John Eggerton of Broadcasting & Cable magazine reported that NBC Meet the Press host David Gregory faced a conservative question at a National Association of Broadcasters state leadership event, but he insisted NBC does a great job of presenting both ends of the political spectrum:
During a Q&A session following Gregory's talk, a broadcaster in the audience suggested network news execs themselves might be guilty of only looking at a sliver of the country. He said one of the issues he had with networks, particularly as they continued to shrink, is that the decisionmakers had a world view limited by their schooling in the "Boston-to-Washington axis." Covering issues of faith, for example, was one place where they "had no concept of this reality of the rest of the country."
The broadcaster asked whether NBC was doing anything to "stop and realize that they have to look outside the small cocoon that they see as normal."
Story Continues Below Ad ↓Gregory said the point was important, but one that could be "overmade." He said he thought NBC was doing a good job in its political reporting of covering "both ends of the spectrum" and had made "pretty good strides absorbing and reflecting different points of view."
Gregory conceded that the point about being East Coast-centric was valid, but he also said that NBC tries to keep in mind the "multi-background point of view that has to enter into our decisionmaking about what we cover and how we cover it."
That’s not the feeling you might get from hearing the rest of his message: that it’s unfortunate there’s no "common purpose" in Washington – that is, no agreement on passing Barack Obama’s legislative agenda. The story began:
Talking to broadcasters in Washington Tuesday at a National Association of Broadcasters' annual state leadership conference , Gregory suggested that Washington, with the aid of the media, has divided itself into disparate streams that eschew common ground.
The theme of his talk, loosely, was community. That included the community broadcasters can create with the Olympics, the kind of appointment TV broadcasters do well. But he was also talking about the community spirit that seemed to be lacking in Washington. "There is no sense of common cause or common purpose," he said, and "no willingness to compromise. "
He suggested that the current media climate has made it easy for people to seek out only the news that fits their views. "We see in our media as well such a polarized environment that there is this connective tissue on the left and on the right to bond everyone together in a national way. So, you can seek out familiar viewpoints on demand. You can go throughout your whole day in your news consumption cycle without really hearing any contrary points of view to what you believe. And it has led to a very difficult environment in Washington."
He cautioned against misinterpreting the ease with which information can be accessed or disseminated to the weight it should be accorded. "Sometimes we forget how big and vast the country is," he said. "I got on twitter early on and have a lot of followers. I'll go on there sometimes, though I will try to stop doing this now because you read several pages of venomous attack and you think: "maybe I won't do that next week.' But you can also get trapped into thinking, 'Oh, yeah, this somehow represents what is really going on out there." And I'm sorry, it doesn't. It represents a sliver of what is going on."
Speaking of Obama's legislative agenda, on last Sunday's Meet the Press, it stuck out that Gregory seemed insulted that former Rep. J.D. Hayworth would use the words "socialist" and "Obama" in the same sentence:
GREGORY: You are in a, a primary battle for re-election against former Republican Congressman J.D. Hayworth of Arizona. And on the issue of health care, this is what he says on his Web site, on the issues, "Nowhere is the Obama administration's socialist agenda more evident than in their attempts to grab control over 17 percent of our nation's economy." Socialist agenda, do you think that goes too far?
McCAIN: Look, you'll have to have Mr. Hayworth on to explain the things he says.
GREGORY: All right.
McCAIN: I'm, I'm not ready to do that.
GREGORY: Do you think that goes too far?
McCAIN: Oh, well...
GREGORY: That this is a socialist agenda from the president?
McCAIN: Look, look, there is no doubt in my mind America's a right-of-center nation and this administration is governing from the left. That's why the president's approval rating's continued to, to decline. And I know you want to get off health care, and I will. But I want to say again--and Eric Cantor who's coming on later will affirm this--we want to sit down and have negotiations, and we have a positive agenda, and we would love to see that agenda...
GREGORY: But--OK, but...
McCAIN: Yes.
GREGORY: ...my question is do you think that kind of--because you've heard that description before, not just from J.D. Hayworth but others. Does it go too far to say the president's agenda is a socialist agenda?
McCAIN: I, I think I gave my description. I think they're governing from the left on a broad variety of issues, but I'll let others speak for themselves. I, I have enough time taking care of my own misstatements.
—Tim Graham is Director of Media Analysis at the Media Research Center.
Coming soon: A brand-new NewsBusters design. But we need your help!























Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Left and Far Left
Sun, 03/07/2010 - 09:34 ET by allanfI guess by all sides he means the left wing and far left wing view on an issue.
Sorry....bogus....they
Sun, 03/07/2010 - 09:47 ET by creekratSorry....bogus....they cannot be that stupid / blind !!
"We Are All Socialists Now"
Sun, 03/07/2010 - 09:55 ET by TexndocThat was the Newsweek cover within weeks of Obama taking over. Amazing how far they want to run away from it now and how offensive Mr. Gregory finds this today, as Obama's numbers plummet. Hey, David, next time you see Howard Fineman or some other Newsweek lackey (they're all over MSNBC) be sure to rip them a new one. They let the cat out of the bag, as if we couldn't figure it out without being told.
Money quote:
Sun, 03/07/2010 - 10:05 ET by Indiana Joe"You can go throughout your whole day in your news consumption cycle without really hearing any contrary points of view to what you believe."
I'm sure you can, David. Working in a network newsroom has to make that easy.
Many of the rest of us actually seek out opposing views, hard as that is for you to believe. One needs to know the opposition's arguments before one can effectively refute them.
You folks are the ones who don't want to seriously listen to opposing arguments, and that's why you aren't at all effective at countering them. Remove the beam from thine own eye.
Out-source Congress... back to the People!
David, please do not "Piss
Sun, 03/07/2010 - 10:22 ET by buddycDavid, please do not "Piss down my back and tell me it is raining" (From "The OUtlaw Josey Wells").
What is sad is David Gregory knows that comment is unture.
Josey Wales for President
Mon, 03/08/2010 - 00:05 ET by NattyGreeneAnyone who quotes The Outlaw Josey Wales in blog post is alright by me. Perhaps the best movie of all time!
If David Gregory thinks NBC
Sun, 03/07/2010 - 10:37 ET by Jack BauerIf David Gregory thinks NBC is "making great strides" in covering both sides then:
1. He must be conceding that prior to this, they didn't cover both sides.
2. A mere two weeks ago, didn't that the little shit, who runs the Daily Kos, claim that Gregory had privately asked HIM how to "improve" Meet The Leftist Press? I'm sure the Kosshite suggested more conservatives.
3. How come he's asking John McCain (he is PERMANENTLY the only Republican they have) about what McCain's opponent says about Obama?
Is it because he wants to get McCain to say Obama is NOT a socialist? Is it an attempt to get any examination of what Obama really belives off the table? To delegitimatize any reference to Obama's crypto-Marxism, as being "outside" the mainstream of discourse?
Isn't that what that odd quetion is about David? If not, then how about asking Haywood TO HIS BLEEPIN' FACE ON YOUR SHOW?
A pretty good job?
Sun, 03/07/2010 - 10:38 ET by Mikeyh0Hey, don't poop on my cupcake and tell me it's icing! News men are not reporters - they simply read the teleprompter - (sounds like our fearless, clueless leader, doesn't it?) The whole idea of asking questions of our elected officials that might be relevant has somehow been destroyed - unless your name is Bunning. The alphabet networks are on the way out. The only reason FDR succeeded in imposing a socialist agenda on this country - besides his moral bankruptcy - was that no one really understaood what he was up to. The internet has allowed us all to keep an eye on the rascals who want to take our wealth for their own schemes. They will not succeed.
Choices, Choices...
Sun, 03/07/2010 - 10:42 ET by srqvetNBC or Pravda? ABC, CBS, MSNBC, NYT, LAT, et al or Pravda? Pravda has more balanced coverage than these communist outlets.
The LSM is leading the charge against normal Americans. Thanks for nothing lying LSM scum.
A new day would dawn in America if the LSM would simply fulfill their responsiblity to fairly report the news rather than advocate for communism.
Caveat auditor
Sun, 03/07/2010 - 10:53 ET by CO2MakerI haven't been to J-school and I don't know what they teach there, typically.
But I can read and listen, and often I actually think while I am doing both.
I noticed a long time ago that reporters introduce biases into their stories in small and innocuous ways, not in big, inflammatory phrases or labels.
For example, instead of saying, "In January, the Labor Department reported that 9,500,000 Americans were out of work, and the number of unemployed in February was 10,250,000," often you hear, "In January, the Labor Department reported that 9,500,000 Americans were out of work, and that number shot up to 10,250,000 in February." You rarely hear, "... and in February, the number of unemployed grew slightly to 10,250,000."
In any event, the first version tells the straight facts. The second version skews the description to the left by using the colorful phrase "shot up," which adds urgency and alarm to the facts. Even the third version is skewed by the word "slightly," a judgment of the reporter.
This practice of "enlivening" the text or giving it more zing or narrative interest, or however it's characterized, is the camel's nose of bias poking under the tent of objectivity. It's not an overt "Jane, you ignorant slut" frontal assault, but the deceit of small pleasantries and expository enhancements.
And the mainstream news organizations practice textual augmentation even more often when they "hand off" the story from one reporter to another or to the anchor or anchoress in the studio. "Well, Alisoun, things look grim here outside the Miller's house, so I'll toss it back to you," or "Thank you, Bill, for that much needed alert about the dangers of oversized snowflakes that children and parents may not be aware of."
For background on this that goes back decades, read Amusing Ourselves to Death, by Neil Postman, 1986. And Ron Powers, The Newscasters: The News Business as Show Business, 1978.
Cover all sides?
Sun, 03/07/2010 - 10:57 ET by AgnosticI thought you were supposed to leave the sides of the cage clear so the bird could see out.
You didn't think he was talking about point of view, did you?
"When the search for truth is confused with political advocacy, the pursuit of knowledge is reduced to the quest for power." - A. Chase
"B-b-b-b-but we're only
Sun, 03/07/2010 - 10:58 ET by samhermanmd"B-b-b-b-but we're only biased...against you Republicans!" is the familiar refrain from the MSM. Quickly follows is the other sputtering remark, "Some of my best friends are from...that (liberal nose turning up) party...".
Two words
Sun, 03/07/2010 - 11:00 ET by txcoRachel Maddow
I like John McCain, but am
Sun, 03/07/2010 - 11:14 ET by gmonsenI like John McCain, but am so tired of his unwillingness to say Obama is a socialist. Certainly all of Obama's backers know he's a socialist. We know he's a socialist. What's the big deal with McCain's unwillingness to say it?
Gmonsen
He's unwilling to say it
Sun, 03/07/2010 - 11:30 ET by dgvBecause it's nonsense. It's a tea party talking point that attempts to scare people who don't know any better. His healthcare program is socialist because Sean Hannity says so doesn't hold a lot of weight in actual dicussions.
Give me a clear example DGV
Sun, 03/07/2010 - 11:47 ET by general companyThat suggest Obama is not a socialist
My Gov. thinks I am dangerous, so be careful
"Television is a freak show" Bernie Goldberg
Ah, a comment from a
Sun, 03/07/2010 - 11:51 ET by MikeBAh, a comment from a leftist lackey! Obama's background is marxist. His spermdonor "father" was a communist. His mother's friends were communists. His friends are communists. (Does the name Bill Ayer's ring any bells?) His pastor of 20 years was a black liberation theology socialist. His policies are strait out of Das Kapital and the Communist Manifesto. Perhaps you should read them both. Obama is a marxist, and his attempted take over of health care is marxist-socialist. Even Russia and China are able to recognise him for what he is. Why can't you?
"A communist is someone who reads Marx. An anti-communist is someone who understands Marx." Ronald Reagan
His healthcare plan
Sun, 03/07/2010 - 12:08 ET by dgvIs to the right of most western nations. They have real "socialized" medicine in the UK. Do you consider them to be Marxist/Fascists blah blah blah? Or Canadiens or the Danish?
This isn't the 50's, stop imitating McCarthy.
Your kidding right?
Sun, 03/07/2010 - 12:39 ET by general companyIs to the right of most western nations.
What the heck is that supposed to mean. Since when do we compare ourselves to the failures of others?
Obama's plan is socialist, it stifles free enterprise, corners several markets, and penalizes those who refuse to participate. Commies dont do that, right?
This is far from the clear example I requested
My Gov. thinks I am dangerous, so be careful
"Television is a freak show" Bernie Goldberg
While I do not agree with
Sun, 03/07/2010 - 13:23 ET by steve05While I do not agree with the Obama plan, I do also do not agree that we're heading down some socialist road - which is the complete take over of the economy.
This is just another entitlement that we will shift the cost of to our grandchildren and their grand children. like medicare and Bush's medicare Part D, like the Iraq war. Our government - both parties - has made a habit of expanding and putting it on the credit card.
Something has to be done about the insurance monopolies. rates have increased some places 40%. why?because they can with zero competition. I don't think the answer is full government take over of health care, but something has to be done.
The leftist meme...
Sun, 03/07/2010 - 15:12 ET by B-townGiant...of zero competition is complete BS. Show me one state, JUST ONE, that only allows one insurance company to do business there in HEALTHCARE (not hurricanes, like Florida does). JUST ONE!!!!!!!!!!
You can't. That situation does not exist. You. Are. A. Liar.
For the record, from someone who lives in CA, Anthem proposed a 39% hike in premiums because they are losing money currently on the Cadillac policies enforced here by state mandate. why do I need to pay for a policy that covers acupuncture or acupressure WHEN I DO NOT, NOR WILL I EVER, USE THOSE TECHNIQUES?!?!?
You can make a stink about Anthem's proposed rate hike, but since you don't know sh!t about what is going on here, you may (in the words of one of your heroes, Alan "Psycho" Grayson) STFU. Want to solve the problem? Then allow insurance companies to do business openly across state lines, do not put any limits on what they can or have to offer, and let the American public shop around for the best deal. And, while we are at it, do not force anyone who does not have insurance to buy it.
And don't sit there all sanctimonious and say this is "both parties" doing. We all know the Dems are the party of entitlements. For an education, I suggest you read "FDR's Folly." That may just awaken your dulled senses.
B-town
Sun, 03/07/2010 - 15:17 ET by steve05Calling people liars? grow up. You are very reactionary (just like GOP fundraisers say the base is)
You clearly have NO IDEA what you are talking about.
I'm not making things up out of thin air, I'm referring to a report by Goldman sachs that analyzes the healthcare market not for political reasons but for investment reasons. it says in part that - (from goldman) In a conference call organized by Goldman Sachs Global Investment Research, Steve Lewis, a highly regarded broker at the world's third largest insurance broker said that price competition between insurers was down from a year ago, Insurers are able to do this (increase rates) in part because the markets in which they operate have no adequate competition... "As I mentioned at the outset, it was without a doubt the most challenging renewal cycle in my 20 years of this business with employers really struggling with how and what was going to drive their decision, combined with the lack of aggressive and competitive pricing in the marketplace,"
This full report can be found anywhere online, but keep on calling people liars if it makes you feel good.
And don't sit there all sanctimonious and say this is "both parties" doing. We all know the Dems are the party of entitlements.
True, dems are the party of entitlements. However you are clearly brainwashed by rush and or fox if you do not recognize that the republicans doubled the debt, had a 500 billion budget deficit by 2005, and BUSH signed one of the most crippling entitlements ever medicare part D.
but since you don't know sh!t about what is going on here
Funny, it seems you have zero idea whats going on anywhere outside your little partisan world.
STFU!...? no thanks, you seem to be the angry reactionary, void of facts one that needs to take it down a notch.
I agree with being able to buy across state lines, if you weren't so busy telling people to shut up and calling them liars (similar to the way a child argues) then you'd see that I wrote I'm not in favor of Obamacare. But finding that out would mean you'd have to calm down and string letters into words and words into sentences. But you'll get there.
A report from Goldman Sachs?
Sun, 03/07/2010 - 15:32 ET by general companyOh yes, very reputable? BTW, did you actually read it? It pretty much says exactly what Rush and others have been saying. The insurance Co's need to make a profit, they cant run on deficits like the Fed. They are also required by law to have a significant Cash reserve.
Think about this Steve
price competition between insurers was down from a year
ago, Insurers are able to do this (increase rates) in part because the
markets in which they operate have no adequate competition..
Why is that?
My Gov. thinks I am dangerous, so be careful
"Television is a freak show" Bernie Goldberg
What it shows is more
Sun, 03/07/2010 - 15:42 ET by steve05What it shows is more competition brings costs down. it happens in every other industry. when there is only one place to go in town then people get ripped off.
So do I agree with you on Obama care? yes. But I think where we disagree is that I do no think insurers are completely blameless. people have been priced out of their plans, wages are stagnant yet insurance prices rise 40%? which this analyst says is in part (among many other factors) because they can.
steveO5, 0k I'm quoting U
Mon, 03/08/2010 - 00:13 ET by upcountrywaterWhat it shows is more competition brings costs down.
So when the 0bama care is the only game in town, what??/?/ Monolopy???? One goverment one OUTRAGEOUS BILL!!!!!!!!!
Wake up, HELLO yuuuhooo... 30 grand for lancing a zit.
Yea well we are the only game in town.
I woke up in the southern hemiphere and the geckos are 4 feet long, tsumani Sunday.
Steve-o
Sun, 03/07/2010 - 23:53 ET by B-townGiantJust too dense to realize he has been b!tch-slapped into submission.
Still won't, or better yet, can't, refute any of my points. Can't, because he knows I am right. Won't, because he is a typical liberal...a coward,
Truly amazing?
Sun, 03/07/2010 - 15:02 ET by general companyDo you read your post Steve?
I do also do not agree that we're heading down some socialist road
OK, so do you have an example of Obama's free market, capitalism mind set?
This is just another entitlement that we will shift the cost of to our grandchildren and their grand children.
But socialist dont do this, do they?
Something has to be done about the insurance monopolies.
How about we run them out of business, by making them compete with the Fed, who subsidizes the short falls using the peoples money. Socialist dont do that either, right?
Meanwhile the Fed takes over Banks and regulates them to unprofitably, takes over industry then threatens those that remain independent. They swallow investment firms, and manufactors, then sell the equipment right out from under the Share Holders for pennies on the dollar, to their competition.
Plus they fire the Board, hire their own, steal bonuses, regulate pay in the privet sector, then pass out hefty pay and bonuses to their own. No I guess Socialist dont do that either.
which is the complete take over of the economy.
Where do they stop? When will they say it's enough? You dont know, and cant give me a clear example of Obama's resistance to socialism. But yet you say, I do also do not agree that we're heading down some socialist road
Well that certainly makes me feel much better?
My Gov. thinks I am dangerous, so be careful
"Television is a freak show" Bernie Goldberg
OK, so do you have an
Sun, 03/07/2010 - 15:30 ET by steve05OK, so do you have an example of Obama's free market, capitalism mind set?
He seems to be falling in line with the bush policy of not imposing any regulation of the derivatives market where the investment banks are making a killing (good for them) but also what brought the system down.
How about we run them out of business, by making them compete with the Fed, who subsidizes the short falls using the peoples money. Socialist dont do that either, right?
I'm sorry, did I ever say I support Obama care? no quite the opposite. All I said is that I do not think we are or will be living in a socialists country.
Meanwhile the Fed takes over Banks and regulates them to unprofitably, takes over industry then threatens those that remain independent. They swallow investment firms, and manufactors, then sell the equipment right out from under the Share Holders for pennies on the dollar, to their competition.
As I said above. regulation? you mean You agree with banks being allowed to leverage their assets 60/1 on risk in a derivatives market, sell credit default swaps, and being insured by companies who are equally over leveraged. ie what brought down our financial system in the first place? If banks are allowed to become "too big to fail" again then whats the point.
In terms of bonuses, I think any private enterprise can give out any bonus they want. When you ask for and receive taxpayer money (thus turning your back on the "free "market ideas) then I will question your bonus plans.
I see you cannot answer my question Steve?
Sun, 03/07/2010 - 15:46 ET by general companyYou suggested Obama isnt a socialist, but offer nothing?
As I said above. regulation? you mean You agree with banks being
allowed to leverage their assets 60/1 on risk in a derivatives market,
sell credit default swaps, and being insured by companies who are
equally over leveraged. ie what brought down our financial system in
the first place?
Holy cow, how did you pull this from what I said. BTW, do you know the best way to prevent this?
If banks are allowed to become "too big to fail" again then whats the point.
Telling them, they are never to big to fail. Loosers, teach others how to win.
My Gov. thinks I am dangerous, so be careful
"Television is a freak show" Bernie Goldberg
You suggested Obama isnt a
Sun, 03/07/2010 - 16:16 ET by steve05You suggested Obama isnt a socialist, but offer nothing?
When some one accuses another of being a socialists it their job to prove it, not mine. Do I believe Obama is a big government liberal? Yes. Socialist? no. if he ever floated the idea that the government nationalize all means of production and the whole economy then he'd be thrown out of office ASAP.
Holy cow, how did you pull this from what I said. BTW, do you know the best way to prevent this?
Because you stated that you thought Obama was meddling too much in banks business. Where is he meddling? In the areas where the banks were reckless.
Telling them, they are never to big to fail. Loosers, teach others how to win.
What do you mean by this? By simply saying "you're not too big too fail" everything is cleared up? because Paulson, bernanke and bush would disagree with you. they were too big to fail.
Good grief,
Sun, 03/07/2010 - 16:55 ET by general companyWhen some one accuses another of being a socialists it their job to prove it, not mine.
I offered many reasons he is a socialist, you have not reputed a single one, nor offered any examples of why you think he isnt, other then you making vague comparisons with Bush?
Because you stated that you thought Obama was meddling too much in
banks business. Where is he meddling? In the areas where the banks were
reckless.
Geez, Maybe when he loaned them our money, then decided that gave him the right to fire who he wanted, rehire who he wanted. How many Banks take the Feds money if they know this in advance? The loans were cheerfully given to gain control of the financial industry. Why do you think so many of them paid it back, or at least wanted to immediately after Obama made this strong arm tactic known to them. Now the funny part, In the areas where the banks were reckless. What policies that started the banking crisis has he changed? None, in-fact they are still encouraging the Reinvestment policies today. Difference is, they now threaten and bully from the WH, instead of the sidewalk and court room. Fanny and Freddy are asking for billions more, where does it end?
What do you mean by this? By simply saying "you're not too big too
fail" everything is cleared up? because Paulson, bernanke and bush
would disagree with you. they were too big to fail.
Considering the current situation, and the Fed threatening more bailouts and more stimulus funds. Looks like I was right, and they were wrong. BTW, Bush was only allowed to spend 300 billion of the 770B originally authorized for the Bailout bill, the rest was doled out buy the Dims and Obama. Who I might add, immediately suggested it was too small and added 800B.
So Steve, while I appreciate your critique of the previous Admin concerning the spending. I fail to appreciate your your seeming apathy of the current Admin taking a bad situation, and making it far worse.
So, where is Obama growing the economy?
My Gov. thinks I am dangerous, so be careful
"Television is a freak show" Bernie Goldberg
Oh this is rich!
Sun, 03/07/2010 - 17:07 ET by BlondeWhen some one accuses another of being a socialists it their job to prove it, not mine.
This from one who accused me of being obsessed with Bush, but when challenged, ran for the hills. Oh I forgot, a pm.
Sauce for the goose, fella. Public accusation, public proof or public retraction.
I hope he fails, too.
double
Sun, 03/07/2010 - 15:50 ET by general companysorry
Steve for self proclamed Conservative
Sun, 03/07/2010 - 15:19 ET by general companyThis should be an easy fix for you.
Something has to be done about the insurance monopolies. rates have
increased some places 40%. why?because they can with zero competition.
I don't think the answer is full government take over of health care,
but something has to be done.
The problem here is over regulation, they force the Insurance Co to provide stuff the customer cant use, they stifle competition by using boarders as obsticals. Further increase the cost of HC, by allowing frivolous law suits forcing HC providers to carry high over head in insurance and manpower to correctly interpret and fill out the countless forms the Fed requires of them. Medicare and Mdeicade are huge obsticals for HC providers, eating precious man hours and resources.
I wont even get into the FDA, DEQ, and the government intrusion into the Medical equipment/supply's industry. BTW Obama wants to further tax these folks to help pay for his HC bill. That will lower cost,,,,right?
My Gov. thinks I am dangerous, so be careful
"Television is a freak show" Bernie Goldberg
I agree with most of what
Sun, 03/07/2010 - 15:35 ET by steve05I agree with most of what you're saying. I agree with tort reform, though it is only a band aid to cutting costs, I think we should be allowed to buy any insurance on a national level (I don't mean government, I mean I should be allowed to buy any plan from any company) as george will said this morning as well. But I do not know why insurance companies are exempt from anti trust laws though.
steve05:I think you are
Sun, 03/07/2010 - 19:57 ET by stratmansteve05:
I think you are looking at only part of the picture.
"Something has to be done
Mon, 03/08/2010 - 11:20 ET by MikeB"Something has to be done about the insurance monopolies. rates have increased some places 40%. why?"
Perhaps you had best ask your state's Insurance Commissioner, Steve. Do you think that insurance companies get to arbitrarily raise rates whenever they want? Think again. For an insurance company to raise premium rates, they have to file with the Insurance Commission. For a minor filing to raise P&C rates, the paperwork stack is over an inch thick. The insurance company has to provide past, current and projected future loss ratios, past and current premium rates, and a host of other statistics. The Insurance Commission will then either utilize in house actuaries or consulting actuaries to go over the filing and give a recommendation. The Commission will review the filing and the recommendations, and then 9 times out of 10, allow a rate increase less than what the company requested.
As to why the rates have increased, it is because the insurance company wants to stay in business. The job of the Insurance Commission is to make sure the insurance company remains solvent so that the company can pay out any and all claims that are submitted to it. What good are low premium rates if the insurance company does not have enough in reserve to pay the claims? Other than government programs which do not need to be solvent (and are not solvent), no insurance company can provide coverage if it's premiums do not exceed the claims paid out.
"A communist is someone who reads Marx. An anti-communist is someone who understands Marx." Ronald Reagan
Meet the Press has come a long ways.....
Sun, 03/07/2010 - 11:35 ET by Poljunkby that I mean, it has taken a far left turn and it's going to be lonnnnnng time before they find their way back. Rachel Madow as a panelist is a joke! Wonder what the old Meet the Press founders think these days or maybe they don't think!
'Pretty Good Strides' He say's...
Sun, 03/07/2010 - 11:41 ET by JTPMust have short legs. You have not made it very far.
نحن الذين كنا ننتظر. BO
echo
Sun, 03/07/2010 - 11:43 ET by JTPecho
نحن الذين كنا ننتظر. BO
I
Sun, 03/07/2010 - 13:00 ET by jessieHI think he actually believes his own b.s.. NBC isn't the worst in news coverage. ABC is. NBC is a close second, though. They try harder.
David is not the best judge
Sun, 03/07/2010 - 13:17 ET by d1carterDavid is not the best judge of how NBC is doing. I think their ratings are.
What is it with NBC this weekend?
Sun, 03/07/2010 - 21:55 ET by pbthinkerFirst you have Chuck Todd trying to convince people not to pay attention to Drudge, just get their news (or not in the case of NBC) only from NBC. That's a great way to keep the country in the dark.
Now we have David Gregory trying to spin NBC being fair and balanced? What a joke! When I look at the guest list, for his show, there are too many times when it's Liberal, Liberal, Liberal, and Token Conservative on his panels. That is purposeful so I made the choice to not watch Meet the Press since Tim Russert died.
I do watch This Week, although they are really having a problem finding a host since Stephie left. Aside from Jake Tapper, they haven't had a descent one on there. I can't think of his name but there was a guy on there last week, who's been on a couple of times, who takes a 4 person, even up panel, and makes it 3 against 2. Luckily, one of the 2 is normally George Will. It seems that ABC isn't afraid to put on real conservatives while NBC and CBS tend to avoid them.
So, David, talk is cheap, start taking it to the Democrats and get them to stuttering, like Tim Russert could do, and perhaps people might believe you. I'm anxiously waiting.
Election 2008-God's way of showing us that elections count.