No Alternative Viewpoints, Please. We Are The "Reality-Based Community."
By Pejman Yousefzadeh Posted in Democrats — Comments (130) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
One of the salient features of the "reality-based" community in recent times has been their desire to go after FoxNews any chance they get and to try to deny it any publicity whatsoever. Remember the time that Democratic Presidential candidates wanted to go on Fox in order to debate? Their netroot base moved instantly to shut it down. And succeeded; evidently, each of the people who styles himself/herself as the next courageous President of the United States does not dare cross the netroot Line of Death and wander into Fox territory.
There danger lies, after all!
And now, for the next exercise in monumental hubris:
Liberal activists are stepping up their campaign against Fox News Channel by pressuring advertisers not to patronize the network.
MoveOn.org, the Campaign for America's Future and liberal blogs like DailyKos.com are asking thousands of supporters to monitor who is advertising on the network. Once a database is gathered, an organized phone-calling campaign will begin, said Jim Gilliam, vice president of media strategy for Brave New Films, a company that has made anti-Fox videos.
The groups have successfully pressured Democratic presidential candidates not to appear at any debate sponsored by Fox, and are also trying to get Home Depot Inc. to stop advertising there.
At least 5,000 people nationwide have signed up to compile logs on who is running commercials on Fox, Gilliam said. The groups want to first concentrate on businesses running local ads, as opposed to national commercials.
"It's a lot more effective for Sam's Diner to get calls from 10 people in his town than going to the consumer complaint department of some pharmaceutical company," Gilliam said.
Some of videos produced by Gilliam's company compile statements made by Fox anchors and guests that the activists consider misleading, such as those that question global warming.
Representatives for Fox News Channel, which is owned by News Corp., did not immediately return calls for comment.
Home Depot has not had an unusual number of calls, said spokesman Jerry Shields, and the home improvement chain will not change its advertising strategy.
"We're not in the business of censoring media," Shields said. "We need to reach our customer base through all mediums available."
There's more. Read on . . .
As I have said before, there is nothing like this on the center-right side of the political spectrum. Republicans don't get angry and exercised when their candidates meet with either NPR or the New York Times editorial board--and none of these news organizations are exactly right-wing propaganda outlets, if you know what I mean. On the contrary, far from it. But if a Democratic candidate even so much as glances towards the direction of FoxNews, the netroots explode in fury and outrage.
One cannot help but think that the netroots possess some kind of long term lack of confidence in both their ideas and their ability to propagate those ideas. Instead of competing in the battle of ideas and welcoming the opportunity to argue and debate, they try instead to shout down and shut down the voices on the other side of the philosophical divide (or at least, what they perceive to be the other side of the philosophical divide). Of course, democratic discourse suffers in this way, but that is not their concern. As with the attempt to reintroduce the "Fairness Doctrine," the efforts of the netroots and partisans on the other side is not so much to foster colloquy but rather to ensure informational control to the greatest degree possible.
Good for the Fox advertisers who have made it clear that they will attempt to resist such efforts at control. But one wonders just how free and fair the nature of our national debate will be if these new censors find themselves allies not only in the majority halls in Congress, but in the White House as well.
« Corrupt Democrat Watch, July 10 Edition, Part One — Comments (20) | A Supreme Court which reflects Chuckie and Arlen — Comments (39) »
No Alternative Viewpoints, Please. We Are The "Reality-Based Community." 130 Comments (0 topical, 130 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
I Tivo Oreilly because he has the liveliest and most free wheeling interview show on television. I can only recall one time a mike was cut off. The reason was the guy talking wouldn't let anyone reply.
When Michelle Malkin hosts I can think of times when I was wishing she would cut off the speaker.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
O'Reilly gives his guests the last word.
Ask not what you can do for your country, ask what your country can do for you. Washington Elected Elite
[Retread. Disregard. - Moe Lane]
I know of at least three or four times O'Reilly has cut people off, and I hardly ever watch the show because for one thing, he's arrogant as hell, and secondly he seriously just makes things up (but I'll admit it can be mildly entertaining in a twisted way). The recent story about massive lesbian gangs roaming the country with pink pistols and turning everyone in their path to lesbianism? Uh, you had to have known it already, but not true. There are lesbians who do happen to be in gangs somewhere, that was the kernel of truth--it's just that all his numbers were wrong, minor detail....But as far as cutting people's mics, he just did it yesterday, to Jane Hall, I think it was. She was trying to explain the obvious fact that he had cherry-picked lame comments by some Daily Kos readers in order to smear the whole site; and simultaneously overlooked the fact that commenters on his own site had talked about wanting to shoot Hillary Clinton, and wished that both houses of congress be bombed. AND, of course, he sort of passed over his own constant hate speech, such as suggesting that if the terrorists wanted to attack San Francisco, that would be a-okay with him......So anyway, Jane tried to get a word in edgewise and point this out and he called her a liar and cut her mic. That's all-spin-zone Bill-O for ya....
Don't recall it happening the way you say it did. I was doing other things while watching so my recollection could be off.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
Wubbies World, MSgt, USAF (Retired):
public static void main(String[] args) {
System.out.println("An argument is a sequence of statements aimed at demonstrating the truth of an assertion.); }
heard anyone's mic get cut off. Ever. I have never even heard a dem be treated distrespectfully. And often times, they are given the last word. In fact, what I see is that they have regular liberal contributors who maintain they are always well treated by Fox, and are always able to give their viewpoint. I am speaking specifically of Susan Estrich - she wrote an article about it,Kirsten Powers who said it directly to Bill O, and also Laura (can't think of her last name - cute, short blonde hair, democratic strategist from Chicago - heard her talk about it on the Roe Conn show in Chicago.
Let me atone by providing a concrete example or two. Please view these videos for express purpose of me providing evidence for my claims, and ignore the sumitters' comments (I think one is submitted by a Ron Paul bot heh)
mic cut #1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yDpIAqfWR2g
mic cut #2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wl0ePtUjDSo
Bear in mind that I'm not implying other networks are better. Hardball uses the same techniques but 100x worse (yelling over interviewees, asking heavily loaded/leading questions then not giving the interviewee time to clarify, and finally cutting the mic)
What tripe. Given the fact that FNC has better ratings than any other news channel, I'm sure its advertisers are shaking in their boots.
And if the Lefties threaten to boycott Sam's Diner, there are likely enough grease eaters amongst us to take their place.
not a new direction, but still frightening
Trying to win by censorship of the other side... these are symptoms of tyranny. The liberals have always fought dirty but this reeks of desperation.
Yet another stain on the whole global warming movement, sadly. These environmentalists jump at every opportunity to shoot themselves in the foot and alienate the rational. I think this issue deserves some honest attention personally, scientific and unpolitical, but there has been so much mudthrowing that it's probably too dirty to touch for a while. The extremists have ruined it for the whole lot.
I'll be discussing this issue, and my post, this afternoon on the Dirk Thompson show at 1:15 pm EDT.
Forgive me if I can't see the difference between the threat of financial ruin & censorship/fascism.
It says alot about how confident progressives are about their issues. The only way they win is if they're the only ones on the playing field.
"Trying to win by censorship of the other side..."
No one is censoring the the other side.
The shows on the Fox News Channel have ratings between one to two million viewers (with O’Reilly having a little bit more than that) and the demographic profile of the network is skewed heavily toward the elderly. It really doesn't make any sense for the Democrats to debate in front of audience of one to two million people who will never vote for them and who are in that demographic category. They should focus their attention on younger people and getting them registered to vote.
Nat, It is censorship because they're trying to make FNC unprofitable. It isn't just about viewership. If Murdoch isn't making money, it's certainly possible that he'd change the format to one more agreeable to Kos & MoveOn. If that happened, a media voice will have been silenced. That's censorship by every definition.
As for your statement that "It really doesn't make any sense for the Democrats to debate in front of audience of one to two million people who will never vote for them...", that's one of the silliest statements I've ever read.
Conservatives go on NPR, CNN & MSNBC every day with the attitude that they might reach people with their common sense agenda. If all you're doing is preaching to the liberal choir, you won't build your party. It's that simple.
Your statement that "They should focus their attention on younger people and getting them registered to vote..." is equally foolish. Young voters are the most unreliable voters. If Democrats hinge their election success on preaching to the liberal choir & increasing the youth vote, then they're heading for a tough election in 2008.
Nat, It is censorship because they're trying to make FNC unprofitable.
That's not censorship.
Anyway, Fox News doesn't need Dems to be successful; they have a loyal fan base of about one to two million who they can make money off of.
Conservatives go on NPR, CNN & MSNBC every day with the attitude that they might reach people with their common sense agenda.
It's their business if they go on NPR, MSNBC or CNN. These networks are far more fair and balanced than the network that claims to be fair and balanced.
Young voters are the most unreliable voters. If Democrats hinge their election success on preaching to the liberal choir & increasing the youth vote, then they're heading for a tough election in 2008.
They're far more reliable than the FOX News audience.
And I think the conservatives are going to get massacred in November 2008.
NPR, MSNBC or CNN. These networks are far more fair and balanced than the network that claims to be fair and balanced.
Networks owned, run and staffed nearly 100% by liberals are bound to look "fair and balanced" ... to a liberal.
George W. Bush: He's A Folder ... Not A Fighter.
"Networks owned, run and staffed nearly 100% by liberals are bound to look "fair and balanced" ... to a liberal."
These liberals get their paychecks from conservative corporate boards.
Give you a hint, CBS,NBC, and ABC's boards aren't exactly conservative.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
I don't think that's true (I know GE owns NBC and GE is also a defense contractor). All these corporate boards know that they can be more profitable and have favorable legislation pass if republicans are in charge. They'll do what's in the best interest of the corporation.
I think one would have to actually show when they might have possibly said something conservative. Not who owned them. Another clue might be to look at the political donations of the employees.
"Another clue might be to look at the political donations of the employees."
It doesn't matter. The corporations are going to do what's in the best interest of the corporation. That's why these networks don't go after the Bush administrations and republicans as hard as they should. These networks should be talking about impeaching the president.
David hes proved himself correct.
Anyone who thinks the the MSM hasn't been going after the president for the past 7+ years would have to believe the media is right wing conspiracy.
Oh Nat just a note. It was Fox that broke the Bush DUI story 24 hours before the 2000 election. Have fun finding some way to incorporate that into your knowledgespace.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
Anyone who thinks the the MSM hasn't been going after the president for the past 7+ years would have to believe the media is right wing conspiracy.
There has been multiple violations of the Constitution and the rule of law by this administration and the media still treats them with kid gloves.
"Oh Nat just a note. It was Fox that broke the Bush DUI story 24 hours before the 2000 election. Have fun finding some way to incorporate that into your knowledgespace."
No. But they sure went along with the Iraq/WMD farce.
The truth is that it was a reporter at fox affiliate WPXT-TV in Portland, Maine, who uncovered the DUI story. FNC had the scoop on the national level.
You want to reconcile that with fox taking its marching orders from the RNC ?
I know, you know this to be true.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
The truth is that it was a reporter at fox affiliate WPXT-TV in Portland, Maine, who uncovered the DUI story. FNC had the scoop on the national level.
If they did that, that was good of them. Anyway, I don't really care if a politician has a DUI, has had an affair or smoked something illegal in their youth. I still don't know why it was such a big story.
And I use to watch the FOX New Channel all the time and I loved the O'Reilly Factor. But O'Reilly went psycho and the network followed his path and I stopped watching the network.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
"I know, you know this to be true."
I didn't read your post correctly. I thought you said it wasn't FOX who broke... Frankly I had no idea who broke the story nor do I care.
Or at least you need to pick the ground you stand better.
The left let you stand on a branch then sawed it out from under you.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
Too easy to use them to say whatever damfool thoughts comes into your head.
Shoo. If you can't get your impeachment lovin' on dKos these days you certainly ain't going to spark any interest here.
Moe
PS: We already preemptively ban accounts using certain temporary email services; this could very quickly turn into a blanket ban all around. Fair warning, people.
The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!
Moe,
Still think you need to look into "speed bumps" as a tool.
No one gets to register, post and have the post appear until the post gets looked at first by a moderator. At least for say the first day or so after registering.
It's only going to get worse.
_______________________________
None of the Above !
The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!
not something you don't like, but an actual violation. Remember, you said "multiple".
"a man's admiration for absolute government is proportinate to the contempt he feels for those around him". Tocqueville
is why Walter Cronkite was allowed to spread Communist propaganda that the Tet offensive was some kind of victory for a group that never won any victories except in the eyes of the left? Why John Kerry was allowed to provide support for the Communists? Why Jane Fonda is not in prison for aiding and supporting the enemy that was killing American Soldiers?
Why Ted Kennedy was allowed to seek Russian support to defeat a Republican running for President?
Why Sen Rockefeller was allowed to take his knowledge of American Intelligence to Syria?
Why American leftist political leaders are running the same propaganda as the Iraqi terrorists?
Why American leftists are trying to destroy America?
To American leftists in and out of the media, nothing matters as long as they can defeat America.
Those are some surreal claims you are making.
So American Leftists want to destroy America?
There are those who look at things the way they are, and ask why ... I dream of things that never were and ask why not. - Robert Kennedy
The America we recognize as America
God knows what it would be replaced with but it won't be pretty.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
The America you wish to portray.
It is sad that so many people must assign evil intentions to others simply because they disagree with them.
This holds true on both sides of the ditch.
There are those who look at things the way they are, and ask why ... I dream of things that never were and ask why not. - Robert Kennedy
Merely action without consideration of consequence
Libs generally look for people that have some kind of problem. They offer a government solution in return for support. What would seem to be a win, win situation.
What actually happens is that the solution is at the expense of society as a whole. It does not solve the problem rather it indefinitely prolongs the problem. The cost of the solution to society creates new problems that need not have happened at all.
Social security is the exemplar of this.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
I can at least understand your views. I think you wildly overstate them but at least they are grounded in a reasonable argument.
Arguing that the Left wants to destroy America is just not rational.
There are those who look at things the way they are, and ask why ... I dream of things that never were and ask why not. - Robert Kennedy
What rational explanation is there for Walter Cronkite to declare Vietnam a Communist victory after they lost so badly in that Tet Offensive? Except to destroy America.
What rational explanation is there for Jane Fonda encouraging the North Vietnamese military in any way she can to kill more Americans? Except to destroy America.
What rational explanation is there for John Kerry to stand in front of the Communist delegations in Paris and tell them that they are right to be killing Americans? Except to destroy Americans.
What rational explanation is there for John Kerry to stand in front of the US Senate Subcommittee on Foreign Relations on 22 Apr 1971 and tell them absolute lies about American soldiers and their conduct in Vietnam. What rational explanation is there for his statement that America must adopt the North Vietnamese peace proposals? Except to destroy America.
What rational explanation is there for the KGB saying there are messages from Ted Kennedy asking for their help to defeat
a Republican
candidate for President; "In May 1983, the KGB again reported to their bosses on a discussion in Moscow with former Sen. John Tunney. Kennedy had instructed Tunney, according to the KGB, to carry a message to Yuri Andropov, the General Secretary of the Soviet Communist Party, expressing Kennedy's concern about the anti-Soviet activities of President Ronald Reagan. The KGB reported "in Kennedy's opinion the opposition to Reagan remains weak. Speeches of the President's opponents are not well-coordinated and not effective enough, and Reagan has the chance to use successful counterpropaganda." Kennedy offered to "undertake some additional steps to counter the militaristic, policy of Reagan and his campaign of psychological pressure on the American population." Kennedy asked for a meeting with Andropov for the purpose of "arming himself with the Soviet leader's explanations of arms control policy so he can use them later for more convincing speeches in the U.S." He also offered to help get Soviet views on the major U.S. networks and suggested inviting "Elton Rule, ABC chairman of the board, or observers Walter Cronkite or Barbara Walters to Moscow."
"So from 1978 to 1983, there is direct evidence from Soviet archives that Tunney was acting as a middleman between Senator Kennedy and the Soviet Union. Circumstantial evidence indicates that Tunney may have begun playing this role as early as 1974-1976.
Tunney’s role as courier to the Soviets was not limited to delivering messages from Kennedy. A review of Paul Kengor’s Crusader adds:
At one point after President Reagan left office, Tunney acknowledged that he had played the role of intermediary, not only for Kennedy but for other U.S. senators, Kengor said. Moreover, Tunney told the London Times that he had made 15 separate trips to Moscow."
What rational explanation is there for Sen Rockefeller's trip to Syria in Jan 2002 except to defeat America?
What rational explanation is there for statements from then Pres Clinton, his SEC of State and many, many other Democrats that Saddam Hussein must be kept from using WMDs and then claiming that they never made these Statements
What rational explanation is there for every Democrat Political leader to seek the same goal the terrorist are seeking in Iraq- Get Americans out of Iraq? At the same time
American soldiers are being killed by the terrorists who are seeking the same goals the Democrat Political leaders are seeking. What rational explanation can be offered?
What rational explanation is there for Walter Cronkite to declare Vietnam a Communist victory after they lost so badly in that Tet Offensive? Except to destroy America.
When did Mr. Cronkite say this? Here's the quote that is most often referenced...
To say that we are closer to victory today is to believe, in the face of the evidence, the optimists who have been wrong in the past. To suggest we are on the edge of defeat is to yield to unreasonable pessimism. To say that we are mired in stalemate seems the only realistic, yet unsatisfactory, conclusion. On the off chance that military and political analysts are right, in the next few months we must test the enemy's intentions, in case this is indeed his last big gasp before negotiations. But it is increasingly clear to this reporter that the only rational way out then will be to negotiate, not as victors, but as an honorable people who lived up to their pledge to defend democracy, and did the best they could.
This is Walter Cronkite. Good night.
Where did he say the Communists won? Or are you referring to a different quote?
What Jane Fonda has to do with this conversation I have no idea. Did she run for office when I wasn't looking?
I'm not even going to bother with the John Kerry stuff since that has been beaten such a bloody pulp of a dead horse it isn't worth it.
Honestly you're a bit too venomous to discuss matters reasonably.
You make a boatload of assumptions based on partial information. To each their own I guess.
There are those who look at things the way they are, and ask why ... I dream of things that never were and ask why not. - Robert Kennedy
I didn't realize only leftists running to office provided aid and comfort to our enemies. In fact, I'm positive that the US Constitution, Article III, Sec III does not mention politicians.
I guess I could find what ever information is needed to prove what ever it is that needs to be proven to rational people. If I could find out what it is that is confusing.
You have a reading comprehension problem? You were talking about Democratic politicans and then brought Jane Fonda, an actress, into the equation.
I know exactly what she did. It was despicable. But I really don't much care what some bimbo actress in her 20s was doing 40 years ago.
There are those who look at things the way they are, and ask why ... I dream of things that never were and ask why not. - Robert Kennedy
simply willfully ignorant, the left absolutely refuses to learn from history. They see a world where the solution to every problem is negotiation despite a thousand years of history that clearly shows this to be untrue. They see a world where "from eacfh according to his ability to each according to his need" actually works. They simply refuse to learn from history and that is the greatest sin of all.
John
----------
Why would God invent something like whiskey? To keep the Irish from ruling the world of course
It is sad that so many people must assign evil intentions to others simply because they disagree with them.
On the whole, I tend to regard leftists and well-intentioned, but mistaken. I think the same holds for the large majority of people on the right. On the other hand, the view that right-wingers are right wing because they are bad or stupid seems somewhere near universal on the left. It certainly seems to infect the highest levels of politics.
Quentin Langley
Editor of http://www.quentinlangley.net
International Editor of
leftists want to "destroy" America in the sense of replacing it with some other form of government such as a dictatorship.
I do think that they are seeking to create a socialist/communist America where every citizen is "cared" for by the government --- but of course in exchange for this "care" citizens have to do as the government says.
On the international front they seek an America that does not exert any influence in the world but rather is on an "equal" footing with every other nation.
The problem with leftists is that they are willfully ignorant.
John
----------
Why would God invent something like whiskey? To keep the Irish from ruling the world of course
Socialism doesn't work. It looks nice on paper, but it's been tried and it's failed miserably every time (usually accompanied by widespread death and suffering).
Proud member of the V.R.W.C.
is why Walter Cronkite was allowed to spread Communist propaganda that the Tet offensive was some kind of victory for a group that never won any victories except in the eyes of the left? Why John Kerry was allowed to provide support for the Communists? Why Jane Fonda is not in prison for aiding and supporting the enemy that was killing American Soldiers?
Johnson and all those who followed his policies were responsible for those deaths.
Why Ted Kennedy was allowed to seek Russian support to defeat a Republican running for President?
Because he can.
Why Sen Rockefeller was allowed to take his knowledge of American Intelligence to Syria?
Because he can. I'm sure the Bush administration would have had him arrested if he did anything wrong.
Why American leftist political leaders are running the same propaganda as the Iraqi terrorists?
The Iraqis want us out of their country and the left has no problem with that. The Iraqis need to find their own path.
Why American leftists are trying to destroy America?
I would say conservatives are trying to destroy America.
To American leftists in and out of the media, nothing matters as long as they can defeat America.
No. We're trying to save America from this disastrous and dangerous path the Bush administration has put us on.
GE is a defense contractor ? Ge builds everything if they don't make it they finance your purchase of it.
But lets try a couple of examples
Sumner Redstone chairman of Viacom (owns CBS)
http://www.newsmeat.com/billionaire_political_donations/Sumner_Redstone....
Pretty conservative record there (Not)
And here we have media contributions overall
http://www.capitaleye.org/mediacontribs.6.2.03.asp
Yep going conservative there
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
For the top 25 media companies pretty much sums things up.
I think you need to question your assumptions now. Theres more than enough material here for you to make a start.
At least try to eliminate some of the crap you seem certain is true, but on even casual fact check proves completely false.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
There are five major companies that own the media. I know the Viacom CEO supported Bush's reelection, I know GE is the defense contractor who would benefit from Bush's reelection. Everyone knows that News Corp. supports republicans. I'm not sure who Disney or Time Warner supported.
Seeing as Sumner Redstone the chairman of Viacom gave not one cent to bush, but over 5000 to Kerry, and over 2000 to Gore in 2000.
So once again what you know is wrong.
As for GE you should have stopped at they are a defense contractor. NBC's contributions went 77% D 23% R
So it seems you know very little thats correct.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
Industry PAC's traditionally split their moneys evenly between the parties in order to have influence with both sides.
So if the PAC contributions are taken out, MSM organizations that already give 70% of their contributions (individual and corporate combined) would be found giving far more than 70% to the D side.
Do you understand the math?
George W. Bush: He's A Folder ... Not A Fighter.
Right now I'm in a union in NYC. The candidate I supported for Mayor in 2001 was not the one the union endorsed.
I know GE owns NBC and GE is also a defense contractor ...
And therein lies the sort of "proof" that Lefties will use to argue that NBC slants the news to the right. Last I checked, Diane Feinstein's (D-CA) husband got a lot of sweet contracts from the DoD thanks to his wife's seat on the Armed Services committee - which just goes to show that being a defense contractor doesn't preclude you from jumping into bed (figuratively and literally) with Democrats.
Heck, does this "Nat Shaw" character know that former Senator Sam Nunn (D-GA) is on the board of GE? Or that every member of the GE corporate board (from Jeff Immelt to Ralph Larsen?) has made political contributions to Democrats?
The real issue here is the contribution history and the partisan leanings of NBC's (not GE's) reporting and editorial staff (heavily Democratic) because the fact that GE splits its political contributions pretty much 50/50 (i.e. 50.6-R to 48.6-D) pretty much blows this sort of nonsense out of the water.
George W. Bush: He's A Folder ... Not A Fighter.
liberal TalkingPoint™ No. 613: Eeeeevil Corporations run everything!
Not quite yet. But if conservatives keep on getting elected your fears may come true.
Whens the last time you saw a board respond to large share holders let alone small ones ? Especially on issues where they have some weird reasoning going on. It usually takes an alliance of share holders to get anything but lipservice. If the stock is doing well thats all they get.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
...corporations running everything, as long as you own 'em. Of course I'm being flip, because our young liberal interlocutor's response will certainly be: "Far be it from me to be complicit in evil!"
To him, I say that idealism is wonderful for young people, but when you get more experienced you realize that life if easier if you work with human nature rather than against it.
To your question, though, American corporations in general are highly responsive to their shareholders. There are very few "star" CEOs that dominate their boards, even if Hollywood and MSM mythology would have it that way.
But on the other side of the coin, the men who sit atop the large mutual funds, pension funds, university endowments and insurance portfolios are not stupid enough to micromanage the corporations they own. They hire CEOs in order to do a job. When CEOs fail, they get fired. Quickly.
Have you ever chaired a board meeting that started off with people saying "Why didn't this quarter go like you promised it would?" and ended with them just walking out?
I have. Boy did that suck.
... this looks like it could be fun.
PS: This is one of those sites where you actually have to present proof for what you say. So, screaming what "everyone knows" (such as the nonsensical belief that the MSM is controlled by "conservative corporate boards ...") on DailyKos or some other enclave of the Left doesn't really convince anyone here.
This is an old argument in these parts so I'll just repeat myself. Let's examine a few media owners; i.e. Sumner Redstone (Chairman: CBS Corporation), Katherine Graham (Publisher & CEO: Washington Post), Arthur Sulzberger (Publisher: New York Times), Robert Iger (Chairman: Disney (ABC)) and Ted Turner (Founder: CNN). Granted, Mrs. Graham is late and her son is now the publisher, but all the evidence supports the proposition that Donald Graham shares his mother's political leanings.
That said, what we do know about these folks is that they are/were the "owners" (for lack of a better term) of the "corporate" mainstream news media. Here's another thing we know about them; they are all liberal. Very liberal. Take a look at Iger's political contributions here. How about Sumner Redstone's - here? And here is Ted Turner's own contributions history.
Let me make this even more fun; let's look at corporate contributions on the Center for Public Integrity's website. For example, CBS gave 87.4% of its corporate donations to the Democrats and a whopping 12.5% to Republicans. The New York Times Company likewise gave a humongous 12.3% to the GOP and a "miniscule" 86.6% to Democrats.
And note that corporate contributions do not actually indicate the bias or political leanings of a news outlet. All corporate entities in America donate significantly to both parties, they're simply hedging their bets, so it's not indicative of anything, anyway. Although if you look at the fact that CBS gives almost 90% of its money to Democrats, it's obviously a lot more partisan than FOX News, since NewsCorp gives nearly 40% of its money to Democrats.
I can go on ... but do you really want me to?
George W. Bush: He's A Folder ... Not A Fighter.
Do you have any info on the corporate donations of the five major companies that own virtually all of the media: GE, Disney, News Corp, Time Warner and Viacom?
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
At least 5,000 people nationwide have signed up to compile logs on who is running commercials on Fox...
Great. That's 5,000 more people who'll get exposed to unbiased reporting and maybe something...anything critical of a Democrat. I wonder how many of those 5,000 will be turned to the dark side?
-----------------------
Develop alternatives to existing policies and keep them alive and available until the politically impossible becomes the politically inevitable. Milton Friedman
Let's stop dancing around with the silly names and just call these people what they are: communists.
Progressives. In the 1930's they were called other things.
They love progress so much that they want to make a project out of sinking a network simply because they claim (falsely) that it is daring to be radically out of line with the MSM.
So does that mean we can shut down Pacifica? Or has it been shut down and no one noticed yet?
The bash Fox crowd is coming out to play.
Wubbies World, MSgt, USAF (Retired):
public static void main(String[] args) {
System.out.println("An argument is a sequence of statements aimed at demonstrating the truth of an assertion.); }
Wouldn't be unduly concerned. Don't see Wal-Mart going out of business and it's been target number one for the leftwing for years now...
Left boycotts Fox News, the right boycotts MSNBC and both networks seem to be doing fine. How dare any of you call exercising one's right to spend their time and money as they see fit 'communism' (Gerry35 comment). What I spent my money and time on is my own business. Long live the free market!
[Retread. Disregard. - Moe Lane]
MSNBC has Joe Scarborough, Pat Buchanan, Tucker Carlson and Chris "I sympathize with felon Scooter Libby" Mathews. Hard to argue they are the left wing's answer to Fox. Olbermann and others might balance things out a little, but we Dems don't exactly have our very own news channel yet....And by the way the only reason Fox has such great ratings is because the country is 30% repubs who aren't interested in watching anything they don't already agree with. All the other networks have to split the remaining 70%. Do the math.
LOL, I hope the left propels Olberman to the mascot of the Dems. What a gift that would be. Olberman embodies the true spirit of the left.
Ask not what you can do for your country, ask what your country can do for you. Washington Elected Elite
[Retread. Disregard. - Moe Lane]
First off, criticizing the Democrats simply for pushing back against Bill O'Reilly's attempts at smearing them is just laughable. That's all you got. The Democrats are.....being political....and trying to....INFLUENCE THE COUNTRY......what will they do next, NOMINATE SOMEONE TO RUN FOR PRESIDENT??? Who do these people think they are???!! As if America is founded on "We the people" or something! Citizens aren't supposed to do stuff, they're supposed to watch Fox News, AND AGREE WITH IT, OR ELSE!!
Speaking of which, for those of you (looks like pretty much everyone here) who think that Fox actually gives fair and balanced, unbiased, no-spin, you decide reporting, here's a simple test. Correct me where I'm wrong:
Fox News liberal anchors:
-Alan Colmes
Fox News conservatives:
-Sean Hannity
-Bill O'Reilly
-John Gibson
-Brit Hume
-Neil Cavuto:
Hard to say, maybe sort of in the middle, probably leaning to the right:
Greta Van Sustern
Chris Wallace
Those are pretty much the only ones I know of since I don't waste my time with it, for this very reason. But not a single show anchored solely by a Dem, one that's half-and-half, and the rest are basically right-wingers. Then they throw in a few squeaky Dems who can barely make an argument, the straw man they fight so they can say they won. Pure and simple, the reason the Democrats are boycotting Fox News is because they are not a news network, they are a heavily slanted opinion network. Nothing wrong with that, but they need to reach inside, come out of the closet and get a grip on the truth. And change their slogan.
but I can see how someone that identifies with the liberal propaganda emanating from ABC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, NBC and PBS would consider FOX News to be conservative.
Let's take a look at the list of FOX News anchors in their proper categories.
Conservative: E.D. Hill, John Gibson, Brit Hume and Sean Hannity.
Independent: Neil Cavuto, Shepard Smith, Chris Wallace and Bill O'Reilly.
Liberal: Martha MacCallum, Alan Colmes, Greta Van Susteren, Kimberly Guilfoyle, Julie Banderas and Geraldo Rivera.
You do have a valid point about balance, but not in the way you think. Conservatives seem to be outnumbered by about 2-1.
Note: I'm pretty sure Bob Beckel, Dick Morris, Mara Liasson, Juan Williams, Kirsten Powers, Laura Schwartz and Ellis Henican would strongly disagree with your categorization that they are little more than "squeaky Dems who can barely make an argument."
***
“Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant, but that they know so much that isn't so.” – Ronald Reagan
I could have saved myself a lot of valuable time if I had hit the refresh button somewhere along the line. ;)
***
“Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant, but that they know so much that isn't so.” – Ronald Reagan
Conservative: “Fox and Friends” crew, E.D. Hill, John Gibson, Brit Hume, Sean Hannity, Neil Cavuto and Bill O’Reilly.
Independent: Shepard Smith and Chris Wallace (but these two like to parrot conservative talking points.
Liberal: Alan Colmes (AKA pushover liberal) and Geraldo Rivera (I’m not really sure if Rivera is a liberal but I’ll list him here anyway).
Unknown affiliation: Greta Van Susteren.
I have no clue who these people are: Martha MacCallum, Kimberly Guilfoyle and Julie Banderas.
I suppose having a grasp of economic theory would tend to make you seem conservative to a Liberal. Of course pointing out how any part of a liberal agenda doesn't correspond to reality, will get you labeled a reactionary conservative.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
Wubbies World, MSgt, USAF (Retired):
public static void main(String[] args) {
System.out.println("An argument is a sequence of statements aimed at demonstrating the truth of an assertion.); }
He's reasonably well-respected by the financial heavyweights I know. (Not so much because they watch him on television but because they'll take his calls.)
Of course, that means Cavuto knows something about business, in the real world. (I admit that doesn't say anything about whether he understands, or cares about, economic theory.)
I think Cavuto is heading up the new fox business channel. He came from CNBC to Fox.
Ask not what you can do for your country, ask what your country can do for you. Washington Elected Elite
"He's reasonably well-respected by the financial heavyweights I know."
The guy did a segment the other day with the headline: "National Healthcare: Breeding Ground For Terror?"
BTW, that was well respected by financial heavyweights. Somehow I doubt you fall into the category. The ability to read a complete sentence being something of a prerequisite.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
...you aught to find out a little bit about who you are besmirching. Mr Blackhedd is someone I would not make that kind cheap shot at. He does not play politics at work. He is speaking from actually knowing.
I strongly suggest you ask him before you make yourself look silly.
Wubbies World, MSgt, USAF (Retired):
public static void main(String[] args) {
System.out.println("An argument is a sequence of statements aimed at demonstrating the truth of an assertion.); }
Would you care to back up your assertion ? That the NHS wasn't making it easy for terrorists to get into England ?
As to your counter claim. Care to demonstrate further ignorance ? Cavuto goes back to the FNN/CNBC . He is now outdrawing his old network. Marketwrap and Power lunch on CNBC were two of their best rated shows.
It would help your case, if you actually knew what you were talking about.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
"Would you care to back up your assertion ? That the NHS wasn't making it easy for terrorists to get into England ?"
Where's your proof that it was?
"As to your counter claim. Care to demonstrate further ignorance ? Cavuto goes back to the FNN/CNBC . He is now outdrawing his old network. Marketwrap and Power lunch on CNBC were two of their best rated shows."
This means...?
Well lets see it arranged for medical staff to be allowed into England under expedited visas and they subsequently participated in terrorist attacks. I think that might be evidence of a problem.
It means Cavuto has had a long successful career in financial journalism. It also means that you should think before posting.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
Well lets see it arranged for medical staff to be allowed into England under expedited visas and they subsequently participated in terrorist attacks. I think that might be evidence of a problem.
This is not evidence of anything. Every country gives out visas and there's a chance a terrorist might slip through. It's hard to tell who is a terrorist or who will become a terrorist without a crystal ball.
This is not evidence of anything. Every country gives out visas and there's a chance a terrorist might slip through. It's hard to tell who is a terrorist or who will become a terrorist without a crystal ball.
Actually, I was in England when the attacks and arrests went down, so I know that there were red flags on these people long before they were issued Visas. Some of them had been rejected for similar Visas by Canada and I believe Australia for terrorist links.
So the UK really didn't need a crystal ball, just common sense and some diligence.
George W. Bush: He's A Folder ... Not A Fighter.
Cavuto's thesis was that medical staff was being let in from terrorist nations. This provided an easy way for terrorists to sneak in and allowed them to get their people in by pricing them cheaply.
So far you have tried to smear a journalist on the basis of a news story you hadn't seen.
You have tried to slam an opinion comentator with a false statement. (Probably haven't watched the show either)
You have made misstatements about the political habits of the people involved in the media.
Have stated that the democrat presidential candidates shouldn't try to engage the entire country
And finally have demonstrated you don't know what the word censorship means.
Not too bad for a newbie.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
...so I've never seen Cavuto on screen, and I've never seen Fox News either. (I've seen a certain amount of CNN because they have the unmitigated gall to make themselves unavoidable in airports.)
I do know some folks that also don't watch a lot of TV (certainly not during trading hours), but they know Cavuto because he calls them when he needs a quote or a guest appearance. They usually have good things to say about him. And that's actually saying something, because most financial journalists don't know their... well, I'll let you fill in the blanks.
Don't get me started on Cramer.
Call them names and make fun of them, anything to shut them up, but I am wondering when the facts of the story are going to be proven wrong?
Mr Nat Shaw belongs to the Hugo Chavez school of marketing.
Wubbies World, MSgt, USAF (Retired):
public static void main(String[] args) {
System.out.println("An argument is a sequence of statements aimed at demonstrating the truth of an assertion.); }
"Mr Nat Shaw belongs to the Hugo Chavez school of marketing."
I'm more of a FDR or a Theodore "Trust-Buster" Roosevelt kind of guy.
... support alternative news sources and a free market.
Wubbies World, MSgt, USAF (Retired):
public static void main(String[] args) {
System.out.println("An argument is a sequence of statements aimed at demonstrating the truth of an assertion.); }
"... support alternative news sources and a free market."
No one is stopping conservatives from having an alternative news source.
I didn't think it would be published until after the party congress. Ah well I am just an outer party member. Thats doubleplusgood
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
The one thing the left misses about Fox is the exact same thing they miss about talk radio. It is the reason why Fox and talk radio are successful. If you deliver a product that people want you will be successful.
If you deliver a product that people don't want you will fail. However, they subscribe to the Hugo Chavez model of marketing because they know what is better for us, and they become enraged if we don't buy it.
They are demonstrating that methodology of marketing in the Fox rantings. Now there seems to be some coming here to push that methodology of marketing too.
Here's an idea, if you don't like it, turn it off. Those of us who do like it will keep it on. The ratings will determine who has the better product.
Wubbies World, MSgt, USAF (Retired):
public static void main(String[] args) {
System.out.println("An argument is a sequence of statements aimed at demonstrating the truth of an assertion.); }
will not bend to leftist twits who rarely shop for anything other then Starbucks and animal free food anyway. FOX recently redid their contracts and got paid a lot more to run commercials then CNN or MSNBC why? because for one O'Reilly in the 25-54 gets on average 500K and overall 2.5 per night Olbermann is lucky to 500K period, and the only one doing anything near O'Reilly's numbers on CNN is Larry King and he averages about 1.7 million viewers the next closest is Lou Dobbs because of his amnesty stance and the fight against the middle class which of course includes the amnesty bs. If you want a link to the numbers I just gave go over to mediabistro.com I check it every day just to laugh at the numbers the other cable channels are getting. I also know that FOX ends up usually in the top 5 of all cable ie: the cartoon channel etc and the next closet is CNN usually around 25th and MSNBC not in the top 30, so those leftist DKos kids can kick and scream all they want but money is king and FOX my friends is King.
"The one thing the left misses about Fox is the exact same thing they miss about talk radio. It is the reason why Fox and talk radio are successful. If you deliver a product that people want you will be successful."
All the cable news networks have abysmal ratings. Most people get their news from their local news broadcast.
"Here's an idea, if you don't like it, turn it off. Those of us who do like it will keep it on. The ratings will determine who has the better product."
So why are you guys whining about the Dems not going on FOX News?
Wubbies World, MSgt, USAF (Retired):
public static void main(String[] args) {
System.out.println("An argument is a sequence of statements aimed at demonstrating the truth of an assertion.); }
we are just pointing out the obvious which is if Democrats do not want to speak to 2.5 million Americans they deem hostile how in the heck are they going to speak to the world and our enemies.....this is a valid point.........care to answer?
So you think the FOX News audience is equivalent to our enemies?
They only shun FOX News because they can and there are absolutely no consequences for doing so. They don't need the one to two million viewers who watch that channel to win elections.
voting for them. Even wonder why every time a voter ID bill becomes law anywhere, the Democrats run to the courts and scream that the voters in that party are unable to get the proper ID, so the law must be thrown out? Ever wonder what kind of American citizens can't get the proper ID?. It's the dead and illegal voters that can't get proper ID.
There's no problem with voter fraud; There is a problem with election fraud. The GOP is doing everything possible to get Democrats of the voter rolls.
Dead Democrats
Illegal Alien Democrats
Ineligible Felon Democrats
Vacation home owning multiply registered democrats ?
Multiple Absentee balloting democrats ?
Or just plain bussed in multiply voting democrats ?
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
would that be anything like counting, recounting and re-recounting the votes until you get the desired results? As was done in the Washington state governors race last election, the same states senator race the election before that, and was attempted to be done in FL 2000 until the US Supreme Court finally stepped in and shut down the farce?
You are right, there is ELECTION fraud...just not the fraud YOU believe is there.
you sound like you are about 15 and know absolutely NOTHING that happened before you became indoctinated.
Nat
I know it does not fit your mime, but here's what the law is in a fairly liberal state, California. I think most Republicans would be satisfied with this nation wide as a standard. How would this be consider getting Democrats out of the voter rolls?
Proof of Identity Required
Proof of identity may be provided prior to an election or at the polling place on Election
Day. The following provide examples of when the proof of identity requirement has
been satisfied:
♦ The applicant provided satisfactory proof of identity with the voter
registration application or otherwise provided satisfactory proof of identity
prior to voting in a Federal election (Title 2, California Code of
Regulations, Section 20108.38(a)(i)); or
♦ The applicant’s California driver’s license or state identification number, or
the last four digits of the applicant’s social security number, was verified
with Calvalidator or the California Department of Motor Vehicles (Title 2,
California Code of Regulations, Section 20108.38(a)(ii); or
♦ The applicant provided satisfactory proof of identity at the polling place
when he or she went to vote; or
♦ The applicant provided satisfactory proof of identity with his or her
absentee ballot.
_______________________________
None of the Above !
The allusion is probably lost on you, and I doubt the inclusion of the words "Master" and "Cybermen" would help, so let me just put it this way:
Your next comment on this site is a citation with verifiable proof that Republicans are trying to remove American citizens who are legally registered to vote as Democrats from the voter rolls. Not hints, not allegations, not "duh, isn't it obvious"; actual proof.
Good luck.
-----------
We are all heroes, you and Boo and I. Hamsters and rangers everywhere, rejoice!
do indeed equate FOX News with our enemies and the audiences that watch cable news and hit the blogs are the people who are political junkies and the people who will actually go and vote as opposed to all those "yutes" liberals throw everything but the kitchen sink at and still they never get up out of their drunken stupors to vote. I suppose you think the echo chamber of the 2+ million that watched CNN are the voters that Democrats need to win, if you do you are a political novice....you must get those who disagree with you to come over to your side to win the election and Democrats are afraid neh they are downright fearful of moving away from the DKos kids and I know they will pay for it in the general election. I look forward to all the youtube video's coming out from the convention that will be used to blister all your hero's in the general. Oh by the way FOX will show each and every one because in the end when you disregard the media they come at you with everything they have and might I remind you that FOX News is in each state for local news and their brand usually picks up stories from the National brand........why I see Neil Cavuto on my local FOX every night at 10:20 for the business update.
Conservatives try to get more airtime for their own viewpoints but liberals try to shut down conservatives speaking at all. That is a big difference. Advice to liberals, there is plenty of work to do on your own message rather than worrying about shutting down the other side.
Ask not what you can do for your country, ask what your country can do for you. Washington Elected Elite
there's the folks who are pushing the "fairness doctrine"...
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.
MoveOn.org, the Campaign for America's Future and liberal blogs like DailyKos.com
Would you care to try again ?
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
seems like the netroots are getting frustrated that they have not been able to reinstate the fairness doctrine and that conservative talk radio etc. has rallied the base on that issues. So they are going after Fox News also. Agree with those who cite the high ratings for Fox News. TV and Radio are commercial entitites and people in the U.S. buy what they like not what is dictated to them by a certain part of the political spectrum.
I don't think the fairness doctrine should be reinstated. We should break up some of these big media conglomerates.
First you ask "who's trying to shut down"etc. and then when answered you respond "I don't think the Fairness Doctrine" etc.
How cute, switching to the first person after asking for a general response, perhaps you didn't like the answer, a little to close to the bone and indicative of the overall game plan, of which boycotts are only one part.
Considering that Democrats in the Congress are discussing this openly I'm surprised you even asked the "who's trying" question. Maybe that comes from following unbiased sources lite CNN and NPR.
Flyerhawk, this goes for you as well.
"a man's admiration for absolute government is proportinate to the contempt he feels for those around him". Tocqueville
You guys are complaining because the Left is complaining about Right-wing media bias?
And when did trying to force corporations out of business based on political beliefs become a Left-wing only tactic? The Right is constantly calling for boycotts of products and/or advertisers based on political beliefs.
There are those who look at things the way they are, and ask why ... I dream of things that never were and ask why not. - Robert Kennedy
social beliefs if you want to call them political that is your choice however they are usually the "religious right" and it is usually with regards to gays and abortions and how that offends their morals which is their right. Politically DKos will attempt to have companies stop their commercials on FOX because FOX news will not allow the MSM to control the thought patterns of the nation anymore and they fear the sunlight much as roaches do, but guess what that sunlight is here to stay and it will not be going away viva le new media!!!!!1
Call social issues political issues. Why in the world wouldn't you?
And what is the social issue that prompts calls for boycotting CITGO?
There are those who look at things the way they are, and ask why ... I dream of things that never were and ask why not. - Robert Kennedy
Well then all political issues are social concerns.
There are those who look at things the way they are, and ask why ... I dream of things that never were and ask why not. - Robert Kennedy
Hugo's attempts to shut down all the media who don't agree with him. Wait, maybe Mr. Chavez has become MoveOn and dKos's newest media advisor?
One of your comments was that you don't see anything like this from the center-right. Unfortunately, if the netroots base took an entirely symmetric strategy, then it would be self-inflicted excommunication from headlines basically because you would be boycotting the vast majority of MSM, whereas Fox News is but one channel.
Being somewhat centrist, or at the very least interested in debates on equal time, I can sympathize with people who get frustrated with Fox. I mean, they routinely cut off interviewee's microphones on a variety of the programs there. We all get tired of hearing the same old liberal arguments ad nauseum, but cutting off the mics of liberal guests is just disrespectful to the audience in my humble opinion.
Oh yeah, and I think spamming activism is in terribly poor taste.