Some Red Meat - Leftist Media Bias

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 25, 2011 5:52 AM GMT
    http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/hannity/index.html
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 25, 2011 8:45 AM GMT
    First, let me state that I am a registered independent who is just left of center, fiscally conservative and socially liberal.

    Second, that couldn't have been more laughable even I were a non thinking individual. Most people don't know about the history of the Civil Rights Act and that democrats have apologies to make for racism? How about this little tidbit of the history of the political parties and how in the 50's and 60's there was a mad jumping of the ships on both sides? How about that little bit that was left out. Sean didn't meantion that did he? Puh-leeze! If he was worth half the stuff that was in that 7 minutes (which by the way, I want back), he would realize that there are slip-ups and baffoons on both sides. THAT is what the American people are finally starting to realize. Unfortunately, most people would rather someone tell them how it is rather than doing it themselves or even just checking what they are being told. If they did that, the Tea Baggers would be the laughing stock of this country for what they have become and are doing. Nuff said, rant over.
  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    Apr 25, 2011 10:54 AM GMT
    Now THAT made me laugh early on a Monday morning

    ........... which is a pretty tall order - cause NOTHING makes me laugh early on a Monday morning

    Sean Hannity of all people doing a piece on media BIAS?????

    That could be run on Comedy Central .... without any Editing icon_cool.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 25, 2011 1:31 PM GMT
    Brilliantly hilarious! I love it!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 25, 2011 2:15 PM GMT
    That was tragic.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 25, 2011 2:32 PM GMT
    ErikTaurean saidFirst, let me state that I am a registered independent who is just left of center, fiscally conservative and socially liberal.

    Second, that couldn't have been more laughable even I were a non thinking individual. Most people don't know about the history of the Civil Rights Act and that democrats have apologies to make for racism? How about this little tidbit of the history of the political parties and how in the 50's and 60's there was a mad jumping of the ships on both sides? How about that little bit that was left out. Sean didn't meantion that did he? Puh-leeze! If he was worth half the stuff that was in that 7 minutes (which by the way, I want back), he would realize that there are slip-ups and baffoons on both sides. THAT is what the American people are finally starting to realize. Unfortunately, most people would rather someone tell them how it is rather than doing it themselves or even just checking what they are being told. If they did that, the Tea Baggers would be the laughing stock of this country for what they have become and are doing. Nuff said, rant over.


    Actually, it was 21 minutes in three segments.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 25, 2011 2:39 PM GMT
    GQjock saidNow THAT made me laugh early on a Monday morning

    ........... which is a pretty tall order - cause NOTHING makes me laugh early on a Monday morning

    Sean Hannity of all people doing a piece on media BIAS?????

    That could be run on Comedy Central .... without any Editing icon_cool.gif


    What exactly made you laugh of the 21 minutes?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 25, 2011 2:41 PM GMT
    TigerTim saidBrilliantly hilarious! I love it!


    What was so brilliantly hilarious? Specifics please.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 25, 2011 2:42 PM GMT
    Upper_Canadian saidThat was tragic.


    How exactly was the 21 minutes tragic?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 25, 2011 2:43 PM GMT
    OneGeezer said
    Upper_Canadian saidThat was tragic.


    How exactly was the 21 minutes tragic?


    I watched the first segment and there was not even an iota of truth in any of the claims made. icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 25, 2011 3:18 PM GMT
    Christian73 said
    OneGeezer said
    Upper_Canadian saidThat was tragic.


    How exactly was the 21 minutes tragic?


    I watched the first segment and there was not even an iota of truth in any of the claims made. icon_rolleyes.gif


    Which claims are you talking about?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 25, 2011 3:43 PM GMT
    Christian73 said
    OneGeezer said
    Upper_Canadian saidThat was tragic.


    How exactly was the 21 minutes tragic?


    I watched the first segment and there was not even an iota of truth in any of the claims made. icon_rolleyes.gif


    Ok,here's one iota

    The first specific claim at 1;32 appears to be true

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/002/791vwuaz.asp

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Duranty

    In a New York Times article dated 23 August 1933, Duranty wrote, "Any report of a famine in Russia is today an exaggeration or malignant propaganda. The food shortage, however, which has affected the whole population in the last year and particularly in the grain-producing provinces—the Ukraine, North Caucasus, the Lower Volga—has, however, caused heavy loss of life." Duranty concluded "it is conservative to suppose" that in certain provinces with a total population of over 40 million mortality had "at least trebled." [5]

    On March 31, 1933, Walter Duranty denounced the famine stories and Gareth Jones in the New York Times. In the piece, he described the situation under the title "Russians Hungry, But Not Starving" as follows: "In the middle of the diplomatic duel between Great Britain and the Soviet Union over the accused British engineers, there appears from a British source a big scare story in the American press about famine in the Soviet Union, with 'thousands already dead and millions menaced by death from starvation." Malcolm Muggeridge, a correspondent for the Manchester Guardian, called Duranty a "liar".

    The duel in the press over the famine stories did not damage esteem for Duranty — whose reporting The Nation had described as "the most enlightened, dispassionate dispatches from a great nation in the making which appeared in any newspaper in the world." Following sensitive negotiations which resulted in the establishment of relations between the U.S. and USSR in November 1933, a dinner was given for Soviet Foreign Minister Maxim Litvinov in New York's Waldorf Astoria Hotel. Each of the attendees' names was read in turn, politely applauded by the guests, until Duranty's. Whereupon, Alexander Woollcott wrote, "the one really prolonged pandemonium was evoked.... Indeed, one quite got the impression that America, in a spasm of discernment, was recognizing both Russia and Walter Duranty."[6]

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 25, 2011 3:56 PM GMT
    I've looked at just first segment many times and I see nothing inaccurate in it. The video clips that Sean references can be independently confirmed. I hate to admit that I'm old enough that I can remember some or most of them. You might disagree with his conclusions, but the evidence is there.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 25, 2011 3:58 PM GMT
    how about segment # 2

    http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/hannity/index.html#/v/4659101/behind-the-bias-the-new-york-times/?playlist_id=86924
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 25, 2011 4:15 PM GMT
    Howell Raines - that not true?

    Jason Blair - did that not happen?

    William McGowan - what is he saying that's inaccurate?

    Duke biased story not happen? Of course we've seen much about the accuser in the last couple of weeks.

    Did Doug Schoen just fabricate this stuff or is he not entitled to his opinion?

    Paul Krugman didn't write what he did after the Gifford's shooting on Jan 8, 2011? That's real easy to confirm or disprove.

    Bill Keller didn't sat that? Again, easy to confirm or disprove.

    You may disagree with Michele's and Brent's summary opinion, but again pretty easy confirm what its based on.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 25, 2011 4:41 PM GMT
    Tragic: having the attributes of classic Tragedy. The fatal flaw the protagonist cannot see leads to his downfall. Hannity is oblivious to his own hipocrisy that will inevitably be his own undoing (like Beck eventually fell to his own clownish act).

    Classical Greek, Roman & French tragedy is by definition:

    passionate and duty-bound conflicts between a small group of noble characters, manipulating base emotions to further their ambition.



    (noble refers to social status, not virtue)


    Forgive me asking but is this not taught in high school?




  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 25, 2011 4:45 PM GMT
    Upper_Canadian saidTragic: having the attributes of classic Tragedy. The fatal flaw the protagonist cannot see leads to his downfall. Hannity is oblivious to his own hipocrisy that will inevitably be his own undoing (like Beck eventually fell to his own clownish act).

    Classical Greek, Roman & French tragedy is by definition

    passionate and duty-bound conflicts between a small group of noble characters, manipulating base emotions to further their ambition.



    As I expected. No specifics, just more hate.

    So again, from part two of the segments

    Howell Raines - that not true?

    Jason Blair - did that not happen?

    William McGowan - what is he saying that's inaccurate?

    Duke biased story not happen? Of course we've seen much about the accuser in the last couple of weeks.

    Did Doug Schoen just fabricate this stuff or is he not entitled to his opinion?

    Paul Krugman didn't write what he did after the Gifford's shooting on Jan 8, 2011? That's real easy to confirm or disprove.

    Bill Keller didn't sat that? Again, easy to confirm or disprove.

    You may disagree with Michele's and Brent's summary opinion, but again pretty easy confirm what its based on.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 25, 2011 4:47 PM GMT
    BOLD TEXT GOES HEREUNDERLINE TEXT GOES HERE
    OneGeezer said
    Upper_Canadian saidTragic: having the attributes of classic Tragedy. The fatal flaw the protagonist cannot see leads to his downfall. Hannity is oblivious to his own hipocrisy that will inevitably be his own undoing (like Beck eventually fell to his own clownish act).

    Classical Greek, Roman & French tragedy is by definition

    passionate and duty-bound conflicts between a small group of noble characters, manipulating base emotions to further their ambition.



    As I expected. No specifics, just more hate.



    that is the specific definition. I explained it. It fits.


    He is passionate; he seaks out of some sense of personal duty and commitment, the apeal is to outrage at perceived unfairness. That fits the definition.

    That he himself does what he complains of is well documented; that is by definition obliviousness.

    Every word I am using is used correctly, supported and in context.

    What is your definition? If I chose the word "tragic" after much consideration to exprewss exactly what I thought of the clip.

    What surprises me is not only did you not already know what "tragic" literally means but you label its proper literary use as "hate".

    Did you never study any of Shakespeare's tragedies? Macbeth is among the most seminal works in Western literature - even the Simpson's referenced it. Julius Caesar? Romeo & Juliet?

    Gawd man, Star Wars is a classic tragedy.


  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 25, 2011 4:49 PM GMT
    once again

    Howell Raines - that not true?

    Jason Blair - did that not happen?

    William McGowan - what is he saying that's inaccurate?

    Duke biased story not happen? Of course we've seen much about the accuser in the last couple of weeks.

    Did Doug Schoen just fabricate this stuff or is he not entitled to his opinion?

    Paul Krugman didn't write what he did after the Gifford's shooting on Jan 8, 2011? That's real easy to confirm or disprove.

    Bill Keller didn't sat that? Again, easy to confirm or disprove.

    You may disagree with Michele's and Brent's summary opinion, but again pretty easy confirm what its based on.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 25, 2011 5:02 PM GMT
    I listened to the first segment again. I didn't hear the word tragic used once. You don’t need to further define your specious attacks

    What exactly IN THE PIECE are you disputing? Be specific. You gotta know what you're hating. Is Juan Williams, who is far from a conservative, making this stuff up or are you disputing that he, and others, even said what you see and hear in the video clips?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 25, 2011 5:03 PM GMT
    Once again -
    what is your definition of tragedy?

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 25, 2011 5:04 PM GMT
    Upper_Canadian saidBOLD TEXT GOES HEREUNDERLINE TEXT GOES HERE
    OneGeezer said
    Upper_Canadian saidTragic: having the attributes of classic Tragedy. The fatal flaw the protagonist cannot see leads to his downfall. Hannity is oblivious to his own hipocrisy that will inevitably be his own undoing (like Beck eventually fell to his own clownish act).

    Classical Greek, Roman & French tragedy is by definition

    passionate and duty-bound conflicts between a small group of noble characters, manipulating base emotions to further their ambition.



    As I expected. No specifics, just more hate.



    that is the specific definition. I explained it. It fits.


    He is passionate; he seaks out of some sense of personal duty and commitment, the apeal is to outrage at perceived unfairness. That fits the definition.

    That he himself does what he complains of is well documented; that is by definition obliviousness.

    Every word I am using is used correctly, supported and in context.

    What is your definition? If I chose the word "tragic" after much consideration to exprewss exactly what I thought of the clip.

    What surprises me is not only did you not already know what "tragic" literally means but you label its proper literary use as "hate".

    Did you never study any of Shakespeare's tragedies? Macbeth is among the most seminal works in Western literature - even the Simpson's referenced it. Julius Caesar? Romeo & Juliet?

    Gawd man, Star Wars is a classic tragedy.




    Again, you're defining your specious attack, but specifically what are you disputing in the piece?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 25, 2011 5:05 PM GMT
    Upper_Canadian saidOnce again -
    what is your definition of tragedy?



    The term tragedy is not used one time in the piece. What is it in the piece that you dispute?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 25, 2011 5:07 PM GMT
    Upper_Canadian saidThat was tragic.


    AGAIN what was tragic? Give me minute and second in the vid.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 25, 2011 5:10 PM GMT
    I called it tragic. I also explained why I called Hannity's clip tragic. It is exemplary of classic tragic characters.

    I was asked why I called it tragic.

    I explained Tragedy. I can no explain it no more simply.

    This is the time to recall the adage: " never try to teach a pig to sing; it never works and only annoys the pig."