The Media's Liberal Bias

[musicman]

So...I could find "liberal" sites that dispute what you say.

Again - please do so, then.

And, no - Dr Grump plainly asked me to:

"...pony up some links regarding lib lies"

I believe I have managed that.

 

[musicman]

PBS, Part I:

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/07/12/1411218

 

[musicman]

PBS, Part II:

http://powerlineblog.com/archives/009475.php

 

[musicman]

Just to sum up: in response to Dr Grump's request that I:

"...pony up some links regarding lib lies"

...I offer the preceding links. I'm not addressing bias, or slant, or perspective. I'm talking about LIES.

Contrary to your belief, lying is NOT subjective. It is objective, concrete, and provable. It is the deliberate attempt to present untruth as fact - be it the outright fabrication, the distortion, the half-truth, the concealment of truth, the lie by omission, the twisting of language, the manipulation of data, and the misrepresentation of oneself as dispassionate, disinterested purveyor of fact. These have been - and remain - the coin of the realm for the MSM; standard operating procedure - and plainly observable - for the majority of my life. You probably shouldn't have gone here.

I feel quite comfortable in saying that I've proven my case. I invite any and all to refute the facts I've presented.

 

[sitarro]

Back to the thread topic. Most gullible, who just won the past two presidential elections? There are some gullible poeple out there all right.

As for Bush's numbers, you may not care....but I bet Bush does and especially what it does for his legacy.

ROTFLMAO!!! I understand the problem of calling someone on misspelled words in a post, look at how you spelled people in a post correcting my misspelling of the word ridiculously. I have learned my lesson and will try to just spell correctly on my posts, everyone else can write in ebonics, I don't care anymore.

You obviously don't understand President Bush. He knows how fickle the American public is and how truely useless polls are. Who cares what the incredibly underinformed masses think? He already has a legacy of protecting this country and rebuilding the military that the last President not only misused but also let degrade to an unacceptable condition(just like the other Democrats have done in the past). History will show that taking out that asshole Hussein was a great second step in the war against fanatical jerks that make the world we live in less safe. I have no doubt about this.

 

[Dr Grump]

ROTFLMAO!!! I understand the problem of calling someone on misspelled words in a post, look at how you spelled people in a post correcting my misspelling of the word ridiculously.

As I also said in that post, I make typos and make no apologies for them.. :teeth:

You obviously don't understand President Bush. He knows how fickle the American public is and how truely useless polls are. Who cares what the incredibly underinformed masses think? He already has a legacy of protecting this country and rebuilding the military that the last President not only misused but also let degrade to an unacceptable condition(just like the other Democrats have done in the past). History will show that taking out that asshole Hussein was a great second step in the war against fanatical jerks that make the world we live in less safe. I have no doubt about this.

Time will tell how right your were. As an aside, what Clinton did to the military would not have had any effect on 9-11 IMO...

 

[Dr Grump]

http://www.florida2000election.com/sections/7.htm

And the lie in this little nugget is where? Also, you somehow took it as some sort of "I'll show that liberal Dr Grump how the liberal media lie!" BFD!! I know they lie some of the time. So do the conservative media. My only point was for you to prove it. And in the above link you haven't proved they have lied, all you have done is post a link that someone opines they were biased on election night...maybe...Try harder M&M....

 

[Dr Grump]

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110006273

Ah, in this little beauty you have somebody who claims they were there when somebody made a statement that has not been refuted. Maybe coalition forces did target those journos. Maybe they didn't. But more than that, CNN was not reporting it as news. It was a speech, not a news item. So while the news chief of CNN might have lied, it wasn't as part of a news report on CNN...try again...

 

[Dr Grump]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1220895/posts

Ok..next...Let's see, a post from the FR messageboard. Here is the original URL, which would have given more credibility to your attempt at finding the liberal press lying. http://www.museum.tv/archives/etv/U/htmlU/uncountedene/uncountedene.htm. However, with these little gems amongst it, I'm trying to figure out where the lie(s) is/are:

Westmoreland sued producer George Crile III, correspondent Mike Wallace, and others ... the suit was dropped, however, before reaching the jury, with CBS merely issuing a statement saying the network never meant to impugn the general's patriotism.

Significantly, TV Guide never disputed the premise of the program.

In his conclusion, Benjamin acknowledges the enduring value of the documentary:

The Uncounted Enemy helps explain an aspect of Tet and gives voice to intelligence officers who were silenced during the war.

Allen reasserted his support for The Uncounted Enemy as a valid illustration of the larger issue and subsequently used the program as a case study in politicized intelligence.

Next...

 

[Dr Grump]

Just getting warmed up...doing a few light stretching exercises.

I think you need to jog a few miles, do a 100 push ups, and do a marathon, then start again... :shocked:

 

[Dr Grump]

http://www.townhall.com/opinion/columns/brentbozell/2002/03/15/162677.html

Not too sure why you even posted this one. It is an opinion piece where the author thinks a NR writer is being disingenuous...All it proves is that a conservative writer thinks a liberal writer is full of crap, to which I say "and?". Nothing new there...again, no lie is proved.

You're batting 4 and 0 at the moment. On to the next little beauty....

 

[Dr Grump]

http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=1717

Because you're batting 4 and 0 at the moment, I had to go back to your original gloating premise. For a second I thought I must have asked you to pony up some liberal bias not lies. But I double-checked and it was definitely lies, which makes the above link more puzzling: a conservative pundit wondering why certain liberal media use certain terms? You call that lying?

Hey, I don't think I'll bother with the other links. You are now 5 and 0 and I think you are deliberately wasting my time. I'm done with this topic, thanks for playing. If you feel the need for the last word, be my guest....

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Because you're batting 4 and 0 at the moment, I had to go back to your original gloating premise. For a second I thought I must have asked you to pony up some liberal bias not lies. But I double-checked and it was definitely lies, which makes the above link more puzzling: a conservative pundit wondering why certain liberal media use certain terms? You call that lying?

Hey, I don't think I'll bother with the other links. You are now 5 and 0 and I think you are deliberately wasting my time. I'm done with this topic, thanks for playing. If you feel the need for the last word, be my guest....

Ok. Grump. There's no liberal bias.

Don't you feel silly arguing so hard against the blatantly obvious?

 

[Dr Grump]

Ok. Grump. There's no liberal bias.

Don't you feel silly arguing so hard against the blatantly obvious?

I have consistently said there is both... :spank3: . Most centrists I know accept this. So do some libs. I have never seen a conservative or neocon admit such. Go figure....

 

[rtwngAvngr]

I have consistently said there is both... :spank3:

Oh. Well I didn't really read all this crap. :teeth:

 

[musicman]

And the lie in this little nugget is where?

Damned if you aren't hard to get through to. I think it's mostly willful. That's OK, though - I'll help you. Remember how I discussed the lie in ALL its manifestations? I'll bold the pertinent parts for you, so you don't miss them AGAIN, again:

Contrary to your belief, lying is NOT subjective. It is objective, concrete, and provable. It is the deliberate attempt to present untruth as fact - be it the outright fabrication, the distortion, the half-truth, the concealment of truth, the lie by omission, the twisting of language, the manipulation of data, and the misrepresentation of oneself as dispassionate, disinterested purveyor of fact. These have been - and remain - the coin of the realm for the MSM; standard operating procedure - and plainly observable - for the majority of my life. You probably shouldn't have gone here.

Also, you somehow took it as some sort of "I'll show that liberal Dr Grump how the liberal media lie!"

What on earth are you sputtering about? I provided what you asked for.

BFD!! I know they lie some of the time.

Yes - and, apparently, that's OK with you - lies being SUBJECTIVE and all.

So do the conservative media.

You haven't provided a shred of proof.

My only point was for you to prove it.

Which I have.

And in the above link you haven't proved they have lied, all you have done is post a link that someone opines they were biased on election night...maybe...

I don't know what would satisfy you, short of Dan Rather himself announcing that - yes - he's a lying sack of shit. THEY TRIED TO SWING AN ELECTION WITH BIASED, UNTRUTHFUL, AND MANIPULATIVE REPORTING WHILE SIMULTANEOUSLY REPRESENTING THEMSELVES AS OBJECTIVE JOURNALISTS.

Try harder M&M....

I'm going to be a nice guy, and NOT say, "If I look like an M&M to you, eat me".

 

[musicman]

Ah, in this little beauty you have somebody who claims they were there when somebody made a statement that has not been refuted. Maybe coalition forces did target those journos. Maybe they didn't. But more than that, CNN was not reporting it as news. It was a speech, not a news item. So while the news chief of CNN might have lied, it wasn't as part of a news report on CNN...try again...

You're...familiar with this story, are you? And you have...no problem with the Chief News Executive of CNN tossing around inflammatory lies like this - abroad - during WARTIME?

 

[Annie]

You're...familiar with this story, are you? And you have...no problem with the Chief News Executive of CNN tossing around inflammatory lies like this - abroad - during WARTIME?

I think our Dr. must be Pitt Law Dean, only a snake could be more slippery and better than the media at twisting.

 

[musicman]

Ok..next...Let's see, a post from the FR messageboard. Here is the original URL, which would have given more credibility to your attempt at finding the liberal press lying.

OK - what the hell are you talking about? Everything you cited was in my link for all to see - everything and MORE. You forgot this:

"The production flaws, however, overshadowed the program's positive attributes".

It seems YOU'RE the one who's cherry-picking here. What are you doing - practicing to be an MSM journalist?

However, with these little gems amongst it, I'm trying to figure out where the lie(s) is/are:

Remember my little piece on the lie in all its manifestations? Think of that as a template for knowledge, young seeker - and, so far, successful avoider - of truth. How about the half-truth - the manipulation - the misrepresentation of oneself as objective? A lie is a lie is a lie.

 

[musicman]

Not too sure why you even posted this one. It is an opinion piece where the author thinks a NR writer is being disingenuous...All it proves is that a conservative writer thinks a liberal writer is full of crap, to which I say "and?". Nothing new there...again, no lie is proved.

Liberal journalists lying about lying. You don't see any problem, though - do you?

You're batting 4 and 0 at the moment. On to the next little beauty....

One does not bat 4 and 0. You're talking about a won-lost record, and I quite agree. I AM 4 and 0.