Republican Party Less Popular Than Dick Cheney
Maybe Dick Cheney should keep talking to bring his party’s popularity up to his 26% level. A new NBC/Wall Street Journal poll shows the party is viewed favorably by just 25%, down from 29% in April. Greg at Plumline puts it in perspective.
There a couple of takeaways here. First, it appears that Cheney is doing a better job of making his own case than the current crop of GOP leaders are doing on behalf of the party as a whole, even though he’s no longer in office. And second, it gives the lie to the notion that Cheney’s ongoing media tour is helpful to the GOP overall, as some party leaders have publicly claimed to think. In reality, he only seems to be helping himself.
With a bit more immigrant bashing, gender/Latino-bashing, and Obama/Muslim bashing and gay bashing, perhaps they’ll be able to save space by living in a much smaller tent.
NBC, ummmm sounds fair and balanced.
Daddio Reply:
June 19th, 2009 at 6:28 pm
Yup. The network that bows to Obama. Did you see Brian Williams actually bow to Obama the other day? Rather sickening. America doesn’t have a King. We do not bow to our president.
Alan Reply:
June 19th, 2009 at 6:32 pm
The poll is co-sponsored by the Wall Street Journal. Do you have a problem with that? These polls are done by independent pollsters that have nothing to do with the editorial content of any of the media organizations whose names you see.
Daddio Reply:
June 19th, 2009 at 6:35 pm
You know, Alan, that polls can be skewed. It all depends on how and what type of question is asked and who they ask.
Daddio Reply:
June 19th, 2009 at 6:36 pm
Nice glasses by the way, Alan.
inaisle8 Reply:
June 19th, 2009 at 7:09 pm
You mean like a Fox News poll Daddio?
Do you hate President Obama [ ]
Do you not like President Obama [ ]
50% said hate
50% did not like the guy
Fair & Balanced
flap Reply:
June 19th, 2009 at 9:31 pm
I just realized something…are Alan’s glasses BLUE intentionally since he aligns more with the Democrats?
I’m probably reading too much into it. I think they make Alan look relatively cool.
JaredfromTexas Reply:
June 19th, 2009 at 7:02 pm
Hmmm,
If I remember correctly, it wasn’t that long ago when the Dem congress was in the single digits…
How quickly the left forgets it’s politically abysmal past…
And, the approval rating for the Dem Congress is still only slightly higher than Republicans are rated…at 29%…funny how you didn’t mention that, ALAN.
Epiphany Reply:
June 19th, 2009 at 7:21 pm
And….. In the same poll Democrats were rated with a positive approval rating of 45%. I think that’s a “little” better, don’t you?
Everyone hates Congress although for different reasons.
JaredfromTexas Reply:
June 19th, 2009 at 7:23 pm
EPIP,
Yes, everyone hates congress for different reasons…however, it’s still interesting to note the Dem congress has an approval rating deep in the ditch…don’t you think?
Daddio Reply:
June 19th, 2009 at 7:26 pm
I think it was last summer that the approval rating for Congress was something like 11-13 percent. I think they were rated below lawyers. Can’t get much lower than that.
JaredfromTexas Reply:
June 19th, 2009 at 7:12 pm
INAISLE8
50/50 split, huh? Sounds “balanced” to me…
EricG Reply:
June 20th, 2009 at 3:48 pm
“You know, Alan, that polls can be skewed.”
Then why do conservatives use polls every time they show numbers they want to see?
You’re all the way twisted into a pretzel on this one.
Polls don’t mean as much as most media-folk want them to but they have significance all the same.
This poll reflects what happens when you let a sexist race-baiter like Rush Limbaugh run the party. This poll reflects what happens when you allow hatred and ignorance be the foundation of your ideology. (Of course that’s just my take on it.)
The wicked fail. The insane destroy their home. The prideful burn their own numbers in riots they start.
Epiphany Reply:
June 19th, 2009 at 7:02 pm
And the Wall Street Journal is owned by Rupert Murdock who also owns Fox News.
Rocky the Liberal Rottweiler Reply:
June 19th, 2009 at 7:21 pm
“…the Wall Street Journal is owned by Rupert Murdock…”
So therefore it’s reasonable to assume that the poll questions were slanted to cast the republikkkan party in the most favorable light possible.
And therefore the republikkkan party’s REAL popularity rating is down in the single digits.
JaredfromTexas Reply:
June 19th, 2009 at 7:25 pm
Spoken like a person who didn’t even bother to look at the poll…congratulations on being a left-wing dittohead…
TDro319 Reply:
June 20th, 2009 at 6:04 pm
And if anybody would know about being a “dittohead” it would be you, Jared.
JaredfromTexas Reply:
June 20th, 2009 at 6:29 pm
TDRO,
Your constant and WRONG injects are getting on my nerves…back up your vitriol with examples of how I’ve regurgitated talking points or apologize…if you’re man enough.
Wait…this is me holding my breath…
TDro319 Reply:
June 20th, 2009 at 8:02 pm
“Your constant and WRONG injects are getting on my nerves…back up your vitriol with examples of how I’ve regurgitated talking points or apologize…if you’re man enough.”
Ooohh Jared is a real tough guy. BTW, I stand by what I said, you’re a dittohead, so I have nothing to apologize for.
JaredfromTexas Reply:
June 21st, 2009 at 4:07 pm
TDRO,
Sigh…are you gonna give me the “I’m rubber and you’re glue” line next?
You can claim that I’m a dittohead all you want…but you’re going to have to back it up with statements that I’ve made that prove your claim, or else I’ll have to lump you into the left-wing wacko bucket that ERICG has made himself comfortable in.
Congratulations on aspiring to be like ERICG…you’ve finally made it!
I’m going to hold a candlelight vigil for your credibility, TDRO…it’s obvious you won’t be using it anymore.
Epiphany Reply:
June 19th, 2009 at 7:30 pm
“Yes, everyone hates congress for different reasons…however, it’s still interesting to note the Dem congress has an approval rating deep in the ditch…don’t you think?”
Not really and not surprising either as I just said. And it’s higher now than it was a year ago. But I’m SURE it’s interesting to you as anything negative towards Obama or Democrats or Liberals would be.
JaredfromTexas Reply:
June 19th, 2009 at 7:36 pm
considering the fawning media attention, I would be VERY surprised to hear anything negative about Obama…you’re right on that account…
News anchor bowing…BOWING…to Obama…it’s just plain ridiculous…oh, and don’t forget Obama’s ninja move killing that fly played ad nauseum
OldLefty Reply:
June 19th, 2009 at 8:04 pm
“News anchor bowing…BOWING…to Obama”
Funny thing is, everybody sees it as a head nod.
As for fawning media….Please.
When Meet the press was the “It’s our best format.” by Cheney’s office?
Judith Miller and the NYT printed EVERYTHING Scooter Libby told her. Then Cheney goes on Meet the Press and quotes the NYT,as if it were a corroborating source, while no one in the MSM points out that the source for the NYT was Cheney.
How much did they question Bush on 9/11, why Iraq? Wmd? the McClatchy reports that all proved to be right?
All the former military “media consultants singing the praises of the equipment without revealing that they worked for the manufactures?
They all mindlessly repeated whatever the administration said.
And of course, ALL the right wing media were so hard on Bush.
JaredfromTexas Reply:
June 19th, 2009 at 8:10 pm
OLD LEFTY,
Again with the deflection tactic…it’s getting boring and old…
The topic of the discussion between Epiphany and I was the approval ratings of the current congress.
She said I would joyfully accept criticism of our current president…and I would, considering the overzealous and rosy media coverage lately.
Congrats…you’ve identified TWO media outlets of the hundreds in the US that gave Bush/Cheney good coverage…where were you the last four years?
Considering the media coverage he’s been getting…
JaredfromTexas Reply:
June 19th, 2009 at 8:11 pm
And…I just LOVE how you’re so willing to be passe’ about something so blatantly obvious…just like Obama bowing to the Saudi king…unbelievable.
OldLefty Reply:
June 19th, 2009 at 8:45 pm
JaredfromTexas AND Epiphany,
I DO apologize if I butted into someone else’s conversation.
Evertime the kettle calls the skillet black, the kettle screams “deflection!” when it’s pointed out that THAT takes a lot of nerve.
And almost EVERY media outlet gave Bush/Cheney good coverage until their numbers became irretrievable.
As for Obama bowing to the Saudi king….another example of kettle calls the skillet black, when you were OK with Bush et al lining their pockets with Saudi money all these years and wanting to give our ports to the UAE.
Besides the ‘bow’ was about your accusing a ‘News anchor of bowing…BOWING…to Obama’.
JaredfromTexas Reply:
June 19th, 2009 at 9:07 pm
OLD LEFTY,
for shame…as I mentioned before…you cited TWO major news sources that catered to the Bush Administration…that’s a far cry from all but FOX news kissing Obama’s arse on a daily basis. The kettle IS black…but only because you libs painted it that way.
Oh, and in case you didn’t know..which apparently you don’t…paying homage to a foreign king in a manner that indicates subservience is a far cry from engaging in business deals…wouldn’t you say? Oh, and surprise…it’s not just the Repubs who were lining their pockets with Saudi money…(this is where the pot calling the kettle black comes back to bite you in your arse, LEFTY).
It was a bow…no question…no matter how the left-wing spins it…it was a bow.
Did you see it, LEFTY? And you still say it was a “nod” goodbye?
Epiphany Reply:
June 19th, 2009 at 9:27 pm
It’s ok Lefty, butt in anytime.
Jared, I didn’t use the word “joyfully” but I get your drift.
Brian Williams bowed? Oh come on, Good God, he was just being polite, a very polite head nod and nothing more than that. It wasn’t any kind of a formal bow. “You people” are very silly sometimes, you know that?
Obama and the Saudi king. I once saw President Bush holding hands with him. I think they kissed too. The king that is. But don’t worry about it, they’re just good friends
OldLefty Reply:
June 19th, 2009 at 9:39 pm
JaredfromTexas said,
“that’s a far cry from all but FOX news kissing Obama’s arse on a daily basis.
The kettle IS black…but only because you libs painted it that way.”
…………………….
That’s only the opinion or the wishful thinking of you “cons” . I felt that they ALL kissed Bush’s butt until things went south.
Nobody comes close to the Bush family. To quote long time conservative Kevin Phillips. “, he traces how four generations of Bushes corrupted U.S. foreign policy through international business ventures that benefited
the family. The most recent two George Bushes aren’t evil people, Phillips argues, just greedy and ambitious Ivy League Texans. The Bush family has brought the American political system to a “perilous state,”
Nobody else was in the position to make foreign policy that benefited their personal fortune.
You can say all you want, “Did you see it, LEFTY? And you still say it was a “nod” goodbye?” , but I don’t know anybody who saw that except those who want to.
It’s silly if it is, but I think I think it’s fantasy.
JaredfromTexas Reply:
June 20th, 2009 at 6:58 am
EPIP,
It is absolutely astounding the lengths to which “you people” will go to in order to protect Obama and his worshippers.
Like it or not…Williams bowed to Obama…I’m not a liberal dittohead…so don’t even bother trying to tell me it was a polite nod…I give polite nods to friends and associates…and they don’t look anything like what Williams did.
And again with the “Well…Bush held his hand…and…and KISSED the king!” Crap…If you won’t acknowledge the difference between “custom” and “subservience” then I can’t help you…but then don’t expect the rest of us who prefer to live in this place I like to call reality, to jump on your bandwagon of spin-a-roony.
JaredfromTexas Reply:
June 20th, 2009 at 7:04 am
OLD LEFTY,
That’s only the opinion or the wishful thinking of you “cons”
Get a grip ol’ gal…you’re losing it…and big time. There’s plenty of finger pointing that goes both ways, sister…don’t act like YOU and yours have the monopoly on political righteousness.
how four generations of Bushes corrupted U.S. foreign policy through international business ventures that benefited
the family.
Oh…you must mean like EXACTLY what the Clintons are doing…your ignorance and blindness and unwillingness to acknowledge the rampant corruption in your own political family is absolutely astounding!
I don’t know anybody who saw that except those who want to.
You must be referring to those of us who don’t look at Obama with the googly eyes of a love-sick teenaged girl. And you’re right…it is a fantasy…but only in the collective left-wing mind.
OldLefty Reply:
June 20th, 2009 at 8:48 am
JaredfromTexas said,
“don’t act like YOU and yours have the monopoly on political righteousness”.
…………………………..
Is this the classic right wing projection??
Aren’t you acting as though YOU “have the monopoly on political righteousness”?
I’m simply quoting an old, long time conservative, from back when the split between Democrats and Republicans was more like 45 – 55, 55 – 45, and Nixon started the EPA because even though he was more pro business, he knew you could not expect them to do the right thing when nobody was looking…..who states that there has not been a government who had so much of their PERSONAL fortune tied to the foreign policy that THEY get to make,……and that requires an emotional rant about Clinton, and you accuse ME of deflection?
There really is nothing that you say about Obama supporters that was not said about Bush supporters, particularly the blind faith that he was somehow a “good Christian” acting with God.
Do you REALLY not think that anti Bush people, those of us in the “reality-based community “, had the same thoughts, especially when the two biggest failures occurred on his watch and everybody in the media took a ,”Oh Dear, it would be impolite, and his supporters say unpatriotic, to point that out.”
You even had high ranking people like Gen Boykin, the Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence, who has repeatedly told Christian groups and prayer meetings that President George W Bush was chosen by God to lead the global fight against Satan:
He told one gathering: “Why is this man in the White House? The majority of Americans did not vote for him. He’s in the White House because God put him there for a time such as this.”
So you can spare me this emotional, ‘My Daddy’s the Best Daddy in the whole world!” bit.
GuidoVanHorn Reply:
June 20th, 2009 at 9:14 am
well in the spirit of fathers day…my daddy really is the best daddy in the whole world. I love you Dad!
JaredfromTexas Reply:
June 20th, 2009 at 4:09 pm
OLD LEFTY, EPIPHANY,
You know what? I thought that maybe I WAS over-reacting about Brian Williams actions after his interview with Obama. I thought, you know what…let’s see if, since 2000 if he has done the same parting “polite head nod” to anyone else he’s interviewed.
I looked at 25 random interviews between 2000 and present…and guess what?
NOT ONE. Not a single “polite head nod” ended a single of those 25 interviews stretching all the way back to 2000. NOt even during the 5 interviews I saw him do with Bush…
But you could still be right…maybe he’s trying to start a trend…
“guffaw”
June 19th, 2009 at 6:26 pm
I’m leaving now. I know my fellow conservatives can hold their own here. After all, we conservatives are sane, rational, and intelligent individuals who hold a differing view than our liberal friends. And we are right. :)
EricG Reply:
June 19th, 2009 at 6:59 pm
Well all we liberals are sane, rational, intelligent, compassionate and informed individuals so we are sorry to see you leave but you fail at making your case by leaving the debate.
If I saw more logic and respectful disagreement from right wingers I would think much more highly of what you just said. But the fact it that it is far and few between to find good men and women in the current conservative crop. I wish it were not so but hating gays, Mexicans, liberals and blacks is not exactly something to respect. And they can call a duck a goose all they want. Racism & bigotry do not redefine at the pleasure of racists of bigots.
So that much is dead wrong.
If we could actually have a debate about taxes or public policy instead of the Bible and whatever slander someone is spreading then all the world might think a little better of the little ol’ GOP.
JaredfromTexas Reply:
June 19th, 2009 at 7:06 pm
ERICG,
I’m assuming you were speaking for the OTHER liberals on this site…as we both know you’re lacking in all the descriptors above…
By the way…go get some credibility before preaching about “logic and respectful disagreement”.
Rocky the Liberal Rottweiler Reply:
June 19th, 2009 at 7:25 pm
“…go get some credibility…”
It’s a great thing that Texas is getting “invaded” by the Mexicans. It’s doubtless improving the literacy rate by leaps and bounds.
JaredfromTexas Reply:
June 19th, 2009 at 7:30 pm
ROCKY,
“It’s doubtless improving…”
Yes…it seems to be doing wonders for your literary prowess as well…
Daddio Reply:
June 19th, 2009 at 7:22 pm
I had to get a bite to eat, Eric.
I would much rather debate about taxes and public policy. Alan usually brings up the issues that lead to one’s view that one has to rely on one’s faith to give their point of view.
I don’t see much if any respectful disagreement coming from your posts Eric. You continually disparage those who disagree with you by calling them un-American, haters, racist, and bigots. Don’t see any respectful disagreement coming from labels like that.
Jared is right, you need to get some credibility before you preach to us about “logic and respectful disagreement”
flap Reply:
June 19th, 2009 at 9:47 pm
I appreciate EricG’s passion but his rantings give me the impression that any opinion coming from the right is spawned from the 7th circle of Hell and that all Republicans are the equivalent of serial killing racist child molesters.
June 19th, 2009 at 6:33 pm
GOP = Male Stale Pale & Frail
Epiphany Reply:
June 19th, 2009 at 7:04 pm
LOL!!
June 19th, 2009 at 6:46 pm
FOX should give Cheney his own variety show, where he can tell some jokes and sing and dance in little skits and stuff. I’d watch it, even as a liberal.
Epiphany Reply:
June 19th, 2009 at 7:12 pm
But can he spin plates on a pole? Maybe Karl Rove could come on and show us some new dance moves. And please don’t forget John Ashcroft’s breathtaking rendition of “LET THE EAGLE SOAR!”. Should’ve won a Grammy for that one.
Now THIS is a press conference! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=woLQI8X2R6Y
June 19th, 2009 at 7:01 pm
The poll is co-sponsored by the Wall Street Journal.
While I don’t dispute the GOP is struggling, it is true that the Wall Street Journal is the news outlet the least neutral of all the outlets in that study I have been quoting. To imply that they are neutral is disingenuous.
June 19th, 2009 at 7:09 pm
The poll is co-sponsored by the Wall Street Journal.
The GOP is struggling, however, the Wall Street Journal is the news outlet the least neutral of all the outlets in that study I have been quoting. To imply that they are neutral is disingenuous.
jasperjava Reply:
June 19th, 2009 at 8:14 pm
You’re right: The Wall Street Journal isn’t neutral, it’s firmly Republican and right-wing.
I certainly hope that you’re not implying that the WSJ – which regularly publishes Karl Rove’s op-eds – is somehow “librul”. If that’s the case, anything to the left of Der Sturmer is the “librul media” to a knuckle-dragger like you.
JaredfromTexas Reply:
June 19th, 2009 at 8:18 pm
uh…perhaps your failure to realize PINO was saying the WSJ is right-wing qualifies you as a “knuckle-dragger”
June 19th, 2009 at 7:14 pm
A new NBC/Wall Street Journal poll shows the part is viewed favorably by just 25%, down from 29% in April.
Or, for example, we could go see where the trust of the American People is:
Out of 10 issues, the GOP leads the Democrats in 6, tied in one and is trailing in the other three. You could say that the GOP has the trust of the people by a margin of 2 to 1.
rasmussenreports.com/scoreboards/by_the_numbers2/by_the_numbers
June 19th, 2009 at 7:20 pm
Yeah tell us again how it’s a center-right country. We could all use a good laugh.
June 19th, 2009 at 7:27 pm
tell us again how it’s a center-right country
It’s a center right country.
Rocky the Liberal Rottweiler Reply:
June 19th, 2009 at 9:36 pm
No, no, seriously. Tell us it’s a center-right country. I mean tell us for real. Because it would just be so funny.
June 19th, 2009 at 7:38 pm
[...] • RIP for the GOP? Alan analyzes the causes behind the Republican Party’s decline in popularity. [...]
June 19th, 2009 at 7:50 pm
Republican Party Less Popular Than Dick Cheney
…but more popular than Nancy Pelosi
June 19th, 2009 at 8:04 pm
The Wall Street Journal isn’t neutral, it’s firmly Republican and right-wing.
I certainly hope that you’re not implying that the WSJ – which regularly publishes Karl Rove’s op-eds – is somehow “librul”.
I am. The WSJ was the news outlet that was THE most biased. And they were not biased to the right; they were biased to the left. OpEd aside, the news as reported by WSJ has a pronounced liberal bias.
OldLefty Reply:
June 19th, 2009 at 8:58 pm
“The WSJ was the news outlet that was THE most biased”
…………………..
Which study states this?
June 19th, 2009 at 8:53 pm
Which study states this?
Serious? You haven’t seen the second of the two that I have found for you?
Lemme look……hold two.
pino Reply:
June 19th, 2009 at 9:05 pm
sscnet.ucla.edu/polisci/faculty/groseclose/Media.Bias.8.htm
Table 4. Just past halfway down the page.
50.06 is the average voter’s score. The lower the ADA score, the more Right Wing. The higgher the score, the more Left wing. Table four has the outlets measured in distance from center. I.E. Jim Lehrer is the closest to neutral; WSJ the furthest.
Of the 20 outlets studied, only 2 lean right. 18 lean left.
Further, CNN no longer has Aaron Brown and MSNBC wasn’t studied. If MSNBC were on the list, I have them left of of NPR but right of the New York Times.
OldLefty Reply:
June 19th, 2009 at 9:27 pm
I know that study.
Why did they only do not do ADA, (American Democratic average not ARD, American Republican Average?
They only compared to Democrats, not Republicans.
They told you that they set out to show LIBERAL bias, not CONSERVATIVE bias.
Do you think that thae facts have a liberal bias?
Again, the idea of neutral means what? That He said,…she said…. We don’t bother with finding the truth?
pino Reply:
June 19th, 2009 at 9:38 pm
They told you that they set out to show LIBERAL bias, not CONSERVATIVE bias.
See below post for response to this.
Continuing the leftist pattern. You say and believe things that YOU WANT to be true. Rarely, if ever, are they grounded in fact or truth.
If you think that Foxnews is more biased than MSNBC or CNN or the New York Times, I think that it’s time YOU show ME the data/study that backs up your claim.
pino Reply:
June 19th, 2009 at 9:05 pm
You owe me a glass of wine for doing your homework ;-)
EricG Reply:
June 20th, 2009 at 4:38 pm
“If you think that Foxnews is more biased than MSNBC or CNN or the New York Times, I think that it’s time YOU show ME the data/study that backs up your claim.”
I’ll go poke around at some point and try to get some figures on this.
Nobody here except Alan gets paid to do these things so I hope nobody is spending any vast amount of time researching for a comment board.
Bias is clear, by the way. If you can’t indentify it wiothout a study … then nobody can help you. You’ll never see the bias when the study is presented to you. You’ll reject it. A biased rejection.
Anyway, just watch how O’Reilly treated Joan Walsh in a recent interview and then tell me that liberals get a fair shake at FOX News.
Then of course, you could just watch H & C from just about any episode. They literally cut off Alan to go to Sean in many cases. They literally and shamelessly let conservative guests just talk right over liberal guests.
The whole FOX Network has shown an extremely strong bias in terms of conservative ideology. I don’t care really, but they should be real Americans and just admit it. Falsehoods and lies are the game they play over there. And it has nothing to do with ideology as much as dishonesty. Liars about being partisan.
Kind of like how your lying about FOX being void of bias while MSNBC is full it. That’s a lie. Total BS.
Rather than go read a study how about you watch the news on FOX and then watch the news on … I dunno … PBS … C-SPAN … I don’t care. But not FOX. And then tell me where the neo-con rants and hatred for all things Democratic are to be found.
June 19th, 2009 at 9:01 pm
Why did they only do not do ADA, (American Democratic average not ARD, American Republican Average?
Lefty ADA is not the American Democratic Average. It is:
Rocky the Liberal Rottweiler Reply:
June 19th, 2009 at 9:43 pm
And they go through all this crap, and they assign letters and numbers and draw all these circles and arrows and apply fifteen formulas and seventy computer models, and no one who disagrees with the results is going to give a damn one way or the other.
Why is the republikkkan party so unpopular? Because they earned it the old-fashioned way. By screwing people twelve ways from Sunday and wrecking the planet.
flap Reply:
June 19th, 2009 at 9:52 pm
“Wrecking the planet…”
Uh, how about all the cash that Bush sent to Africa? Seems to me that actually was one of the most helpful (albeit expensive) things to be done for the planet.
I care more about people than the planet.
Lee Reply:
June 19th, 2009 at 11:11 pm
You know, the AIDS help to Africa was one of the very few good achievements of the Bush Administration (along with the creation of the TSA and thats about it).
However, if you care about people, you need to start caring about the planet. Even if you don’t buy into global warming you should investigate how we are ravaging the planet of resources that we need to survive i.e water, food and energy.
Um Cara Reply:
June 19th, 2009 at 11:49 pm
However, if you care about people, you need to start caring about the planet.
Yep, environmentalism is all about people, the planet will do just fine after we are gone, but if we would like to stick around a bit longer – we should probably be doing stuff to keep the planet hospitable to us.
Which means biodiversity, clean water, clean air, etc…
Once we all croak the planet will cleanse itself of our waste in the blink of an eye, geographical time scale speaking.
EricG Reply:
June 20th, 2009 at 4:30 pm
Flap – “I care more about people than the planet.”
I’ll remind you that you said that when the sky turns green, fresh water costs more than any but the rich can afford, the temperature extremes start killing people in America and the smog in cities chokes someone you love to death.
I’ll remind you about your love for people in place of the planet. The home of all these people you love so much.
OldLefty Reply:
June 19th, 2009 at 11:05 pm
Pino,
Sorry, call from my mom who chastises me for wasting time on this site.
I stand corrected on the ADA (Americans for Democratic Action), but I still wonder why they did not compare stories to Republicans. I repeat they were looking for liberal, not conservative bias.
If the facts reflect a liberal viewpoint should they withhold them? I would like specific examples that they don’t seem to cite.
When the WSJ reported that the General in charge of paying Afgan army could not get the promised money from Washington, and the French kicked in X million, that would be perceived as liberal, but it’s true.
When they report facts shedding doubt on WMD in Iraq, THAT would be liberal?
As for studies, about Fox, one has to be done first.
As for others, Maybe you know I go to bed by now, so I can get more detailed about reports like:
~ Black and White and Re(a)d All Over:
The Conservative Advantage in Syndicated Op-Ed Columns
~ McClellan stated that these talking points were not issued to provide the public with news, but were issued to provide Fox News commentators with issues and perspectives favorable to the White House and Republican Party
~ In August 2007 a new utility, Wikipedia Scanner, revealed that Wikipedia articles relating to Fox News had been edited from IP addresses owned by Fox News.
~ The Project on Excellence in Journalism report in 2006, showed that 68 percent of Fox cable stories contained personal opinions, as compared to MSNBC at 27 percent and CNN at 4 percent.
~ Sean Hannity broadcasting outside Terry Schivo’s hospice.
~ The Center for Media and Public Affairs at George Mason University, where researchers have tracked network news content for two decades, found that ABC, NBC and CBS were tougher on Obama than on Republican John McCain during the first six weeks of the general-election campaign.
During the evening news, the majority of statements from reporters and anchors on all three networks are neutral, the center found. And when network news people ventured opinions in recent weeks, 28% of the statements were positive for Obama and 72% negative.
Network reporting also tilted against McCain, but far less dramatically, with 43% of the statements positive and 57% negative, according to the Washington-based media center.
If you care to respond, I;ll get it in the morning.
Good night.
EricG Reply:
June 20th, 2009 at 4:28 pm
“chastises me for wasting time on this site.”
If anybody anywhere actually paid any attention to me they would do the same.
June 19th, 2009 at 9:34 pm
No, no, seriously. Tell us it’s a center-right country. I mean tell us for real. Because it would just be so funny.
Serious. It’s a center right country.
Most people trend national defense.
Most people trend pro-life.
Most people trend traditional marriage.
Most people trend less debt.
Most people trend less Socialism.
Though I will give you most people are trending Universal Health Care.
michael Reply:
June 20th, 2009 at 1:32 pm
The vast majority treend against the Iraq war.
Most trend toward doing more to combat climate change.
Most trend toward increasing the minimum wage.
As you acknowlege, most trend toward universal health care
Bottom line Is that we are neither a center left nor center right country. Americans tend to think for themselves on Individual issues unlike our politicians.
libpatriot Reply:
June 21st, 2009 at 12:50 am
The vast majority favor protecting our world’s natural environment as well, now more than ever.
libpatriot Reply:
June 21st, 2009 at 12:53 am
Besides just responding to climate change.
libpatriot Reply:
June 21st, 2009 at 3:09 am
While the public is still skeptical about the benefits of cap-and-trade, and polls split about evenly on whether government or business is best equipped to solve environmental challenges, the trend towards favoring more environmental protections is growing:
pollingreport.com/enviro.htm
pewforum.org/doc/?DocID=121
envirocenter.research.yale.edu/programs/…/yale-environmental-poll
thewest.com.au/aapstory.aspx?StoryName=373497
GuidoVanHorn Reply:
June 21st, 2009 at 4:13 am
Libpatriot,
I don’t think anyone is for completely trashing the environment, however many of us make a distinction of cost vs. benefits. Is it worth a billion dollars to save the norwegian biracial big headed small footed rat that only lives in one specific rathole of the country, or should we just build the nuclear energy facility on that land anyway that will save us 100 billion cft of C20 and carbon solids pollution a year. (Jimmy Carter is responsible for more pollution per year due to his anti-nuclear stance than any president since using my unscientific method of random guessing)
Many of us recognize (because scientists tell us so) that it’s the other components of smog that is the danger and not O3, even though the EPA continues their misguided attempt to destroy all 03 output and continues to track smog levels solely on the presence of O3 and spends time and money worrying about the O3 created by certain air filters, they continue to publish denigrating information on their website about 03 even though it’s completely and utterly false. OSHA lends a hand by making harsh restrictions on workplace O3 standards making it more expensive and impractical in some cases to use the disenfectant properties of 03 on fresh and frozen produce and meats thereby reducing spoilage, retaining nutrients, and drastically reducing the chance of E.coli/Salmonella/Listeria/other food bourne incidents. Even though 03 is the only disenfectant that breaks down into nothing other than pure oxygen. The expansive use of chlorine and chlorine like products creates massive amounts of cancer causing dioxins and other dangerous byproducts every single day.
Instead of fighting to Breach the Dams…perhaps environmentalists could aim their fight at replacing the dams with more efficient and fish friendly dams, thereby providing us with more arable crop lands, and clean and cheap electricity.
Instead of fighting wave power possibilities because it MIGHT interfere with the pink bangladeshian herring salmon run, we tend to think…perhaps we’re being a tad bit sensitive to the plight of a fish.
When California continues the practice of banning Diesel vehicles and wants to ban Diesel Trucks even though diesel has been reformulated to burn cleaner than ever and diesel vehicles can get 40% better gas mileage than their gas counterparts (less fuel=less oil=less pollution), we tend to think that well intentioned environmentalists are borderline crazy.
Anybody with half a brain is for clean waterways, clean wetlands, functional recycling programs. But when the costs of adhering to Utopian Protocols would literally put you out of business, we recognize that perhaps a slightly less lofty standard should be applied and strived for.
EricG Reply:
June 20th, 2009 at 4:04 pm
“Most people trend national defense.
Most people trend pro-life.
Most people trend traditional marriage.
Most people trend less debt.
Most people trend less Socialism.”
Idiotic. Shallow. Uninformed. Should I go on?
National defense has nothing to do with Republicans, and it never did. That’s a lie made up by lobbyists and party-hacks.
Everyone is the fricken world is “Pro-Life” and if you are trying to say that a majority of Americans are against women’s reproductive rights then you have read the wrong data or listened to a spin artist … the nation is almost 50/50 on the issue, as far as I’m aware.
Traditional marriage is exactly what gay people want to do. And once again you have read some funny numbers if you think this is true. Most people want to provide equal rights and are vastly misinformed by anti-gay individuals in the media and in general that ‘civil unions’ provide this when they do not. When you ask people if they want to deny gay Americans the right to marry in civil ceremony instead of asking slanted questions … you get a real result.
Less debt? Oh come on. Bush, debt. This is pointless. You and all the neo-cons can’t be honest for even ten seconds about what your party’s elected leader did to this nation and did to our debt.
Nobody is this country, with rare exception, are socialist. You have offended the real Americans you read this and have made happy all the partisan fools who hate their country. If you could define that word you would have some ground to stand on. As it is you’re using the Glenn Barf definition of ’socialism’ which is basically just anything done by a Democrat is socialism and everything done by a Republican is not. You offend your fellow countrymen with these lies. Please stop, I’m begging you now not only to stop this yourself but to call out to your fellow neo-cons and try to convince that using the wrong words for federalism is making it easier for people like me to paint you all as unpatriotic and idiotic.
“Though I will give you most people are trending Universal Health Care.”
Okay, back into reality. This is true. Wanna know why?
Because most people are effected by it. Most people know someone with these issues in their life.
If more people had gay members in their family, Armed Service involved in the wars we start, people they care deeply for facing decisions about reproductive health, and finally if you just can take a minute and use your human heart to imagine what it is like to be on the other end of the viscous hate and lies spread by Republicans everyday about liberals and Democrats.
Then maybe we could find Bipartisan Road.
As it stands we are coming ever closer to never again having a United States of America.
We shall continue to live in the Divided States of America.
June 19th, 2009 at 9:44 pm
Why is the republikkkan party so unpopular? Because they earned it the old-fashioned way. By screwing people twelve ways from Sunday and wrecking the planet.
You may be right; err, left–ummm, you know what I mean. The Republican Party has done many many things wrong in the recent past. This includes having a President do many many non Republican type things.
However, as true as that is, it has nothing to do with the fact that the WSJ is the MOST left leaning media source listed in this study.
So, when Alan claims that this was sponsored by them, as if that Ought give it more weight, it’s laughable.
But then again, close your eyes and believe in Fairies and Peter Pan.
flap Reply:
June 19th, 2009 at 9:54 pm
But then again, close your eyes and believe in…Peter Pan.
You liar! I’ve seen plenty of it next to JIF at the Wal-Mart.
*groan*
EricG Reply:
June 20th, 2009 at 4:11 pm
You go ahead and make yourself believe the lies spread by Hannity / Limbaugh about the ‘liberal media.’
You are seriously up the creek on this.
The media just gives people what they want. If you don’t think so you obviously don’t watch the media, except of course YOUR media. Which is made for you.
AH HA!
Are the pieces fitting together yet?
There is a ‘liberal media’ and it’s cable news. There is a conservative media’ and it’s cable news.
Is this getting to hard to understand for conservatives or something?
Oh, wait. Now I remember. Those useless hacks you call themselves conservatives on the radio and the TV have made careers off lying to the public and trying to convince people that there is a ‘liberal media’ but never mentioning that they are the ‘conservative media’ and both sides are guilty of unamerican reporting and baloney in place of news.
Who is guilty? Both. So shut your fricken trap about liberal media until you admit the hate-radio and hate-cable network that you adore is the face of American Fascism as much as MSNBC or CNBC.
June 19th, 2009 at 9:52 pm
Eric – Rocky;
If I am opposed to giving an illegal alien all the benefits an American gets, am I an Mexican basher? If I suggest that the 10th amendment to the constitution should allow for states to pass their own laws governing marriage am I a gay basher?
What if I think that there is absolutely no right under OUR constitution for free health care, does that make me evil? If it’s there, I don’t see it.
If you can’t make a reasoned and civil response, don’t start name-calling.
Thanks
GuidoVanHorn Reply:
June 20th, 2009 at 2:06 am
oh to be so naive and foolish…
EricG Reply:
June 20th, 2009 at 4:21 pm
“If I am opposed to giving an illegal alien all the benefits an American gets, am I an Mexican basher?”
Nope. Not in my eyes anyway. You drop one single ‘wetback’ or ‘dirty Mexicans’ and I stop listening to you. I should warn you so you can pass it along. If people have an issue with that they need to stick to it. Saying racist BS like ‘they bring disease’ or ‘they all are filthy dogs’ or the other things I’ve heard then I and most will reject all that you say prior and after that. Racism is not to tolerated unless you accept it as truth. Applies to everyone, don’t care what party you are in.
“If I suggest that the 10th amendment to the constitution should allow for states to pass their own laws governing marriage am I a gay basher?”
Once again, I am a liberal and I am 100% with you on this point. I want the states to decide for themselves and (how much do you know about the USA?) once enough states have made it law the Supreme Court can finally approve the matter of legal, civil, gay-marriage as US Law. It’ll take time but that’s what will happen, in the meantime I stand with what you said. States should decide on their own in absence of a federal decision on the civil rights of homosexuals.
Same thing as before: if you even start to say ‘deviants’ or ‘faggots’ or … never mind I won’t type out anything else but you get the point. Then it’s over. You’re a gay-basher and not an American but a stinking fascist dog better fit for Hitler’s Germany than America in 2009. This brings up full-circle. I want to see conservatives make their points minus the hate. Their hate inspires my hate and so on. It’s not an excuse for me to be partisan against them, against YOU. But I am not kidding when I say that if the Radio Hacks would just apologize for giving us and defending Bush and then be HONEST with their audience about … something.
Hate sells. So as long as they make their bucks off hating liberals and hating the president … then I explain why they are communists, bigots, domestic terrorists and racists.
June 19th, 2009 at 11:21 pm
“With a bit more immigrant bashing, gender/Latino-bashing, and Obama/Muslim bashing and gay bashing, perhaps they’ll be able to save space by living in a much smaller tent.”
Excellent comment. The Republicans don’t seem to realize that the more they insist on right-wing ideological purity, the more they alienate vast sections of the population. The bashing of Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor, a source of pride for Hispanics, as a “racist,” is a case in point. As far as I’m concerned, let the GOP keep bashing–and losing.
EricG Reply:
June 20th, 2009 at 4:25 pm
It’s true.
Of course they have represented partisanship, gay-hate, Muslim-hate, liberal-hate, and Christian theocracy … so I say let them burn.
I’ll pour out a 40 for the memory of the Republican Party but I’m not going to try to stop it. They made their bed, now they can sleep in it.
June 20th, 2009 at 9:23 am
I still wonder why they did not compare stories to Republicans. I repeat they were looking for liberal, not conservative bias.
They studied all outlets for an bias, not just dem or repub.
The Center for Media and Public Affairs at George Mason University, where researchers have tracked network news content for two decades, found that ABC, NBC and CBS were tougher on Obama than on Republican John McCain during the first six weeks of the general-election campaign.
That looks interesting. Please provide the link into that study.
OldLefty Reply:
June 20th, 2009 at 1:49 pm
Pino,
I never link because it doesn’t go through, then I freeze and have to reboot, but what IS fascinating here is, there is NO link, while many sources report it from via the LA Times, and when you link THERE, you get,
Page Not Found:
Sorry, the page you requested could not be found.
Michael Calderone from Politico writes:
“Network reporting also tilted against McCain, but far less dramatically, with 43% of the statements positive and 57% negative, according to the Washington-based media center.
Robert Lichter, the center’s director and onetime Fox News contributor — yes, he’s been praised by O’Reilly before — told the paper that “this information should blow away this silly assumption that more coverage is always better coverage.”
UPDATE: I just called the Center, and was told that the study should be available online later today (and will link when its up). After the jump is the press release.”
But it’s not.
Actually, one mention you CAN find is from the Glen Beck Show:
Just google, Glen Beck, The Center for Media and Public Affairs at George Mason University,
“
Beck, speaking to :Robert Lichter professor of communications at
George Mason University and director of the Center for
Media and Public Affairs.
Beck: And Robert, I know you to be a credible guy”….blah, it goes on
The UCLA study has been debunked, most extensively by Media Matters, (before you say THEY are biased, {they are.}, so are the authors of the UCLA study.):
None of the outlets that reported on the study mentioned that the authors have previously received funding from the three premier conservative think tanks in the United States: the American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research (AEI), The Heritage Foundation, and the Hoover Institution on War, Revolution and Peace. Groseclose was a Hoover Institution 2000-2001 national fellow; Milyo, according to his CV (pdf), received a $40,500 grant from AEI; and, according to The Philanthropy Roundtable, Groseclose and Milyo were named by Heritage as Salvatori fellows in 1997. In 1996, Groseclose and Milyo co-authored a piece for the right-wing magazine The American Spectator, titled “Lost Shepherd,” criticizing the then-recently defeated member of Congress Karen Shepherd (D-UT) and defending her successor, Enid Greene (R-UT); when the piece was published, Greene was in the midst of a campaign contribution scandal and later agreed to pay a civil penalty after the Federal Election Commission found (pdf) that she violated campaign finance laws.
An article that quoted a member of Congress taking one side of an issue, and then quoted a think tank scholar taking the other side, would be coded as “biased” in the direction of whichever side was represented by the think tank scholar.
The UCLA study has been debunked, most extensively by Media Matters, (before you say THEY are biased, {they are.}, so are the authors of the UCLA study.):
None of the outlets that reported on the study mentioned that the authors have previously received funding from the three premier conservative think tanks in the United States: the American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research (AEI), The Heritage Foundation, and the Hoover Institution on War, Revolution and Peace. Groseclose was a Hoover Institution 2000-2001 national fellow; Milyo, according to his CV (pdf), received a $40,500 grant from AEI; and, according to The Philanthropy Roundtable, Groseclose and Milyo were named by Heritage as Salvatori fellows in 1997. In 1996, Groseclose and Milyo co-authored a piece for the right-wing magazine The American Spectator, titled “Lost Shepherd,” criticizing the then-recently defeated member of Congress Karen Shepherd (D-UT) and defending her successor, Enid Greene (R-UT); when the piece was published, Greene was in the midst of a campaign contribution scandal and later agreed to pay a civil penalty after the Federal Election Commission found (pdf) that she violated campaign finance laws.
An article that quoted a member of Congress taking one side of an issue, and then quoted a think tank scholar taking the other side, would be coded as “biased” in the direction of whichever side was represented by the think tank scholar.
pino Reply:
June 20th, 2009 at 2:08 pm
If you want to post links here on alan’s site, you have to delete off the leading double-you double-you double-you dot.
For example, if you want to link to cnn, you can not do this:
double-you double-you double-you dot cnn.com
you have to do this:
cnn.com
Same goes if you have an ache tee tee pee; delete that out.
June 20th, 2009 at 10:35 am