Its funny, when caught, they really didn't meant what they said/wrote. They are bi-partisan,fair, or "moderate."

Typical comment by a lefty. They don't know a good man when they see one.

Yes Tina, this is all sorta fun. America is watching the MSM and is slowly sucking the profit from their business by walking away. I love the shock of CNN, when Gallup said they only can reach 200,000 on a good day.... ha ha Those are probably shut-in's who don't control the remote. Could someone please get rid of that pretentious boob on 'Countdown'....MSNBC is on its last legs too and its about time.

Well anyone who has a hint of intelligence and isn't a millionair with no morals is disgusted by bush, he disgusts me and I'm one of his biggest fans.

Exactly, Tina. The MSM is toast--their monopoly has ended. Thanks, Laura Ingraham, thanks, alternative media...

Well anyone who has a hint of intelligence can spell "millionaire," steve. I'm disgusted with you--go jump off a cliff! Peace

", he disgusts me and I'm one of his biggest fans."

BS meter just went off the charts

Hey Steve, glad to hear you say I'm one of his biggest fans. We always thought you were smart enough to see the light. -Peace-
ps: The rest of that post was a little confusing.

keefer looks like we've finally outnumbered the moonbats for a change.

I've been blogging a lot lately so I can put off doing my income taxes. Going to be paying a lot more this year, hope those democrats don't raise the rates.

*Chuckles*

This comes as no surprise to me. Anyone who spends any time with most reporters could hear similar things from them directly. Off the record of course. ;)

Both the left and the right are to blame for the poison that has replaced political dialogue.

But now that the Republicans control all the microphones they are taking it to new lows.

This email at ABC was perhaps an immature way to express a valid opinion. But what is truly disgusting is the immaturaty shown from all quarters.

Wade

dl, the moonbats have been showing up in all GOP-leaning blogs lately. Something to do with the prez's poll numbers, I suspect. The moonies will disappear come November...

Former first lady's donation aids son:

Katrina funds earmarked to pay for Neil Bush's software program

Read about it in the Houston Chronicle (today's issue). This is investigative journalism at it's best. (And yes I applauded all the White Water stories}

Why do I consider this important? It tells me a lot about the charactor of the Bush dynasty. These are very wealthy people. And the matriarch pulls a stunt like this to a) appear generous b) get a huge tax write off.And those poor people in N.O. are still not getting near enough help.

Shame on her.

Why did she invest in her sons business under the guise of a charitable donation.

I think we should all agree that the people of New Oreans need clothing and shelter a tad more than educational software.

She should make a dontation to the relief fund and invest in her sons business seperately.

dl,

What part confused you?

You know, you're free to challenge any facts in news *reporting*. You think that individual human beings don't have opinions of their own?

The honchos at FOX news have admitted all sorts of biases against anything they can label "liberal", and yet i'd be willing to bet that YOUR bias doesnt' allow you to see the simliarities.

This is the same broadcast network that did a story on Fat Cats contributing to the Republican Party "Under Cover". The story then cuts to one of President Bush's daughter holding a glass in her hand at the party, like she was drinking illegally. What does showing her with a glass in her hand (indicating under age drinking) have to do with a fund raiser? That's ABC News

Keefer, Bush's number have surged nearly 10 points from CBS to the Rasmussen poll in about 2 weeks. Its funny with all these meaningless polls of Americans, not even registerd or likely voters, and the oversampling of Demos and Indies.

Its sad when Cnn and MSNBC are only pulling about 200,000/100,000 viewers, respectively. It seems that all they have is a left-wing, writer with an agenda on their programs touting the latest conspiracy theory or the bush lied people died soup of the day special.

I'm surprised Green isn't crying that his comments were "taken out of context."

The honchos at FOX news have admitted all sorts of biases against anything they can label "liberal", and yet i'd be willing to bet that YOUR bias doesnt' allow you to see the simliarities.

Ah, but that's the difference right there. As you say, they "admit" it. Over and over again we're told by the main stream media that they are "unbiased." That there isn't any bias in their reporting and they're not "cherry picking" their stories.

As you say, every human being has bias, I know I do. What's wrong with admiting it and letting everyone know going in? That way you know what kind of slant to expect as you watch/listen. I mean it's not like you're going to listen to Rush Limbaugh and expect him to spout liberal ideals now are you? So why can't we have the media admit their own biases so we can look at their reports in the proper light?

Yes, Gozer, they admit their bias. You can see it in their tag line: "Fair and Balanced".

The whole idea of news is objective reporting of fact. There's a process. There are ethics. There's "journalistic integrity", or there's supposed to be. There are supposed to be references that can be checked.

These days what passes for "objectivity" is giving the Intelligent Design whackos equal time with Evolutionary Theory, no matter how ludicrous the former is. The media has been bullied by a raging rightwing that seeks to do anything to spoil whatever doesn't support their preconceived notions of what is Proper or Right.

This blog doesn't have any interest in fact unless it supports their side a priori.

That's called propaganda.

To decry a trait in others that you yourself possess is called hypocrisy.

This blog has both in spades.

Let's not forget, ABC is the same network where senior political director, Mark Halprin, was exposed as the author of a memo telling all ABC reporters and producers to favor Kerry in their coverage of the 2004 presidential race.

Both should've been summarily fired for their extraordinarily unprofessional conduct.

But the fact that John Green and Mark Halperin even felt comfortable sending out these communications (which would NEVER be tolerated at any honest news organization) shows just how deeply the corruption and political bias are ingrained at ABC News. I suspect Green's job is as safe as Halperin's was. Heck, he'll probably get a promotion.

FOX News should run ads from coast to coast emblazoned with this email, and Halperin's memo, and Dan rather's phony story, and a huge headline: "Now More Than Ever--FOX News--Fair and Balanced"

Is there actually anyone in here who doesn't think the media is biased???

If anything, they are biased toward NEGATIVE NEWS. I think we all get it. Point taken. Move on, please.

The media is biased towards "man bites dog" journalism because they're now in business not for the common good, but for the profits of the huge corporations who own them.

You know, huge corporations which are traditionally hippie liberal bastions.

"That's called propaganda.

To decry a trait in others that you yourself possess is called hypocrisy.

This blog has both in spades.
Posted by: GodOfBiscuits at March 24, 2006 03:48 AM

Apparently godofbiscuits is not aware of how the blog world works. This is a blog - owned and operated by admitted conservatives. Outwardly and openly stated. You are in THEIR livingroom, using their bandwidth, with their permission, and follow their rules. They can say and do whatever they like. Don't like it? GET YOUR OWN BLOG!!! If you come into someone else's livingroom with a different opinion, it is by the grace of the owner that you get to speak your opinion. Journalists, however, present their bias under the disguise of NEWS - not their own show, not a cable entertainment network, but the NEWS. That's wrong.

btw: Fox does NOT mislead by saying fair and balanced. THAT IS A SLOGAN!!

"Well anyone who has a hint of intelligence and isn't a millionair with no morals is disgusted by bush, he disgusts me and I'm one of his biggest fans.
Posted by: steve at March 23, 2006 07:18 PM"

Really mature, Steve. Like, really.

"But now that the Republicans control all the microphones they are taking it to new lows."

Wade: huh? that's a joke, right?

For the Wades and Biscuits that are posting here:

Get a Grip: For far too many years, the MSM, had
total domination in the Media world, and people were fed "pablum each and every day-that was tweaked and massaged-according to the personal points the 'powers that be' wanted to feed to the general public. No one dared question any of the news that went out daily, as it was the "only game in town"...liberal/leftist-pablum. WE HAD NO OTHER SOURCES FOR 'GETTING THE OTHER SIDE OF THINGS'...THAT IS, Until the rise of radio hosts like Rush, Hannity, and Fox at times. THIS, is when, the usual suspects-the liberal left-started crying "foul"...as they no longer had the ball game played ONLY IN THEIR PARK. IT WAS NOW, BEING
OPENED UP TO A CONSERVATIVE AUDIENCE OUT THERE, AS
IT HAD NOT BEEN BEFORE. Look at the actions of
Dan Rather, now this J. Green character, don't you
think their overt reporting, trying more to give their own opinions, was just a little over the top? Yeah, but NOW, that the Conservative public
have their own people, who give them a voice in the "very liberal/past MSM-that held "all the cards before"....We hear whinning, we hear-too unfair, we hear the Conservatives-'hold all the microphones'...GET OVER IT..."THE AUDIENCE SHARE,
SPEAKS FOR ITSELF...DO YOU REALLY THINK, THAT THE
NUMBERS WOULD BE AS HIGH AS THEY ARE, IF THERE WERE NOT MORE CONSERVATIVES, THAT "FINALLY HAVE THEIR VOICES BEING HEARD?"

You need only look at the 'drop off figures of not
only the news at the MSM outlets, but look at the
movies that are being filmed, showing the liberal
leftist leanings of the Hollywoodheads....and the
liberal rag/papers, that are continually losing
revenue, because people are turning their backs on
the "pablum of long ago"....Since I worked in the
media for many years, I can state with certainty,
that there "WAS, IS, AND ALWAYS HAS BEEN A LIBERAL
SLANT, AND THOSE THAT WERE CONSERVATIVES HAD TO BE
VERY QUIET ABOUT IT"...OTHERWISE, 'NO WORK'

The only whinning now, is that the liberal left,
tries to bash the conservative media, and pretends
that the 'conservative voice was always there-B.S.
it has only been opened up recently, and with the
world of bloggers, have we all been able to galvanize, "to get the other side out, and dispute
the lies, and slant, that the libs, keep trying to
push down our throats"...NO GO....IT'S A NEW GAME NOW FOLKS, GET OVER YOURSELVES, WE WILL NOT BE THE
"SILENT MAJORITY ANYMORE"

I maybe wasn't clear with my point. I actually come here to read the conservative news, just like many others. I'm just saying it's not necessary to bash the "liberal media" with every single story, because by doing that you are stooping to their level. You're always taking something that should be positive and adding that negative slant. Report the news, I love it, and I'm learning from it. That's why I keep coming back here, and for my love to argue.

Does John Green feel bad about writing the
email or does he feel bad about being caught?

All due respect Captain Ron, if you have read any of the liberal sites, and listened to the 'slanted
reporting(aka Dan Rather, Green, etal) you KNOW, that they have set out to banish all Conservatives
from the planet....We are tired of all this, and
have set out to reject it. It is not "stooping to
THEIR level, that would be just too, too low", we
instead, are finally speaking our minds, hearts,
and disputing the lies, innuendo and misstatements
be they, celebs, supposed reporters, or anyone else, who tries to slant our right as Americans to
be Conservatives, without fears anymore of the harassments that have come our way, since "coming out"

Oh, Annie, I thought "your side" was supposed to be all about truth and fairness and rationality and the rest of us were the extremists?

if that's true, Annie, then this site should WELCOME disagreement. The purpose of real argument is to change the nature of truth.

Thank you, Annie, for admitting that you have no interest other than the propagation of your faith.

"if that's true, Annie, then this site should WELCOME disagreement. The purpose of real argument is to change the nature of truth."

Godofbiscuits: Where in my post did I say that this sight, or any other one "on my side", did not welcome debate? Huh?, what's that? you made that part up? Yea, I noticed you do that alot. I was addressing your accusation of the use of bias by this sight versus that of journalists.

"Thank you, Annie, for admitting that you have no interest other than the propagation of your faith."

Feel free to prove where I said that. Can't? didn't think so. Don't put words in my posts that aren't there. If you can't quote ME correctly, when my post is just a few lines away from you, how do you get facts straight that you read elsewhere? Or, aren't facts important to you? It isn't important to journalist anymore either, hence the article about media bias. See how "your side" co-exists with that?

"Oh, Annie, I thought "your side" was supposed to be all about truth and fairness and rationality and the rest of us were the extremists?"

and, btw - I'm glad you agree with us.

Annie:

Wish you would have commented to Biscuit, about his statement-

"The purpose of real argument is to change the nature of truth"

To: The purpose of real argument is to exchange ideas if sensible people have them, NOT to change
the truth, as truth will always win out. Of course, the likes of the leftist/liberals, hasn't really been the "Truth", since they spew out the
rhetoric/lies/ like there's no tomorrow. This all
due to the fact, that they have No New Ideas, only
attacks on the GOP/President/ADM. and Conservatives, as their way of trying to sway the
public and try to win elections. We all know where that ended up, since they DO TRY TO CHANGE THE TRUTH.

Jo: I didn't respond to that particular remark because "the nature of truth" makes no sense. I was hoping that my post would point out that he/she didn't know what truth actually meant, since he/she couldn't even speak the truth about what I had said. I was probably too nuanced in my answer. :)
Your post, btw, was absolutely correct. Hate will blind people to new ideas and truthful debate.