Fox news "fair and balanced" yeah RIGHT

#276
#276
rjd970 said:
Personally, I wouldn't go that far. Bush did veto federal funding of stem cell research, a bill that almost three quarters of Americans supported. That is pretty hawkish on the pro-life front. He all but politicized his religion to get votes after Clinton's immoralities.

From my point of view, he was liberal where he should have been conservative and conservative where he should have been liberal.
Click to expand...

As far the stem cell research ban went this was really the only issue with which he took a strongly conservative stance.

As far as politicizing his religion to get votes it was basically just for show, as i said before stem cell was one of the few stances he took which could be considered right wing or extremely conservative. Take that away and he was pretty moderate.
 
#278
#278
rjd970 said:
Personally, I wouldn't go that far. Bush did veto federal funding of stem cell research, a bill that almost three quarters of Americans supported. That is pretty hawkish on the pro-life front. He all but politicized his religion to get votes after Clinton's immoralities.
Click to expand...

couldn't it be considered more fiscally conservative than pro-life? He didn't ban it altogether, just that no taxpayer funds be spent on it. I have a hard time believing 75% of Americans believe their money should be used for this research.
 
#279
#279
"FNC's ratings are so high because people on the left tune in to see how the right think."

that statement, on it's face, is idiotic. On a deeper level it's indicative of the left's desperation to somehow mitigate their staggering losses in mass media.
 
#280
#280
I watched the Chris Matthews show Sunday and it was interested to hear the panel (no Republicans) explain how Republicans think. What a world.
 
#281
#281
I remain firmly convinced that a substantial majority of the country would describe themselves as fiscally conservative but liberal on social policy.

The Democrats' problem is that their definition of fiscally conservative is sort of like mine, at the Dollhouse at midnight, after 4 bourbons, when money seems to have no value relative to boobies. The problem for conservatives is that, except for the more libertarian among them, they think socially liberal means that school prayer will only be held twice a day instead of three times a day.
 
#282
#282
utvolpj said:
couldn't it be considered more fiscally conservative than pro-life? He didn't ban it altogether, just that no taxpayer funds be spent on it. I have a hard time believing 75% of Americans believe their money should be used for this research.
Click to expand...

He's stated reasoning was socialized, not budgetary, if I remember correctly.

According to this poll, it was 72%:

CAMR

But other polls have seen it as low as 58% support, still a majority.
 
#283
#283
rjd970 said:
He's stated reasoning was socialized, not budgetary, if I remember correctly.

According to this poll, it was 72%:

CAMR

But other polls have seen it as low as 58% support, still a majority.
Click to expand...

support the research (I personally see no problem with it but don't want my dollars doing it) but there's nothing that says 72% want federal funding. The article seems to dance around that point quite well
 
#284
#284
utvolpj said:
support the research (I personally see no problem with it but don't want my dollars doing it) but there's nothing that says 72% want federal funding. The article seems to dance around that point quite well
Click to expand...

Forget the article, see the poll results pdf at the bottom.
 
#285
#285
rjd970 said:
Forget the article, see the poll results pdf at the bottom.
Click to expand...

sorry but I only see 2 questions:

1) For/against stem cell research
2) Should Congress vote on it

There is not one single mention of how it should be funded. Question 3 should be: Do you want your tax dollars going to fund this research? That was never asked.

Maybe I'm just being joo vuh ny ul but I want to see people say they want to pay money for research that may not yield results.
 
#288
#288
VolunteerbyBirth said:
That's ok the white house is the only one who watches that channel anyways in the south.
Click to expand...

fyp.

I like most of MSNBC's actual news coverage, and Morning Joe is alright as well. The evening stuff, well, see below.

5-6 - Hardball - I like this show. I really do. It's not all that biased as some would claim. He does get Republicans on there every day, unlike a lot of shows.

6-7 - The Ed Show - What a tool. Is he on board with Obama, or not? I don't know. He always seems to throw a compliment out there to him, then roasts him for seemingly no real reason. In any case, the show sucks.

7-8 - Hardball - See above

8-9 - Countdown - Olbermann isn't too bad. Although he does carry a type of arrogance for no particular reason, other than he is a liberal.

9-10 - Rachel Maddow - Nearly unwatchable. While her political positions are noted, and I like most of them, she's kinda like Olbermann, except much worse.

I used to watch Hannity and Colmes at the 9 o'clock hour, but I stopped when it just became Hannity. Alan Colmes at least proved to be of some resistance, although most of the time, it ended up being like a Harlem Globetrotters game, with Colmes being the Washington Generals.
 
#290
#290
Of course I know some people do watch MSNBC, their business programs are not bad. But when you get into the evening shows is when it turns into comedy central 2.
 
#292
#292
nickknx865 said:
fyp.

I like most of MSNBC's actual news coverage, and Morning Joe is alright as well. The evening stuff, well, see below.

5-6 - Hardball - I like this show. I really do. It's not all that biased as some would claim. He does get Republicans on there every day, unlike a lot of shows.

6-7 - The Ed Show - What a tool. Is he on board with Obama, or not? I don't know. He always seems to throw a compliment out there to him, then roasts him for seemingly no real reason. In any case, the show sucks.

7-8 - Hardball - See above

8-9 - Countdown - Olbermann isn't too bad. Although he does carry a type of arrogance for no particular reason, other than he is a liberal.

9-10 - Rachel Maddow - Nearly unwatchable. While her political positions are noted, and I like most of them, she's kinda like Olbermann, except much worse.

I used to watch Hannity and Colmes at the 9 o'clock hour, but I stopped when it just became Hannity. Alan Colmes at least proved to be of some resistance, although most of the time, it ended up being like a Harlem Globetrotters game, with Colmes being the Washington Generals.
Click to expand...
undermined any shred of credibility you were trying to maintain.
 
#298
#298
Take from this what you will.

Pew Research Center: Media Metric: Obama's 100 Days of Press

A few interesting tidbits:

As he marks his 100th day in office, President Barack Obama has enjoyed substantially more positive media coverage than either Bill Clinton or George W. Bush during their first months in the White House, according to a new study of press coverage.

Overall, roughly four out of ten stories, editorials and op-ed columns about Obama have been clearly positive in tone, compared with 22% for Bush and 27% for Clinton in the same mix of seven national media outlets during their first two months in office, according to a study by the Pew Research Center's Project for Excellence in Journalism.

The study found positive stories about Obama have outweighed negative by two-to-one (42% vs. 20%) while 38% of stories have been neutral or mixed.
Click to expand...

In contrast with Clinton and Bush, Obama's treatment was more favorable than skeptical both in news coverage and on newspaper opinion pages. For Clinton, on the other hand, news coverage tilted toward the negative, while newspaper op-eds and editorials offered favor. The treatment went the other way for Bush, with news coverage leaning positive, while op-eds and editorials studied were decidedly negative.

The topics covered have also been different for Obama compared with his predecessors. Roughly twice as much of the coverage of Obama (44%) has concerned his personal and leadership qualities than was the case for Bush (22%) or Clinton (26%). Less of the coverage, meanwhile, has focused on his policy agenda.
Click to expand...

There are significant variations in how the different media sectors have covered the Obama presidency. Newspapers and evening network television were most positive in their treatment of Obama. Online news sites were more neutral. Within the cable news universe, MSNBC and Fox News offered strikingly different portrayals of the young presidency, while CNN more closely reflected the tone of the media overall. Meanwhile, NPR and PBS offered the highest percentage of neutral stories of any outlets studied.
Click to expand...
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top