Posted on 01/16/2005 2:50:11 PM PST by italianquaker
Trying to decide on a subscription Thanks in advance
Seems conservative.
thank you
As long as you're intelligent enough to differentiate news from opinion disguised as news, exposure to any newspaper won't hurt you. Although it may really irritate you after a while.
must use money wisely and not support leftist agendas with subscriptions
I got the SF Comicle free for several years. I was worth more as an advertiser's target than I was as a paid subscriber. Then, the last time they called to offer me a paid subscription, I said I didn't need to pay if I was getting it free. The freebie stopped shortly thereafter.
You've got a computer. Don't limit yourself to any one source for news and opinion.
I lived in Miami for a couple years and, as I recall,
the paper was not particularly liberal. To me it doesn't
matter what the editorial page says - it's just when a la
N.Y. Times the opinions and bias creep into the main text
of "hard news." This can be very tricky because bias can
be shown not just by what is printed but by what is omitted. The best thing to do before you commit to a subscription is to buy a few issues at the stand and make
up your own mind.
I don’t know when was the last time you lived in Miami, but I’ve been here for my whole life, and the Herald is very Liberal.
Examples:
- Jason Collins admits he’s gay, gets coverage (Frontpage), and Greg Cote calls Dolphins’ receiver Mike Wallace a “bigot and intolerant” for the following quote: “All these beautiful women in the world and guys wanna mess with other guys SMH...”. A Conservative would argue that he did not say anything wrong or hateful. A Conservative would argue that by labeling him a bigot and intolerant, Greg Cote and others are doing a disloyalty to his first amendment right to free speech by silencing him and others based on (supposed) shame and guilt and forcing them to think a certain way.
Also, they ran the following poll: Should Dolphins receiver Mike Wallace be forgiven for his insensitive tweet about Jason Collins?
Yes, we all make stupid remarks
No, it showed surprising ignorance
Link: http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/04/29/3371173_should-dolphins-receiver-mike.html
You see how the “Yes” option reinforces this detriment to the first amendment right? Even if you don’t think he said anything wrong, the Liberal Herald wants you to believe that it was a “stupid remark.” It does not give the reader another option for the people who felt Mike Wallace never said anything wrong in the first place and judging from the comments left in that link, a lot of people were very critical of the first option and the lack of another option. Now, a Conservative has no problems with Gay people, but they do have a problem with people being forced to think a certain way, which is how Liberals think is the right way to get others to accept. A Conservative would say that people should only be judged by the content of their character.
- When Hugo Chavez died, they ran articles that would make you believe he was a great person. Now, that is perfectly within their right, but they did not mention any of harm that Hugo Chavez has done to his country by impoverishment. They do not mention how his multi-decade “Presidency” is a threat to our 4/yr or 8/yr term based on elections. They talked about how Chavez provide things such as universal health care for his country, a topic of hot debate in America which Conservatives are largely against because it goes against the Constitution.
- Gun-Control debate: very largely for gun-control. They don’t ever present the gun-rights argument or the fact that it is a part of our Constitutional freedom. They sensationalize shootings, but never mention the reason why gun-rights exist in the first place (to protect us from the Castros, Hitlers, Stalins, etc etc ETC). There are hundreds of deaths each day due to reasons other than gun violence, but like with most media outlets, Americans are lead to believe that Gun Violence is what is occurring most often and should be dealt with immediately.
They had a political cartoon that has a Conservative wife talking to her Liberal husband about the deaths of the babies from the Gosnell case (which they didn’t give much coverage to because they are pro-abortion). The wife is talking about how cruel the deaths of innocent new-born babies are. The Husband stays quiet until he rebuts that many people die from guns every day, while the wife responds with “DON’T TREAD ON MY RIGHTS!!!” The cartoon is meant to insult the Conservatives supposed hypocritical logic towards gun-rights and abortion.
What’s wrong with this cartoon is this: the Conservative would argue that the tools that Dr. Gosnell used were NOT responsible for the babies’ death, as is implied by the Liberal’s response to his feelings toward’s guns. It was Dr. Gosnell’s actions that resulted in the deaths of these babies, not the tools that he used. But the Liberal thinks that it is guns that are responsible for the deaths of people, not the evil people who use guns to harm others.
One of the very basic principles of the Liberal that they would never admit to outright is this: they believe people are inherently good, but the tools that mankind creates are evil. Guns are evil, not people. They believe all mankind can be free of living without fear of harm and death if you take away their freedoms to act in such an evil manner. If you know about Sharia Law, it is based on the same principles. If you get caught stealing, they cut off your hand, because your hand is what caused you to steal, not your free thought. You are inherently good and it is your arm that must be disposed of in order to realize the goodness in your heart.
-Benghazi/Extortion 17: no coverage on the front page, a small article in the 3rd page of the first section. They don’t want anyone to think anything bad about BHO, HRC, or any other Democrat for that matter. They don’t want the thought that perhaps our Pres is selling this country to the people who hate us in the name of “winning the hearts and minds of our enemies.”
I could go on, but all you have to do is look through the Miami Herald and pin point coverage that furthers the Liberal agenda and does not even offer the viewpoint from the Conservative side.
I don’t know when was the last time you lived in Miami, but I’ve been here for my whole life, and the Herald is very Liberal.
Examples:
- Jason Collins admits he’s gay, gets coverage (Frontpage), and Greg Cote calls Dolphins’ receiver Mike Wallace a “bigot and intolerant” for the following quote: “All these beautiful women in the world and guys wanna mess with other guys SMH...”. A Conservative would argue that he did not say anything wrong or hateful. A Conservative would argue that by labeling him a bigot and intolerant, Greg Cote and others are doing a disloyalty to his first amendment right to free speech by silencing him and others based on (supposed) shame and guilt and forcing them to think a certain way.
Also, they ran the following poll: Should Dolphins receiver Mike Wallace be forgiven for his insensitive tweet about Jason Collins?
Yes, we all make stupid remarks
No, it showed surprising ignorance
Link: http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/04/29/3371173_should-dolphins-receiver-mike.html
You see how the “Yes” option reinforces this detriment to the first amendment right? Even if you don’t think he said anything wrong, the Liberal Herald wants you to believe that it was a “stupid remark.” It does not give the reader another option for the people who felt Mike Wallace never said anything wrong in the first place and judging from the comments left in that link, a lot of people were very critical of the first option and the lack of another option. Now, a Conservative has no problems with Gay people, but they do have a problem with people being forced to think a certain way, which is how Liberals think is the right way to get others to accept. A Conservative would say that people should only be judged by the content of their character.
- When Hugo Chavez died, they ran articles that would make you believe he was a great person. Now, that is perfectly within their right, but they did not mention any of harm that Hugo Chavez has done to his country by impoverishment. They do not mention how his multi-decade “Presidency” is a threat to our 4/yr or 8/yr term based on elections. They talked about how Chavez provide things such as universal health care for his country, a topic of hot debate in America which Conservatives are largely against because it goes against the Constitution.
- Gun-Control debate: very largely for gun-control. They don’t ever present the gun-rights argument or the fact that it is a part of our Constitutional freedom. They sensationalize shootings, but never mention the reason why gun-rights exist in the first place (to protect us from the Castros, Hitlers, Stalins, etc etc ETC). There are hundreds of deaths each day due to reasons other than gun violence, but like with most media outlets, Americans are lead to believe that Gun Violence is what is occurring most often and should be dealt with immediately.
They had a political cartoon that has a Conservative wife talking to her Liberal husband about the deaths of the babies from the Gosnell case (which they didn’t give much coverage to because they are pro-abortion). The wife is talking about how cruel the deaths of innocent new-born babies are. The Husband stays quiet until he rebuts that many people die from guns every day, while the wife responds with “DON’T TREAD ON MY RIGHTS!!!” The cartoon is meant to insult the Conservatives supposed hypocritical logic towards gun-rights and abortion.
What’s wrong with this cartoon is this: the Conservative would argue that the tools that Dr. Gosnell used were NOT responsible for the babies’ death, as is implied by the Liberal’s response to his feelings toward’s guns. It was Dr. Gosnell’s actions that resulted in the deaths of these babies, not the tools that he used. But the Liberal thinks that it is guns that are responsible for the deaths of people, not the evil people who use guns to harm others.
One of the very basic principles of the Liberal that they would never admit to outright is this: they believe people are inherently good, but the tools that mankind creates are evil. Guns are evil, not people. They believe all mankind can be free of living without fear of harm and death if you take away their freedoms to act in such an evil manner. If you know about Sharia Law, it is based on the same principles. If you get caught stealing, they cut off your hand, because your hand is what caused you to steal, not your free thought. You are inherently good and it is your arm that must be disposed of in order to realize the goodness in your heart.
-Benghazi/Extortion 17: no coverage on the front page, a small article in the 3rd page of the first section. They don’t want anyone to think anything bad about BHO, HRC, or any other Democrat for that matter. They don’t want the thought that perhaps our Pres is selling this country to the people who hate us in the name of “winning the hearts and minds of our enemies.”
I could go on, but all you have to do is look through the Miami Herald and pin point coverage that furthers the Liberal agenda and does not even offer the viewpoint from the Conservative side.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.