Cliff LyonOf Lies: The Media is Liberal
On any given day, one can visit Media Matters and see physical proof of a conservative bias in the media. The right-wing mantra claiming the opposite can at best produce only anecdotal evidence to support their lie.
Print media reported McCain attacks on Obama for purported ties to Freddie and Fannie, but not McCain aides’ lobbying on their behalf
In articles about the presidential candidates’ responses to the economic crisis, several media outlets reported that the McCain campaign has attacked Sen. Barack Obama for what it says are his ties to lenders Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, without noting that several senior McCain campaign aides have lobbied for Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, or both. Read more
Any questions Bob?
September 20th, 2008 at 2:29 pm
Cliff,
Yes a couple of questions:
Why don’t you include information about Media Matters, such as this
Or more on it’s links to the Clintons:
Media Matters for America is funded in part by the Democracy Alliance.
Can you truly claim that Media Matters is a credible, a-political source?
How about some of the studies proving there is a liberal media bias?
Would you consider UCLA to be a conservative university?
Should I go on or is this enough, Cliff?
September 20th, 2008 at 2:46 pm
Yes, Bob Media Matters is funded by progressives which would makes sense given the media is controlled by large conservative corporations.
You may be surprised to learn that Media Matters Founder was a very mean right-wing noise maker.
But anytime an watchdog organization reports on right-wing shit, a retarded child would also arrive at your premise.
Lets say for instance that it IS true that Big Media media is has a conservative bias. Would a non-partisan watchdog still be non-partisan?
There is an easy way to decide if you are full of shit or not. If you are NOT full of shit, then you could find another media watchdog who would be able to produce as much empirical and physical evidence of a liberal bias. But you can’t.
Brent Bozell is the best you could do, and he doesn’t have shit compared to media matters.
On the other hand, if you ARE full of shit (which you are), you would simply claim that any criticism of the right-wing media is partisan and hope everybody just agrees with you.
You will find Bob S, if you care to THINK…the TRUTH has a liberal bias. That is true for many reasons some of which may be too complicated for the average Christian College drop out.
September 20th, 2008 at 2:52 pm
When wealthy people try to start a network to promote the truth, Bob gets all bent out of shape, but decades of lies cause no concern and are considered free speech.
WOW!
I thought nobody cared about these liberal organizations. What are you worried about Bob? If nobody is listening, why do you care?
September 20th, 2008 at 3:06 pm
Cliff,
How about the UCLA study or any number of other studies that have found the liberal bias?
How about the fact that the members of the media donate more to liberals then conservatives?
Or this
Also, I would like to remind you of your own words, written less then a month ago:
And your words today:
So we see how well you live up to your standards, your own words.
September 20th, 2008 at 3:28 pm
We can only hope that some kind of liberal bias, (truth), is emerging after all these years of Americans being fed full of shit, Bob. We’ll all be much healthier if that happens. I’ll believe it when I see pigs like Hannity, Limbaugh, Savage and the rest in the long unemployment lines.
September 20th, 2008 at 3:54 pm
Cliff
The only way you could possibly see the mainstream media as being right wing is because you are so far to the left that even Pravda is right wing to you.
The liberal media is fawns over Obama so much that even the left leaning Saturday Night Live made fun of it. If Obama loses it will be a death blow to the media because it will expose how little influence they have over the masses. Many in the left wing media a aghast that the election could be so close after all they have done for him. They now have to cling to a liberals last desperate refuge and that is cries of racism. They can’t claim sexism anymore after what they did to Hillary and now Governor Sarah Palin.
When are you and the main stream media going to expose the lies of Barack Hussein Obama? Obama calling McCain a liar is like a pot calling a kettle a “community organizer”.
September 20th, 2008 at 5:59 pm
Did not Barney Frank shill for Fannie and Freddy?
I’ll bet you have never listened to Savage Larry. He’s a hoot, and not really a partisan except when it comes to Israel. His support there is unequivocal.
September 20th, 2008 at 6:41 pm
Bias exists, what do you want? We’re human. It’s just that when, after ten or so years of the kind of bullshit that has so characterized this admin, and clearly they’re not done yet, should anyone suggest that something revolutionary needs to ocur, you all cry out there’s no reason beyound a common whine. That’s just more bullshit. Would you have us go to the lower slopes of the stockyard, there to bury our heads, just because you do?
Take your ‘one-world’ crime-mobile over the cliff, the world’ll be a better place.
September 20th, 2008 at 7:15 pm
Fred (Glenn, Oprah),
Barney Frank supported Freddy and Fannie as charter banks, NOT in the form they took on during Bush.
Bob and Ken, Specific examples like the media fawning all over Obama do not contradict the fact that the Corporate Media has a conservative bias.
Perhaps you do not understand the concept of profit. I wonder if either of you have run a profitable business that you know, made a profit. Thinking you get it doesn’t count.
The other thing that could explain your non-nonsensical arguments for how and what the media report is perhaps some sort of special insider knowledge of some editorial decision making process that somehow rejects the profit motive. Notwithstanding threatening phone calls from Rove, inquiring minds want to know.
In order to understand the corporate media you must think like a whore. Political reporting in general does not make money, anywhere, anytime, ever.
Right-wing politics sells when combined with grunting, militarism, machismo, fear combativeness and assholes like O’Reilly and Hannity. Note the resemblance to professional wrestlers provarication.
The profit motive also explains why we saw lots on TV during the invasion and subsequent battles, and why we don’t hear anything about the occupation.
Here’s how you can identify an idiot (someone who does not understand profit, and thinks the media is liberal) without leaving home;
They will say, “You know the media is liberal because they never report all the GOOD things that are happening in Iraq.”
I don’t mean to suggest all people who say that are idiots.
Some are LIARS! Bill O’Rielly, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, Michelle Malkin, and Ann Coulter come to mind most immediately. They all know why the media does not report on the schools and clinics being built (if they really are), but they say it over an over. Why not? They are paid to say what right-wing tools want to hear.
The only reason it seems the media is loving Obama is for the same reason they reported so heavily on Nicole Simpson instead of IEDs in Iraq.
I know that is fairly obvious to a third-grader, but I’m not so sure about the average Republican.
September 20th, 2008 at 7:20 pm
Bob, Do you know who Brent Bozell is? I understand he filed for personal bankruptcy. It seems his services are not so popular anymore.
September 20th, 2008 at 8:48 pm
Everyone is in on it Cliff, this is the trouble with our gov’t. Everyone. Maybe not Bernie, but the rest are all complicit. Frank was an idiot, he declined to support reform of the process. All moot now, we are stuck with the bill. Loyal opposition? More like loyal offal sitting.
Here is the active link with all the complicity. html didn’t work
http://http//citizenwells.wordpress.com/2008/09/17/obama-barney-frank-fannie-mae-freddie-mac-campaign-contributions-democrats-lobbyists-truth-about-obama-more-obama-lies-mccain-reformer/
Your back-pedaling makes no sense Cliff. Bottom line, Frank and the rest didn’t see it coming or were complicit. Either way, we the People are screwed. Blame it on whatever. The ship is sinking, and as a rule at sea, I never worked for “blamers”. They are too stupid unaware of where they are and what the consequences of such wasted time has, should things turn for the worse.
You revel in the blame game, it’s all you have.
We are poorly served by all in our government and there is is no partisan bias in that statement.
September 20th, 2008 at 9:21 pm
The U.S. economic collapse is hurting millions of real people, including me. If that were not the case I’d be laughing out loud.
For years, the Bush Brigade has been telling me that all the negative economic statistics are made up or misinterpreted, that Bushonomics really works. Now they have had to retreat to their fall-back position, which is: Our economy is a mess after all, but it’s the fault of the Democrats– especially Bill Clinton and Barack Obama!
Meanwhile, the MSM tell us that Obama is running more negative ads than McCain, but they usually omit the important information that those “negative” ads criticize McCain for constantly lying. I didn’t need Media Matters to tell me that, but they did because they don’t miss anything.
September 20th, 2008 at 9:26 pm
rmwarnick, I feel your pain.
September 21st, 2008 at 12:40 am
Cliff:
Brent Bozell has to get a real job? Now there is some good news! Let the struggle begin!
Richard W:
Did you see the Deseret News on Friday? Senator Bob Bennett says the financial mess is bad but not as bad as the recessions following Clinton and Carter:
(I added “code for Clinton”)
If we could only get these Democrats to quit messing up our economy! Thank goodness we have the Republicans to fix things.
September 30th, 2008 at 10:06 am
Republican success in economics is no secret. When the free market is on an upswing, they take credit. When it’s not, they start a war. Wartime economies have historically been the most successful. Anyone wonder why tax receipts went up by 97% after Reagan lowered taxes? Because he poured an unprecedented amount of unbacked bills into the American war industry (lets heat up the cold war, eh, my fellow Americans?). When you circulate money (even fake money) it increases tax revenue. It has nothing to do with income increasing for the average American (remember all the union members that lost jobs and all the factories that closed during Reaganomics?) and everything to do with income increasing dramatically in segmented portions of the economy and a subsequent redistribution of a small part of that income to the rest of the economy.
The fact is that the rate at which the national debt is increasing has skyrocketed for every single Republican president in the last 40 years, and dropped for every single Democrat president in the same amount of time. Doesn’t it make sense that we should have economic improvements when the government is borrowing trillions and putting it in Americans’ pockets? It’s just so sad, so itty-bitty-violin-playing-a-sad-song sad that you can’t sustain an economy on constant borrowing. I could take out a huge loan and disperse the funds to my children for mowing the lawn. Their income would go up, but I’d have nothing to pay off my debt with. Republicans simply have not shown any control or any ability to understand economics. They want short-term quick fixes that impress their more imbecilic constituents. Some of us are not fooled.
As to the “liberal” media: I have little doubt that the media MEMBERS are liberal. But how many reporters are going to stand up to Rupert Murdoch and his hordes of walking cashboxes? Reporters LIKE BEING EMPLOYED–and they hate being trampled on by propoganda and blacklisting. Can you blame them?
Let me present a little scenario:
Persons #1 and #2 watch CNN. The main story is about mosquitos, malaria, and how to protect yourself responsibly–with a pinch of pizazz thrown in just for emotional impact. The news totals 30% information, 48% chortling actors reading teleprompters (we’ll ignore this segment for the rest of the scenario), and 11% each of liberal and conservative commentary and spin. The two persons have very different responses. They go as follows:
Person 1: having had a small red tube inserted into his olfactory nerves through which the phrase “the media is liberal” has been inputed into his brain for the last 32 years, Jonny Icanthelpmyself completely ignores 41% of the pertinent news; after all, the 11% that’s conservative is negligible, because, to Jonny, it’s just common sense. But that other 11%? Oooh, Jonny is burning in his red-and-white striped britches. 11% is proof that the media, when it’s not simply an inhuman drone repeating factual information, is diabolically, unequivocally, and absolutely liberal. Jonny hops in his truck, complains about gas prices while ignoring the “liberal” implication that his personal purchases might be impacting the local human situation of which he gripes, and heads off to buy a large keg of DDT, just to spite the liberal scientists who used liberal media to report liberal findings.
Person 2: having had a metal plate installed on his cranium to protect from the tube insertion so commonly suffered from an infection of the notorious Propagandus demobias, George Mymindismyown perceives the news as-is: he sees 30% information, and is dismayed–but not distraught–at the presence of a shifting polarized bias in 22% of the reporting. He acknowledges that, due to unavoidable human error, the news is sometimes biased, but that this is something that he can deal with as an intelligent consumer of information products. It rolls off his shoulders, and he goes to the store in his hybrid automobile to buy a mosquito net.
Liberal bias is noticeable because you’ve been trained to notice it. I think it’s time to take back the whip and to stop roaring whenever your trainer commands.