Understanding both sides of the debate

[Dragoon68]

Originally posted by Baptist in Richmond:
This is all well and good, but I couldn't help but notice that you conveniently forgot to address one point I made:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />By the way, since we are talking about "how information is presented," did anyone see Sean Hannity or Joe Scarborough admit that the doctor they perpetually proclaimed as a "Nobel Prize nominee" in fact WAS NOT a "Nobel Prize nominee?" They certainly made the false claim over and over and over and over and over and over...........

Don't forget: you are the one who was discussing "how information is presented........" </font>[/QUOTE]I didn't respond to that point, Baptist in Richmond, because, on the face of it, it seemed more like a question about the creditials of a guest on the shows who made the claim rather than about the political affilation - conservative or liberal - of any of the parties involved. I don't typically watch either FoxNews or MSNBC and this particular subject would not have interested me even if I'd been aware of it. If the claim is untrue then it should be corrected regardless.

 

[OCC]

Well since Bush supposedly leans to the left himself...and he apparently wants supreme power over the minds of the people...then I guess it is a "liberal media". I don't know though...the conservatives I hear such as Hannity are even more annoying and biased than liberals.

 

[poncho]

Both sides of the debate in the mainstream media is controlled and scripted by the CFR. Both parties are bent on building an American Union and scraping the constititution and bill of rights in favor of a global government.

 

[OCC]

"Of course, we can count on the US Immigration Service to screen you very thoroughly and do an extensive background check before you are allowed in, right?"

They pretty much do that...to old ladies and young men with no criminal history going to baseball games.

 

[KenH]

Originally posted by King James:
I don't know though...the conservatives I hear such as Hannity are even more annoying and biased than liberals.

I will agree only to the point that I think that Rush Limbaugh is a nicer person to those who disagree with conservatism than Sean Hannity is.

 

[OCC]

Originally posted by KenH:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by King James:
I don't know though...the conservatives I hear such as Hannity are even more annoying and biased than liberals.

I will agree only to the point that I think that Rush Limbaugh is a nicer person to those who disagree with conservatism than Sean Hannity is. </font>[/QUOTE]

Ken

Hannity wasn't always so bad when I listened to him but he had some "inconsistencies" and he got irritating.

 

[Baptist in Richmond]

Originally posted by Dragoon68:
I didn't respond to that point, Baptist in Richmond, because, on the face of it, it seemed more like a question about the creditials of a guest on the shows who made the claim rather than about the political affilation - conservative or liberal - of any of the parties involved.

Then you need to read what I said again.

Here you go:

Originally posted by Baptist in Richmond:
By the way, since we are talking about "how information is presented," did anyone see Sean Hannity or Joe Scarborough admit that the doctor they perpetually proclaimed as a "Nobel Prize nominee" in fact WAS NOT a "Nobel Prize nominee?" They certainly made the false claim over and over and over and over and over and over...........

On their shows, Sean Hannity and Joe Scarborough repeatedly identified that neurologist as a "Nobel prize" nominee, and that claim was not only patently false, it was completely absurd. Hannity mentioned this numerous times when the neurologist was on Hannity & Colmes, and it WAS NOT TRUE. I never heard Hannity correct himself, and cannot find where he did online.

I don't typically watch either FoxNews or MSNBC and this particular subject would not have interested me even if I'd been aware of it. If the claim is untrue then it should be corrected regardless.

So, exactly what do you watch, the "liberal media?"

 

[Magnetic Poles]

I see very little of a liberal media left, outside the fledgling Air America radio network, and some PBS programs. Rush Limbaugh has been spewing his drug-induced reactionary tirades for years, Faux News Channel is a PR arm of the Bush White House, and MSNBC isn't much better (although they do have Ron Reagan as a liberal commentator. CNN is more moderate, but not as liberal as when Ted Turner ran the show.

 

[Rocko9]

From what I observe. it does appear that major news networks minus Fox have adressed conservative views and are not at biased towards conservatism as they used to be. As for Fox it seems they are truely making efforts to be more fair and balanced than they have in the past but still remain mostly conservative in idealology.

 

[ASLANSPAL]

Oh what are the Fox Viewers going to do
when Rupert comes out for Hillary.

If they only new Bill was really a moderate
Republican and Hillary was the "Goldwater Girl"