Comment

Comment by J.R. on March 25, 2011 at 8:34pm

Roma and Tom, my last comment was in reference to your earlier comment stating:

"When I was part of the grass roots organization (The Better Westside Project) we were up against a Republican Governor. We had a written letter from Admiral Mike Mullins and maps backing our side, but we could not get the local or national news media to publish those  documents.  One reporter kept telling his superiors that he had seen the documents, and they needed to be reported because the people needed to know...they removed him from the case.

The campaign specialist working on our case explained that what both parties do is tell the press "if you report the other side, we will take our business elsewhere", and money talks.  You see both parties spend lots of money during campaign season with the news media..."

Comment by J.R. on March 25, 2011 at 8:18pm

Well, that seems like coercion and suppression of free speech to me, either of which is unacceptable. The network should have stood on principle and rejected that company's advertising. Surely, some other company would have been happy to take that advertising time segment. They don't have to allow companies who are advertising to pick an advertising slot on the basis of their own political views---Democrat or Republican---or to control the programming accompanying it. Unfortunately, ethics and principles often lose out to money and power, in both business and government.  That's a major flaw the Tea Party is fighting against in many areas. 

Shining a bright and highly visible light on and speaking out against such practices can sometimes bring about change.  And, even communication, or even complaints, up the chain of command can help. I wouldn't think any media outlet would want to be seen as discriminating against anyone, but of course there are always the MSNBC's of the world out there and I think they are too wigged-out to even care.  

Comment by J.R. on March 25, 2011 at 7:05pm

Very interesting videos, Roma and Tom.  Thanks for posting them.  Ted Turner owned and controlled CNN for years and engaged in providing a liberal slant to news and programming.  Rupert Murdock, who owns FBC and FNC, provides news and analysis programming with a conservative slant, but allows a voice to be given to liberal views.  I assume he is a Republican. But, just as Murdock stated, "we try to be balanced." I believe Ted Turner was a Democrat. But, neither news channel/network is owned or run by the Republican Party or the Democrat Party.  It's interesting that the shows at FNC that draw the highest viewing audiences in the entire business are O'Reilly Report, Hannity, and the Glenn Beck show and none of those guys are registered Republicans.  And, CNN advertises on FOX because that is where the viewing audience is, especially in the evening where they get the highest ratings in every time frame.  

I worked in advertising for almost 5 years, and I observed that the money goes where it can get the most bang for a buck.  Sure, there will be some stations, like any other businesses, that support only their own political party's interests.  And, there are some that play dirty. But, big organizations like FNC, and probably still CNN, don't have any shortage of advertisers.  But, I have seen CNN advertise on FNC, perhaps to regain some of the viewing audience they've lost. I do know that, when I had Comcast television service, if I wanted to have the new Fox Business Channel, I would have to pay $20.00 more a month for it, whereas other networks' business programming was included in the overall package I had. That seemed discriminatory to me. 

But, unless or until we have net neutrality rules again, networks are free to provide the programming of their choice, and we are free to make our own choices as to what to view. We can vote with our remote control handsets, by changing the channel. 

Obama and the Democrats want to force net neutrality on us, so liberals can regain their lost audiences. That would take away the freedom of choice we now enjoy. And, it would apply to online news, as well.  Heaven help us if they succeed. 

Comment by J.R. on March 25, 2011 at 5:49pm

This makes ME want to scream!  It's amazing how Democrat progressives will dance around specific and accurate words to seek out the most obscure words they can find to describe and hide what they actually are, in fact, DOING...like engaging in WAR.  "Kinetic military action" more aptly describes a twenty-mile run or calisthenics.  War is motion all right... DEADLY motion. 

If a Republican were President now and doing what Obama is doing, liberal Democrats woud be taking to the streets, smashing windows, looting stores, turning over cars, and screaming their heads off.  Now, the blame tail has to be pinned on the Donkey-in-Chief," Weasel-Word" Obama.  This war is his baby and he owns it.

Comment by JL Gawlik on March 25, 2011 at 5:11pm

The white house sources are calling it a kinetic military action. This is one reason lawyers should not be elected into office, they twist and manipulate words to their advantage. I am really surprise ever war hating liberal is NOT screaming for the Congress to stop Obama right now. It is amazing to stand back and see all the double standards that that the liberal news media outlets allow.

Comment by J.R. on March 25, 2011 at 5:05pm

Libyan rebel commander admits his fighters have al-Qaeda links

Abdel-Hakim al-Hasidi, the Libyan rebel leader, has said jihadists who fought against allied troops in Iraq are on the front lines of the battle against Muammar Gaddafi's regime..."

Read more here: 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/liby...

Comment by J.R. on March 25, 2011 at 4:24pm

J.L., Like you said, Fox News does a very good job of fact checking and are quick to correct and retract anything wrongly reported or written, both in their news and in news provided by other news outlets.

And, yes, Obama is the Commander and Chief of the U.S. Military, The Constitution grants him that power, but it also limits that power by providing a check and balance on that power.  That check and balance was granted to the U.S. Congress, for the Constitution only allows the Congress to declare war. It requires the President to seek authorization, in the form of a Declaration of War, from the Congress. Nowhere in the Constitution is there any provision or any authorization for any President to circumvent the Congress and, of his own volition, engage the U.S. military in any war action.  Neither does it give the President authority to police any area of the world outside of the United States of America.  

I believe the War Powers Resolution passed by Congress and used by some presidents is unconstitutional.  If to be valid constitutionally, it would have to be added to the Constitution by Amendment, which it has never been. 

Obama has made his disdain for the Constitution and the powers of Congress clear.  And he has violated them in more than one instance.  What remains is for us to see whether Congress will hold him accountable, on behalf of the Amerian people, all of whom they were elected serve.   

Comment by J.R. on March 25, 2011 at 3:51pm

Here is a link to AQIM, which is Al Qaeda in the Maghreb.  Al Qaeda allied groups operate in many countries under different acronyms.

http://www.adl.org/terrorism/symbols/al_qaeda_maghreb.asp

Comment by J.R. on March 25, 2011 at 3:31pm

Roma and Tom, the captions are designed to focus our attention on and define the main issues and the online articles can go into more depth than can be done on a time-limited show.  And, you make a good point that you want to hear from both sides.  I do, too, in order to get the big picture of all that's in the news.  However, I disagree that the Republican Party controls FNC.  FNC provides conservative news and views, but do allow for liberal input, in order to be "fair and balanced," and they are open to debating issues and facts. I occasionally watch CNN for comparison on how news is being presented and find them to be firmly biased toward liberal views and observe that they tend to take a harder line with conservatives who are on their shows, especially on the Sunday news programming.  It's always good to read or listen with an open mind, then sythesize what you've learned and form your own opinions.  And also to do something else you do, which is to read and listen and then use what you read and heard as a stimulus for further inquiry. And I'm glad you share that information here. 

Comment by JL Gawlik on March 25, 2011 at 3:26pm

Read this article:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/25/world/middleeast/25egypt.html?_r=2

Apparently quiet a few conservatives were right. Why can't the news get it right, earlier?

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 23
• 24
• 25
• 26
• Next ›
• Page