|
Post by jdredd on Mar 27, 2009 13:25:48 GMT -5
P.S. Janene Garafalo will have my eternal gratitude for being one of the embarassingly few public figures to aggressively oppose the invasion. Now you made me laugh Glad I could bring a little humor to your day!
|
|
|
Post by jdredd on Mar 27, 2009 13:32:08 GMT -5
I believe Baby Boomer journalists, who are now beginning to retire, will have to live the rest of their lives in shame. In the hour when the public needed them most, they sat on their hands and let the Bush administration deceive America into the disastrous Iraq invasion. P.S. Janene Garafalo will have my eternal gratitude for being one of the embarassingly few public figures to aggressively oppose the invasion. Oh, Please, let's not go there today. Everyone has formed an opinion by now and few are willing to change their position. It's been beat to death on the blogs, in the press and on all the radio/TV talk shows. Cant' we just be thankful that it's almost over and pray that there isn't an unsuccessful escalation in Afghanistan? Well, I never got to chime in on this one, but I see your point. As for it being almost over in Iraq, I think you may be being a little over-optimistic. We have been fighting there since 1991, and I doubt it will ever be "over"...
|
|
|
Post by nikki on Mar 27, 2009 14:02:36 GMT -5
Janene Garafalo?
Oh, my. The last time I remember seeing her was when she made an appearance years ago on MSNBC in her pigtails, sweats, and glasses talking about how some drug that she was taking made her think much more clearly than ever before!
|
|
|
Post by jdredd on Mar 27, 2009 14:11:07 GMT -5
Janene Garafalo? Oh, my. The last time I remember seeing her was when she made an appearance years ago on MSNBC in her pigtails, sweats, and glasses talking about how some drug that she was taking made her think much more clearly than ever before! I hear she's on "24" of all things but I haven't had a chance to check it out.
|
|
|
Post by nikki on Mar 27, 2009 14:17:29 GMT -5
jdredd,
You read my mind. I came back on here to say the same thing. I don't watch "24" that often, but, yes, she has appeared on that show, come to think of it.
|
|
|
Post by lou on Mar 27, 2009 18:55:32 GMT -5
DJ, I guess my concerns are more about the role of the media in a free society than the role of the media in the prior election. I think once you factor in all voting concerns, media concerns, fund raising concerns than the election was a collections of activities that taken as a whole produce a victor and that is as fair as we get. I do not think the media was the key either. The media did not show much balance in our ramp up to the Iraq war. The questions they should have been asking were out there they just never asked them. I am concerned that the bailout and Afghanistan may represent the same opportunities and we again may get nothing. Allow me to weigh in as well. I think the media did give O a pass, how long was it before the Rev Wright scandal was covered by the msm? Look at the negative reporting that Hilliary received. Look at the hatchet job the media did on Cindy McCain. I disagree with you, I think the media early on decided on O as the candidate and the President and they slanted their coverage in that manner. Remember what happened to "Joe the Plumber?" Journalism has always been report the facts, in this run, I don't think "report the facts' was truly practiced. Did it influence me? NO; but it can and does in Apologies for the delay! I think the media did influence some in O's favor. Do you remember those Youtubes in which the responder was asked "do you know anything about O's record?" and the answer was No; but I am still voting for him! Not too long ago there were several editorials on the demise of the "great" newspapers, and, several of the authors cited 73% of the population were not sorry to see these newspapers go because of the "slant of the reporting."
|
|
|
Post by lou on Mar 27, 2009 19:01:12 GMT -5
"The media gave BUSH a pass about the phoney WMD's and since then have done NOTHING TO HOLD HIM ACCOUNTABLE."As mentioned by escapehatch, the WMD's were mentioned, some identified and action being discussed by the Clinton administration long before Bush (W) became president. Just because they were not found does not mean they did not exist! Your phony WMD's issue is just like the birth certificate issue! "Can anyone here say over 4000 dead US soldeirs over a lie or at best a mistake? Republicans DONT CARE because they are silent...how cowardess."What kind of comment is that? I suppose that the Democrat administrations didn't care in Vietnam where 58,148 troops died. The Vietnam War was not lost by its military, it was lost by the Vietnamese government when the Americans left and did not provide support. Something we are hoping will not happen in Iraq. That is why how we exit Iraq is so important. Not that we want to stay there forever. Heck, I would like to see all our troops on foreign lands returned home. But that would not be in this countries best interest in the long run. Many countries want and need our assistance. Anyone who has been in combat does not look at the loss of life lightly. It must be for a purpose and a purpose exists in Iraq. Maybe not the original purpose but still a purpose exists. Hopefully the Iraqi's won't squander the opportunity when we leave. That regions tribal factions need to learn to co-exist and co-govern together to succeed. Not unlike the political parties here in the United States. If we continue to aim partisan bickering at each other we will stay divided and this country will continue to degrade. Or someone who lost a most beloved one in Vietnam and then to hear his sacrifice so lightly treated as an "oh well, mistakes happen!" I would not wish this to be repeated again not in Iraq!
|
|
|
Post by bruce on Mar 27, 2009 20:26:02 GMT -5
I get a kick out of those who claim the newspaper industry is liberal.Yes the big papers like the NYTimes,Washington Post,and LA Times are liberal,more or less.Someone said in a previous post that the the UT was liberal.That is a gross distortion.In competitive races,they almost always support the Republican.They support Democrats who are incumbents and bound to win(Bob Filner,Susan Davis)Their support for more open borders is not liberal:it's based on the big-business/Republican cheap labor viewpoint.The majority of daily newspapers are Republican-oriented.Not that it makes much difference,their influence,as is that of the "big three" is waning.I subscribe to the UT,mostly out of habit.If they disappeared,I wouldn't really miss it.
|
|
|
Post by jdredd on Mar 27, 2009 20:34:18 GMT -5
It's a simple fact of physics, bruce. If you are REALLY far to the right, middle-of-the-road media appears liberal. Works the other way, too.
P.S. Yes, you should have given up your UT habit years ago. Maybe now by some miracle the UT will turn into a decent newspaper under it's new owners.
|
|
CM
Rookie
Posts: 0
|
Post by CM on Mar 27, 2009 22:26:26 GMT -5
It's a simple fact of physics, bruce. If you are REALLY far to the right, middle-of-the-road media appears liberal. Works the other way, too. P.S. Yes, you should have given up your UT habit years ago. Maybe now by some miracle the UT will turn into a decent newspaper under it's new owners. No hope for the UT CANCEL, CANCEL, unless you need fish wrap, bid cage material or mulch it is a worthless read.
|
|
|
Post by lou on Mar 28, 2009 9:21:17 GMT -5
Further stats on the "liberal bias" of the media: 1968 86& voted for Hubert Humphrey 1972 81% voted for George McGovern 1980 80% voted for Jimmy Carter 1984 54% supported Mondale 1988 12-1 supported Dukakis over Bush (#1) 1992 89% supported Bill Clinton 2004 3-1 supported Kerry over Bush (#2) 2008 Investors Business Daily had 11 to 1 media donations to Democrat Party & causes stats compiled by Goldberg
|
|
|
Post by jdredd on Mar 29, 2009 2:18:09 GMT -5
I won't contest the validity of those numbers or the validity of polls and surveys in general for the sake of argument. Instead, I will default to my original comment about physics: from where I stand, liberals ARE middle-of-the-road. Have I confused everyone yet?
|
|
|
Post by bruce on Mar 29, 2009 7:14:42 GMT -5
jdredd-you post some of the most insightful comments on this site.We liberals are middle of the road now. As for Afghanistan what a great plan-get rid of al-quada,help them get moving,and no "nation building" imposing a form of government alien to them,like we tried in Iraq to little success. A big mistake in Iraq.
|
|
CM
Rookie
Posts: 0
|
Post by CM on Mar 29, 2009 10:37:06 GMT -5
.......liberals ARE middle-of-the-road....... Did you get that line from the Comedy Store?
|
|
|
Post by Tired in CV on Mar 29, 2009 14:40:29 GMT -5
As for Afghanistan what a great plan-get rid of al-quada,help them get moving,and no "nation building" imposing a form of government alien to them,like we tried in Iraq to little success. A big mistake in Iraq. Bruce, where have you been? Obama has proposed just what you don't want, "nation building!" Building of the infrastructure in Iraq was one of the right things we did. We gave them the tools and they made the decisions concerning "their" government. We also built schools, utility services and many other facilities to assist the country to rebuild itself. Afghanistan will not require the same government rebuilding that Iraq received but the President of Afghanistan has welcomed the "nation building" policies Obama has presented to assist the Afghan's to prosper. This is paramount to keep them from the employment of al Qaida and the Taliban.
|
|