what are you talking about Mark. The whole MSM lined up like ducks in a row behind the invasion. They have done study after study of this and more than 95% of the stories about the war in Iraq leading up to the war were positive and supported the war. That is pretty much chear leading.

Bush's approval is ~25% .... what are you expecting a cheering crowd?

Booing Bush is not bias.... its the norm

Bush approval is at 38% (check Rasmussen Reports) and the democratic controlled congress is at 16% (check Rasmussen Reports). So I am not sure what neologizer is on about.

However, it is sad when he approves of the supposedly unbiased media acting in such a partisan fashion. Is he so stupid that he can't comprehend that without impartiality the MSM will become a mere rump of its former self in terms of influence and relevance?

Just check out how well the newspapers and network news outlets are currently fairing.

Are you really that much of a hack that you approve of a biased and agenda driven media? Seriously? If so, you are one scary dude.

Mark,

I can't quite fathom what you think you have proven here. The fact that employees of a mainstream media company booed the president or cheered Karl Rove's resignation does not prove media bias - it merely suggests that the audiences in question were made up of liberals. They didn't boo or cheer on air, or in print. And nobody would deny that employees of mainstream media companies are liberal - not even far-leftists.

Traditional media outlets have generally tried to build clearly marked walls between reporting (intended to be objective) and opinion/editorial (not intended to be objective). Reporting is meant to be objective as a matter of professionalism, even if the reporter's personal views are miles from center. Brit Hume is a great example. When he was an ABC news reporter, you would have never known he was a conservative from his reports. But now that his job is commentary for Fox News, he is free to let his personal views take center stage.

You certainly have made good cases in the past where MSM outlets have demonstrated bias in reporting, by omitting reporting on certain events or by framing stories with the wording of headlines, to name a couple of examples. But this case seems to prove nothing in terms of bias.

what no reponse to the comment above mine?

I think that one puts liberal media bias to rest.

38%?
38%? -LOL talk about bias, picking the poll with the highest approval rating bush has had in what over to years ....Yeah no bias there

WSJ has him at 31,
Quinnipiac at 29
etc etc

but 38 - 29 whatever, Bush has been down there for years now and it says one thing - the majority of Americans think he's done a poor job...no bias just the facts

extra,

The bias comes out in the selection of stories and the emphasis within the stories - and I understand that as a liberal, like liberalT above, you simply won't see this. I know the liberal/left is impervious to facts in this matter...this is the 97th time I've brought this up, after all, and if you go back and read all of them and still come away unconvinced of a liberal bias, then you are just too far gone into liberalism to allow facts to interfere with your liberal faith.

Thank you Mark

As Editor of BlogsforBush has accuse others of being impervious to the facts, of bias and putting faith above fact.

Up until the 96th time you mentioned this I was skeptical but the 97th put me over the edge.

I believe it now - there's definitely bias out there!

Mark

there were actually people in the newsroom that were booing the president

But have we caught Joe in a lie here? He signed up at MSNBC around MID FEBRUARY 2003, the SOTU was January 29

Obviously the answer to left wing media bias is to kill the ONE neutral network FOXNEWS and to outlaw talk radio.

Note - even if (big if) FOXNEWS is conservative, it is one network in a sea of liberalism.

WVO - you'd be talking German now if it wasn't for us.

Kahn, I speak German too.

Just to keep the lying libs honest...neologizer originally said 25% approval...then when confronted with a higher more accurate number, comes back with two numbers like 31 and 29 to substantiate his original 25!...ha ha Too hard to keep straight for you libs huh. Pass on his postings..nothing to see there...similar to the AP.

From Joe's own website:

In April 2003, NBC hired Joe to host Scarborough Country on MSNBC, a current affairs show that is based in Florida.

Rasmussen Reports is a conservative polling company.

Nuff Said

Magnum - that must be why they are the most accurate pollster.

WVO - you wouldn't have a choice would you? One thing though, you're probably not Jewish. You people shopped them all off to Auschwitz. Not too many left, are there?

News Flash for ya WVO..

People will often visit their perspective employers sevral times prior to actually being accepting employment.

I know for fact people are often invited to view the in workings especially around the time big events are taking place..

But I'm sure you knew that..

oops..sorry for the mistakes... shoudl have proof read ..

remove "being"

should have been "inner workings"

Kahn,

If you think Fox News is neutral it goes to show your conservative bias. I think most media outlets are following the all mighty dollar as opposed a certain ideology. Although, there are organizations on both sides that promote an ideology i.e. Fox News, Talk Radio, NBC, Murdoch, the NY Times etc.

On your attack on Willem, that is equal to non-Americans say, "Hey you guys really butchered the native Americans and kept black people in bondage for centuries." When in fact, present day Americans had nothing to do with either.

Also, the French could say, "We really saved your ass in the Revolutionary War. If it wasnt for us, you would still be a colony!"

I don't really care about supposed liberal bias. Frankly, the Right's almost constant complaining it makes you sound like a bunch of pussies crying about the refs.

Still, though, I'm curious. What are all these doom and gloom pre-war stories about Iraq? Please, cite specific stories.

theblksheepwasright, read the story.
Furthermore, articles from that period report that they hired him in late February and talks started as early as mid February.

Only far left fanatics deny the liberal bias of the MSM...

They, and the kooks who show up here, can deny all they wish, but the bias is there. And who needs Al-Jazeera in America, when we've got CNN?

That is pretty much chear leading.

You're a talking-point lemming..and it's CHEERLEADING, you POS a$$hat!

Mark, since the drive-by media didn't produce some forged documents prior to the liberation of Iraq, that amounts to "cheerleading." Or, as liberalTHC would put it, "chear leeding."

Good for you, WVO--you speak German. You probably speak French too, as in, "Please don't hurt me, nice Jihadist--I surrender!"

Rasmussen Reports is a conservative polling company.

Nuff Said

Gee, big snake, I check out their website regularly, and I've never read that they're conservative. Oh, wait, they don't do push polls, like WaPo, ABC, CNN, Gallup, USA Today, et.al. They're, if you will, fair and balanced. So, in your world, that makes them conservative.

You are a parrot lemming tool, as are the rest of your boyfriends here.

Mark, why lock horns with the mindless? These failed abortions live in a world where their view is mainstream...

"Note - even if (big if) FOXNEWS is conservative, it is one network in a sea of liberalism."

Posted by: Kahn at August 16, 2007 09:15 PM

You are right Kahn. It's just one little conservative media network in a sea of ...........oh wait a minute, I just remembered a few others....

Filmed Entertainment - News Corporation
20th Century Fox
20th Century Fox Espanol
20th Century Fox Home Entertainment
20th Century Fox International
20th Century Fox Television
Blue Sky Studios
Fox Searchlight Pictures
Fox Studios Australia
Fox Studios LA
Fox Studios Baja
Fox Television Studios

Television - News Corporation
Fox Broadcasting Company
Fox Sports Australia
Fox Television Stations
FOXTEL
STAR

Cable Television owned by News Corporation
Fox Movie Channel
Fox News Channel
Fox Sports Digital
Fox Sports Enterprises
Fox Sports Espanol
Fox Sports Net
Fox Sports World
FUEL
FX
National Geographic Channel
SPEED Channel
Stats, Inc

Direct Broadcast & Satellite Television - News Corporation
BskyB
DIRECTV
FOXTEL
Sky Italia

Magazines - News Corporation
Inside Out
Donna Hay
News America Marketing
Smart Source
The Weekly Standard
Gemstar

Newspapers - News Corporation
Australasian region Newspapers:
Daily Telegraph
Fiji Times
Gold Coast Bulletin
Herald Sun
Newsphotos
Newspix
Newstext
NT News
Post Courier
Sunday Herald Sun
Sunday Mail
Sunday Tasmanian
Sunday Territorian
Sunday Times
The Advertiser
The Australian
The Courier Mail
The Mercury
The Sunday Mail
The Sunday Telegraph
Wall Street Journal
Weekly Times
United Kingdom region Newspapers:
News International
News of the World
The Sun
The Sunday Times
The Times
Times Education Supplement
Times Higher Education Supplement
Times Literary Supplement
TSL Education
United States region Newspapers:
New York Post

Books - News Corporation
Harper Collins Publishers
- Australia
- Canada
- Childrens Books
- United States
- United Kingdom
Regan Books
Zondervan

Other Investments - News Corporation
MySpace.com Profile
Festival Records
Mushroom Records
National Rugby League - Australia
News Interactive
News Outdoor
Nursery World

......and that's just a little drop in the slop bucket which makes up Murdoch's conservative propaganda machine.

Stop whining, sit back and enjoy while John Gibson berates you for not having enough white babies.

Fox news is neutral. I can't believe anyone can say that with a straight face..

Zero,

Want us to list all the organizations affiliated with CNN, ABC, CBS and NBC?

I don't think there's enough bandwidth...

Mark,

You didn't actually read my comment, did you?

I acknowledged that you had made good cases for media bias in your previous installments but argued that THIS post did not make a good case. Your example merely showed that some MSM employees displayed some personal emotions that suggest that they disliked the Bush administration.

Rather than respond to the argument, you gave me an unexpected rant about me being a lefty, liberal, left-leaning lib, immersed in liberalism due to my liberal faith. Yet, I'm not a liberal and my argument was not a liberal one.

Normally you make intelligent arguments based on what has actually been said. What's going on here?

I always find it amusing that the looney left just HATES conservative media. Oh, they cry and rant, and rave at the unjustness of it all. I haven't seen Bill O'Reilly call for the assassination of the President like Randi Rhodes did on Air America or the haters on the Daily Kos. I find it amusing that the haters on the looney left want to censor conservative media, yet don't want to censor the whackos on the left. I find it amusing that the looney leftists support vast communism and socialism, yet give no one credit for making something out of nothing in their lifetime. I find it really amusing that those left wing trolls still live in the USA. Could it be they are waiting for Hillary to give them her house?

"Want us to list all the organizations affiliated with CNN, ABC, CBS and NBC?

I don't think there's enough bandwidth..."

Posted by: Mark Noonan at August 17, 2007 01:13 AM

Mark-

You can list all the organizations you want, It doesnt make them Liberal. I was responding to one of your resident whiners who's spreading the lie that there's only one conservative media outlet in a sea of SUPPOSED liberal news. That's BS!!! Even if it was true (which it clearly is not) conservatives have more than their fair share of places to turn to get their feel good message as my post proved. All this "liberal media bias" crap that you and other conservatives have been spouting for the last 25 years is just a tactic known as "roughing the referee" so you can get favorable media coverage for your side. In the past it's worked well for you guys but not so much anymore. Just admit that it a political tactic because Bill Kristol and others in camp have already admitted it.

BTW are you watching Joe Scarborough this morning? It's interesting because he's now saying that bloggers, like you, have taken his words out of context and that MSNBC and NBC are very fair and balanced, (loved that part) and while there are democrats in house as well as republicans, the networks are very politically AGNOSTIC.

i think you may have been a little quick on 97. Looks like you're just chomping at the bit to get to 100.

Btw the greater part of this country booed Bush during the SOTU not just a couple of technicians in the back rooms of MSNBC .

So the left lists every media interest in the world that one man is into and labels them all conservative. Even channels showing movies decades old.

Well if its the whole world, then should we list all the liberal media outlets? All of them? Everything in China? Everything in Viet Nam? You pips.

"Well if it’s the whole world, then should we list all the liberal media outlets? All of them? Everything in China? Everything in Viet Nam? You pips."

Posted by: Kahn at August 17, 2007 11:11 AM

LOL Murdoch is in China to, doing business with them censoring the news, trading his "patriotism" and "ethics" for cold hard cash.
Aren’t you just proud? :-)

As I've always suspected, you have a tremendously flawed view of what the word liberal actually means. I don't blame you; I blame the nearly 3 decades long campaign of lies emanating from the (YES KIDS IT DOES EXIST) right wing media machine. You're just at fault for listening to and believing it.
China and Vietnam are hardly what anyone on the Left in this country would call "liberal". If anything they are authoritian regimes whose politics tips towards Socialism. This would make them Authoritian Leftist on the spectrum but hardly liberals. I don't go around calling you or Rupert Murdoch a Nazi, although you’re both hard right conservatives, as were the Nazis, now do I? You see the Nazis went over the top in their far right authoritarian leanings and they out did you both, let's hope. So I advise you to steer clear of calling China or Vietnam “liberal” if you don't want to come off looking foolish.

I suggest you do some reading. Try something other than the right wing " infoganda " sites or Limbaugh , Coulter , and Hannity. Find out about what the words liberal and conservative actually mean. Then take a political test. There are many on the web. I did many years ago and found out that I’m a Liberal/ minor Libertarian as I always suspected. I know big shock for you huh? LOL .If you do it I think you'll find, as I've always suspected about you, that you are an Authoritarian Conservative.

Actually if you were born in China I have no doubt you would have been a model Communist, because at heart you seem to be a classic Authoritarian and any Establishment will do for them.

Look kooks, Keefy Dobermann makes up for all of the so-called conservative media. Let's be intellectually honest here, this guy, other than the fact he's aching to come out of the closet, and that he still lives with his Mum (who drives him to work every day) can't even give credit where credit is due. At least Fox news brings on libs to even out the flow of political rhetoric....sheeez!

Please name one conservative that's been on Hardboiled or Dobermann in the past month....that's right...NONE.

Now, on the other hand, H&C & Bill-O invite RFK Jr., use Bob She's Not My Hooker Beckel, Susan My Girl Estridge and others to co-host, and let's not forget how many black activists with a chip on their shoulder they have on.

Again, I'll reiterate my point. Your constant whining about liberal bias makes you seem like pussies. Grow up, crybabies.

Zero - nope. You're deluded. I actually travel quite a bit. But more to the point here in the USA FOXNEWS isn't even conservative - its neutral. It just seems conservative compared to the blatantly liberal press. A huge percentage of the press is card carrying campaign contributing Democrat. NPR has gotten into trouble several times for sharing donor lists with the Democrats. CBS uses forged documents to attack Bush. And at MSNBC they boo the president in the control room.

You are, well full of crap.

Kahn-

I've traveled all over the world as well; I don't see how that pertains to your point.
I see you're getting pissed because you know what I'm saying is the truth. Fox is as conservative as they come.
Don't believe me; just listen to a plethora of former Fox employees who'll tell you the same. They'll tell you about the "daily memos" which come from News Corp with advice from the RNC. These memos regularly instruct Fox's on air "talent" how to spin stories to appear favorable to republicans and negative to democrats.

Rupert Murdoch himself said that he's a conservative who did all that he could through his media empire to support Bush's invasion of Iraq. He actually said that on camera in Switzerland during a panel discussion.

And then there's Roger Ailes, president of Fox News Channel. He's worked on the campaigns of Nixon, Reagan, and George H. W. Bush. Impartial? HA!!! He also describes himself as a conservative and regularly rips into Democrats from any podium he can waddle up to.

If you travel a lot then come here to New York City where I live and see what we think of your "impartial " news network. We think it's a joke. I even know people who work at Fox so I think I have a little more of an inside story than you think my friend. Funny, did you see Joe Scarborough this morning DEFEND MSNBC's impartiality on his show? Quite a sight my friend.

No - I DON'T know what you're saying is the truth. The press picks and slants stories to argue for liberal and democrat advantage. The press does not pretend to be neutral. The press shares lists with the Democratic party and contributes heavily to it. The press uses forged documents.

Now yes, if that is your standard of neutrality then Fox would appear conservative. Wouldn't it? And note. Most of the Fox staff donates to Democrats also.

Navydud-

Actually a media source breakdown regularly gives conservatives a 14 to 16 % advantage in camera time on Hardball. Now if these "conservatives” are getting their butts kicked while they're on the show that's another story.
Personally I think Matthews is a major gasbag to whoever is sitting in front of him so it would be wise for a guest to pack along an oxygen mask to compensate for the elevated CO2 emissions coming from Matthews' blowhole. With that being said though, he may be a little creepy at times, but for the most part he's fair and an equal opportunity offender.

Olbermann on the other hand is completely partisan and he doesn't care who knows it and WE LOVE THAT ABOUT HIM!!!! YES!! It's about time this country had someone who has the balls to tell it like it is to the Right. The Right has had an army of lesser Keith's blather on for a quarter of a century now, so I'm in no way perturbed that we now have one working for us. No apologies. Enough said. Now if you want to attack Olbermann’s masculinity then I must remind you that your hero Limbaugh chickened out of Vietnam medical deferment because he had a periodontal cyst. What’s that you ask? It’s a slightly painful PIMPLE ON HIS ASS. My uncle had one when he went in and the military treated it, then they sent him to a nice secluded little spot in southeast Asia to convalesce called Kai San. To bad they didn’t pump Limbaugh full of Oxy Contin after he had his lanced. It might have given him some balls.

So now a question for you. In this "Fair and Balanced" network you defend, how many shows does it have that are headed by bona fide liberals? I don't mean co-host either. As we all know Colmes is a moderate and has described himself as such. How many shows are hosted by liberals on FOX? Hmmm?

I do fear the crickets will chirp forever before we have an answer.

Kahn-

You're not addressing any points I've made about Fox, you're just engaging in obtuse "they do it so we gotta do it to" justifications. Nice ignoring the admission he made in Switzerland btw.

There's no purpose in arguing the point any further with you. The chip on your shoulder about being a conservative in a nation you see as an ocean of liberalism is just to great. That last post of yours tells me that Fox could slant as far to the right as it wants and you'll just cheer it on. Personally I couldn't care less how far to the right Fox is. It's here and probably here to stay regrettably. I just want conservatives to be honest with themselves and finally admit Fox for what it is. A right wing network headed by a man with right wing sympathies who has acquired literally hundreds of media outlets to broadcast his right wing views. He's admitted that much, why can't you?

Oh and my condolences on that 1/2 hour News Hour cancelation. I really thought it those guys stood a chance against Jon Stewart............... BWAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!

Chirp this punk!

WTF are you smokin?

You must be using a media source by the Michael Moore Institute of Lobotomies as your source.

I watch Hardboiled regularly, and you son, are full of BS....get your facts straight. Unless of course, you're basing your stats on Pat Buchannan....bwaaaaaaa!!

I must agree with Kahn that "You are, well full of crap."

So go on back to the Daily Hogs where you belong with the other sh*t eatin fools....please, and take Congressive and the other kooks with you!!

BTW, here's a quote from Chrissy Matthews you may like: "[e]verybody sort of likes the president, except for the real whack-jobs"; and that, if he succeeds in creating a democracy in Iraq, Bush "belongs on Mount Rushmore."

Whack jobs? Could he be talking about his liberal buds?

Get out the chisel...punk!

Navydud,

Such anger..........my my.

Aren't you shooting down your own point that Matthews favors liberals by using that quote?

Looks like your anger has gotten the better of you. Cool down.

Cool down...I'm just getting started and if you can't take what you dish out...punk...go home.

It appears the allure of blogging has emboldened you to the point in which you're rants become, well, rants....bwaaaaa!

Matthews [is] a lib...kook, but even he knows that if Iraq does turn out for the better, he doesn't want to be affiliated with your kind...no, he has a future, even if it is being a lib host. Remember, he's paid for his work.....sheeez!

Again, I'll reiterate my point. Your constant whining about liberal bias makes you seem like pussies.

We seem like you, steveGA? Wow.

Whoever listed all those FOX networks as conservative--you are an idiot. FOX News has a right lean to it, but most of those others put on whatever pays the bills.

Guys, why waste your time with these a$$hats? They are all Bill Moyers wannabees...

Navydad-

Oh I can take throwing, it’s just you’re not throwing that much.

Your circular logic is entertaining to watch though. We’re all having a great time reading it. I’m sure this “logic” is the result of the over consumption of conservative media. Personally, I think you may be getting a contact high off Limbaugh's gas.

Let’s see if we can wade through your logic:

Mathews is a liberal, who works for an openly liberal network, and he gives over access to liberals on his show at the expense of conservatives, so that he can keep favor with liberals and the network as he trashes liberals in the way that you’ve just stated, because he wants to keep his job at the openly liberal network who itself is in league with the liberal establishment.

WHAAAAAA???????

What ever you’re watching or smoking that gives you such ridiculous ideas should come with a Surgeon General’s Warning.

Greta Van Sustern.

http://www.polisci.ucla.edu/faculty/groseclose/Media.Bias.8.htm

Kahn-

Greta Van Sustern???

LMAO!!!!

Look, just because she was against tort reform and didn't want to impeach Clinton on Constitutional grounds hardly makes her a Liberal shouting her views from the rooftops of Fox. In fact all she's known for is being Nancy Grace's less evil twin sister. When she starts doing shows that showcase her "supposed liberal" views in topical debates then I'll give that one to you.

http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-liberalmedia.htm

William Kristol, "I admit it: the liberal media were never that powerful, and the whole thing was often used as an excuse by conservatives for conservative failures."

Pat Buchanan,"The truth is, I've gotten fairer, more comprehensive coverage of my ideas than I ever imagined I would receive." He further conceded: "I've gotten balanced coverage and broad coverage -- all we could have asked… For heaven sakes, we kid about the liberal media, but every Republican on earth does that."

Just one more time.......

Greta Van Sustern

LMAO !!! You guys crack me up.....LMAO!!!!

That's it; I'm signing out now. If this is the "ammunition" you guys have for your arguments it's too easy. Arguing with you just makes feel like I'm clubbing baby seals at this point.

Nice try though.

LOL

But there are only so many nightime shows, and she is an acknowledged liberal. You give just SOME of the examples. So - I gave you one.

Now from all the other networks. All of them. You give me ONE.

Hey, or maybe even a TV show on one of the broadcast networks that is conservative? You know, like ???

The only seal that's been clubbed is Zero.

Anyone here believe for a second that this freak doesn't use Dennis Kookspinach as his baseline for analysis?

"Mathews is a liberal, who works for an openly liberal network, and he gives over access to liberals on his show at the expense of conservatives, so that he can keep favor with liberals and the network as he trashes liberals in the way that you’ve just stated, because he wants to keep his job at the openly liberal network who itself is in league with the liberal establishment."

Zero is proof that liberals evolved from snakes.

Wait a second... they evolved?

"Hey, or maybe even a TV show on one of the broadcast networks that is conservative? You know, like ???"

Posted by: Kahn at August 17, 2007 11:07 PM

You really are serious?

Like?????

Now mind you I'm gonna tie one hand behind my back while I do this and not even mention the 24 hour a day conservative tripe on Fox News.

I'll make it easy on you and give you just the shows hosted by undeniable conservatives ok.

You mean shows hosted by the likes of......

MSNBC
Joe Scarborough
Tucker Carlson

CNN
Glen Beck
Lou Dobbs
Nancy Grace (also on HLN)
contributor J.C. Watts Jr

CNBC
Larry Kudlow
Maria Bartiromo (and she's on NBC as well)
Donny Deutsch

PBS
Tucker Carlson: Unfiltered (yes believe it or not on liberal PBS)

That's not even close to all of them and I steered clear of the Fox Empire.

i'm getting tired of this, you're just making it too easy now.
For your own sake just tune into Fox, get your feel good "news" and let it go.

None of those people are conservative. Only to your socialist eyes would they be considered so.

Ya know Zero, if your baseline is Michael Moore, then I agree, but you're just plain friggin nuts!!
It appears you're simply pulling these names outayerars and serving them up as fact...BS!

The only one you're impressing is yourself....LOL!

"i'm getting tired of this, you're just making it too easy now."

Making what too easy...lying thru your teeth ya little lyin sack O crap. No one believes a thing you've posted and I'll bet even Congressive and a few other libs here would question your data collecting methods.

This is what you sound like:

Gee, you conservatives are suckers, so I'll throw out some blatant lies and see who bites.

The only fool here is you son....LOL!

None of those people are conservative. Only to your socialist eyes would they be considered so.

Posted by: Kahn at August 18, 2007 11:13 AM

Kahn-

Glen Beck
"I am a conservative who doesn't happen to be a Republican".

Tucker Carlson,
"I don't know what you consider conservative," Carlson said, "but I'm not much of a liberal, as least as the word is currently defined. For instance, I'm utterly opposed to abortion, which I think is horrible and cruel. I think affirmative action is wrong. I'd like to slow immigration pretty dramatically. I hate all nanny-state regulations, such as seat belt laws and smoking bans. I'm not for big government. I think the U.S. ought to hesitate before intervening abroad. I think these are conservative impulses. So by my criteria, Bush isn't much of a conservative."

Joe Scarborough,
Scarborough was regarded as a reliable conservative while he was in Congress, receiving a 95 percent life time rating from the American Conservative Union. Scarborough had a conservative voting record on economic, social, and foreign policy issues, but was seen as moderate on environmental issues and human rights causes.

Lou Dobbs,
Dobbs once described himself as a "lifelong Republican," but has stated that he has switched to being an unaffiliated independent populist, as he no longer openly supports any party. However, he made a donation of $1,000 to the Bush-Cheney campaign in January 2001.

Larry Kudlow,
This one's a little personal for me because I happen to know him through his wife and they both would be shocked to know that he is not a conservative. In fact Larry has told me about a year ago, in a short discussion I had with him at a party, that he's an unapologetic neo-conservative and he supports supply-side economics. Dispite that he's a pretty nice guy.

These may not be the conservatives that you like, especially since they've all jumping ship on George W. Bush, but I assure you they are conservatives and they describe themselves as such.

If they're not conservatives in your eyes, then I'd sure would like to know what you think makes a conservative.

Navydud-

I can see it's getting to you.

"Making what too easy...lying thru your teeth ya little lyin sack O crap. No one believes a thing you've posted and I'll bet even Congressive and a few other libs here would question your data collecting methods."

Instead of name calling why don't you go ahead and refute one "lie" that I've supposedly told. Just one.

Calling someone a liar insist refutting a lie. It's just making you look desparate.

"I haven't seen Bill O'Reilly call for the assassination of the President like Randi Rhodes did on Air America or the haters on the Daily Kos."

Uffy-

No he advocates the death of many citizens not just one.

Bill ORielly (quote)
Hey, you know, if you want to ban military recruiting, fine, but I'm not going to give you another nickel of federal money. You know, if I'm the president of the United States, I walk right into Union Square, I set up my little presidential podium, and I say, "Listen, citizens of San Francisco, if you vote against military recruiting, you're not going to get another nickel in federal funds. Fine. You want to be your own country? Go right ahead."
And if Al Qaeda comes in here and blows you up, we're not going to do anything about it. We're going to say, look, every other place in America is off limits to you, except San Francisco. You want to blow up the Coit Tower? Go ahead."

"I haven't seen Bill O'Reilly call for the assassination of the President like Randi Rhodes did on Air America or the haters on the Daily Kos."

Uffy-

No he advocates the death of many American citizens.

Bill ORielly (quote)
Hey, you know, if you want to ban military recruiting, fine, but I'm not going to give you another nickel of federal money. You know, if I'm the president of the United States, I walk right into Union Square, I set up my little presidential podium, and I say, "Listen, citizens of San Francisco, if you vote against military recruiting, you're not going to get another nickel in federal funds. Fine. You want to be your own country? Go right ahead."
And if Al Qaeda comes in here and blows you up, we're not going to do anything about it. We're going to say, look, every other place in America is off limits to you, except San Francisco. You want to blow up the Coit Tower? Go ahead."

Just look at yourself Zero, the only one that believes this garbage is you...pathetic.

Sorry Kahn, you're right, they haven't evolved.

"Calling someone a liar insist refutting a lie. It's just making you look desparate."

I callz em' like I seez um...punk!

BTW, I haven't seen a post from your kook buddies on this thread, supporting your so-called facts....snicker...snicker!

Could it be they don't care to get involved with a lying sack O crap?

Thank you.
You've just given us another post of name calling which is going nowhere fast.

Again you haven't refutted one point I've ever made or even exposed anything I've said here as an outright lie. Why haven't you done this? Because you can't, it isn't a lie. Typical to this blog, when you guys find yourself out of ammunition (facts) to prove your points, you just degrade into name calling.

What I'm saying here about the media isn't radical or outrageous. It just conflicts with the view you've inherited, ironically from the conservative voices in the media, that conservatives are an under represented voice in this country. The logic you and fellow conservatives present on this matter is completely circular and doesn't even stand up under unbiased examination.

Look Fox News has conservative leanings and that's well known by everyone. Most of the cable networks have bowed to conservative pressure and incorperated a host of conservatives into their programming. I'm not saying it's a bad thing I'm just saying it's the reality. I've given you quotes from conservatives (Bill Kristol / Pat Buchanan to name just two) that prove even THEY agree in principle with what I'm saying here.

Again you've never refutted or exposed anything I've said here as a blatant lie. Any quote I've given is easily found. Look them up.

So just continue with the name calling because you're completely out of facts at this point.

Period.

Okay...A-hole.

We'll just wait and see if any of your kook buddies come to defend your lies.
crickets.......

Nothingdud,

"We'll just wait and see if any of your kook buddies come to defend your lies. "

Again you came up short, haven't proven anything to be a lie.

The case is closed on you.

Wait a second zero - we haven't refuted one point? What points? You made claims. We disagreed. Since we both have our opinions nothing was proven. But:

I did post the link to (liberal) UCLA study that concluded that there was liberal bias.

And the fact is that most reporters, and producers, and directors, and writers, are card carrying donation making Democrats.

And liberals at MSNBC booed the president.

And liberals at that Seattle paper cheered Rove quiting.

And PBS has been caught more than once sharing donor lists with the Democratic Party.

And CBS used forged documents to attack President Bush.

Now THERE are some facts.

No he advocates the death of many American citizens.

Maybe he's threatening the citizens of SF, IQoflessthanzero--don't you think you and your butt-buddy, stevomoron, should alert the FBI and Secret Service.

Disclaimer: Although I called IQoflessthanZero and stevomoron "butt-buddies," I was in no way, shape, or form asserting that the two of them engage in anal sex. I am a peace-lovin' lib-hatin' good-ol' boy who loves his God, his wife, his daughter, his dogs, and his cat, and would enjoy nothing more than seeing all libs in this country move to the soon-to-be Islamic Republic of Canadastan...

Zero,

You're relentlessly confusing the issue - or, perhaps, you are just confused?

Liberal bias is immaterial in editorial content; you can have 100 conservative pundits to 1 liberal pundit and that wouldn't mean there is a conservative bias in the MSM - the bias comes in on the selection and emphasis of stories.

Newsroom hacks who would boo a Republican President are going to be overly eager to find anything bad about said Republican and under eager to find out anything bad about his opponents - what this institutional bias comes out as is the huge imbalance between good and negative news stories on the burning issues of the day - the economy, the liberation of Iraq, etc. It comes out in things like when we get a report of robust GDP growth, the MSM brackets it with some "expert" who warns that tough times are right ahead in spite of the good economic news.

You're talking about O'Reilly (who isn't, by the way, a conservative; he's a man with some conservative views, but he is no conservative), I'm talking about the nearly anonymous AP writers who get to decide what will be in the news today.

Zero,

Like this from Reuters:

Inflation gauge ticks up as trade gap narrows

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Rising energy costs drove up U.S. producer prices last month, while the trade deficit unexpectedly narrowed in June on stronger exports, according to reports on Tuesday suggesting the Federal Reserve will remain cautious about cutting interest rates.

Why write a headline like that? Why note write it like this:

US Exports Increase, Inflation Inches up

Strong US exports narrowed the US trade deficit more than expected, while rising energy costs forced producer prices higher.

Same story, same facts - totally different emphasis. Back when Clinton was President, the news on the economy was usually pitched as I've set it in the re-write...whenever a GOPer is in office, the economic news is written like the Reuters story...doom and gloom brought forward to damp down any good feelings about the actual good news.

That, my friend, is the liberal bias.

Mark - if that is your best example of liberal bias I think you are a very very confused man. The text is almost identical. What about the first version don't you like?
I simply do not understand where this total different emphasis is. The only thing I can see is that in your version the positive thing comes first. Surely anyone with half a brain could figure out.. (oh whoops)