Carville Works for CNN and Hillary - Why?

[red states rule]

typically, you failed to address the content of my links and just attacked the source.

When you have read the links that I posted and are ready to comment on their content which refutes your claims that CNN does not have republicans on their network, then we can recommence this discussion.

I will wait.

Still ating for you list the Conservatoves - if you have the names then list them

So far you have given two - is that all?

As far as Fox bieng biased here is more from the Clinton news Network

CNN Anchor Describes Fox News Channel as ‘F-Word Network’
Posted by Scott Whitlock on September 26, 2006 - 18:13.

Jack Cafferty, the CNN host of the "Cafferty File" segment of the "Situation Room," today derided Fox News as "the F-word network." He also alluded to collusion in regards to an interview Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice gave "The New York Post" editorial board. After being introduced by host Wolf Blitzer on September 26 at 4:11PM EDT, this exchange occurred:

Cafferty: "How you doing, Wolf? You mentioned Condoleezza Rice met with the editorial board of 'The New York Post' today, right?"

Blitzer: "Right."

Cafferty: "Yeah, ‘The New York Post’ is owned by Rupert Murdoch, the same guy that owns the F-word network, the Fox News channel, right?"

Blitzer: "Right."

Cafferty: "Just wanted to connect those dots for our viewers."

Blitzer: "Good."


Once assumes that by "connect[ing] those dots," Cafferty means that Murdoch was somehow using the NY Post to defend FNC over President Clinton's recent charges.

This isn't the first time that Cafferty has used a vaguely profane term to describe Fox. He closed the segment with a bleak description of the situation in Afghanistan:

Cafferty: "Support in the United States for the war in Afghanistan is at an all-time low. A new CNN poll conducted by Opinion Research Corporation shows that only 50 percent of Americans support the war in Afghanistan. 48 percent oppose it. At the beginning of that war in 2001, 90 percent, Nine out of ten Americans, supported our efforts in Afghanistan. And as recently as 2003, two-thirds of Americans backed the operation. Part of the reason for the decline in support may be because Afghanistan is beginning to look more and more like Iraq. Just today, 17 people died in an attack in Afghanistan by a suicide bomber. The Taliban making a comeback in many parts of the country. There is a report today that in some places in Afghanistan, women are once again required to wear a burqa when appearing in public. That's progress. And Afghanistan’s opium cultivation is up 59 percent this year over a year ago, contributing mightily to the world's heroin problem. So here is the question: ‘Why is support for the war in Afghanistan declining? Among Americans?’E-mail your thoughts to [email protected]. Or go to Cnn.com/caffertyfile. Wolf?"

http://newsbusters.org/node/7915

 

[maineman]

conservatives who have appeared on JUST ONE program on CNN:

Ann Veneman
Arlen Specter
Bob Dole
Charles Grassley
Christopher Shays
Chuck Hagel
Dan Burton
David Dreier
Donald Rumsfeld
Frank Keating
Frank Murkowski
Fred Thompson
Henry Kissinger
James Baker
Jeff Sessions
John McCain
Karen Hughes
Kay Bailey Hutchison
Laura Bush
Linda Chavez
Lynne Cheney
Mark Kirk
Mary Matalin
Michael Deaver
Michael Reagan
Pat Robertson
Richard Thornburgh
Spencer Abraham
William Bennett

 

[red states rule]

conservatives who have appeared on JUST ONE program on CNN:

Ann Veneman
Arlen Specter
Bob Dole
Charles Grassley
Christopher Shays
Chuck Hagel
Dan Burton
David Dreier
Donald Rumsfeld
Frank Keating
Frank Murkowski
Fred Thompson
Henry Kissinger
James Baker
Jeff Sessions
John McCain
Karen Hughes
Kay Bailey Hutchison
Laura Bush
Linda Chavez
Lynne Cheney
Mark Kirk
Mary Matalin
Michael Deaver
Michael Reagan
Pat Robertson
Richard Thornburgh
Spencer Abraham
William Bennett

What program? Did they take part in a debate or were they interviewed. There is a difference

 

[maineman]

What program? Did they take part in a debate or were they interviewed. There is a difference

the answer to your question is contained in the links I already gave you. do your own fucking research....you asked for a list of republicans, and I gave it to you.

When will YOU ever start answering MY questions, asshole?

 

[red states rule]

the answer to your question is contained in the links I already gave you. do your own fucking research....you asked for a list of republicans, and I gave it to you.

When will YOU ever start answering MY questions, asshole?

Translation - I posted a bunch of names and that is good enough

 

[maineman]

Translation - I posted a bunch of names and that is good enough

that's what you asked for... a list of republicans...I gave it to you.

"Still ating for you list the Conservatoves - if you have the names then list them"


now... answer MY questions.

 

[red states rule]

that's what you asked for... a list of republicans...I gave it to you.

now... answer MY questions.

Interviews and news stories do not count

My list of Libs if Fox are all Fox News Contributers and they take part in round table discussions on a regular basis

 

[red states rule]

and lets not foget about Chris Matthews over at PMSNBC


Matthews Snickered at Bush Hate, But Blew Gasket at Anti-Kerry-in-Vietnam Spin
Posted by Tim Graham on September 7, 2006 - 16:21.
Geoff Dickens had the low-down first on Chris Matthews smiling through kooky Green Party gubernatorial candidate Malachy McCourt's talk about how he'd favor execution if the criminal was Pinochet or George W. Bush. It must depend on which politician is being criticized. On August 19, 2004, when columnist Michelle Malkin suggested it was possible John Kerry may have wounded himself in Vietnam, Matthews huffed after Malkin was evacuated, "We're going to keep things clean on this show. No irresponsible comments are going to be on this show."

After Matthews pounded Malkin on how the Bush campaign should force the withdrawal of the Swift Vet ads, it was comical how out of control Matthews became. He wouldn't let Malkin speak for more than a few seconds without interrupting with outrage. See how very different Malkin was treated, compared with the execute-Bush joker. San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown argued there was no question Kerry was shot in Vietnam, so what else was there to ask?

Video clip of Matthews pouncing on Malkin as he deliberately misconstrued her assertion Kerry suffered a “self-inflicted wound” to be an accusation “he shot himself on purpose” (2:10): Real (3.7 MB) or Windows Media (4.2 MB), plus MP3 audio (650 KB) [Transcript follows.]

Malkin: "Why don't people ask him more specific questions about the shrapnel in his leg?"

Willie Brown [the other guest]: "He didn't get shot at in Alabama..."

Malkin: "There are legitimate questions about whether or not..."

Brown: "He didn't get shot at..."

Malkin: "... it was a self-inflicted wound."

Brown: "... a fighter pilot in Alabama."

Matthews: "What do you mean by self-inflicted? You say he shot himself on purpose? Is that what you're saying?"

Malkin: "Well, did you read..."

Matthews: "I'm asking you a simple question. Are you saying he shot himself on purpose?"

Malkin: "I'm saying that some of these soldiers..."

Matthews: "I'm asking a question."

Malkin: "And I'm answering it."

Matthews: "Did he shoot himself on purpose?"

Malkin: "Some of those, some of the, some of the soldiers have made allegations that these were self-inflicted wounds."

Matthews: "No, no, no one has ever accused him of shooting himself on purpose."

Malkin: "These, that these were self-inflicted wounds."

Matthews: "No, no, are you saying he shot himself on purpose?"

Malkin: "I'm saying that I read the book..."

Matthews: "That's a criminal act."

Brown: "Chris, that is the most irresponsible thing that..."

Malkin: "I read the book..."

Matthews: "Are you saying he shot himself on purpose? I want an answer yes or no, Michelle."

Malkin: "Some of the veterans say..."

Matthews: "No, there are..."

Malkin: "Yes. Some of the veterans say that!"

Matthews: "No one has ever accused him..."

I didn't get this transcript from the actual program, but from the replay that "Hardball" put on the next day, as reporter David Shuster came in and defended his boss:

Shuster: "No, none of them say that. What they do say in their book is that John Kerry, quote, ‘got hit by a piece of shrapnel from a grenade that he had fired himself. He fired it too close to the shore, and it exploded on a rock or something.’ If that actually caused Kerry's injury, it would be called in military terms a self-inflicted wound. But to the military, it is a descriptive term, not a damning one. And there is still no evidence Kerry intended to harm himself."

Matthews: "Is there a direct accusation in any book you’ve ever read in your life that said John Kerry shot himself on purpose to get a credit for Purple Heart? On purpose? On purpose? Yes or no, Michelle?"

Malkin: "In the February 19, 1969..."

Matthews: "Yes."

Malkin: "In the February 19, 1969 event..."

Matthews: "Did they say he did it on purpose?"

Malkin: "There are doubts about whether or not..."

Matthews: "There are doubts about, that's..."

Malkin: "... there was intense rifle fire or not."

Matthews: "... the kind of, just tell me for a fact..."

Malkin: "And I wish you would ask these questions of John Kerry instead of me."

Matthews: "I had never heard anyone say he shot himself on purpose."

Malkin: "Have you, have you tried to ask?"

Matthews: "And I haven't heard you say it."

Malkin: "Have you tried to ask John Kerry these questions?"

Matthews: "If he shot himself on purpose? No, I have not asked him that."

Malkin: "Have you, don't you wonder?"

Matthews: "No, I don't. It's never occurred to me."

I just transcribed the rest of this today. With a stern face, Matthews went to commercial: "We're going to keep things clean on this show. No irresponsible comments are going to be on this show."

After the commercial, Matthews returned with Dana Milbank and David Gergen, and continued his protest: "Dana, what did make of that exchange we just had with Michelle Malkin there, saying that there's rumors out there, there's certain people out there that say John Kerry shot himself on purpose to get a Purple Heart. This is how bad it's gotten, I think."

When Milbank suggested that was a new one, Matthews whacked away again: "I think it occurred right here to our, our problem here. I hope I corrected it. Nobody who's watching now -- believe that, until you get some facts on a case like that. Don't believe that one. Til you know that it's a fact."

Ironically, of course, Malkin was trying to urge Matthews to seek the facts, instead of suggesting that fact-seeking was out of bounds.

In the original CyberAlerts in 2004, there were these items:

On August 23, we recounted Malkin's column on the brouhaha, and how Keith Olbermann stepped in to support John Kerry, who had not yet "won" Ohio.

On August 25, we recounted how Matthews whacked Malkin again on his show on the Monday, August 23 edition of Hardball.

On September 2, Sen. Zell Miller told Matthews not to pull another Malkin beating, with his own talk of lethal force: "I wish we lived in the day where you could challenge a person to a duel. Now, that would be pretty good. But don't ask me, don't pull that, don't pull that, wait a minute, don't pull that kind of stuff on me like you did that young lady when you had her there brow-beating her to death. I'm not her."
Matthews: "She was suggesting, let me tell, she was suggesting-"
Miller: "You get in my face, I'm gonna get back in your face."
Matthews: "-that John Kerry purposely shot himself to win a medal, and I was trying to correct the record."

We later made fun of Matthews -- we made up a sound-alike Terri Schiavo exchange -- in the 2005 April Fools Edition of Notable Quotables.

Malkin also wrote a blog post about her experience.

http://newsbusters.org/node/7461

 

[maineman]

you asked for a list of republicans. I gave you such a list.

I have asked YOU to address numerous questions which you continue to ignore.

Start changing that trend.

 

[red states rule]

you asked for a list of republicans. I gave you such a list.

I have asked YOU to address numerous questions which you continue to ignore.

Start changing that trend.

News stories and interviews do not count

Using your logic John Kerry would be considered a Fox News Contributor

 

[maineman]

News stories and interviews do not count

Using your logic John Kerry would be considered a Fox News Contributor

I am waiting for you to address my questions. I answered yours.

 

[red states rule]

I am waiting for you to address my questions. I answered yours.

No you didn't

You listed a bunch of names and did not state in what manner they appeared on CNN or MSNBC

News stories and interviews do not count

It is a fact Fox has more libs then CNN and MSNBC have conservatives

 

[maineman]

No you didn't

You listed a bunch of names and did not state in what manner they appeared on CNN or MSNBC

News stories and interviews do not count

It is a fact Fox has more libs then CNN and MSNBC have conservatives

You ASKED for a list of names.

I gave you a list of names.

I gave you links that show significant research into the political persuasions of guests on major news shows on all networks.

and I am done answering ANY MORE of YOUR questions until you start answering a bunch of mine.

 

[red states rule]

You ASKED for a list of names.

I gave you a list of names.

I gave you links that show significant research into the political persuasions of guests on major news shows on all networks.

and I am done answering ANY MORE of YOUR questions until you start answering a bunch of mine.

Transalation - All I can do is pull names of conservatives from a left wing website.

 

[maineman]

the request:

"Still ating for you list the Conservatoves - if you have the names then list them"



the response:

Ann Veneman
Arlen Specter
Bob Dole
Charles Grassley
Christopher Shays
Chuck Hagel
Dan Burton
David Dreier
Donald Rumsfeld
Frank Keating
Frank Murkowski
Fred Thompson
Henry Kissinger
James Baker
Jeff Sessions
John McCain
Karen Hughes
Kay Bailey Hutchison
Laura Bush
Linda Chavez
Lynne Cheney
Mark Kirk
Mary Matalin
Michael Deaver
Michael Reagan
Pat Robertson
Richard Thornburgh
Spencer Abraham
William Bennett

asked and answered.

Quit tapdancing and start answering MINE

 

[red states rule]

Using MM's method Hillary is now a Fox News Contributor

 

[red states rule]

More from the unbiased liberal media


Newt's Struggling Spanish vs. Nancy's Sophisticated Scarves
Posted by Tim Graham on April 6, 2007 - 08:58.
Usually, media coverage comparisons of Newt Gingrich and Nancy Pelosi take place across about twelve years, from Gingrich's rise in 1995 to Pelosi's new job in 2007. But Friday's Washington Post makes it all contemporary on the front page of the Style section. At the top, Jose Antonio Vargas whacked Gingrich as he apologized in a YouTube video for his recent remarks "equating bilingual education with 'the language of living in a ghetto.'"

At the bottom of the page came the latest in a series of print high-fives for Pelosi from Post fashion critic Robin Givhan, who insisted the scarves Pelosi used to cover her hair in Syria were fabulous. Over a large photo of Pelosi with head scarf, the headline read "Nancy Pelosi, Respectfully Maintaining Her Own Image."

The Vargas piece on Gingrich was loaded with angry Latinos in favor of bilingual education. Vargas mocked Gingrich's grasp of Spanish: "(However: Memorando al Señor Gingrich: In Spanish, the "r" is rolled and the syl-la-bles are se-pa-ra-ted.)" He added: "As of yesterday afternoon, Gingrich's YouTube apology, the Spanish version, had been watched more than 34,000 times on the video-sharing site. Comments kept coming in, some viewers sympathetic to Gingrich, many not, others simply LOLing -- laughing out loud." Only one website commenter was quoted supporting Gingrich's stand on bilingualism.

Givhan took no time to argue that there could be giggles in Nancy's headwear. She argued that while Western leaders looked profoundly uncomfortable in Vietnamese garb at the last Asian summit, and while the British hostages in Iran were denied their uniforms as they departed from captivity, Pelosi was a diva, fully in control of her fashion faculties:

Pelosi, with her carefully coordinated scarves, respected her foreign surroundings without ceding any control. She assiduously avoided leaving a trail of cringe-inducing photographs in which she looked so uncomfortable she might as well have been dressed in a coat of porcupine quills. Her multipurpose, culturally adaptable scarves underscored the reality that sometimes it not only matters who you are, but also what you wear.

No one in the liberal Post could locate the feminist argument that perhaps the Middle East is antiquated for requiring the ladies to cover their locks. Instead, Givhan merely began by noting Pelosi's talent for modesty and her movie-star heroine good looks:

The scarves provided her with an additional bit of sartorial modesty when the situation required it and she was also able to use them to cover her head when protocol dictated -- such as when she visited the tomb of John the Baptist inside a mosque in Damascus and tied one around her head in the manner of a Hitchcock heroine.

http://newsbusters.org/node/11871