by Republican lawmakers and right-wingers after the Mark Foley scandal broke?
And in this example, the Democrats did not mess around – they called the cops, PRONTO. Politics was their last concern. Child safety came first.
Emme – so, to YOU, the collecting and storing and viewing of kiddie porn is a mere “difference of opinion?”
Southern Lady Anita — I agree with you 100%.
Firebaal — EXACTLY.Political News Writer answers:This is a sick individual. I don’t care if they are Democrat or Republican, these sick people need to leave office.Daniel asks…”Political tide turning on illegal immigration or Ridicule, then respect, for GOP’s border plan “http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/09/23/MNGOGLBFP31.DTL&feed=rss.news
Critics conceded a setback but argued that it would be temporary. They said enforcement alone won’t stop illegal immigration but will alienate Latino voters, the nation’s fastest-growing voter bloc. They said it will turn Republicans into a minority party, much as when former Gov. Pete Wilson won re-election in 1994 on an anti-immigrant platform that ultimately helped make California a Democratic-majority state.
For now, however, the political tide clearly favors enforcement first, legalization later.
“Not even a year ago, if you talked about a fence, you were an extremist who wanted to wall off the United States,” said Rosemary Jenks, government affairs director for Numbers USA, a group opposing immigration on population grounds. “Now the fence is a no-brainer.”
Frist said everyone agrees with border enforcement.
“We can’t have hundreds of thousands of people running across that lower border of the United States of America,” Frist said. “Let’s go ahead and do what we all agree … needs to be done, and that is to focus on securing our border.”
Lungren said his conversations with GOP colleagues in the Senate lead him to believe that “they now understand the magnitude of the feeling out there that we’ve got to get control of our border.”
Frank Sharry, executive director of the National Immigration Forum, a pro-immigrant group, conceded that if Republicans retain their House majority, their tough stand on immigration will be given wide credit, posing a serious hurdle to the push for broader legalization.
He predicted his side eventually will prevail nonetheless. ”
What do you think?
Mike, I don’t think anyone is missing that issue. Employers have convinced Congress that there is not an adequate system to verify employees in place and that building one will take years. While part of ‘reform’ is to start building that system, the employers have ‘plausible deniability’ until the system is in place, so current action is looking at other things. Besides, benefits are also a magnet, and if any are looking at legalization of screened people here, that will just draw more illegals unless we get a handle on borders and visa overstays. (Take a look at Spain for a recent illustration of this.)
America – absolutely.Political News Writer answers:We need to close our borders regardless of the illegal immigrant issue. There are criminals crossing that border, fleeing prosecution in their own countries. There are drug runners hauling there poisons across that border to prey on our innocent young people. There are murderers, pedophiles and rapists coming across that border to prey on our decent family members. There are thieves coming across that border to take what we worked all our lives to achieve. There are TERRORISTS coming across that border. A wall or a fence is a NCESSARY deterrent. It is not the ONLY thing that needs to be done. It is PART of the solution. It will slow them down. The Border Patrol can catch many who slip through. Others will be caught when they try to get a job with no documentation, or try to rent a house with no documentation or try to get health care or welfare or a drivers license with no documentation. Illegal immigration can be stopped. It has to be addressed in many different areas, not just one.Betty asks…What do you think of this idea to improve CNN’s political coverage?? or at least make it more interesting?This article simply points out the fact that CNN is getting DESTROYED in the ratings. It then offers multiple opinions from multiple people on changes they could potentially make to improve the situation. To clarify: CNN is making a profit but not getting ratings.
Rosen has his own ideas for a 7 p.m. to 11 p.m. line-up.
At 7 p.m., he would rename John King’s show “Politics is Broken,” and focus on “bringing outsiders to Beltway culture and Big Media into the conversation dominated by…. Beltway culture and Big Media.”
Rosen would program “Thunder on the Right” at 8 p.m., a show where a well-informed liberal “mostly covers the conservative movement and Republican coalition and where the majority of the guests (but not all) are right leaning.”
The following hour would be “Left Brained,” a show offering the opposite mix of hosts and guests. And at 10 p.m. would be “Fact Check,” an accountability show with major crowdsourcing elements” that would cut through “the week’s most outrageous lies, gimme-a-break distortions and significant misstatements with no requirement whatsoever to make it come out equal between the two parties on any given day, week, month or season.”Political News Writer answers:Interestingly, I noted today that CNN now has a bus trailing the Tea Party Express bus on it’s cross country tour. It is my opinion that CNN was stuck on the “spin” cycle this last year+ and now that they’ve figured it out, it’s too late.Powered by Yahoo! Answers