Ted Koppel: Fox News `Bad for America`

Submitted by: smaus 4 years ago in

Kiss off.
There are 105 comments:
Male 546
He just wants it, the way they have had it since the 60`s. In that manner, his values win!
0
Reply
Male 15,832
@Roland [quote]And it is disgusting hearing Bill O`Reilly pretend his "work" is of any value.[/quote]
Let`s see, he has the #1-rated cable news program in the country; he generates $millions in ad revenue for his employer; his advertisers are getting their message to millions of potential customers every night; he provides high-payig jobs for dozens of people; he currently has four best-selling books on the NYT list; and he raises $millions for more than 2 dozen different charities.

So, tell us, please, what "work" have YOU done that`s so much more valuable than that?

I didn`t think so.
0
Reply
Male 2,988
called out like the bitch he is
0
Reply
Male 9,503
5cats

You didn`t answer my weed question.
0
Reply
Male 9,503
5Cats

"If the Dems had the 60 votes to pass "cloture" then they had the same 60 votes to pass the Bill, unless I`m horribly mistaken?"

They didn`t have 60 votes, or they had it for a small amount of time. I`m on my phone so i`m not looking it up. Correct me if i`m wrong.

"In the "old days" (pre-Obama) the two sides would *gasp!* talk and come to a compromise!"

Remember when I first jumped in and said I was pointing to two factors mconnel`s quote and cloture votes? The senate minority leader said his main goal was defeat the president. Then cloture votes skyrocketed. So you take that as being Obama`s fault? The dems don`t need cloture votes to stop discussing they need them to stop filibusters because the senate republicans have stated quite clearly that they Errol block any legislation the president tries to make.
0
Reply
Male 17,512
markust: And as I noted, there are ways around cloture and filibusters. It doesn`t always take 60 votes.
0
Reply
Male 40,302
@markust & @HG: If the Dems had the 60 votes to pass "cloture" then they had the same 60 votes to pass the Bill, unless I`m horribly mistaken?

In the "old days" (pre-Obama) the two sides would *gasp!* talk and come to a compromise! So I point out that this is NOT happening under Obama, and @HG provided proof of what I said! thx!

Obama: so good at compromise he never does it!
0
Reply
Male 40,302
I was grumpy last night, eh? Thanks for your kind words @HG and @markust

Back to arguing!

@HG: So you admit that the Dems had the 60 votes, so you propose examples of them NOT negotiating as proof of their ability to compromise?
Many Senate bills get passed with less than 60 votes, at least BEFORE Obama took office.

[quote]However there is nothing wrong with being gay and nothing that needs to be fixed.[/quote]
True that! I`m talking about the stigma attached to either. "Gayness" used to be highly discriminated against - true! People have become a lot more tolerant, accepting even! That`s a + for Western Civilization!

[quote]You mention the debt constantly on here and you flat out didn`t when Bush was in charge.[/quote]
Didn`t need to under Bush: the MSM did it EVERY DAY! They also attacked him for the 5.5% unemployment rate!!! Imagine that!

My point is Media Hypocricy, not IAB members.
0
Reply
Male 4,850
@Crackrjak, "You said "Pass Legislation", NOT "Pass A Cloture Vote". "

Quit moving the goal post Crackrjak. Below is HG`s full comment. It is quite clear he is talking about the whole process including having to pass a cloture vote because Republican`s filibuster everything:

"You need 60 Senators to pass legislation. Since Republicans rarely to never crossed party lines and filibustered everything, he in no way had "total control". "
0
Reply
Male 2,670
Fox isn`t even a news station. Fox is the thinly-veiled propaganda arm of the RNC.

0
Reply
Male 9,503
CrakrJak

"Obama also missed 303 votes (46 percent of all votes that came before the Senate) in 2008."

Actually, the number I found is that he missed 64% of votes. That happens when you run for president. That same year McCain missed 80% of Senate votes.

"You said "Pass Legislation", NOT "Pass A Cloture Vote".

I did say that. I was talking about the entire process to pass legislation, and unfortunately, in our current political climate a cloture vote is needed to pass anything.
0
Reply
Male 9,503
5Cats

My ex struggled with depression. Try to stay positive and hopefully things will get better. Have you tried smoking weed? It helped her at times.
0
Reply
Male 17,512
HG: [quote]No gay person will ever adversely affect my life by being gay.[/quote]

There are many ways that anyone can adversely affect your life. An Alcoholic could adversely affect your life by driving on the same road as you. A blogger could make a mistake and adversely affect your life by posting something about you. A person texting on the phone could send a text, mistakenly, to your phone and your partner see it and adversely affect your life.

There are countless ways your life could be adversely affected, and it could possibly be by a gay person being gay.
0
Reply
Male 17,512
HG: You said "Pass Legislation", NOT "Pass A Cloture Vote".

Markust: The senate has gotten around cloture using tricks like reconciliation and budget resolutions are exempt from cloture. There is also the "Nuclear Option" whereby the senate changes the procedural rules.
0
Reply
Male 17,512
HG: Again, you are reading it wrong, abstentions and being absent still counts toward their total vote count, but not toward their liberal/conservative score. Then they discard a whole category if they don`t vote often enough, which eliminates those liberal/conservative votes, in that category, that they did make.

The leftist organization Americans for Democratic Action (ADA) similarly rated Obama’s Senate voting record at 97.5 percent. Obama also missed 303 votes (46 percent of all votes that came before the Senate) in 2008.

Quit trying to gloss over the fact that Obama`s voting record was extremely liberal.
0
Reply
Male 9,503
5Cats

"Obama hold the record for voting "present" despite other senators being in office for DECADES!"

FACTCHECK FACTCHECK FACTCHECK

Obama never voted "present" in the U.S. Senate. You can`t really vote present as far as I know. This is a messed up talking point. He voted "present as a state senator in Illinois 129 times out of 4,000 votes in eight years. That is only 3%. Is that a record? I don`t know, but I doubt it. Post a link to back up your statement.

http://tinyurl.com/9dv2pc9

0
Reply
Male 9,503
5Cats

My ex struggled with depression. Try to stay positive and hopefully things will get better. Have you tried smoking weed? It helped her at times.
0
Reply
Male 9,503
5Cats

"Mentally ill VS gay: which one will be MORE discriminated against in 2012?"

1. That depends on where you are and who you are talking to. Nobody is going to picket your funeral or drag you to death behind a car for being mentally ill.

2. I don`t have to fear gay people. No gay person will ever adversely affect my life by being gay. Someone with mental illness could kill me or my kids.

"And the fact remains: I`m "sick" while you are "acceptable". In 2012 standards of course."

You ARE sick. There IS something wrong with you. Something you are taking medication to fix. I wish you luck with that. However there is nothing wrong with being gay and nothing that needs to be fixed. Not sure what your point is? Comparing mental illness and gay is like comparing diabetes and being asian.
0
Reply
Male 9,503
5Cats

"16,000,000,000,000.00 in REAL DEBT? Or did you first hear of it via MY post at IAB?"

No I knew. I might not have known it passed that day, but I knew it was close. I have a pretty good idea withing a quarter trillion where the debt is simply by trying to stay informed.

I`ve told you before it is an issue. I am against the spending. But I am the same no matter who is in charge, that is my only point. You aren`t. You mention the debt constantly on here and you flat out didn`t when Bush was in charge.
0
Reply
Male 9,503
5Cats

"LIE! LIE! LIE! LIE!
You KNOW @HolyGod that it only takes 51 Seante votes!"

I was going to respond to this, but Markust did it beautifully.

"The only way to force Senators to stop deliberating is by a cloture vote, and that takes 60 votes. HolyGod is absolutely correct in his statement. You need 60 Senators to pass pretty much any legislation now days. All it takes is 41 senators to filibuster a bill."
0
Reply
Male 4,850
The only way to force Senators to stop deliberating is by a cloture vote, and that takes 60 votes. HolyGod is absolutely correct in his statement. You need 60 Senators to pass pretty much any legislation now days. All it takes is 41 senators to filibuster a bill.
0
Reply
Male 40,302
[quote]I wasn`t being sarcastic. I never would with maters such as this.[/quote]
Well I thought so @markust! But had to ask to be sure, eh?
Yeah: taking medication for mental illness? You want to compare "stigma" with me? Hummm?
Mentally ill VS gay: which one will be MORE discriminated against in 2012?
I`ll put my money on Mentally Ill, and give 2:1 odds to boot!
And the fact remains: I`m "sick" while you are "acceptable". In 2012 standards of course.

@HG: "factcheck" my shiny ass! You suck! Pbbbt!
0
Reply
Female 5
I agree with him completely at :50-1:30, it`s just the fact that he is saying it through a stance of hypocrisy.
0
Reply
Male 40,302
[quote]FACT CHECK: You need 60 Senators to pass legislation.[/quote]
LIE!
LIE! LIE! LIE!
You KNOW @HolyGod that it only takes 51 Seante votes!
I am sickened by you!
Seriously, this is an unforgivable lie. Recant or face being ignored. I know you`ll make excuses, but F-Dat! YOU KNOW it`s a lie so admit it!

[quote]Did you ONCE come on this site and post a video about the debt hitting $8 Trillion or $10 Trillion?[/quote]
NOPE! The MSM did a VERY efficient job of detailing EVERY mistake, real OR IMAGINED that Bush II ever made!
And I for sure cried out against his idiotic "bail out" and other liberal measures. Bank on it Bro!
I ask you again: did the MSM mention, even ONCE the passing of 16,000,000,000,000.00 in REAL DEBT? Or did you first hear of it via MY post at IAB?

Fianlly: @HG: Obama hold the record for voting "present" despite other senators being in office for DECADES!

0
Reply
Male 4,850
I wasn`t being sarcastic. I never would with maters such as this. You had mentioned something before. You went on such a rant there I was just wondering if you were all right.
0
Reply
Male 40,302
[quote]Are you off your meds 5Cats?[/quote]
Nope, on them. But they`re not helping a whole lot, it`s hard to say if the side effects outweigh the benifits. I`ve taken almost every anti-depressant on the market in the past 20 years. Most didn`t work at all, some had harmful, even LETHAL side-effects! (seriously! 4 days in hospital = almost bled to death!) There`s only like 2-3 (Prozac, Lithium) left for me to try if fluvoxamine doesn`t help. But thanks for asking @markust!
I do hope you weren`t being sarcastic? Or is it sardonic, I forget. I`m willing to give you the benifit of the doubt though.
Your "reposte" is teh sux though.

@Squrlz: thx! You would not believe how many YouTube videos exist of people KILLING squirrels! Guns, bows, traps, ICKY! I was shocked!

As for "May Day" it`s been #1 in the news forever. 60+ years running. Yes indeed, the MSM is 100% leftist biased. It`s a fact, jack!
0
Reply
Male 335
People watch Fox News just to hear someone validate the opinions they have already formed. And it is disgusting hearing Bill O`Reilly pretend his "work" is of any value.
0
Reply
Male 9,503
CrakrJak

"And NO, I was correct Obama WAS the most liberal senator, not counting the absentee votes, for those 3 years overall."

How do you figure? They divide liberal votes by total votes made to get a percentage. So the score is based on percent of votes they made, not percent of total votes. The only absentee votes would change his percentage is if you added them in making assumptions about how he would have voted.

"Absences and abstentions were not counted; instead, the percentage base was adjusted to compensate for missed roll calls. A member who missed more than half of the votes in any issue category was scored as “missing” in that category"

http://tinyurl.com/9lr6dxp

Once again you are making statements that are factually incorrect. These aren`t opinions or subjective things. These are facts. There is only one set of facts.
0
Reply
Male 17,512
HG: Please don`t act so high and mighty. I`ve caught you not even reading your own damn links before posting them. So don`t get all pissy because I revised a comment of mine.

And NO, I was correct Obama WAS the most liberal senator, not counting the absentee votes, for those 3 years overall.
0
Reply
Male 15,832
Koppel is just pinin` for the good ol` days when the liberals had an absolute monopoly on the news. They can`t stand to have their opinions contradicted.
0
Reply
Male 9,503
CrakrJak

So you admit he WAS NOT "THE most liberal voting record of any senator, during his time in that office" and only was, in fact, for only one of four years?
0
Reply
Male 9,503
CrakrJak

"I chose to revise my comment, within a minute I might add, and you jump all over it like a rabbit in heat. "

Because you clearly formed an opinion and posted a rebuttal without even reading my post or going to my link. I never respond to one of your comments without reading links you post and checking facts you list.

It is simple etiquette.
0
Reply
Male 17,512
HG: I`m judging based on the votes he cast, not the ones he decided to not vote on. But your link adds those absent votes in, which skews his score.

Absent votes shouldn`t count for anything.
0
Reply
Male 17,512
HG: you has already conceded he indeed was the most liberal senator of 2007. I chose to revise my comment, within a minute I might add, and you jump all over it like a rabbit in heat.

Calm down, you`ll live longer.
0
Reply
Male 9,503
CrakrJak

"I have no doubt that if he had voted more times, he would`ve ranked higher. If you subtract the votes he missed, He was indeed THE most liberal senator for those 3 years."

SO now i can`t debate you with facts, I have to debate you with what you think might have happened under theoretical circumstances? That will be tough.

You made a statement. That statement was WRONG. Stand up, be a man, and admit it.
0
Reply
Male 17,512
Squrlz: "all of the scores among Democratic presidents are close and generally within the system’s margin of sampling error."

In your link.
0
Reply
Male 9,503
In case my below post doesn`t make sense:

Crakr posted:

"HG: I`ll double check your check with this. CNN"
Linking to this article: http://tinyurl.com/2lsv9g

Then he deleted it, I`m guessing after he realized how ridiculous it made him look.
0
Reply
Male 17,512
HG: Obama was only senator for part of 2005 and he had a lot votes where he was absent or just didn`t vote. He was indeed the most liberal senator of 2007 and in the top 10 of 2006.

I have no doubt that if he had voted more times, he would`ve ranked higher. If you subtract the votes he missed, He was indeed THE most liberal senator for those 3 years.
0
Reply
Male 9,503
CrakrJak

"HG: I`ll double check your check with this. CNN"

Holy Jesus Mother F.ucking Pogo-Sticking Christ

Did you even read before you started arguing?

Not ONLY is your link simply a story referencing the study from the National Journal that my link sends you directly to, but it also reiterates what I posted. I said he was the most liberal in 2007 leading into the primaries. But being the most liberal ONE year and being the most liberal "during his time in that office", is very different.

Also, just for reference, due to campaigning he did not vote enough times to qualify for ranking in 2007 according to the National Journal`s revised qualifications.
0
Reply
Male 6,227
Have to hit the hay, but I just stumbled upon the chart below, which I found interesting. The more negative the score, the more liberal the president; the more positive the score, the more conservative the president.

Full article here.

0
Reply
Male 9,503
CrakrJak

"Obama had THE most liberal voting record of any senator, during his time in that office"

FACTCHECK FACTCHECK FACTCHECK

Obama was a senator 2005 - 2008

According to the national Journal, which is the only source for this rating that I am aware of:

2005: Liberal score 82.5. Makes him 15th most Liberal Senator
2006: Liberal score 86. Makes him 10th most Liberal Senator
2007: Liberal score 95.5. Makes him 1st most Liberal Senator
2008: Liberal score 79.5. Makes him 22nd most Liberal Senator

Source:
http://tinyurl.com/97mg5cu
0
Reply
Male 9,503
5Cats

I have a problem with what the president does whether he has a D or an R next to his name. The issues I vocally care about, defense spending, gay rights, incursion of religion in government, the drug war, etc, are issues I care about no matter who is in charge and I will complain about the way the president handles those issues whether it is Bush, or Obama, or anyone else.
0
Reply
Male 9,503
CrakrJak

"Obama had THE most liberal voting record of any senator, during his time in that office"

FACTCHECK FACTCHECK FACTCHECK

Obama was a senator 2005 - 2008

According to the national Journal, which is the only source for this rating that I am aware of:

2005: Liberal score 82.5. Makes him 15th most Liberal Senator
2006: Liberal score 86. Makes him 10th most Liberal Senator
2007: Liberal score 95.5. Makes him 1st most Liberal Senator
2008: Liberal score 79.5. Makes him 22nd most Liberal Senator

Source:
http://tinyurl.com/97mg5cu
0
Reply
Male 6,227
@CrakrJak: I`m really torn on the Affordable Healthcare Act. (I dislike the term "Obamacare" for a host of reasons I won`t get into here.) On the one paw, it prevents insurers from turning people away with pre-existing conditions and allows young adults to get insurance more easily. Yay for that. On the other paw, it bends over backwards to protect the outsize profits of the health insurance industry and the pharmaceutical firms. So, yes, CJ, I agree with you: It`s going to cost a hell of a lot, there`s no getting around it. And a lot of that money is going to go into the pockets of corporations that are already bleeding the American middle class dry. That`s my main problem with it.
0
Reply
Male 17,512
markust & squrlz: That still doesn`t change the fact that Obama had THE most liberal voting record of any senator, during his time in that office, and hasn`t signed a single budget in the past 3 years.

That`s not to say that there aren`t politicians more liberal than him out there, there are, but that doesn`t make him even close to being centrist. Obamacare will add another $2.6 Trillion to our debt (according to the CBO) and that`s on top of the $6 Trillion that he`s already added to it. Not to mention the other $1 Trillion he wants for another stimulus package.

Enough is enough, we can`t afford what he has already heaped upon us, let alone another 50% more.
0
Reply
Male 9,503
5Cats

I have a problem with what the president does whether he has a D or an R next to his name. The issues I vocally care about, defense spending, gay rights, incursion of religion in government, the drug war, etc, are issues I care about no matter who is in charge and I will complain about the way the president handles those issues whether it is Bush, or Obama, or anyone else.
0
Reply
Male 9,503
5Cats

The debt is an issue. It was an issue under Bush and it is an issue under Obama. It has been an issue since Reagan.

Here is my issue with you bringing up the debt. Bush`s budgets took the debt from $5.8 Trillion to $11.9 Trillion. Did you ONCE come on this site and post a video about the debt hitting $8 Trillion or $10 Trillion? Or an iconographic about how $9 Trillion looked stacked up? Were you constantly making comments about it? In fact did you bring it up ONCE?

Because if the answer is no than why is it suddenly an issue for you now when it wasn`t then?
0
Reply
Male 4,850
Not being able to admit you are wrong is a clear sign of weakness and insecurity.
0
Reply
Male 6,227
CrakrJak: I`m open to discussing ideas. If you can demonstrate that a position I`m holding isn`t sound, more power to you. I`m not perfect and I certainly have a lot to learn.

That said, I`ve yet to see one convincing argument that anthropogenic climate change is a "hoax," while my bookcases are literally sagging under the weight of studies and books that affirm it.

But, as you say, that`s another topic for another time.
0
Reply
Male 9,503
Markust

"Here are 4 pages of compromises. "

Hahahahaha. Brilliant. Where is your rebuttal to that guys? Oh, I`m sure politifact is liberally biased right?
0
Reply
Male 9,503
%Cats

"Obama had 2 full years of total control: he never ONCE even ASKED the Repubs about anything."

FACT CHECK: You need 60 Senators to pass legislation. Since Republicans rarely to never crossed party lines and filibustered everything, he in no way had "total control".

"Obama didn`t even know what the current debt was in the USA when he showed up on Letterman. "

FACT CHECK: Letterman did not say "What is the national debt?" he said, in reference to the clock at the RNC last month, "Do you remember what that number WAS?" I absolutely promise you Obama knows what the current debt is every day. It is the one thing Republicans (who never b.itched when it was their guy running it up) keep bashing him over the head with.
0
Reply
Male 17,512
Squrlz: You just won`t admit my facts are correct because that might mean you`d have to change your politics :Gasp:

It still won`t change the fact that you`re wrong on climate change. Time and science is proving it to be a hoax. But that`s another topic, for another time.
0
Reply
Male 6,227
@Patticakes: "This leftist ruling class"? By any normal description of the political spectrum, America`s Democrats are centrists or even soft-Conservatives. America doesn`t HAVE a political left, something that is glaringly obvious if you`ve spent time abroad.

Were there any Labor Day parades in your town this year? Have you ever seen any May Day celebrations on your local news? Have you seen any Socialists or Communists on the ballot in the past 30 years? Are there any Green Party representatives in your state legislature? In high school, were you ever taught about the Homestead Strike, the Pullman Strike, or the Ludlow Massacre?

The fact that a sizable portion of America thinks that Barack "Status Quo" Obama is a Communist, of all things, shows just how saturated in Conservative propaganda this country is.
0
Reply
Male 4,850
"Name ONE compromise he`s agreed to, ONE! Something important of course, not giving that lady her medal or something."

The Public Option was removed from Health Care Reform. That is the one I remember personally.

Here are 4 pages of compromises.
0
Reply
Male 4,850
Are you off your meds 5Cats?
0
Reply
Male 6,227
@5Cats: Thanks for the squirrel submissions. I liked the last one best because you could see some of the squirrel`s personality. I liked the first one least because... well, the squirrel was dead. >.<
0
Reply
Male 40,302
For the record: Obama didn`t even know what the current debt was in the USA when he showed up on Letterman.
It`s 16,000,000,000,000.00 bozo! And counting UP.
Linky #1: My Post on this
Linky #2: Debt To The Penny

Obama didn`t have the balls to admit it`s 16 Trillion Dollars in public? And you want 4 more years of THAT?

Another 6+ trillion in debt (if re-elected) and he`ll have more than DOUBLED IT in 8 years!

Worst-President-Ever! Oooo but I must be `racist` for saying that, eh? Pbbbt!
0
Reply
Male 2,670
[quote]MoldyDog...People on the left don`t listen to talk radio. Talk radio is for old people, white trash, and truckers. Those people tend to be republicans. Liberals are at work or school or having premarital and/or gay sex. They don`t sit around listening to fat, hypocrite, drug-addict, philanderers like Rush pontificate on "family values".[/quote]

The hell you say. They are forever being shoved to the front of the caller line just because they are from the left. Your response was as predictable as markust`s. And the drug addict line is really getting old. Try and keep up with the times, your smack talk is weak.
0
Reply
Female 465
Koppel will never get it. And you can`t explain freedom and small government to a statist. Normal patriotic Americans are now the enemy of this leftist ruling class.
0
Reply
Male 40,302
[quote]Rachael Maddow has impeccable journalistic practices[/quote]
HAW HAW HAW HAW! Oh wait, you actually believe that @QZ?

@Squrlz: Sometimes over-caffinated, sometimes under-medicated! lolz! I just flat-out refuse to drink the kool-aid of the left, so I guess that makes me "radical" these days.
Did you look in the "live submissions" for all my Squirrel Suggestions? 4 of them iirc... there they are! Top of page 2...
0
Reply
Male 40,302
@Squrlz: I am mystified at how that uber-left site blames Repubs for blocking nominations:
#1 it`s the `duty` of the opposition to only vote for the best, or is that ONLY when the Dems did it Reagan? Bork and Thomas ring a bell?
#2 Dems had a majority the whole time! They only needed ONE Repub to cross the floor and be filibuster-proof, BUT Obama (and Reid) refused to even TRY to compromise!

FACT: Obama couldn`t even compromise with his own party and get their support! Talk about "worst"!

@HolyGod: So you measure how well a PotUS compromises by how often he SLAMMED THE DOOR SHUT ON FURTHER DISCUSSION? (or his party, same difference). Remarkable!
And did ALL those bills fail? Why no! They passed! So Obama didn`t even NEED to compromise, obviously! You see that, yes?
109th Repubs 34 times
110th DEMOCRATS 61 times
111th DEMOCRATS 63 times
112th Repubs 35 times

So the party that refuses to talk is the best at compromise?
0
Reply
Male 40,302
[quote]The Republicans in congress had absolutely no intension of working with President Obama.[/quote]
@markust (and @HG too) Obama had 2 full years of total control: he never ONCE even ASKED the Repubs about anything. Since then he did negotiate a budget with them, BUT at the last minute tried to "sweeten" an agreed-up deal!
The Repub House cannot pass anything important without either the Senate (Dem) or the PotUS (Dem) supporting them.
It`s ALL ON OBAMA: it`s his J-O-B!
Reagan compromised.
Bush I compromised.
Clinton compromised - best of the bunch at it!
Bush II compromised - too much I`d say.
Obama: Name ONE compromise he`s agreed to, ONE! Something important of course, not giving that lady her medal or something.

[quote]Yes really. Truth in journalism should not be too much to ask for.[/quote]
Whose "truth" @markust? Mine or yours? Who gets to decide which is what?
0
Reply
Male 6,227
CrakrJak: CJ, I`m pleased when you stick to facts. It`s your sticking to *falsehoods* that`s the problem. =^.^=
0
Reply
Male 17,512
Squrlz: Wonder no more, I`m not paid by anyone to express my opinion. I just know the facts and it irks you that I`m adamant about sticking to them.
0
Reply
Male 6,227
(Cont`d)

4. AuburnJunky. In the few discussions I`ve had with AJ, I come away most impressed by his good nature. I suspect it`d be easy to be friends if we met in person. Conservative but open to discuss opposing views, which is awesome.

5. Randomxnp. Haven`t engaged with Random enough to have a good read. His profile says Europe, but he argues a classic American right-wing position, which is puzzling.

I`ve missed a few, no doubt. Maybe I`ll expand the list at a later date.
0
Reply
Male 6,227
I generally like discussing topics with conservatives, as long as the discussion is conducted honestly. (By that I mean there are no hidden agendas and errors are acknowledged.) Here are my short notes on the players across the aisle.

1. Ollie. Funny as all get-out, very smart with physics. A true iconoclast in the best sense, if a bit crotchety. Wish he`d use foul language less (e.g., bullpoo, etc. etc.).

2. 5Cats. Really out there on the far right, but he seems genuine, if over-caffeinated. Often asserts things that are manifestly not true, but I don`t think he does so out of malice or in an intent to deceive. Plus, he`s down with catgirls, so he gets some points there.

3. CrakrJak. CJ is my biggest challenge on here when it comes to civil debate. I`ve tried to connect because I admire his faith. But he has a tendency to repeat falsehoods so persistently I find myself wondering if he isn`t paid to shill for the far-right.

(Cont`d)
0
Reply
Male 15,184
Crakr is on the fringe of the far right.
0
Reply
Male 4,850
Maybe the Fairness Doctrine is outdated but there should be some kind of new law that makes it harder for organizations that call themselves news to purposely lie people.

I would also like to see a new law that would bring back honesty to political ads.
0
Reply
Male 6,227
(Cont`d on Fairness Doctrine)

What kind of standards would I like to see enacted? Well, for one thing, I`d make it against the law to describe public officials in a national newscast as Nazis or Communists--or even implying that they are such--unless there`s clear evidence that they identify themselves as Nazis or Communists or are advocating Nazi or Communist policies. This, of course, goes for both sides. (Remember: I`m talking about national news broadcasts here, not personal speech. Say whatever you like as an individual as long as you aren`t making terroristic threats.)

Slippery slope? Maybe. But honestly: We`ve got a nation full of people out there cowering in their boots because they think Barack "Status Quo" Obama is going to come flying out of the White House foaming at the mouth waving a red flag.

It`s a bizarre and sad state of affairs.
0
Reply
Male 6,227
@QueenZira et al: You may be right regarding the Fairness Doctrine. But I`m not yet convinced something isn`t called for.

Here`s what I`m thinking of: A bipartisan commission, libs and conservatives, would enforce standards for any media outlet with an audience of 500,000 or more that reports national news or national news commentary.

Gardening or sports show? Or a small local show? Have at it, hoss: say whatever you want. But if you`ve got a large national audience and you purport to be a news source? *Some* standards should apply.
0
Reply
Female 2,228
One more thing, on the Fairness Doctrine.

You have to remember, our parents and grandparents grew up in a time when there was limited media available, there were 3 news stations tops and not too much radio left after the dawn of TV. Back then it made sense to set up standards like the FD so no one could dominate the news or air waves, but today the same schema would totally fall apart.

Now there are numerous sources of media available, often at the touch of a button and the policing of these sources would just not make sense. Anyone, anytime, can go look up anything anywhere and there are no sitilted boundaries anymore. It`s kind of a relic, really.
0
Reply
Female 2,228
Thanks Squirlz! :-) :-) :-)
0
Reply
Male 6,227
@QueenZira: Well said. Kudos.
0
Reply
Male 17,512
HG: I`ve seen Koppel on TV decades before Fox News even existed. He was left-wing then and still is.

The `Fairness Doctrine` was a bunch of BS. Why? Because it were the liberals that dominated the industry that got to decide what was `fair` and what wasn`t.

One conservative news source vs. Five liberal ones still isn`t fair, numbers wise, but it`s better than nothing at all like before.
0
Reply
Female 2,228
That`s not to say that there`s no MSNBC personalities that don`t adhere to her strict professionalism, because there are. I catch Ed Schultz leaping off the deep end all the time.

Both of them are as different as night and day, Rachael informs me while Ed makes me cringe. Basically what I`m saying is there is no good reason to watch Ed. ;-)

And that`s about the size of it (trust me, as a Daily Show viewer I`m trained to recognize Bulls#it in the fourth estate all the time). :-)
0
Reply
Male 4,431
I`m pretty sure Koppel did NOT say that FoxNews was bad for America. He said that ideological "reporting" of the news is bad for America. Now, sure, he did say that FoxNews is guilty of it. But he acknowledged that MSNBC is, too (and they are).

Now, as for Obama being the "most divisive" president ever, who can guess who was before him? Guesses? Yes, right, it was Clinton! Remember, Slick Willy, Whitewater, Haircutgate, etc., etc. And, let`s see, prior to Bill, who was it...let`s see if I can remember...OH! Yes! It was Jimmy Carter!

So, let`s see, what do they all have in common? Oh, yeah, they`re ALL Democrats. So, are they the most divisive presidents in history, OR, are the people who vote for the dratnut party who opposes them, and bases their votes and beliefs on claims of values and patriotism and religious purity who are ACTUALLY the divisive factor.
0
Reply
Female 2,228
When we talk about "Fair News" I think we tend to believe that now means "both sides of the story," but sometimes there is no "other side of the story" to be told. There`s, "Just The Facts Ma`am", and then there`s everyone who deviates from the facts.

When some crazy guy on the street mentions he thinks ice cream cures cancer there`s no need to muster up a TV crew to go report on him to "balance the story." You point at him, laugh and move on and that`s the end of it. You don`t muddy the waters and provide cover for the crazies.

Rachael Maddow has impeccable journalistic practices, she posts all the content of her newscasts online so she can be corrected if wrong and she will correct herself on air. She fully discloses any links her network may have to a story now in the headlines and she makes clear the network does not tell her what to say or think. (1 more Cont).
0
Reply
Male 9,503
DromEd

"And as far as radio is concerned, show me a left wing talk show that has more than 2 listeners. If the left could "sell it" Limbaugh, Hannity, Beck and Savage would have opposite numbers."

People on the left don`t listen to talk radio. Talk radio is for old people, white trash, and truckers. Those people tend to be republicans. Liberals are at work or school or having premarital and/or gay sex. They don`t sit around listening to fat, hypocrite, drug-addict, philanderers like Rush pontificate on "family values".
0
Reply
Female 146
Bill O`Reilly`s such a douchebag
0
Reply
Male 2,670
[quote]Seams to me this just shows that the left doesn`t feel as strong a need to be told what to think.[/quote]

I can`t even being to describe how predictable that response was.
0
Reply
Male 9,503
QueenZIra

"Fox`s staff are also free to donate their money to political candidates (Karl Rove and his superpacs immediately come to mind) whereas Olbermann was fired for exactly that @ MSNBC. "

I was just coming on here to post that same thing. Nicely put.
0
Reply
Male 9,503
5Cats

"Obama is the most divisive PotUS EVER! Reagan, Bush, Clinton and Bush II ALL worked with the opposition at many points."

I could spend the next few hours siting sources, posting statistics, and sharing links that could show you how absolutely, beyond reproach, wrong you are. However, I have to work on a project today, so you only get one.

Markust already gave the Mitch McConnell quote. The other major indicator is filibusters.

Filibusters aren`t tracked, but cloture motions are. There were never more than 82. The 110th filed 139, 11th filed 137, and 112th has already filed 109. The VASTLY overwhelming majority of those motions were filed by Democrats to block Republican filibusters.

That is clear indicator about of who hasn`t "worked with the opposition".

tinyurl.com/8cg6ux
0
Reply
Female 2,228
Markust I amiably disagree with your view of MSNBC as just like Fox, or that they "keep their followers in a constant state of anger," etc. And this has nothing to do with the personal politics of the hosts or anything like that, it`s just that the networks *are* significantly different.

For one thing, currently there are Fox employees who are simultaneously senior Romney campaign staff. They "analyze" their own campaign, not to mention Fox`s staff are also free to donate their money to political candidates (Karl Rove and his superpacs immediately come to mind) whereas Olbermann was fired for exactly that @ MSNBC.

MSNBC doesn`t have staff concurrently part of the Obama campaign and indeed that would go against their professional standards. There just is no equivalence between the two. (Cont).
0
Reply
Male 6,227
5Cats, what is with you? You seem to be waging some kind of disinformation campaign on here. I`m not talking about Conservative vs. Liberal views, which I enjoy debating.

No, I`m talking *facts.* You call Obama "the most divisive PotUS EVER!" The reality? One of Obama`s biggest flaws has been a compulsive habit of trying to play nice with Republicans who have publicly vowed to do anything and everything to ensure that he fails.

Case in point: The Republicans refusal to confirm judicial nominees. Two years into his presidency, Senate Republicans had confirmed just 58% of Obama`s nominees, a new historical record in partisanship obstructionism.

But go ahead, 5Cats: Call Obama "the most divisive PotUS EVER" and sprinkle some extra exclamation marks on it. ~sigh~
0
Reply
Male 9,503
CrakrJak

"Like Ted Koppel isn`t a left-wing shill himself."

You think everyone who is left of you is left-wing. And considering how far right you are, that`s pretty much everyone.

Let me ask you this, what are some issues that you disagree with republicans on and agree with democrats on? Are there any? You probably think I`m a leftist liberal, but there is tons of things I swing conservative on.
0
Reply
Female 29
the kiss at the end blew me away. best rebuttal.
0
Reply
Male 4,850
"Fairness Doctrine? Really?"

Yes really. Truth in journalism should not be too much to ask for.

"And as far as radio is concerned, show me a left wing talk show that has more than 2 listeners. If the left could "sell it" Limbaugh, Hannity, Beck and Savage would have opposite numbers."

Seams to me this just shows that the left doesn`t feel as strong a need to be told what to think.
0
Reply
Male 4,850
"Obama is the most divisive PotUS EVER! Reagan, Bush, Clinton and Bush II ALL worked with the opposition at many points."

You are full of absolute 100% sh*t 5Cats. The Republicans in congress had absolutely no intension of working with President Obama. "The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term President." That isn`t from some obscure representative in the house. It was from Mitch McConnell the Senate Minority Leader.
0
Reply
Male 40,302
[quote]Can`t wait for Gerry1of1 or Ollie to comment on this.[/quote]
@peakingo: @Gerry1`s been scarce lately, let`s hope he`s coming back soon!

Obama is the most divisive PotUS EVER! Reagan, Bush, Clinton and Bush II ALL worked with the opposition at many points.
Obama? NONE! NEVER! "We Won!" And the MSM covers up and lies for him constantly.
When Obama goes down in flames in November (I hope!) the MSM is falling with him unless they toss him under the bus!
It will be interesting to see at which point they stop kissing his butt and start kicking it!
0
Reply
Male 2,670
Fairness Doctrine? Really?

Yeah, like there`s no way for "the other side" (who ever you think that is) to get their point across to the public.

And as far as radio is concerned, show me a left wing talk show that has more than 2 listeners. If the left could "sell it" Limbaugh, Hannity, Beck and Savage would have opposite numbers.
0
Reply
Male 17,512
Like Ted Koppel isn`t a left-wing shill himself. He dodged every direct question put to him.

0
Reply
Male 6,227
@Andrew155: You asked what the solution might be. Here`s my 2 cents: This kind of divisiveness among the citizenry and on the airwaves was unknown when I was growing up, in large part because of the Fairness Doctrine, which was tossed out in 1987.

I say it`s time to bring it, or something similar, back.
0
Reply
Male 2,578
And the media has also silenced 3rd points of view. Ron Paul`s treatment by FOX and the leftist news networks was dreadful. And Gary Johnson won`t get any coverage, even though a recent poll had him at 6%. Debates are being silenced in favor of this two-party business that the networks seem content with.
0
Reply
Male 2,578
Opinion media is definitely bad. Not only does it create divisiveness and create false narratives, but it feeds people talking points and hinders their ability to think independently.


But what`s the solution? This is something I`ve thought about a lot. Nationalize the media? I would foresee major problems with that.
0
Reply
Male 761
Can`t wait for Gerry1of1 or Ollie to comment on this.
0
Reply
Male 91
To quote Jane`s Addiction...."The news is
just another show".
0
Reply
Male 2,528
Bravo, Ted.
0
Reply
Male 4,850
I believe opinion news (Fox News/MSNBC) is the worst thing to happen to America. The standards of journalism are truthfulness, accuracy, objectivity, impartiality, fairness and public accountability. These two cable news stations have thrown out the standards of journalism and ruined news forever. They have made it impossible for congress to work together by demonizing the other "side" and they are dividing the fine citizens of our nation. There are families and friends who no longer talk because of opinion media. What MSNBC/FoxNews, partisan radio and partisan blogs are doing is absolutely un-American. Journalism and news is not pushing multiple points of view repeatedly until they are burned into peoples heads. That is brainwashing. And it is accomplished by keeping their followers in a constant state of anger. Opinion media turns people into angry parrots. The sooner the brainwashed realize this the sooner we can start to repair this great nation of ours.
0
Reply
Female 1
He`s not wrong.
0
Reply
Male 3,445
`He seems to only implicate Fox. Bad form.`

No, he`s criticizing Fox specifically because Bill`s asking him about it. But he also says "I think that ideological coverage of the news, be it of the Right or be it of the Left, has created a political reality in this country which is bad for America."
0
Reply
Male 3,445
He`s absolutely correct, and that goes for Fox and MSNBC.

I miss watching Koppel on Nightline.
0
Reply
Male 6,227
This clip speaks for itself. For those that can`t hear, there`s nothing I could say to reach you.
0
Reply
Male 2,419
I don`t know ted koppel, so i can only judge on what he just said. he`s got a point. and he made it, beautifully.
0
Reply
Male 2,578
He seems to only implicate Fox. Bad form.
0
Reply
Male 715
0
Reply