"Carl" <saints@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:fqvql1$8oc$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Mar 8, 6:40 pm, "Chuck Stamford" <shell__stamf...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> "**Rowland Croucher**" <rccroucher@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in
>> message
>>
>> news:47d30bb7$0$20842$afc38c87@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > Jani wrote:
>>
>> >> "Chuck Stamford" <shell__stamf...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>> >>news:GEyAj.42875$kp6.12188@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> > <>
>> >>> Let me guess, you
>> >>> like Fox (Faux) News, right?
>>
>> >>> Chuck:
>>
>> >>> I view them all, but I like Fox the best because of their balance
and
>> >>> lack of a political agenda; something that is lacking in the news
>> >>> organizations you've just mentioned.
>>
>> > I watch Fox every evening and have noted the *presence* of a
>> > right-of-centre political agenda - often in the innuendos,
>> > whatsisname's
>> > raised eyebrows etc. as well as the word-content
>>
>> I would agree that Fox is a bit right of center in it's editorializing.
>> However, if we're going to use catagories such as you've articulated
>> above
>> in making a determination about Fox's political leanings in covering
the
>> news, then to be consistent we'd have to do the same for NBC, CBS, and
>> ABC.
>>
>> When you have a re****ter like Chris Matthews saying he feels a tingle
run
>> up
>> his leg just listening to Barack Obama speak (not to mention all the
>> other
>> partisan rhetoric from this quarter!), I think we're past raised
eyebrows
>> and word counts in making a determination that NBC is left of center.
>
> Furthermore, Chuck, if we are to be beholden to political correctness as
> well as affirmative action, then it should be mandated by federal law
that
> an equal number of conservative networks be created and maintained with
> federal money to level the playing field since the overwhelming majority
> of networks airing national and international news are clearly of a
> liberal nature with an unequal ratio of at least 9 to 1.
>
> [The previous paragraph has been close-captioned for the
humor-impaired.]
>
> May God bless,
> Carl
> my website -- http://www.nettally.com/saints/
> my blog -- http://www.anniemayhem.com/cgi-bin/wordpress/
Carl, being the conservative I am, I'm more than happy to allow the free
market of ideas to function on it's own. Most liberal news outlets are
beginning to have problems competing in that market. Both the LA Times
and
the NY Times are bleeding readers, and NBC is losing share points like
dogs
shed hair in the summer. But even if that wasn't true, all I really want
is
a level field.
I would, however, like to see two things happen that aren't happening now,
and that would go a long way toward leveling the field. First, if the
"Fourth Estate" isn't going to live up to its name as the watchdog of
government at the behest of ALL Americans, and is instead going to simply
cheerlead for the Democratic Party, I believe it should have some of it's
special protections under the First Amendment canceled. No more unnamed
sources without any liability; no more having to prove malice of
forethought
in a court to win a slander case against a news organization; and no more
putting extra burdens of proof on celebrities who sue news organizations.
All those extra-protections are im****tant and necessary for a press that's
actually doing what the Founding Fathers envisioned it doing (being an
even-handed, apolitical check on governmental power), but it's been
decades
since that's been the case!
Second, I'd like to see it become the case that NPR has to *demonstrate*,
on
an annual basis, via a publicly available re****t, it's *complete*
objectivity in its re****tage, and it's politically blind hiring of
re****ters
and commentators. Why should I, or any conservative, be made to pay for
the
overhead expenses of a news outlet that is slanted against my values; that
doesn't have a single Republican re****ting the news or conducting a talk
show? Especially when those values more or less represent the majority
view
in this country?? Either that station becomes fair and balanced (by
either
becoming apolitical, or even-handed in it's politics), or it should have
its
government funding jerked.
However, this last wish is far and away the least im****tant to me. There
are only two things that presently keep the liberal media going in my
view.
One is public assistence (in the form of taxpayer money!), and the other
is
a residual dependence upon the major networks and newspapers left over
from
when there were no conservative alternatives. As time goes by the former
isn't going to be able to take up the slack as the latter abates.
Btw, I noticed that Hilliary has already tried to buy her way into power
with the promise to give every child born on her watch a $5, 000
government
bond! Now there's a principled candidate.
I would also like to mention the passing of a great man, and the founder
of
the conservative political movement we see today, William F. Buckley. I
hope he's enjoying his reward with Jesus as I write this.
God bless
Chuck
|
