Why liberals are in denial about talk radio and tv (Cal Thomas)

TownHall.com ^ | 1/07/03 | Cal Thomas

[txzman]

Liberals are especially uncomfortable with people who worship God and not the state. Most broadcast programming and reporting in big newspapers reflect these biases.

Bingo! Thesis of the article - no more need be said.

[IncPen]

Liberals think that the media is unbiased because they agree with it...

If I own a fast-food establishment and significant numbers of customers tell me that my hamburgers do not taste good, I have two choices. I can make cracks about the inferiority of my customers' taste buds and drive them to the competition, or I can make a better burger and keep them as customers.

A liberal would place a hamburger tax on the places selling 'good' burgers to 'level the playing field' for those unlucky enough to have been born making bad burgers...

[Mo1]

Liberals don't get it and they never will .. because to do so would mean taking responsibility ..

Plus .. LIBERALS ARE BORING!!!!

[scottinoc]

A liberal would place a hamburger tax on the places selling 'good' burgers to 'level the playing field' for those unlucky enough to have been born making bad burgers...

They'd also level "hate crimes" charges against those disparaging the bad hamburgers

[goodnesswins]

What you said...And....LIBERALS are...arrogant, ignorant and racist, IMHO.

[Freedom4US]

"A liberal would place a hamburger tax on the places selling 'good' burgers to 'level the playing field' for those unlucky enough to have been born making bad burgers..."

That, or they'd require that everyone make the same, nasty tasting burger. It's "better" for the children you know.. or something.

[Lady In Blue]

Bumping for a read tomorrow. Thanks!

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Conservatism is optimistic and fun. Liberalism is pessimistic and dour. Even liberals don't watch or listen to liberal talk shows, which ought to tell management that their problem is not about "kicking butt " but about serving up a different product more people will buy.

Cal has it nailed!

Thanks for posting this!

[ClancyJ]

Liberalism is all about control. Control of all the people. How they got the label "liberals" is beyond me - they represent control. Control of what we hear, say, do, think.

They now are probably trying to find a way to promote a law against talk radio.

[Tall_Texan]

So how come Rush Limbaugh never has Cal Thomas on as a guest host? Cal would be better than some of the guys he's trotted out lately.

[Mo1]

Yep .. those things also

[Political Junkie Too]

A liberal would place a hamburger tax on the places selling 'good' burgers to 'level the playing field' for those unlucky enough to have been born making bad burgers...

That "tax" is called the Fairness Doctrine. Eliminating it is what allowed Rush Limbaugh to flourish -- stations were no longer forced to give equal time to opposing views.

The liberal solution would be to reinstate the Fairness Doctrine as a way to shut down successful conservative voices, since they can't beat them. In other words, if Liberals can't have the most successful voices, then nobody can have successful voices.

-PJ

[Andy from Beaverton]

Liberal talk radio doesn't work because it's based upon emotion.

[First Amendment]

Not just based on emotion - specific emotions such as envy, lust, rebellion against God and all reasonable traditional morality, goody-goodyism (a type of holier-than-thou-itis),willful blindness, sour grapeism, sucking up to superiors, bullyism, phoney compassion, general all-around duplicity, seeing others as cardboard cutout props, etc...
Maybe somebody can think of more?

PS Once I heard Jom Hightower by mistake and he was horrible - actually made me sick to my stomach because of the above-mentioned.

[AndyTheBear]

I think he got it mostly right, but missed a key point. Note that the conservatism has more of an advantage in talk radio in paticular then any other medium, whearas liberalism has its best advantage through fictional T.V. shows.

No analysis goes on in he minds of people watching fictional T.V., giving liberals a chance to condition the audience to see the world as they see it. By contrast talk radio is full of analysis and subject to critical thinking and desent more then any other medium.

My own hypothesis is that the Left has conditioned itself to hold positions which maximize the gratification of their vanity, while requiring only a small portion of real world validity. Such positions are not suited for hours of analysis.

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

Liberalism is all about control. Control of all the people. How they got the label "liberals" is beyond me

They didn't "get labeled"--they labeled themselves. Twice.

They labeled themselves "socialists", and outside of America that was sufficiently deceptive to sell the concept. In America, we-the-people may not have articulated it this way, but we knew that it wasn't "social" at all--it was all about government power. Not "social"ism but governmentism--tyranny.

Here "socialism" became a terrible brand. Here "liberal" was what we-the-people actually were. So, having journalism on their side, the socialists simply redefined the term "liberal" to mean the opposite of its dictionary definition. And that was an accomplished fact in the New Deal era.

[CDHart]

Judy Woodruff on CNN over the weekend was interviewing someone re the war on terror, and as she closed the interview, she said, "Let's hope the Bush administration is listening." She said it with such a superior air, as if anyone who didn't take her advice was really stupid. Very irritating, to say the least.

Carolyn

[.30Carbine]

The big media have shown sensitivity to virtually every other group and concern, but not to conservatives. This is why conservatives have taken their eyes and ears elsewhere to newspapers, radio and television outlets that respect and do no mock their beliefs.

Two of Vermont's largest newspapers, owned by the same parent company, recently fired top editors. Both were paragons of liberal double-think. I believe the management is starting to see the light. We hit them where it hurt, in the pocketbook, with cancellations of subscriptions, refusals to buy single issues, and campaigns to inform their advertisers of the papers' outrageous bias resulting in decreases in circulation.

Story one.

Story two.

One proof of the changes resulting from the firings at the Times Argus/Rutland Herald exists in the printing of an article by Neal Laybourne, Pastor, who submitted a point-blank editorial on the Christian celebration of Christmas in 2001 and had it refused. He submitted the very same article this year and it was printed - in the Sunday combined edition of the two papers.