Commenting on the Scooter Libby trial yesterday, Rush Limbaugh made a very astute point about the whole nasty affair: Libby's conviction ought to tell Republican politicos they can't trust the liberal elite Washington press corps.
Don't try to convince them, don't try to be their friend, the number-one talker asserted. They come to any interview with you with their story already written out beforehand.
An excerpt from yesterday's comment:
Their minds are already made up, because they have a prejudice about what Republicans and conservatives are. So the whole point of talking to members of the administration -- Republicans and otherwise -- is trip 'em up, and what happened here? Russert, Matt Cooper and Judith Miller? It's a bunch of journalists at the center of this and what Libby told 'em, and then the FBI and grand jury and so forth. This juror that came out and talked. He said they have "a lot of sympathy" for Judith Miller, the New York Times info babe that ended up in jail for not revealing her sources to Fitzgerald. The juror said, “I really feel sorry for her. The defense was just pounding her. They were just too hard on her.”
You don't hit the girl. It is one characteristic or aspect of that. But until people learn that you're not going to be able to bring a bunch of reporters in from Washington or New York, and explain conservatism or your policy and have a sympathetic ear (or even an ear that wants to understand what you're trying to do) is beyond me. Why they keep thinking they can do this is also beyond me. I know what you're saying. "What would you do? You have to talk to them."I understand a presidential administration has to talk to them. They have to do press conferences and you have to do all this. I myself have had experience dealing with these people, as you know. [...]Story Continues Below Ad ↓
The New Yorker's Jane Mayer, who with Jill Abramson (who is the Washington bureau chief of the New York Times) wrote a book about Clarence Thomas, and just smeared the guy. She was going to do a story in the New Yorker about “24” and so forth. It was going to be basically a profile of Joel Surnow. I was told that she wanted to talk to me about this because she knew that I was a friend of Surnow's. So I called some people who had already talked to her and found out that, basically, it was a story on how the program “24” is promoting torture and just going to be a treatise on torture. So I called her under those circumstances, knowing what this was about, and I talked to her for about 20 minutes. The first 15 were purely social. I'd been on a TV show with her once. Way, way, way, way back, Bob Beckel hosted a local TV show in Washington, a panel show, i.e., the McLaughlin Group. I appeared on the show, and she remembered that, and I have a good memory. I remembered that she had to hustle out of there and go play tennis, and I reminded her of that, and she, “Oh, wow. Yeah. You're right.”
She congratulated me on all my success, how wonderful it all was, blah, blah, talking about, “I understand you're friends with Joel. I understand he had a party at your house.” She was in the mall with her daughter shopping, had her cell phone, and she wasn't taking any notes, and then starts asking me about torture. The last five minutes were what she really wanted my thoughts on and all this other stuff was just setup. Knowing full-well that it was about torture I did my best -- and I was honest, but I did my best -- to tell her, “You know, you're barking up a tree here that's got no branches on it.” But the story was written before it was published, is the point. So what I can't figure out is why other people are not as aware. I'm not trying to give myself credit. This has been learned by experience. This is no great insight of mine. I got sandbagged I can't tell you how many times the first five years of this show thinking you could be nice, fair, and just be honest and they will report what you say. It's not that way with us. It doesn't happen. Why other people don't figure this out...? This is why I get so fed up when I see some of my conservative brethren in the DC media trying to curry favor with the Drive-By Media.
It's why I get so bent out of shape when I see potential Republican candidates and elected officials trying to make the media their best friends, because it's all temporary. Even if it works for a while, come back and the media is going to end up stabbing you! Ask Senator McCain. They're dumping on him after him being their favorite Republican for four years.
—Matthew Sheffield is the creator of NewsBusters and its Executive Editor.
Comments Policy
And President Bush himself de
March 7, 2007 - 12:53 ET by HumanEventsAnd President Bush himself definitely needs to consider these words of wisdom from Rush. He keeps trying to be all buddy buddy with the DemocRATS, esp. the Clintons. While they do nothing but demonstrate daily how much they hate his guts.
Rush's common sense words fal
March 7, 2007 - 14:33 ET by midnight cowboyRush's common sense words falls on deaf ears in the administrtion. The problem is it becomes tough to defend him when he won't defend himself or his administration from the relenltess assaults from the libs and the press. This only encourages them to ratchet up the rhetoric.
What was so great about Reagan, was he treated the press the way they deserved to be treated, like pions. Even as far back to 1980 during the Carter Reagan debate. One of the Gipper's most memorable line's came from when Jimmy continually tried to mischaracterize and distrort Reagan's policies and statements. Which Reagan then elegantly followed through with a "There you go again", which summed up the entire Carter playbook.
Hope they learned now!
March 7, 2007 - 13:00 ET by sembyHope they learned now!
I have maintained that the ne
March 7, 2007 - 13:06 ET by JDWI have maintained that the news media has attempted to persuade the public that Iraq is an American mistake.
They are influencing oil, energy, education, endangered species, economy, judicial... while out of power.
Think about the control the conservatives had for the past six years. How has the political power benefitted us in light of the overwhelming news media influence?
JDW
Wounded skier, beware of mistakes.
News media: Scoreboard for terrorists
"Man, if only the media
March 7, 2007 - 16:19 ET by waka waka"Man, if only the media hadn't been there, we would have been able to accomplish what we really wanted, like invading Iraq, spying on Americans without warrants, throwing habeas corpus out the window, torturing prisoners, cutting taxes for our rich buddies, handing out sweetheart, no-bid contracts to our campaign donors, giving tax breaks to Big Oil, filling the coffers of Big Pharma, handing unfunded mandates to the schools...Just think of what we could've done!"
Reality has a well known liberal bias.
waki,If the media hadn't been
March 7, 2007 - 16:36 ET by bigtimerwaki,
If the media hadn't been invited to tag along to Iraq I think we would of already won the war...one way or another.
As far as I am concerned they should not be allowed to report period...until after it is over.
The majority of them are as bad as the enemy we are fighting...IMHO.
As far as oil, President Bush should of made an executive order to start drilling everywhere within our borders when the war started, Katrina would of been another perfect opportunity, after-all we have more oil in our own country than all of Iraq does...we should be self-dependent, period.
Bigtimer:"As far as I
March 7, 2007 - 16:54 ET by bushwickbillBigtimer:
"As far as I am concerned they should not be allowed to report period...until after it is over."
So you'd rather have Al-Jazeera and the BBC doing all the reporting?
We will acheive energy independence when some "liberal" scientist develops cheap solar power, which will happen within the next 20 years due to advances in nanotechnology. Then all the big oil fatcats will be SOL, and so will the GOP. As if they aren't already.
bushwhacked,I said NO reporte
March 7, 2007 - 17:01 ET by bigtimerbushwhacked,
I said NO reporters....what part of that don't you understand.
On the other hand not much difference with our own leftist media and the BBC/Al Jazeera.
BT, I figured you would say
March 7, 2007 - 18:16 ET by bushwickbillBT, I figured you would say something like that, but it's funny you think you just tell the Brits and the Arabs what to do. The world's just your little oyster isn't it? That would be a great headline for our troops: "US soldiers under orders to shoot to kill all journalists." Way to win the hearts and minds!
Let alone that you want to rewrite the Constitution, or rather, use it as toilet paper.
oil
March 8, 2007 - 10:21 ET by pbanks7Until then, oil and coal are still the most efficient way to power things. Otherwise we'd already have an alternative. It's called economics. Until we find a cheaper alternative, more domestic oil and coal are what we need.
Liberals love to legislate ways to make things more difficult, then blame eeeeevvvill corporations for not doing enough. So let's make it impossible to drill for oil, nearly impossible to open a new refinery, and then blame big oil for high gas prices. Let's make it impossible to open a nuclear power plant, nearly impossible to open a coal power plant, then complain about the higher cost of natural gas and petroleum. Then we can say it's all an evil plot by Bush, the Sauds and big oil to make windfall profits.
Ignorance is bliss. It's easier to repeat a mindless slogan than to do some actual research.
I swear, BT, sometimes I thin
March 7, 2007 - 17:34 ET by waka wakaI swear, BT, sometimes I think you're a lefty plant. Your oil idea has got to be the most ridiculous, hare-brained scheme I've heard in years! Talk about erasing whatever thread of credibility the right had left.
But then again, it might just work. The Supreme Court's recent eminent-domain ruling could make it possible. And I know the perfect place to start drillin': Your front yard. Support for the waronturr starts at home, right? You might think a messy, noisy oil rig going 24-7 is a little annoying, but think about the STAKES! We're in World War III here, and the Islamofascists pose much more of an existential threat to Amurca than those wussies Hitler and Hirohito. FDR had it easy, period, despite the fact that reporters were allowed on the battlefield. Thank goodness we have strong, resolute G.W. to do the right thing in these dangerous times.
Reality has a well known liberal bias.
waka, there's a joke about
March 7, 2007 - 17:39 ET by MightyMouthwaka, there's a joke about you on the open thread. Something about a guy trying to get his date drunk ...or something like that....
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
waka ...funny you should ment
March 7, 2007 - 17:42 ET by bassndudewaka ...funny you should mention it. I used to have an oil well in my front yard, so to speak and one in the back...wasent so bad...
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
Yeah, reporters were allo
March 7, 2007 - 20:05 ET by The PresbyterYeah, reporters were allowed on the battlefield and the vast majority of them weren't trying to sabotage the war effort. This country will never be as great as it was during 40's again IMHO. Things have become so polarized it frightening.
I think part of the problem is this administration. I defend it where defense is due, but overall its just weak. As someone in the thread stated earlier, Where's the courage, where's the conviction in this administration. I rarely hear any good policy defense and I'm forever left wanting for something impressive in this current Whitehouse.
"Your oil idea has got t
March 7, 2007 - 20:12 ET by Conservative Voice"Your oil idea has got to be the most ridiculous, hare-brained scheme I've heard in years!"
how so? We should drill more here, and if Clinton could just wave his hand and make over 200 acres protected in Utah, then President Bush could wave his hand and do the opposite.
Oil
March 8, 2007 - 10:26 ET by pbanks7Waka,
For once I agree with you. Let's put a whole lotta them rigs right there in the spot where absolutely no one in their right mind would live. ANWR.
Ignorance is bliss. It's easier to repeat a mindless slogan than to do some actual research.
Explain...
March 8, 2007 - 07:19 ET by UnsaneWhy should we focus on such silly things like national security and expanding the economy when we can do much more effective things like stealing from the successful producers in society and ruthlessly punishing anyone who is succeeding or wants to?
Reality has a liberal bias? Then perhaps you can explain why the rotting EU is Going Nowhere (you love persistent 9-10% unemployment, don't you?) and why the Second World has long been eviscerated? Seems to me that history, a subject you are quite hostile to, has a very CONSERVATIVE bias.
"HAV3 TH3 BRIDG3S OF INSANITY B33N CROSS3D AND FOR3V3R R3TRACT3D???." - Meshuggah, "3ntrapm3nt", from Catch Thirty Thr33 (2005)
I've stopped reading newspape
March 7, 2007 - 13:06 ET by Senior ChiefI've stopped reading newspapers and avoided the rest of the MSM since I came back from overseas duties in 2001. Thank goodness there's Newsmax, FOXNews, Rush and Newsbuster which are the sources of my news. You just can't trust the drive bys. Rush was right, the "news" were pre-written before it happens... Anyway, Libby was not tried for the original intent of the case- the "outing" of Plame, because there was no case. The left has to find anything to "prove" something and show the whole world their vile hatred to GWB and his adminstration. And even with Scooter's conviction, they're still not happy. Losers!
No one was never tried for ou
March 7, 2007 - 16:23 ET by waka wakaNo one was never tried for outing Plame because Libby lied to Fitzgerald. Plus, you have to know the agent is undercover when you disclose their identity, something that's next to impossible to prove.
Reality has a well known liberal bias.
Fitzgerald already knew
March 8, 2007 - 11:13 ET by pbanks7Fitzgerald already knew Armitage was the leaker before he even interviewed Libby. After that, it was just a fishing expedition. That's the real crime here.
If he was actually trying to hide something, he would have used the "I don't recall" defense.
Ignorance is bliss. It's easier to repeat a mindless slogan than to do some actual research.
Wishful thinking
March 7, 2007 - 13:11 ET by RJIt's wishful thinking to believe that the media will ever treat conservatives in anything approaching balance. They are an integral part of the left, and the left has one rule: whatever it takes to win. "Playing nice" isn't going to change that, nor is it going to change the public's impression, because the media will continue to sell them a negative image of conservatives.
The "I'm better than that" kind of behavior has caused George Bush unending problems in his presidency. When he "reached out" to the media and the other side, what did the other side do in response? From the State Department to the floor of Congress to the media, they chewed him up while continuing to push their agendas and slamming conservatives. Can you think of a single thing he or conservatives gained by his extending the hand of friendship?
Criminal
March 7, 2007 - 13:27 ET by cvgbuckeyeRush said something even more insightful today. He said that ALL OF THIS BUSINESS about Scooter Libby and the attacks upon President Bush and Vice President Cheney AND the war on terror is ALL about CRIMINALIZING CONSERVATISM!!!!
I totally agree. What the MSM and the democrat party is doing right now is Naziism at best. We need to stop trying to get along with them. They only interpret it as weakness. They are no longer the watchdog and the loyal opposition, respectively, they are both the enemies of America and our way of life.
I can remember saying that exact thing at a lunch table about 12 years ago. Most of the people in the restaurant were Conservative Republicans and they had a cow whan I said it. Wonder what they think now.
Rush
March 7, 2007 - 13:57 ET by JNaughtThe longer that conservatives and Republicans look to the likes of a Rush Linbaugh or a Sean Hannity for talking-points, the longer the GOP will bow to the MSM and remain a laughable minority.
Speaking of talking points, JNaught
March 7, 2007 - 14:05 ET by RJSpeaking of talking points, JNaught, you've posted a perfect example of the concept. Show-And-Tell must have been your strong point in grammar school...maybe High School, too, eh?
Agreed, first these guys used
March 7, 2007 - 14:18 ET by banditAgreed, first these guys used the "liberal elite media" to sell this un-needed war, then spin around and blame them when things go bad and their lies are uncovered. It's fun to check in on these sites when things do go bad just to see the insane spin. Laughable is an understatement.
KOS Kiddie Huffs & Puffs
March 7, 2007 - 14:29 ET by CTGee JNaught do you work for a subscription department somewhere out there in the wild and wooly land of leftwing lunatic liars and losers? The Leftwing MSM is drawing all the rope they need to hold their own lynching party and they are rushing to string themselves up! I am not afraid of the Liberal Left because like cockroaches that cannot stand the light of day they always scurry under a rock when the light of truth is shone on them.
JNaught... Your village jus
March 7, 2007 - 15:49 ET by Tim the EnchanterJNaught... Your village just called. Someone noticed you were missing.
Tim...LOL!
March 7, 2007 - 16:00 ET by bigtimerTim...
LOL!
Hey Jnaught...Laughable Minor
March 7, 2007 - 16:42 ET by JayTeeHey Jnaught...Laughable Minority ?
So the Pelosi election "mandate" majority got more than the 53 million votes that Bush received in his "mandate" ? ?
Pelosi is the only Laughable Minority.....who thinks she's got a mandate.
At Times like these, it becomes more than just a Moral Obligation to express ones opinion, it becomes a Pleasure.
The lefties just might want
March 7, 2007 - 15:45 ET by RowaneThe lefties just might want to watch out, don't they realize that conservatives own the "Evil Guns of Death", What do they think the conservatives will do if they are criminalized, just meekly surrender to the nearest Re-education camp?" Not all of us are "Neo-Cons" some have been conservative forever and espouse everything in the conservative ideology.
Remember, the founding Fathers fought for MUCH less than we put up with today and there are groups out there who are just waiting for what they call "Civil War II" Does anyone think those people will just willingly submit? I helped the Army infiltrate a group in Arkansas several years ago and can tell you that these groups are organized well. They also have funding, training, weapons, and an abiding hatred for everything "liberal"
Little do the mediots know, but they are at the top of these people's list when "TSHTF" right under politicians.
This kind of crap worries me, as a conservative gun-owner. I don't want to see my beloved country fall to ruins in revolution because of a bunch of mealy mouthed politicos and cowardly RINOs and thier PC garbage.
موت الاسلام وميديوت العمل
Duty, Honor, Country
(in THAT order)
Rowane
Look Who’s Posting At Huffington Post — The Libby Juror
March 7, 2007 - 13:52 ET by GeepersCheck this out.
Denis Collins, Libby trial juror is: Author of a book on spying, reporter for the Washington Post, already shopping his book about the conviction at the Huffington Post.
More details at Sweetness & Light.
Let him. That is grounds fo
March 7, 2007 - 14:04 ET by NL207Let him. That is grounds for a mistrial.
One hopes that Libby's att
March 7, 2007 - 16:29 ET by kathleenirishOne hopes that Libby's attorneys will make a vigorous appeal, using all these rather incriminating statements and comments. I am so disgusted with the whole situation.
"He who has a thousand friends has not a friend to spare, and he who has one enemy will meet him everywhere" -Ali ibn-Abi-Talib, 4th Islamic Caliph
kathleen,Let's hope he finds
March 7, 2007 - 17:45 ET by Dave Rkathleen,
Let's hope he finds some better lawyers, as I think the people who represented him in this case were something less than competent.
Grounds for coffee, perhaps
March 7, 2007 - 17:39 ET by MobiusStripHow would that be grounds for a mistrial? His occupation, something he wrote once, or something he may relate AFTER the trial? Please explain your legal arguments or sources.
Moby
March 7, 2007 - 17:57 ET by Dave R1) He lived next to Tim Russert, who testified as an, a'hem "witness" in this case. A little too convenient, that is.
2) He cannot keep his fool mouth shut, saying yesterday that the politics of the jurors was never discussed during the deliberations, among other things. Right, and I fell off the turnip truck just this morning.
3) He posts an article on The Huffington Post, which is a website currently vying with the Kos Krazy's and the DUmmies for the (unenviable) position of Commie Kook Central.
Moby, this Collins idiot is well on his way to being Defense Exhibit "A" when the appeal roles around.
So where you live- and what about vetting?
March 7, 2007 - 18:38 ET by MobiusStripI live next door to a man who is dying of berryliosis, due to working at Rocky Flats making plutonium triggers for his career. I would recuse myself from a trial concerning that particular issue as I have an emotional content with it. And I'm sure I would have been dismissed. Libby spent millions on his defense; his lawyers could've whacked the guy- but they didn't . No legal standing to do so? I would like to hear it explained. Jurors are selected randomly. There are a lot of media types in DC. The probability increases that a media type will be on a randomly selected jury. Unless you are really paranoid, and dismiss Libby's lawyers as totally incompetent, and verge into clearly paranoid set-up scenarios, this was a jury of his peers who convicted him.
He worked with Bob Woodward..
March 7, 2007 - 18:47 ET by bigtimerHe worked with Bob Woodward...the Washington Post...their (Tim Russert and Denis Collins) sons played basketball together and had back-yard BBQ's now and then....on and on...
Geesh...
Some people might think that
March 8, 2007 - 12:37 ET by NL207Some people might think that Collins' book and public statements after the trial indicate a lack of objectivity. In particular, if he professed to have no prejudicial opinions in areas covered by his book during jury screening and selection, these statements would prove that he was lying under oath. What a concept! A potential juror lying under oath at a trial about lying under oath! A novel concept, don't you think? The defense could use such statements as the basis of an appeal on the grounds that the jury selection process was flawed because Collins was able to use deception to conceal his obvious bias, the jury empaneled was not impartial, therefore the verdict should be set aside.
You don't have to be a lawyer to think, do you?
Me thinks I'm detecting some
March 7, 2007 - 13:54 ET by JayTeeMe thinks I'm detecting some anger in NB today.
I think we now have Replacement words for "Faggot, Dumb Sum Bi..ch, etc...etc...
All these words can now be replaced by calling someone a
"Journalist"
That thar is officially a fightin word nowadays....people will no longer stand for being called an Ugly name.
It's the "J" word.
At Times like these, it becomes more than just a Moral Obligation to express ones opinion, it becomes a Pleasure.
Media
March 7, 2007 - 14:33 ET by DontabIts time the conservatives went on the offensive, fight back . Take no prisoners.
Speaking of Rush....I just he
March 7, 2007 - 14:55 ET by bigtimerSpeaking of Rush....I just heard this on his show, but already had the link...hope it works.
http://hotair.com/archives/2007/03/07/fox-news-set-to-pick-up-the-half-hour-news-hour/
Too funny...hope the leftists go nuts!
Don't bother
March 7, 2007 - 14:56 ET by KC MulvilleIf you presented facts and a coherent analysis to a liberal, it wouldn't convince him. His position isn't based on facts or analysis in the first place. That's the whole point. Therefore, it makes no sense to expend the effort.
All you can do is vote.
Political conversation is great when someone is listening. But the refusal to listen makes talking useless. Just vote. That's all you can do.
And if you don't vote, don't speak.
Liberals have no place for lo
March 7, 2007 - 16:52 ET by DesperadoLiberals have no place for logical analysis. As Whoopi Goldberg said recently, it's about how she 'FEELS' about an issue. This is why there will never be any possible way to get through to these individuals. We can provide all sorts of facts, but these liberals and journalists are driven by their emotions.
I swear, it's like dealing with a 2 year old.
But the 2 yr old eventually
March 7, 2007 - 16:59 ET by Clear thinkerBut the 2 yr old eventually listens, liberals, not so much!
The liberal MSM has become an enemy of the USA.
Perhaps this is why they are
March 7, 2007 - 17:01 ET by DesperadoPerhaps this is why they are against spanking!
Sounds like Rush still has th
March 7, 2007 - 16:00 ET by joe conservativeSounds like Rush still has the monkey hooked on his back again. I don't associate with drug dealers and I also don't listen to them on the radio.
Rush? Was a drug dealer? When
March 7, 2007 - 16:09 ET by bassndudeRush? Was a drug dealer? When? Might wanna check your facts there joe. Sounds like you a tad bit out of touch.
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
joe conservative drinks puke beer.
March 7, 2007 - 16:32 ET by Dave Rbass,
Joe here doesn't listen to Rush because he cannot afford to buy a radio. Radios cost money, and I'm guessing Joe here is too ignorant to even have a job, at least one that doesn't involve french fries in some way. Either that or he is living off the taxpayers (us).
My guess is he is one of those people driving some old clapped-out car we all see parked in front of convenience stores, with four mal-nourished and filthy children in the back seat (three of which aren't even his) and a severely over-weight female sitting in the passenger seat. Meanwhile the owner (borrower?) of said vehicle (Joe) stands in front of the counter, upon which sits a twelve-pack of some puke beer along with a pack of generic smokes (menthols, I'm guessing) while Joe fishes for his last bit of change to buy that all-important lottery ticket.
That's the impression I get, anyway.
Dave, Maybe Joe Conservative
March 7, 2007 - 16:50 ET by JayTeeDave, Maybe Joe Conservative wants Rush put on Trial like Libby......in the DC area ? ?
DC. the New Selma Alabama .......... descrimination in the Courts is not dead. Journalists and ex reporters please retire in DC....and continue to pedal your Trade, write books, and retire as Jurors.
At Times like these, it becomes more than just a Moral Obligation to express ones opinion, it becomes a Pleasure.
Joe is just po'd because
March 7, 2007 - 16:58 ET by RJJoe is just po'd because Rush is one who got away from their socialistic program of using partisan prosecutors (Tom DeLay ring a bell?) for witch hunts and show trials.
joec,Bet he's all broken hear
March 7, 2007 - 16:11 ET by bigtimerjoec,
Bet he's all broken hearted you and your ilk don't listen to him...eh?
Just like I hear callers say on the Washington Journal in the morning they never watch FNC and then proceed to talk about a particualr anchor and the particular show they said they got it from...
Too funny and hypocritical, let alone just plain lying.
Joe Trotskyite... you are e
March 7, 2007 - 16:14 ET by Tim the EnchanterJoe Trotskyite... you are easily the most disgusting, soulless creature I have ever seen in my life. You are beyond pathetic. My wife has had two lumbar laminectomies, and I remember the kind of pain that she was in pre-op. Someone getting addicted to pain killers as a result of intense chronic pain has my sympathy. If I saw a lib in trouble or in need, I'd do my best to help him or her (and I have). Sounds like if you were a similar situation you'd kick him, spit on him, then walk away laughing. Filthy B@$^@&d!
You have a way with the keybo
March 7, 2007 - 16:23 ET by kathleenirishYou have a way with the keyboard, Tim! Sorry about your poor wife's troubles.
"He who has a thousand friends has not a friend to spare, and he who has one enemy will meet him everywhere" -Ali ibn-Abi-Talib, 4th Islamic Caliph
Someone care to list all the
March 7, 2007 - 16:20 ET by kathleenirishSomeone care to list all the liberals who have been drug/alcohol abusers and are still being "associated with" by the likes of joe commie? Patches Kennedy is one who comes to mind, who should have been the latest Kennedy who should be in prison but isn't. Never mind his father....who needs no introduction. I believe Rush was totally set up by a liberal d.a. out to get him...now there's a new one for conservatives, huh? Too bad it's too true to be funny.
"He who has a thousand friends has not a friend to spare, and he who has one enemy will meet him everywhere" -Ali ibn-Abi-Talib, 4th Islamic Caliph
Kath...so true. And to equa
March 7, 2007 - 16:28 ET by Tim the EnchanterKath...so true. And to equate someone with a severe chronic condition with someone who, by choice, is a drunk and a womanizer- well, how does one respond? No sense of proportion or balance. Just another mindless, bomb-throwing, barking moonbat troll. They need to be treated just like that arcade game with the gophers- when one pops up, smack him back down into his hole.
My favorite game!
March 7, 2007 - 16:39 ET by RJWHACK-A-TROLL!
You know what joeconservative? I've been quiet today.
March 7, 2007 - 16:41 ET by acaiguanaYou know what joeconservative? I've been quiet today.
I have been trying to hold back on my clear idea that you and your ilk are really trying to destroy the United States of America. My country.
But you take the cake.
ACA
...
Quoted from: 'Acaiguana Notes from the Bomb Shelter' (soon to be a movie at theaters near you)
good. i am glad for you.
March 7, 2007 - 17:21 ET by buddycgood. i am glad for you. the guy that owns your party is a banker for the south american drug lords, he wants to legalize controlled drugs and when he says jump hillary, bill, obama and edwards JUMP. are you going to associate with them?
I have known for a long time
March 7, 2007 - 16:33 ET by Clear thinkerI have known for a long time that the media cannot be trusted, just read my tag.
The liberal MSM has become an enemy of the USA.
I whole-heartedly agree! Ou
March 7, 2007 - 17:00 ET by DesperadoI whole-heartedly agree! Our current MSM reminds me of Orwells 1984.
Either they are willfully colluding with the Dems to destroy the country, or they are trying to be an un-elected self appointed political branch. Either way, they have displayed as much treasoness behavior as Benedict Arnold.
I'm in the same corner. ACA
March 7, 2007 - 17:14 ET by acaiguanaI'm in the same corner. ACA
...
Quoted from: 'Acaiguana Notes from the Bomb Shelter' (soon to be a movie at theaters near you)
I keep asking myself why nobo
March 7, 2007 - 17:21 ET by Clear thinkerI keep asking myself why nobody in the media get's investigated for sedition?
Anyone?
The liberal MSM has become an enemy of the USA.
The US no longer has sedition law. That's why. ACA
March 7, 2007 - 17:24 ET by acaiguanaThe US no longer has sedition law. That's why. ACA
ACA
...
Quoted from: 'Acaiguana Notes from the Bomb Shelter' (soon to be a movie at theaters near you)
ACA...Please tell me you are
March 7, 2007 - 17:34 ET by Clear thinkerACA...
Please tell me you are joking, PLEASE!
The liberal MSM has become an enemy of the USA.
CT,Great question.Lord these
March 7, 2007 - 17:27 ET by bigtimerCT,
Great question.
Lord these enemies get away with everything...absolutely everything.
I hate to put a damper on t
March 7, 2007 - 18:31 ET by SomerTeethI hate to put a damper on t
March 7, 2007 - 18:33 ET by SomerTeethI hate to put a damper on the MSM conspiracy theory, but I would ask you to consider a different point of view. It's easy to buy into the philosophy of Limbaugh, Hannity, and O'Reilly, who claim the MSM is driven by a hard "left agenda". Have you ever stopped to consider the possibility that major media is driven by corporate interests, rather than liberal politics?
Consider the findings of a study done at Sonoma State University in 2006:
118 people comprise the membership on the boards of director of the ten biggest media giants. These 118 individuals in turn sit on the corporate boards of 288 national and international corporations. (Basically,
there’s an incestuous relationship among corporate America and the media).
Here are some of the major media companies, and the companies with whom they share board members.
*New York Times: Caryle Group, Eli Lilly, Ford, Johnson and Johnson, Hallmark, Lehman Brothers, Staples, Pepsi
* Washington Post: Lockheed Martin, Coca-Cola, Dun & Bradstreet, Gillette, G.E. Investments,
J.P. Morgan, Moody’s
* Knight-Ridder: Adobe Systems, Echelon, H&R Block, Kimberly-Clark, Starwood Hotels
* The Tribune (Chicago & LA Times): 3M, Allstate, Caterpillar, Conoco Phillips, Kraft, McDonalds, Pepsi, Quaker Oats, Shering Plough, Wells Fargo
* News Corp (Fox): British Airways, Rothschild Investments
* GE (NBC): Anheuser-Busch, Avon, Bechtel, Chevron/Texaco, Coca-Cola, Dell, GM, Home Depot, Kellogg, J.P. Morgan, Microsoft, Motorola, Procter & Gamble
* Disney (ABC): Boeing, Northwest Airlines, Clorox, Estee Lauder, FedEx, Gillette, Halliburton,
Kmart, McKesson, Staples, Yahoo
* Viacom (CBS): American Express, Consolidated Edison, Oracle, Lafarge North America
* Gannett: AP, Lockheed-Martin, Continental Airlines, Goldman Sachs, Prudential, Target, Pepsi
* AOL-Time Warner (CNN): Citigroup, Estee Lauder, Colgate-Palmolive, Hilton
My question to you is this, “Are the so-called liberal media companies making decisions based on politics, or are
they making decisions because they are beholden to certain corporate interests?” In other words, is NBC less likely to write a critical story about Bechtel because of politics, or because it shares members of its board of directors?”
Just wanted to offer another way of looking at the situation. Either way, it's not "objective journalism".
ST
---
<Insert cliche' quote here>
SomerTeeth- don't expect a response
March 7, 2007 - 18:57 ET by MobiusStripThanks for the data: I'll keep it. The problem with bringing valid information to this forum is that it is never really read or analyzed. The posters go off on tangents blaming liberals for everything, regardless of facts, and often wind up just dissolving into paranoid, self-righteous hissy-fits. Very emotional stuff here- which oddly is often attributed to the liberal left. If I were to, say, sign off with "save a polar bear, castrate a conservative!" I'm sure there'd be a dozen reactions. And maybe some erections. But keep trying- maybe a few people here will come to point where they really want a discussion, and not Floyd's Barbershop.
Yawn
March 7, 2007 - 19:01 ET by RJLike your unnamed "Double Super Secret Background Source?" Yawn.
Leave them be, RJ.Now that th
March 7, 2007 - 19:06 ET by BlondeLeave them be, RJ.
Now that they're talking amongst themselves....they're too busy to bother us.
So typical...they show up here and think they're going to magically transform years of conservative thought with a few ill-timed and clever posts (and yes, sarcasm meter is pegged on high tonite).
I know, Blonde
March 7, 2007 - 19:27 ET by RJI know, Blonde, but sometimes it's hard to resist playing whack-a-troll. ;^>
A 'study'? Which 'study'? A
March 7, 2007 - 19:07 ET by DontFeedTheTrollsA 'study'? Which 'study'? Any links?
D
Oh, and one more thing
March 7, 2007 - 19:33 ET by MobiusStripI'm not really sure if most of the community here will ever go out and look at other sites that offer documented facts. Having offered a number places NB folks can go and check facts, and even just suggesting they can Google info based on the topic, I have yet to have even one response wherein someone actually went to look for something. When you ask for direct proofs, real-world information, everyone backs out and you never ger a response beyond a slur. BUT Rush is always right, yeah, we should think like him more often, he has the Truth and the Way and the Light. Let's stay in the light: it's so warm and cozy.
There's an old NB favourite a
March 7, 2007 - 19:36 ET by BlondeThere's an old NB favourite around here.
Instead of whining.....link or slink.
You ought to try it, instead of your sorry moaning.
Get your head out of your but
March 7, 2007 - 19:39 ET by NL207Get your head out of your butt and look for posts with red highlighted text. I put hyper links in anything I feel needs a reference. Roger the Shrubber and Gary Hall do this a lot as well. ACA used to do it a lot too.
Besides, What good will facts do you? Liberalism is a religion whose adherents view all facts through the prism of their own beliefs, and you are a liberal.
Thwack!
March 7, 2007 - 19:41 ET by RJYawn. Yet another self-aggrandizing leftist giver of knowledge to the poor folks in the hinterlands.
Not to interrupt the circle
March 7, 2007 - 20:32 ET by Roger the ShrubberNot to interrupt the circle jerk you two are engaging in right now, but simply listing corporations does not make them Conservative.
You are stretching things here a bit, ASSUMING all corporations are "Right-Wing". If you looked at some of the rabid-Left "non-profits" like the Tides Foundation, Ford Foundation, & La Raza, for example, they receive considerable sums of money from thoese same money-grubbing, evil, obviously Right-wing corporations.
This is rather humorous, since, after watching Fox News kick the crap out of every other cable news Network for years, you'd think the major networks (and major newspapers, all owned by those evil hatemongering corporations) would try adapting the Fox gameplan, instead of watching their network news viewership drop year after year (kindly go to page 16), and newspaper subscriptions are in a steady nosedive subscription-wise.
Corporations are out there to make money, right? If so, you are saying these corporations are going against their idealogy to back money-losing facets of the business. Not very good business sense. It's all about the money. Here is an interesting story about the downfall of network news, if you are interested.
Sorry for posting all these links. I'll try harder to be a knuckle-dragging Dittohead in the future
So, Roger, I was just over at the WaPo editorial page.
March 7, 2007 - 20:42 ET by acaiguanaSo, Roger, I was just over at the WaPo editorial page.
Believe it or not, these nuts commenting think the Post is a tool of the Right Wing?
Go figure.
So, Somerteeth is somewhat right, the perceptions out there are really strange. How anyone could come to the conclusion that the Post is 'right wing' is out of my brain scan. I'm convinced that I need to read more.
ACA
...
Quoted from: 'Acaiguana Notes from the Bomb Shelter' (soon to be a movie at theaters near you)
So, Somerteeth is somewhat
March 8, 2007 - 06:56 ET by SomerTeethSo, Somerteeth is somewhat right, the perceptions out there are really strange. How anyone could come to the conclusion that the Post is 'right wing' is out of my brain scan. I'm convinced that I need to read more.
Maybe I wasn't specific enough. I didn't claim that any of the organizations listed are right-wing or left-wing. My point is that it's far too easy to accept the Limbaugh, Hannity O'Reilly (and NewsBusters for that matter) mantra that asserts the entire MSM is exclusively driven by liberal ideology. In other words, it's just intellectual laziness to write off an entire media organization as "left-wing". But, Rush (et al) built their audiences around that laziness. And no, I'm not calling anyone stupid, I'm just saying it's a reality that most people don't have time to do their research into the facts. It's more convenient to accept the information they provide (we're all guilty of it).
While selective journalism certainly occurs in the so-called "liberal MSM" (which also occurs in the conservative media), I'm simply suggesting that media decisions are more likely driven by corporate interests than by ideology. The purpose in the list of companies with ties to media organizations was to illustrate the degree of potential conflict of interests that currently exist. As someone else pointed out, the name of the game is money. In any situation where corporate media has to choose between money and ideology, money wins every time.
It's not an attempt to excuse or defend any media organization, it's simply a proposition to consider a different hypothesis. One might say it's request to be open-minded.
ST
--------
"<Insert lame cliche' quote here>"
What You Offer Has Been Discussed Before
March 8, 2007 - 13:17 ET by emjem24SomerTeeth...
What, exactly, is your point? That corporate bigwigs sit on the boards of the MSM? Ohhhh, I'm so shocked. Maybe your whole point was: "See, I told you that conservative, corporate big wigs sit on these news boards, therefore it's not a liberal media." Or: "