More proof MSM is Conservative

[jreeves]

Congress, the power to impeach and remove the President. So, no review by a court. They'd say the power to interpret what "high crimes and misdemeanors" are lies with Congress, and Congress alone.[/QUOTE

before 2000 we would have said the supreme court wouldn't have the power to decide a states election but that's exactly what happened.
ps. read The Prosecution of george bush for murder. it is amazing and compelling.

Are you really Michael Moore?? SCOTUS was ruling on federal election law, which was needed because of the questionable standard of the recount in Florida.

 

[sealybobo]

Conservatives have taken over the media? LOL. That's pretty generalized dude. (I.E. CNN),

they deregulated the media and big corporations like clearchannel own everything. liberals had to buy air america and it isn't the strongest signal. they put rush on everywhere even though randi rhodes beats him in more markets. some red states only get rush. I'm not going to argue when I have fact and you wanna talk about why the media won't report bush's propoganda anymore. you think i'm dumb.

 

[jreeves]

they deregulated the media and big corporations like clearchannel own everything. liberals had to buy air america and it isn't the strongest signal. they put rush on everywhere even though randi rhodes beats him in more markets. some red states only get rush. I'm not going to argue when I have fact and you wanna talk about why the media won't report bush's propoganda anymore. you think i'm dumb.

Yep I see that conservative media jumping all on those ethics investigations of Dodd about his sweetheart loans from Countrywide while serving as head of the Senate Finance and Banking Committee....

 

[editec]

umm, guess this is a question for the boards constitutional scholars...

but lets say a president is impeached simply based on politics with no high crimes or even missedawieners couldn't a president sue and be reinstated by the court on the grounds that the impeachment violated the constitution?

No.

The constitution very clearly puts the entire issue of impeachment in the hands of Congress.

The Federal Courts are not involved, nor can they insinuate themselves into that issue.

Separation of powers and all that, you see?

So I reassert that the decision to impeach a POTUS is ENTIRELY a political decision and the words:

" Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors."

while comforting, perhaps, actually have little or nothing to do with what it takes to impeach.

 

[William Joyce]

Are you really Michael Moore?? SCOTUS was ruling on federal election law, which was needed because of the questionable standard of the recount in Florida.

Bush v. Gore was a challenge to Florida's conducting of a federal election on "equal protection" grounds. Federal election law per se wasn't in play, it was state election mechanisms challenged for their supposed violation of the 14th Amendment. It was a pretty dumb challenge, I thought, but it worked.

 

[sealybobo]

Lmao...other than Fox the news media has a liberal agenda.

why aren't they talking about impeachment?

why are they talking about race and guns and gays? that's what conservatives want to talk about.

are you saying the liberal media is dumb?

I showed my right wing friend all kinds of proof that between 00 and 06, the gop took over the media and in the end, he still thinks its liberal.

you don't know you're being brainwashed.

 

[jreeves]

why aren't they talking about impeachment?

why are they talking about race and guns and gays? that's what conservatives want to talk about.

are you saying the liberal media is dumb?

I showed my right wing friend all kinds of proof that between 00 and 06, the gop took over the media and in the end, he still thinks its liberal.

you don't know you're being brainwashed.

Here you go....genius....
The American Journalist: Politics and Party Affiliation | Project for Excellence in Journalism (PEJ)
In the most recent survey, 40% of journalists described themselves as being on the left side of the political spectrum (31% said they were “a little to the left” and 9% “pretty far to the left”). But that number was down notably, seven percentage points from 1992, when 47% said they leaned leftward.

The percentage of “middle of the roaders” moved up slightly to 33% in 2002 from 30% in 1992. And the number of journalists identifying themselves leaning toward the political right also inched up to 25% from 22% a decade earlier (20% “a little to the right” and 5% “pretty far to the right”).

The findings, interestingly, stop a trend of newsrooms becoming more liberal that the authors detected between 1982 and 1992.

If newsrooms have moved slightly rightward, the research shows, however, that journalists are still more liberal than their audiences. According to 2002 Gallup data in “The American Journalist,” only 17% of the public characterized themselves as leaning leftward, and 41% identified themselves as tilting to the right. In other words, journalists are still more than twice as likely to lean leftward than the population overall.

When it came to the subject of party affiliation, 36% of the journalists said they were Democrats in 2002 compared with 44% in 1992. (That’s the lowest percentage of self-proclaimed Democrats since 1971.) The percentage of Independents dropped slightly from 1992 to 2002 and the ranks of Republicans grew incrementally from 16% to 18%. (There was actually a notable bump in the percentage journalists who named another political affiliation or declined to answer the question in 2002)

By comparison, the public’s party affiliation is evenly divided with 32% characterizing themselves as Democrats and Independents and 31% saying they belonged in the Republican ranks.

 

[sealybobo]

Really, if that's the case then where the hell has Iraq went? If the media is conse You are truly brainwashed if you think the media has a conservative agenda...

we shall see how iraq is going. and why. do we still have a truce with sadr? a guy from livonia,mi just died. so sunni's are getting along with shiites?

but I do know exxon just got a few oil wells. they are inviting foreign oil companies to bid on some other wells. so we are finally asking for help.

is a war with iran progress?

malaki is friends with iran. sadr too. were supposed to get out at the end of the yr unless iraq asks us to stay. us staying under malaki's puppet regime taking their oil is never going to sit well with iraqi's. remember what the hangmen chanted when they hung saddam? mooktada! as in sadr!

this is going to be a costly 100 yr invasion. we will be fighting sunnis, shiites and al queda, aka evil doers.

the media bought them 5 yrs. now the media just doesn't report the war. I wish they would!

 

[sealybobo]

Conservatives have taken over the media? LOL. That's pretty generalized dude. (I.E. CNN),

there were laws against one company owning too many radio,tv and newspapers. the gop conned clinton into de-regulating the industry. I watched as the ruper murdocs gobbled everything up. and I see the neo-cons are choosing the discussions. what about keating 5, mccains temper,wife history,lobbiests running his campaign, flip flops... why isn't cnn talking about iran? why when the war was going badly were they talking about anna nicole and paris hilton and britney?

you must think liberals are stupid. either that or you are.

 

[editec]

what is your point here? but it is true the right owns the media. lou dobbs, fox, glenn beck, even tim russurt was too easy on chaney. rather was left and he got fired. bill clinton deregulated the media. another deregulations scandal. crazy times.

My point is fairly pedestrian.

The reason that they won't impeach Bush is because they want the same freedom to impose their will on the American people that this administration has taken, plus they won't impeach him of rimcompetence because they know damned well they're likely to be just as incompetent when they're in office.

It's an insider's club, these guys belong to, sealy.

They're very kind to their own kind.

 

[jreeves]

there were laws against one company owning too many radio,tv and newspapers. the gop conned clinton into de-regulating the industry. I watched as the ruper murdocs gobbled everything up. and I see the neo-cons are choosing the discussions. what about keating 5, mccains temper,wife history,lobbiests running his campaign, flip flops... why isn't cnn talking about iran? why when the war was going badly were they talking about anna nicole and paris hilton and britney?

you must think liberals are stupid. either that or you are.

Genius when the war was going badly that was the majority of the news. Do you need links to prove it or should you backtrack from that statement now? I guess over 40% of the media saying they are leftist isn't convincing enough for you. While 33% saying they are middle of the road and a paltry 25% saying they are right of the middle. CNN has talked about Iran again I can post links if needed.

If the liberals come to the same conclusions as you do then yes I do think they are stupid.

 

[Charles_Main]

true. but the MSM has never really been conservative in my opinion...the owners have been, but the news delivery? naw, just biased. and sometimes not against something as much as for something.

In order to be Biased for something, you are usually biased against something else.

I my mind our media, leans to the left, but more to the point all our media is biased toward bad news.

Scary, bad news sells much better than good news. However in the case of a war, being biased toward reporting the gory bad news, also makes you biased against the administration running the war.

I mean can any of you really tell me the coverage of the War in Iraq has been fair and unbiased?

I think not, since day one of the war, our media has been against the war, and Bush.

Charles

 

[BrianH]

there were laws against one company owning too many radio,tv and newspapers. the gop conned clinton into de-regulating the industry. I watched as the ruper murdocs gobbled everything up. and I see the neo-cons are choosing the discussions. what about keating 5, mccains temper,wife history,lobbiests running his campaign, flip flops... why isn't cnn talking about iran? why when the war was going badly were they talking about anna nicole and paris hilton and britney?

you must think liberals are stupid. either that or you are.

No, I don't think liberals are stupid....just you. And I would have used the word "dumbass"

 

[sealybobo]

I think not, since day one of the war, our media has been against the war, and Bush.

Charles

is that how you remember it? i'm a liberal, and after 9 11, bush had the support of the entire world. he used that to lie us into iraq. I was fooled. anyone that questioned the wmd thing was silenced. the media buried its collective head for 2 yrs. we found out from intl. news we were conned. and I remember boycotting canada because they didn't go along.

you republicans are unamerican. why do you hate our freedoms?

or are you brainwashed? overly into banning abortion? self hating gay like larry craig? pedophile like mark foley and the page scandal? think we'd forget? hypocrite party. delay, abramoff, gonzo...

the bush appointees have flown nukes over america on accident, keep the borders unsecured, letting more iranians in, selling ports to dubai, invading iraq and iran, gao gave undercover agents components that could make a dirty bomb.

I know, I, rambling... that's cause this has been the worst 8 yrs. did you hear 600 starbucks ae closing? way to go gop from 00-06 ruined america!

 

[Charles_Main]

Yes that is how I remember it.

Dont you remember how we were "bogged down in Basarah" then a few days later we were in Baghdad?

Or does your liberal mind like to forget that?

The press might have been less against Bush and the war at the start, but it did not take long at all for them to turn. To start the counting up of US casualties and their total lack of coverage of anything close to good news.

You can even see it today, as things have quieted down in Iraq, all of the sudden the press hardly talks about Iraq at all, unless of course it is to report a car bombing or more US deaths.

You have to really search to find any mainstream press outfit that reports anything but death Tolls, and Bad news from Iraq.

Do you really think there is NO good news at all out of Iraq?

If we had todays press during WWII we would never have fought that war till the end. The people would have screamed for Peace long before the end of the war.

A people can not be bombarded with Bad news daily and be expected to remain behind the War.

The press in general has long been running a get us out of IRaq campaign.

AS I said if you fail to see this you are either a) a moron, or b) biased.

Charles

 

[Gunny]

Yes that is how I remember it.

Dont you remember how we were "bogged down in Basarah" then a few days later we were in Baghdad?

Or does your liberal mind like to forget that?

The press might have been less against Bush and the war at the start, but it did not take long at all for them to turn. To start the counting up of US casualties and their total lack of coverage of anything close to good news.

You can even see it today, as things have quieted down in Iraq, all of the sudden the press hardly talks about Iraq at all, unless of course it is to report a car bombing or more US deaths.

You have to really search to find any mainstream press outfit that reports anything but death Tolls, and Bad news from Iraq.

Do you really think there is NO good news at all out of Iraq?

If we had todays press during WWII we would never have fought that war till the end. The people would have screamed for Peace long before the end of the war.

A people can not be bombarded with Bad news daily and be expected to remain behind the War.

The press in general has long been running a get us out of IRaq campaign.

AS I said if you fail to see this you are either a) a moron, or b) biased.

Charles

Why did you even list a choice b?

 

[Charles_Main]

Actually I think I needed a choice c as well (You watch to much FOx news) lol

 

[Gunny]

Actually I think I needed a choice c as well (You watch to much FOx news) lol

Your ID ... from the John Jakes books?

 

[Zoomie1980]

Whatever you think of Rep. Dennis Kucinich’s articles of impeachment the very fact so little was broadcast on national TV and radio proves again what a wishy washy weak fourth estate our press has become.

"Although this is the most important motion made in Congress in the 21st century, it was also the most significant plea for a restoration of the republic, which had been swept to one side by the mad antics of a president bent on great crime. And as I listened with awe to Kucinich, I realized that no newspaper in the U.S., no broadcast or cable network, would pay much notice to the fact that a highly respected member of Congress was asking for the president and vice president to be tried for crimes which were carefully listed by Kucinich in his articles requesting impeachment."

Gore Vidal’s Article of Impeachment by Gore Vidal

Truthdig - Reports - Gore Vidal’s Article of Impeachment

Kucinish a "respected" member of Congress.....now that is funny....

 

[Dr Grump]

If we had todays press during WWII we would never have fought that war till the end. The people would have screamed for Peace long before the end of the war.

DIfferent war, different reason for going to war, different president (one who had a brain and could think for himself), different times, different place...