They Beat Shoe Throwers, Don’t They?
The brother of Muntadar al-Zaidi, the journalist who hurled his shoes at President Bush in Iraq, says the reporter was beaten while in custody. Zaidi has a broken hand, broken ribs, internal bleeding and an eye injury, according to his older brother, Dargham. There are conflicting reports about his well-being.
The head of Iraq’s journalists’ union told the BBC that officials told him Mr Zaidi (l) was being treated well.
The union head, Mouyyad al-Lami, said he hoped to visit his colleague later.
An Iraqi official said Mr Zaidi had been handed over to the judicial authorities, according to the AFP news agency.
Earlier, Dargham al-Zaidi told the BBC’s Caroline Wyatt in Baghdad he believed his brother had been taken to a US military hospital in the Iraqi capital.
The shoes are being treated by Iraqis as a hot commodity.
According to unconfirmed newspaper reports, the former coach of the Iraqi national football team, Adnan Hamad, has offered $100,000 (£65,000) for the shoes, while a Saudi citizen has apparently offered $10m (£6.5m).
Maybe Willy and T.Mason would want him waterboarded.
December 16th, 2008 at 11:21 am
People were bragging about how under the Saddam regime he would have been killed. OK, he wasn’t killed, but is this what we were fighting for over there?
Bush needs to ask the Iraqi president to pardon this guy. I don’t support what he did, but I’d say this was more than enough punishment.
December 16th, 2008 at 11:48 am
Hope,
You are rediculous.
December 16th, 2008 at 11:54 am
Bush is fine with the shoe-throwing! Sign of democracy and all that! For pete’s sake!
“And it was amusing. I mean, I’ve seen a lot of weird things during my presidency and this may rank up there as one of the weirdest. On the other hand, I do remember when the president of China came to the South Lawn, and a member of the press corps started yelling. I think it was Falun Gong slogans at the Chinese president. So this happens and it’s a sign of a free society.”
December 16th, 2008 at 12:04 pm
Better to find it amusing than to act like a weak little victim.
December 16th, 2008 at 12:07 pm
If the reporter suffered injuries while being stopped at the press conference, while it is bad, it is understandable how it could happen.
Heck, Dana Perino has a black eye from it, and she wasn’t even the attacker.
However, if the journalists injuries occurred while in custody then it is something to be condemned. I think he should face charges for the physical attack, something small like attempted battery or something, but he should not be beaten. That is bad if that is the source of his injuries.
December 16th, 2008 at 1:15 pm
Hope for Change:
Now remember, Rudy Giuliani told us that waterboarding is not torture – it’s called “enhanced interrogation”. Because, after all, America doesn’t torture you know.
December 16th, 2008 at 1:28 pm
Compltetely right, TRA. He should be charged for what he did, but definitely not beaten while in custody. I find it hard to believe that he would get broken bones just from when they tried to stop him, though.
December 16th, 2008 at 2:08 pm
“The Iraqi authorities have said the 28-year-old will be prosecuted under Iraqi law.”
“Iraqi lawyers had earlier speculated that the charges could include insulting a foreign leader…”
“The offense carries a maximum penalty of two years in jail.”
Yeah that’s some democracy. And it sounds like a George Bush vision of democracy.
December 16th, 2008 at 2:30 pm
I’m taking up a collection for charity: How much would you pay to see Alan lob a shoe at Hannity’s melon during his last show?
December 16th, 2008 at 2:38 pm
ROCKY—Do you feel the journalist deserves no punishment? If so, why? Just curious.
December 16th, 2008 at 2:45 pm
Do you feel the journalist deserves no punishment?
And I’M curious as to how you got that impression from his comment.
Can you say “straw man?”
December 16th, 2008 at 3:09 pm
I wonder if Hillary really ment shoe throwing instead of “ducking under sniper fire”
December 16th, 2008 at 3:18 pm
Rocky,
What makes you think that some middle east countries embrace our forms of punishment based on their history?
Let’s see: cut off the hand of a thief, cut out the tongue of a liar, stone the woman who is promiscuous, etc etc etc
They literally go by “an eye for an eye”.
December 16th, 2008 at 3:43 pm
He threw, they beat, and he’s still alive. He should at least be satisfied with that, i’m sure he’s praising allah for taking sadam out and at least giving him that opportunity.
December 16th, 2008 at 4:37 pm
I said once before and once again. Our welcome wagon is worn out. Billions of U.S. dollars have been lost that could have been used here. Bush lied to us and abuse of power that is unAMERICAN to the AMERICAN taxpayers.
December 16th, 2008 at 5:02 pm
Look, if he faces punishment for what he did then that is called ‘establishment retribution’ and he if gets away scott free then its called ‘journalist favoratism.’ I would face punishment for a political conviction just like I would face punishment for a personal conviction. My wonder to myself is the CONS and the LIBS who read this wonderful site ever think about how we may very well be called to stand up or die someday.
When you have a gun in your face will you suddenly be a fan of your politics or would you share in whatever politics the person holding the gun told you to have?
I will stand in front of tanks and I begin to think I am the ONLY one on ANY side actually this invested in freedom and our nation.
No I’m not full of it. I walk away from fights and refuse to hunt down and harm those who have wronged me no matter what. That might not mean much to people who don’t get robbed but I can get a little hard not to go crack a few heads when the little ****s take your guitar.
December 16th, 2008 at 5:06 pm
Ew, it can get a little hard. That doesn’t sound right as it is above……
December 16th, 2008 at 5:07 pm
“I wonder if Hillary really ment shoe throwing instead of “ducking under sniper fire” Posted by Separate Man”
No, she meant ducking the dodging the verbal bullets of conservatives. She gets a little confused if she is a warzone or listening to the radio because every fellow with a microphone and a R after his name uses every second of his time to defame and smash on her if her name is even whiffed in the news.
I noticed this Separate Man is be of the Michael Savage ilk in that he thinks I hate America as a liberal.
I can’t hope to convince people like that of anything. My only comment on sich things is that partisanship sells books and radio shows but it doesn’t balance the budget or pay for the cops that keep you safe every night. Too bad we all can’t enjoy freedom of speech and organization and only conservatives are allowed to gather and speak.
December 16th, 2008 at 5:13 pm
http://ericlightborn.wordpress.com
December 16th, 2008 at 5:21 pm
ERIC,I served my country for 3 years and i was in harms way as well.
December 16th, 2008 at 5:33 pm
“What makes you think that some middle east countries embrace our forms of punishment based on their history?”
And that’s Georgie’s kind of democracy.
December 16th, 2008 at 5:43 pm
PAUL—Since I obviously didn’t get the point of Rocky’s post at 2:30, please explain it.
The way I read it was that Rocky was being sarcastic about the possible charges against the journalist, particularly those of insulting a foreign leader, being democractic in nature.
It could mean that Rocky sees the journalist facing charges as ironic given President Bush called the act proof of democracy.
I don’t know, so I asked Rocky for clarification.
However, since you seem to know what Rocky meant, I will gladly read your opinion of his post.
December 16th, 2008 at 8:16 pm
Thank goodness you are leaving Hannity’s programme. Your persistant whining and fawning over Obama is sickening. You are just another terrorist appeaser…good riddance!
December 16th, 2008 at 9:15 pm
Army Wife:
If you hate Alan so much, why do you go to his website?
Here’s an unrelated observation. Notice you don’t see Hannity touch the bailout issue. Guess he doesn’t want to F up his Escalade endorsement deal.
December 16th, 2008 at 9:23 pm
Violence of any kind is never a good thing.
I know Alan was most persistent in voicing his opinion that violence is never good, and that this journalist shouldn’t be met with physical violence.
I understand the other side of the coin as well. As is the custom of throwing shoes to show disgust and a sign of insult, this man was probably (as I can’t read minds) offering Bush his just desserts. I can’t see where he was actually trying to harm him.
As the journalist aimed for Bush, knowing he was a dignitary in their country, he should be accountable for his actions, but I can’t see the justice in beating him up, breaking his ribs. Or are they just practicing the democracy that Cheney so proudly espouses?
December 17th, 2008 at 5:57 am
Mark,
Last week they both talked about the bailout. I don’t care what hannity says about the bailout. It is a bad idea. The first one didn’t work and this one is only throwing money at bad business.
Rocky,
I don’t see George Bush having journalists arrested. Do you? didn’t think so. I did, however, see the obama/biden people get angry and whine over a journalist in Florida asking tough questions noone else would ask. Whose democracy are you talking about?
December 17th, 2008 at 7:45 am
“I did, however, see the obama/biden people get angry and whine over a journalist in Florida asking tough questions noone else would ask”
………………………………………………………………
What can you do but laugh?
The transcript:
WEST: You may recognize this famous quote: “From each according to his abilities to each according to his needs.” That’s from Karl Marx. How is Senator Obama not being a Marxist if he intends to spread the wealth around?
BIDEN: Are you joking? Is this a joke?
WEST: No.
BIDEN: Or is that a real question?
WEST: That’s a question.
BIDEN: He is not spreading the wealth around. He’s talking about giving the middle class an opportunity to get back the tax breaks they used to have.
WEST: What do you say to the people who are concerned that Barack Obama will want to turn America into a Socialist country much like Sweden?
BIDEN: I don’t know anybody who thinks that, except the far right-wing of the Republican Party.
What she asked John McCain:
“Why haven’t you gone after him” on ACORN, “Are you going to cut and run (in Florida) or fight harder?” and “Do you feel the Democrats are trying to paint you into a box?”
***************************
The critiques from ACTUAL journalists:
- Frank James of the Chicago Tribune:
“If journalism schools ever needed a perfect example to show their students of how an interview should never be conducted, it would be the recent encounter between Sen. Joe Biden and Barbara West, an anchor for WFTV in Orlando, Fla.
Embarrassing and painful are two words that quickly come to mind to describe West’s interrogation of Biden last week. It may be the worst interview of a major political figure by a “professional” broadcast journalist I’ve ever witnessed. It was like something out of the old Soviet Union where propaganda masqueraded as news.
Every question West asked revealed a bias against Sen. Barack Obama that reached the point of outright hostility.”
-Mike Thomas of the hometown Orlando Sentinel weighs in:
“This is the most embarrassing interview I’ve ever seen on local television. This has nothing to do with whether you are for Obama or McCain. It’s about being professional. Quoting Karl Marx?
Even Sean Hannity wouldn’t be so ham-handed. Making matters worse, it looks like Barbara is just dumbly reading questions someone just handed her, then staring blankly at the screen. Biden made her look like a complete dimwit. Not that this was hard.
How could WFTV allow this to happen?”
Brings to mind legendary fake journalist and gay male prostitute, Jeff (Guckert) Gannon, who ask such hardball questions at the whitehouse press conferences as, “How do you deal with Democrats who are so divorced from reality?”
December 17th, 2008 at 8:19 am
Old,
You didn’t like it because she asked what millions were thinking and noone in the media would ask. I am tired of the left acting like certain topics/questions are of limits.
Isn’t Obama the candidate who ran on transparency?
So much for that.
December 17th, 2008 at 8:21 am
And BTW….Even if you don’t like the lady OR her questions…she is a REAL journalist.
December 17th, 2008 at 8:22 am
Again,
She asked what the far right wanted to be established.
“It was like something out of the old Soviet Union where propaganda masqueraded as news.
Every question West asked revealed a bias against Sen. Barack Obama that reached the point of outright hostility.”
We’ll see when we get a “REAL journalist” ask Bush,
“Why did you lie about WMD?”
“Why do you hate poor people?”
Same biased talking points, but hey, don’t let the facts get in the way!
December 17th, 2008 at 8:35 am
Old,
It was not biased. They were questions that offended Biden because noone else ANYWHERE in the media would ask them. There are polls out that indicate Americans do NOT trust the media based on their coverage of this past election. With good reason.
I am posting these links, but I doubt you will take the time to look at them.
http://www.forbes.com/opinions/2008/12/11/liberal-media-bias-oped-cx_kb_1215bowman.html
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/11/halperin-decrie.html
http://hnn.us/roundup/comments/57847.html
http://www.jbs.org/index.php/jbs-news-feed/4267
http://frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=870C920A-AE7E-4D61-B288-B4EBD4F3AE15
http://www.newsobserver.com/105/story/1305996.html
December 17th, 2008 at 8:48 am
Old,
The fact is she asked questions noone else in the mainstream media would. You, and many from the left didn’t like it because they were questions of substance, not fluff. I tried posting links, but this darn filter wouldn’t let me.
You can think whatever you want. The vast majority of Americans do NOT trust the media, believe there was media bias in this last election. And there was. You can post quotes from other journalists, etc who say she was off her rocker, I posted double the amount of information that indicates there was a sharp media bias…dare I say they hinted that the media helped them win the election.
December 17th, 2008 at 8:51 am
T Mason:
I must have missed Hannity’s position on the bailout. What was his position? Did he come out against the Auto Bailout (GM)?
December 17th, 2008 at 9:21 am
“The fact is she asked questions noone else in the mainstream media would.”
Because the others knew it was the height of yellow journalism to ask them. It seems the neocons herald her as a real journalist (a doubtful characterization) because she asked leading questions reflecting slanderous accusations being made by ultra right-wing neocons.
It was a line of questioning reeking of the very bias the right wing claims to disdain, which makes them all the more entertaining.
December 17th, 2008 at 9:28 am
T Mason,
“You, and many from the left didn’t like it because they were questions of substance, not fluff. I tried posting links, but this darn filter wouldn’t let me”
……………………………………………………
That is only in the minds of the right wingers.
To most of us from the left, those questions had no more substance than …….
“ President Bush, isn’t it true you wanted to invade Iraq , because you believe that a war time president has political capital?”
(That is what he told Mickey Herskowitz)
I feel that the right invents something, then disseminates it through the right wing echo chamber, and the mainstream media, then complains when reputable journalists don’t repeat it.
I agree that the vast majority of Americans do NOT trust the media, but I believe that it biased in favor of corporate consolidation, and thus favors Republicans.
Just because you repeat “liberal media over and over again doesn’t make it so.
Media LOVES power, and gone are the days of the reporter with the middle class salary reporting on city hall. Now they belong to the same country clubs as those in positions of power.
And EVERYONE on the left, felt that the media was SO biased towards Bush, again because he comes from old money and power, they love war because because it sells papers, and they ARE part of the corporatocracy.
But in THIS election, REALLY, they ALL reported that Hillary was “inevitable” , they couldn’t deny that people liked Obama, and McCain used to refer to the media as his base, but he made SO many mistakes, that they couldn’t keep showering him with love.
As for media bias:
Former Cheney communications director, Cathie Martin testified that;
“I suggested we put the vice president on ‘Meet the Press,’ which was a tactic we often used,” Martin testified. “It’s our best format.”
She wrote,
Option 1: “MTP-VP,” then listed the pros and cons of a vice presidential appearance on the Sunday show. Under “pro,” she wrote: “control message.”
MR. BROKAW: Chuck, a very senior Republican was startled the other day when he called me and said,
‘What in the world is going on in Florida? Why are we in trouble there?’
On Sunday’s Meet the Press, NBC’s Tom Brokaw allowed McCain strategist Steve Schmidt to falsely claim that John McCain had called for Don Rumsfeld to be fired. That’s an old lie that the McCain campaign had abandoned long ago — but Brokaw let Schmidt get away with bringing it back.
Even worse, Brokaw ended the segment by announcing — “in fairness to everybody here” — that the “latest NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll” found that John McCain “continues” to lead Barack Obama on the question of who is “best-equipped to be commander in chief.”
Yesterday, Nicole Belle pointed out that the numbers Brokaw read did not, in fact, appear in the “latest NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll.”
Just two teeny,weeny examples.
December 17th, 2008 at 9:35 am
whine over a journalist in Florida asking tough questions noone else would ask
Was that the one asking why Obama is/is not a socialist? That wasn’t a tough question, it was an idiotic question. A laughable question. An obvious Rove propaganda question.
December 17th, 2008 at 9:38 am
I don’t see how anyone can claim President Elect Obama doesn’t have many socialistic type views. He talks about tax cuts for 95% of Americans, when not that many Americans even pay taxes.
I am an example of someone who does not pay taxes. Every year, without fail, I get every time that was taken from me in taxes back when I file my tax return. How can President Elect Obama give me a tax cut?
I will be the first to admit that currently, there seem to be very few politicians who don’t look socialistic, given the bailout and proposed nationalization of the automakers.
As for media bias, Lefty has once again produced good examples to support himself. (I like that about Lefty, even if I disagree with his positions.)
However, what about the likes of Chris Matthews and Keith Olberman, who were both taken off of election coverage because of their bias toward President Elect Obama? What about the difference in the number of total stories, the number of covers, and the number of positive stories that favored President Elect Obama over Sen McCain by the likes of Newsweek and Time? What about all the OpEds, written by chief OpEd editors in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, New York Times, and LA Times that were blatantly pro Obama and con McCain.
I’m not saying there aren’t any reporters or journalists that are biased to the right, but please don’t say that aren’t any bised to the left. Or even that there aren’t as many.
December 17th, 2008 at 9:59 am
“I am an example of someone who does not pay taxes. Every year, without fail, I get every time that was taken from me in taxes back when I file my tax return. How can President Elect Obama give me a tax cut?”
What are you complaining about?
December 17th, 2008 at 10:20 am
I wish I could say I am truly complaining, but I am only partly complaining.
I believe it is up to me to determine my success. And failure. I don’t want government hand outs. I don’t deserve government hand outs. I want to contribute to my country’s well being.
While I definitely benefit from the way things are now and I stand to actually make money if President Elect Obama actually follows through with his plan, is it really fair for me to receive money I haven’t earned? Especially if comes from someone, anyone, who is more successful than I?
Do I deserve extra money even though I didn’t go to college but a CEO or lawyer or doctor did? Do I deserve extra money even though I wasn’t blessed with great athletic ability? Do I deserve extra money even though I wasn’t born into a wealthy family to begin with?
I believe President Elect Obama thinks I do. I don’t think I do.
And again, how do I, as someone who in the end pays no taxes get a tax cut?
If my tax cut is via extra money given to me by the government, at the expense of higher taxes on those more successful than I, then how is that not governmental redistribution of wealth?
And how is governmental redistribution of wealth not socialistic?
December 17th, 2008 at 10:35 am
Um,
NO, the reporter from Florida who interviewed Biden. And no, it was not an idiotic question. Redistribution of wealth IS socialism. What the government is doing now with these “bailouts” IS socialism.
I didn’t agree with the first bailout, and I don’t think we need a second, and it ticks me off that the white house wants to do it even though it was voted down. If the first bailout was such a great idea and “fixed” the problem as they said it would, why do we need this one and why are the democrats talking about MORE?
Mark,
“what are you complaining about” is exactly the sentiment that won obama a lot of votes. Those who want to sit on their laurels and let peter pay for paul. If we continue down this road, there will be NO incentive to work hard and do better. Why bother when you can sit with your legs crossed and a hand out, and someone continually puts money in your pocket?
December 17th, 2008 at 10:43 am
T. Mason
NO, the reporter from Florida who interviewed Biden.
Yea, the one who asked Biden whether Obama was a socialist (paraphrasing).
Anyway, if she had done a bit of research she would have known he was a Democrat, not a socialist. The socialist candidate was Brian Moore.
December 17th, 2008 at 11:34 am
I don’t think you have to be a registered socialist to have socialist tendencies. In my opinion what the current adminstration has fascilitated is an example of socialism as well. I don’t like it.
December 17th, 2008 at 11:41 am
TRA: “However, what about the likes of Chris Matthews and Keith Olberman, who were both taken off of election coverage because of their bias toward President Elect Obama?”
Olbermann and Matthews, like Hannity and O’Reilly, are commentators, not straight-news reporters. You also mentioned OpEd pieces.
There’s an unfortunate increase in the inability of the public to distinguish commentary from news, editorials from news, roundtable discussion from news, etc.
Even with Olbermann & Matthews off the coverage, and Hannity, et. al, continuing to show overwhelming favoritism for McCain-Palin, Obama still won.
December 17th, 2008 at 12:18 pm
SARAH—I agree there is a difference between editorials and actual news. However, I believe many of the OpEds that I was referring to were written by editors of the publications. If the editor is willing to write an OpEd dramatically and overwhelmingly in support of one candidate, then it only follows that the editor will include and tweak actual news stories with the same sort of slant.
You also mention O’Reilly and Hannity as being for McCain. I will agree with Hannity. That is very obvious. I don’t think O’Reilly was in the tank for McCain the way Hannity was. How did you feel about the interview O’Reilly did with President Elect Obama after the primaries were complete?
December 17th, 2008 at 1:15 pm
“whine over a journalist in Florida asking tough questions noone else would ask”
I remember a journalist who was smeared for asking a so-called “tough question” of Palin like, “What do you think of the Bush doctrine?”
Apparently she didn’t know what the Bush doctrine was so the journalist was at fault for asking her that question.
Talk about ridiculous.
December 17th, 2008 at 1:44 pm
TRA: “I agree there is a difference between editorials and actual news. However, I believe many of the OpEds that I was referring to were written by editors of the publications.”
Yes, the Opinion/Editorial page is one of the few instances when an editor is allowed to voice an opinion, based on all the news he/she is inundated with on a daily basis.
TRA: “If the editor is willing to write an OpEd dramatically and overwhelmingly in support of one candidate, then it only follows that the editor will include and tweak actual news stories with the same sort of slant.”
It depends on how many editors the paper employs. Most large metro newspapers (curious you’re now talking strictly about printed news, rather than radio and TV media) employ a strictly-Op/Ed editor for those pages. The news is overseen by other editors (Internation, State, Local, Business, Education, Culture, etc.).
Actually, I’ll repeat what I’ve said before on this venue:
Printed newspapers, god love ‘em, are probably the last bastion of honest journalism we have. It’s more difficult to slant or misreport news — and get by with it — when it’s printed by the ton and barrel.
On the Internet, the archived news could go “missing,” and on radio/TV, it’s in one ear and out the other, and MAYBE you can find it on YouTube again, maybe not.
Printed journalism has to be the most honest of the media. And even they can be corruptible, sure (was it Pulitzer or Hearst who said, “Give me the pictures, I’ll give you the war”?).
Anyway…Is there a danger that political leanings can provide bias in straight-news? Yup. I can think of a few papers that are liberal leaning, and I can think of a few papers that are conservative leaning.
As for TV/Radio, I wish there were more oversight on labeling what’s being broadcast as opinion or analysis or news.
December 17th, 2008 at 2:34 pm
T Mason,
Except for the polls, all the sources you site are conservative.
As for polls:
Three quarters of Americans believe the Bible teaches that “God helps those who help themselves.”
60% of Americans can name no more than four of the Ten Commandment. (I’m not religious, and I can name more.)
How many people believed that Iraqis were on the hijacked planes on 9/11?
The disconnect here is this;
Did these people think the media was biased in favor of Obama because he was the superior candidate, while McCain ran such a bad campaign, they could not possibly give him equally positive coverage, OR are they saying that: They were unfairly biased , AND they saw through it, AND they voted for Obama anyway?
My believe has always been that conservative strategy is to blame all facts they don’t like on liberal bias the media.
I think there IS a perception of liberal bias because they repeat it so much. It’s a huge machine.
Republican pollster Frank Luntz said, “A compelling story, even if factually inaccurate, can be more emotionally compelling than a dry recitation of the truth.”
Sumner Redstone, CEO of CBS ’s parent company Viacom, made an unusual political statement at a gathering of corporate leaders in Hong Kong (Asian Wall Street Journal, 9/24/04):
I don’t want to denigrate Kerry… but from a Viacom standpoint, the election of a Republican administration is a better deal. Because the Republican administration has stood for many things we believe in, deregulation and so on. The Democrats are not bad people…. But from a Viacom standpoint, we believe the election of a Republican administration is better for our company.
Redstone repeated these sentiments in an interview with Time (10/4/04):
There has been comment upon my contribution to Democrats like Senator Kerry. Senator Kerry is a good man. I’ve known him for many years. But it happens that I vote for Viacom. Viacom is my life, and I do believe that a Republican administration is better for media companies than a Democratic one.
Conservatives admit it among themselves:
~ Richard Bonn, former RNC chair said,
“There is some strategy to bashing the liberal media…if you watch any great coach,what they do is try to ‘work the refs’. Maybe the ref will cut you some slack the next time”.
~ Bruce Bartlett said in NRO: “the idea that the media tilts towards liberals is absurd.”
This myth of a “liberal media” is just there to manipulate the people.
The disconnect here is this;
Did these people think the media was biased in favor of Obama because he was the superior candidate, while McCain ran such a bad campaign, the could not possibly give him equally positive coverage, OR are they saying that: They were unfairly biased , AND they saw through it, AND they voted for him anyway?
I guess that what you think of this woman, we think of Helen Thomas.
If there REALLY was a liberal bias, the media would have walked out when bush had his “press conference “with pre approved questions.
It’s a good trick though….anything that doesn’t fit with your world view is liberal bias, while when the facts DO fit, it’s “even the liberal media could’t deny this.”
December 17th, 2008 at 4:23 pm
And who in the media asked about corporate socialism?
It came to be that Drudge became the assignment editor for the mainsrteam media.
December 17th, 2008 at 4:25 pm
Old,
I guess it depends on which side of the aisle you are on whether or not you will accept there was media bias. You obviously see none.
December 17th, 2008 at 4:38 pm
I guess it does, but I DO see bias.
I just see it on on side of big media corporations….
Less journalists, fewer foreign bureaus, less regulation, more consolidation, more entertainment,more sucking up to advertisers and whatever you do… NEVER, EVER, EVER!! report on anything that might be boring, so celebrity trumps international news, missing girl trumps trade agreements.
December 17th, 2008 at 4:51 pm
LEFTY—I lean toward the “They were unfairly biased , AND they saw through it, AND they voted for him anyway?” viewpoint.
Two reasons I say this. One, I think there were a lot of people who, because of dislike of President Bush, didn’t want to know anything negative or definitive about President Elect Obama. They decided, which is absolutely their right to do, that a lack of voting on tough issues and a some suspect associations with extreme left persons and an unwillingness to support the unborn was not as important as simply voting “against President Bush”.
The second reason I say this is because of the Howard Stern “experiment”. (Let me be clear, I don’t think Howard Stern is a bastion of journalism. I don’t even listen to him, but I have seen the interviews on youtube.) He had some of his guys go and interview people, particularily blacks, who supported President Elect Obama. The people interviewed were asked how they liked President Elect Obama’s choice of Gov. Palin for VP. The people had no problem with it. They were asked how they liked President Elect Obama’s desire to restrict abortions. Again, no problem with it. They were asked how they liked President Elect Obama’s plan to stay long term in Iraq. Again, no problem with it.
Basically, they seemed to have voted for President Elect Obama just because….you can fill in why. Be it because he is partially black or because they just didn’t want another Republican or because of whatever reason.
These people didn’t even care about the basics of the election, let alone if there was any media bias or not.
So I think there were a lot of people who just didn’t care because they had already made up their mind who to vote for irregardless of anything that may have come up.
I also find it interesting that except for Lefty, who once again seems to be on top of things with the info on the Viacom CEO from four years ago, there are no examples of conserative bias except for Fox News’ people. None from CNN, NBC, CBS, ABC, or PBS. None from print either.
December 17th, 2008 at 6:17 pm
TRA,
Here’s why I disagree:
First off, I think that many, many felt that the incumbent party made a mess of this country, and while McCain seemed to not have a grasp on the issues, and seemed to many like a cranky old man who had supported the same old Bush policies, Obama seemed to be like conservative Peggy Noonan said, “”Obama seems older in a way,” said the former Ronald Reagan speechwriter. “McCain has seemed herky-jerky. Obama has seemed like the older, steadier fellow since the economic crisis began.”
As for “associations with extreme left persons and an unwillingness to support the unborn”, if there really was a media biased towards the left, EVERYONE would have known of Bush’s associations with the bin Ladin family, and fundraising through radical Islam:
Grover Norquist’s Strange Alliance With Radical Islam
The New Republic ^ | November 11, 2001 | Franklin Foer
The Arabian candidate
How George W. Bush’s close ties to Islamic lobbying groups — and to an accused supporter of Palestinian terrorism — may have brought him his razor-thin margin of victory in Florida.
March 15, 2004 | On March 12, 2000, Republican presidential candidate George W. Bush and his wife, Laura, met with Muslim leaders at a local mosque in Tampa, Fla. Among them was Sami Al-Arian.
But Al-Arian had unusual credentials for a Bush campaigner. Since 1995, as the founder and chairman of the board of World and Islam Enterprise (WISE), a Muslim think tank, Al-Arian had been under investigation by the FBI for his associations with Islamic Jihad, the Palestinian terrorist group. Al-Arian brought in Ramadan Abdullah Shallah, the No. 2 leader in Islamic Jihad, to be the director of WISE. A strong advocate of suicide bombings against Israel, Shallah was allegedly responsible for killing scores of Israelis in such attacks.
If this had been on the TV as much as Rev Wright or the Swiftboaters, 2004 may have been a very different story.
I am done with abortion discussion, but Bush has shown contempt for the born , especially in Iraq.
As for lack of knowledge of Obama, how many people voted for Bush because the buzz was “you want to have a beer with him”, or “he’s a good Christian”
How many voted for McCain because he was the white guy?, and they falsely believed Obama was a terrorist or a Muslim? I heard people call on the radio saying the blacks will run amuck, if he is elected.
As for conservative bias from the networks??
Judith Miller would regurgitate what Scooter Libby told her, then Cheney would go on Meet The Press, and Quote the NYT as though it was a different source, confirming Cheney, without anyone pointing out that NYT source WAS Cheney.
None dared ask about their planning the war before they took office.
Vanity Faire did a huge story about how the media , especially the Times and WaPO trashed Gore in favor of Bush, and printed corrections on pp20 a week after the TV savaged him based on their misquoting them.
Anyway…sorry to be so long winded.
The ONE finger that I can type with is awfully tired.
December 17th, 2008 at 6:56 pm
TRA:
“I wish I could say I am truly complaining, but I am only partly complaining.”
Huh?
“I want to contribute to my country’s well being.”
Then do so. There are lots of ways to contribute to your country’s well being… with your time and your money.
“is it really fair for me to receive money I haven’t earned? Especially if comes from someone, anyone, who is more successful than I?”
Is it fair for you to inherit wealth?
“I believe President Elect Obama thinks I do. I don’t think I do.”
No, President Elect Obama doesn’t believe that you necessarily deserve extra money. He doesn’t know you (I’m guessing). He believes, like I believe, that every American deserves a chance. It’s hard to have a fighting chance if your parents can’t afford food, affordable health care, and a decent education.
It’s no coincidence that wealth tends to run in families. And in most countries, your pretty much stuck with the luck of the gene pool. America is different in that you can be dealt a bad hand at birth and still have a shot at a better life than your parents had.
I believe (although I don’t have a way to prove it) that the U.S. has been competitive in many fields over it’s history for this reason. We have a bigger pool of talent to draw from since we give everyone a chance.
Anyway, that’s my opinion since you asked for it.
P.S. Sorry about the athletic ability thing. Try golf lessons. Any old dork seems to be able to do that.
December 17th, 2008 at 7:07 pm
LEFTY—Where do you go to get your facts and find these articles?
Please understand, I’m not asking so that later I can say, see, all left or liberal or whatever. You just seem to usually be able to bring up articles and interviews, with dates and what publication or network. I would be interested in researching more myself and would appreciate a bit of boost as to where to start.
Thanks
December 17th, 2008 at 7:10 pm
MARK—I know President Elect Obama doesn’t know me from Adam. I didn’t literally mean he thinks I specifically deserve it, but that people in my situation do.
I agree with points about having a chance, both that we all deserve a chance to make the most of ourselves and that the ability to have that chance has contributed greatly to our being the world’s leader in many areas.
I also agree with your point about parents who can’t afford the basics. I just don’t agree that it is the governments responsibility to provide those basics, nor should the government mandate someone else provide them. I do feel that as a society we should help those people in need, but I don’t think it should be forced upon people by the government.
I do think it is fair to inherit wealth from another individual. If my parents had been fortunate enough to make a ton of money, then they should have the right to give it to whomever they choose. If they chose my siblings and I, so be it. If they chose to leave it to charity, so be it. It would have been their money to do with as they pleased.
However, if I was fortunate enough to receive a large inheritance, that would not excuse me from still being productive. That would not excuse me to sit back and do nothing.
I don’t begrudge anyone who is fortunate enough to receive a large inheritance. I think I even listed that as a source in my post.
To me, the difference is this. In the scenario of an inheritance, the person to whom the money and assets belong is deciding who to give them to and are doing so willingly.
President Elect Obama’s plan would, at least partially, take those choices away. More affluent people would be required by the government to give to anyone and everyone through taxation rather than by their choosing.
December 17th, 2008 at 7:26 pm
MARK—I’ve tried golf. All I seem to be able to hit are “worm burners”.
I like basketball and have a decent jump shot. However, that whole not being able to jump over a dime thing sort of hurts my chances. I certainly won’t be quitting my day for it, that’s for sure.
December 17th, 2008 at 7:29 pm
Tra,
I have been so upset with this administration that I have saved many articals, or copied & pasted many on microsoft word.
Two that can be easily googled:
1) Bill Moyers Journal . Buying the War . Watch the Show | PBS
*short excerpt:
Bill Moyers Journal: Buying the War Excerpt PBS – Truveo Video Search
2)BBC NEWS | Programmes | The Power of Nightmares: Baby It’s Cold
…Starting with the birth of American neo-conservatism and radical Islamists in 1949, the series explores the idea that the threat of an international terror …
Parts 1,2 & 3
This link allows you to watch the documentaries.
http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=%22power+of+nightmares%22&hl=en#
Each is one hour long.
They aired in England, and many other countries.
December 17th, 2008 at 7:31 pm
TRA:
You sound like a real good guy. I think if the world was full of guys like you government intervention wouldn’t be necessary. I suppose I’m more cynical than you in that my life’s experience has taught me that the world can’t work on the honor system. If it did, it would result in anarchy.
Coming from a low income family, it would be hypocritical of me to deny the same opportunities to the next generation that I had. Those opportunities came from government assistance. Now, I can not only afford to put my kids through college and make sure my parents live a dignified existence in old age, I can give back to the country that made it possible as well.
That being said, I respect your opinions very much and thanks for serving for me in the military as I did not.
Mark
December 17th, 2008 at 8:05 pm
MARK—Thanks for the kind words. I appreciate being able to have civilize debates with folks such as yourself and Lefty and Sarah in particular.
I agree with your point about the honor system. If the honor system worked, most of the nonsense going on in the world now would not be happening.
Some examples that I think support you are Madoff, Blagojevich, and the financial collapse. Those are just here in the US to.
Gotta run. Great posting with all. Have a great night.
December 17th, 2008 at 8:12 pm
MARK—Also, I commend you for having the courage and strength to improve your situation, and that of your kids and parents. If there were more stories like yours, then I could probably better accept the various programs that are out there.
I think again, as you mentioned, it comes down to the honor system. Some people, such as you, use the programs as a spring board to better things, while others use the programs as a way of life.
I also guess my opinion partly comes from life lessons as well. After my folks split, my mom worked, went to school, and raised two kids. The only assistance I know of that she ever received were grants from the college and help from her parents.
Don’t get me wrong, my dad was still very active in our lives. In fact, he would keep us while my mom was in school.
Now my mom is a nurse, and at least financially, she did most of it on her own or from her family.
I don’t say mention my mom’s story to knock the government assistance, only to do like you, explain a little more where my perspective comes from.
Again, I commend you for the improvements you have made to your and your families situation. That is awesome!!!
December 17th, 2008 at 8:24 pm
Alan:
Since the election I have been finding it harder and harder to tune into Fox News at 8pm for O’Reilly, and H&C. Sorry to say, O’Reilly is out of touch with reality. When he said that the NY Times was “hyping up” the recession, I threw in the towel. I can’t stand to hear Karl Rove try to rewrite Bush’s legacy. I tried watching Olbermann and Maddow, but after having voted for Bush it is really painful to hear the truth from these two, they’re so cynical. I’m watching more CNN (I really like Anderson Cooper) and I try to watch Charlie Rose’s show every night. He is actually the best interviewer on Television, no commercials for Viagara and extremely smart people come on his show. He never interrupts them or is rude.
December 18th, 2008 at 4:39 am
socialism: 1.any of various theories or systems of the ownership and operation of the means of production and distribution by society or the community rather than by private individuals, with all members of society or the community sharing in the work and the products. 3.the stage of society, in Marxist Doctrine, coming between the capitalist stage and the communist stage in which private ownership of the means of production and distribution has been eliminated. (source–New World Dictionary)
All you liberal, private owners of business, taking from one to give to another is socialism. That is governments way of legalizing theft of a person’s private property, in this case, his or her hard earned money in order to give to someone who the government deems less fortunate.
Big Brother knows best what to do with YOUR money. You might go and blow it on a new car or tv or something. See how dumb we are with OUR money. How dare us spend OUR money the way we see fit!!!!!
December 18th, 2008 at 9:09 am
I have a friend who told me that her Republican family members would often badmouth “librul-Democratz” at the kitchen table, talking while their mouths were full of government-issued cheese. “Want some? We got plenty,” they’d always offer.
She said it was amazing how the irony was completely lost on them.
December 18th, 2008 at 10:47 am
I have a democrat friend who voted for obama who admitted the other day that we have been safe for the past 7 years, thanks to George Bush and our military..but in the same sentence said we needed change.
All the while completely not getting the meaning of what she just said.
It works both ways. It shouldn’t matter WHO is doing the mooching, just that mooching when you are able to provide for yourself is WRONG.
December 18th, 2008 at 10:50 am
T. MASON—You said “…just the mooching when you are able to provide for yourself is WRONG.”
I agree with that. And where I have hearburn is when people at all levels are FORCED to support those who will not do for themselves.
I don’t how many read Mark’s post from 8:05 PM last night, but if more people where as he describes himself to be…used government assistance as a springboard to bigger and better things, changing his family tree in a positive way for generations to come…then I would probably support the programs more than I do now.
December 18th, 2008 at 12:35 pm
Mooching, whether it be white collar or blue collar, conservative or liberal, is anathema. But it is also a matter of perspective, clearly.
I’m not keen on supporting people who have no interest in helping themselves AT ALL. Then again, I have a crisis of conscience, since birth control is not free and abundantly accessible, boys are still getting girls pregnant and dumping them, child care is considered a privelege, and efforts to educate and prepare welfare recipients have taken quite a few blows in the past 6 years.
Add to this, an abundance of jobs that neocons claim “were never intended to support families,” when family-creation continues to be encouraged by neocons, we’ll still be supporting generations of welfare recipients for eons to come.
December 18th, 2008 at 2:22 pm
SARAH—Why does it seem you put the responsibility of a pregnancy only on the male? Why is there not equal disdain and responsbility put on the female?
Also, from what I read in another thread, you seem to be pro choice. If that is the case, why do you seem to show such disdain for a male choosing not to care for a child?
I think we can agree that it takes a male and female to conceive. Why does one get the “choice” and the other get the disdain?
December 18th, 2008 at 8:10 pm
Sarah,
since birth control is not free and abundantly accessible, boys are still getting girls pregnant and dumping them, child care is considered a privelege, and efforts to educate and prepare welfare recipients have taken quite a few blows in the past 6 years.
Any girl can go to the local health dept. and get birth control and low or no charge. Not to mention most schools hand out condoms via the school nurse and in some cases refer them to get pills. Better yet, don’t have sex if you don’t want to possibly have a child since no birth control excpet abstinence is 100% effective.
Boys aren’t getting girls pregnant by themselves, the girls are usually willing unless you have a case of rape. If you can’t pay for childcare then don’t have a child in the first place. Isn’t that what we tell people when they want to get a pet? If you can’t pay for it don’t get one. Kids deserve at least the same respect we give our animals.
Sarah,
when family-creation continues to be encouraged by neocons, we’ll still be supporting generations of welfare recipients for eons to come.
You act like republicans are the only ones having children. Is there some sort of baby making colony I am unaware of? you might want to look at statistics and see the vast majority of welfare recipients vote democrat….for a reason.
As long as people are down they need the government. Who wants bigger government? Democrats.
December 18th, 2008 at 8:42 pm