Posted on 10/21/2006 8:14:28 AM PDT by ricoshea
Because a large part of the clueless Center continues to get their news from those sources and they are being LIED to! Fortunately, with the dawn of the internet, the Old Media is losing it's grip and folks have far more options for news, but the MSM still has a strong reach and influence.
Why would they deny it?
In fact, they are so overconfident,
they are *bragging* about it.
Look for that list to be shorter next week after the Media Marxists have the leaker taken out and put in fornt of a wall for treason against the DNC.
You're buying into the leftists' mantra. When most of what you see is skewed 90-10 left, 50-50 appears right. That is what they are counting on.
Because 'the pen is mightier than the sword', and our enemies have recognized this fact for a long time. We aren't born with the innate ability to differentiate all truth from all untruth. All lies are dangerous.
MSM still has a strong reach and influence.
I have always ignored them. In fact, I get more liberal stories from FR than I ever did before. It is interesting what articles show up here. Some are really funny. Some are really scary. Alway a good mix.
Do you really think that Fox News is only 50-50 conservative or right? I am not disputing it just would not have thought that.
"meta-narrative"
What an antispetic term for the party line.
I like that! Very good.
Fox News has lots of liberals.
Alan Colmes to start.
They also invite lots of liberals as guests.
Other than Brit Hume and maybe Hannity, where are the conservatives?
In their news presentation, yes. When they present the same (left serving) item of political significance as the other networks, they at least appear to try to find an answering take from the right. Their opinion programs are clearly labeled as such, unlike a large percentage of the network "news" programs. You know that O'Reilly is going to come up about 70-30 conservative in his personal opinions, yet he will ask the hard questions of conservatives. Compare that with Chrissy the Sissy and his ilk, who claim to be unbiased but have never (to my knowledge) seriously challenged a hard left guest.
I wish more of Fox's talking heads would be like Brit Hume and Michael Barone and correct the lies the libs often get away with on that channel.
Listening to the lib liars go unchallenged on FoxNews is annoying me. I watch Fox less often than I used to. I'm finding that I prefer to listen to Rush Limbaugh or Mark Levin.
A television viewer has to be a 18-hour a day news junkie to figure out the real story. I don't have that much free time. "Fair and balanced" is nice, but so is good old fashioned reporting of the facts, instead of the Dem talking points.
John Gibson is generally ok.
Rarely can I watch Greta.
Just seeing the face of Shepard Smith...I grab the remote for a fast click.
Excellent point, JimRed!
not worried...we have "secret meetings' with God every Sunday nationwide...
Choose your friends wisely!
By the way, thanks for your service, from a 60's kiddie cruiser squid.
It seems like I post the same thing over and over. Mark Halperin, Political Director for ABC news, was caught passing info on to Clinton during his first election. His father was involved in the Pentagon Paper scandal and now runs a Soros group. His brother was a Clinton speech writer and now works for another Soros group. Halperin is the same one who sent emails during 2004 election to go after republicans more than democrats. This man should not be in that position. I don't understand where the outrage is. Google Mark Halperin and Morton Halperin. Would the left let G. Gordon Liddy's son be a political director somewhere? I don't think so.
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.