The enemy of the american people

Lavender Room
20

That does not mean that there aren’t issues of liberal bias among our great journalistic institutions

do you think there are issues of conservative bias?

is bias a problem for you, or just liberal bias?
I think there’s an issue of people silo-ing themselves off with like-minded media sources, regardless of ideology. But I have no problem with general bias among journalists, it’s to be expected because they’re only human.

The problem, however, is in something that Ken just displayed (and I brought up earlier) in my other thread: the ‘conservative sites’ are always labeled as such, regardless of quality, and so they’re expected and known to have an obvious bent in their coverage. That’s fine…but the same ‘liberal site’ label isn’t applied, there isn’t that same stigma about liberal news because, in my opinion (and based on studies) there’s a liberal bent to the media anyway. And so you have a chart like this, with CNN somehow winding up down the middle, the WaPo, NPR and NYT down the middle.

There isn’t a problem, per se, with bias in media. There is a problem when people use the ‘conservative’ label to dismiss information from valid conservative sources, when liberal sources are accepted as the ‘fair and unbiased’ organizations.

21

You mention 76 major newspapers endorsed a presidential candidate in 2012. What you’re not seeing is 76 newspapers all with a bias. Biased reporting has become the norm and it is not serving the people to be relying on such biased reporting. Whether it’s left or right leaning, the biases are attempting to manipulate people to accept a certain perspective.

I don’t align with either of the parties and as such a clear bias against all third parties has been obvious. Once again because we are forced by major news sources to only accept D or R as being legitimate and to dismiss all others, we are not being served.

22

What slays me is that almost all the righties, you apparently included, are not pushing back on trump’s assault on the wide middle of our professional press. Rather, you’re lining up with him.

That’s you’re prerogative. I think it’s illuminating and probably healthy that we all see where we stand here.

23

What slays me is that almost all the righties, you apparently included, are not pushing back on trump’s assault on the wide middle of our professional press. Rather, you’re lining up with him.

What “wide middle”?

I think his comments are inappropriate considering his office. I also think there far less consequential than you do. I think the reason so many don’t trust the press is because the press is untrustworthy. To me, that’s a far bigger problem and greater threat to the liberty than what Trump says. Much of the country has been complaining about a biased media for years, and we have plenty of evidence to support our case. You still don’t want to hear about it, and you don’t care, because you happen to share most of those same biases.

I’m not inclined to be sympathetic to a press that I regard as actively hostile to me, no. Go cry me a river.

I think it’s illuminating and probably healthy that we all see where we stand here.

I don’t know about you, but I haven’t been hiding.

24

“What “wide middle”?.. I think his comments are inappropriate considering his office.”

can we stop all this horseshit?

trump called CBS, NBC, CNN, ABC are enemies of the american people. that’s not “inappropriate considering his office”. that’s specifically, directly in contravention to the spirit and the letter of the 1st amendment. it is a refutation of the primary check on the presidency.

you have to decide where you stand. i am not afraid to say where i stand. i stand squarely with the “wide middle” of the professional press, which are our major daily newspapers, our public radio and TV, and the TV networks named above.

they don’t report the* liberal* news. they report the news.

all that said, if trump widens his list of american enemies to include fox news i’ll stand arm-in-arm with fox news. this is just as much an assault on fox, on the washington times, and the NY post as it is on these other media outlets. this is why, when obama flirted with denying fox news credentials helen thomas, ruth marcus, jake tapper, and a lot of other enemies of the american people stood with what tapper called, in an interview with then white house press secty robert gibbs, “one of our sister organizations.”

whenever anyone gets situational about the first amendment it calls into question the true attachment to all the other amendments, and the rest of the constitutional protections. you’re either with our 4th estate or you’re with trump. i didn’t draw the lines of demarcation here. trump did.

25

Just a thought for discussion.

If the MSM has such a liberal bias then why is it the majority of our government at all levels (state leg, governorship, congress, president) currently controlled by conservatives? If the MSM supposedly has so much power then it should be the opposite in theory.

26

You can tone down the hyperbole and recognize that President Obama criticized the media far more than Trump has done. He just did it in a far more articulate and political manner than the buffoon in the White House.

You also conveniently forget that Obama denied more FOIA requests than any prior President and threatened to jail reporters. Where was your outrage???

It’s not just FOIA requests. The Obama government has also gone after journalists for doing their jobs—journalists like New York Times reporter James Risen, who was threatened with a jail term for refusing to divulge the name of a former CIA agent who leaked information about the U.S. military’s nuclear program. Risen has called Obama “the greatest enemy of press freedom in a generation.”

http://fortune.com/2016/03/29/obama-media/

Recalling past days when three television channels delivered fact-based news that most people trusted, Obama said democracy require citizens to be able to sift through lies and distortions.

“We are going to have to rebuild within this wild-wild-west-of-information flow some sort of curating function that people agree to,” Obama said at an innovation conference in Pittsburgh.

“There has to be, I think, some sort of way in which we can sort through information that passes some basic truthiness tests and those that we have to discard, because they just don’t have any basis in anything that’s actually happening in the world,” Obama added.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2016/10/14/obama-change-wild-west-media/

Media critic is not a new hat for Obama to wear. He (and his senior aides) have been disdainful and dismissive of the media ever since he began running for president in 2007 and 2008. The criticism then is the same as the criticism now: The media focuses on bright, shiny objects at the expense of serious policy. The media cares about clicks and ratings, not providing a public service to the electorate. From the coverage of the Affordable Care Act to the 2012 campaign and into his second term, Obama has viewed the media as overly simplistic, horse-race focused and, often, just plain wrong.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/12/16/president-obama-isnt-a-big-fan-of-the-medias-coverage-of-the-2016-campaign/?utm_term=.1f36fe8e5b3f

**
“We’re going to have to change how our body politic thinks, which means we’re going to have to change how the media reports on these issues and how people’s impressions of what it’s like to struggle in this economy looks like, and how budgets connect to that. And that’s a hard process because that requires a much broader conversation than typically we have on the nightly news.”

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/05/13/obama-call-to-change-how-media-reports-raises-concerns.html

27

that’s specifically, directly in contravention to the spirit and the letter of the 1st amendment.

Yeah? Is he a traitor? Is that an impeachable offense?

Lay off the kool aid, Dan. It’s gotta be tiring being hysterical 24/7.

whenever anyone gets situational about the first amendment it calls into question the true attachment to all the other amendments, and the rest of the constitutional protections. you’re either with our 4th estate or you’re with trump.

Such complete bullshit. You know who’s 1st amendment rights have been infringed? Nobody’s. Not a single person’s. Not a single reporter, not a single media outlet. You know who’s been intimidated into silence? Same people.

Constitutional rights and freedoms are not in play here. Not even a little bit. What’s at risk is the credibility of the press, who long ago abdicated any right to the title of the fourth estate, and who have ruined their own credibility through years of blatant bias.

Hey, did you ever get around to reading that NYT piece I linked to? Thoughts on that? Because seems to me that talked about some ACTUAL threats to the 1st amendment. Crickets from you, both now and at the time. Getting situational with the issue, looks like. I’m not surprised.

28

Can you cite to a source for that?

here’s one.

“Also do you have a similar study for the network news organizations?”

no, i don’t.

but back to the daily newspapers, these papers generally reflect the constituencies they serve. even in california the san diego union trib, orange county register, bakersfield californian will tend to endorse republicans. in my town (california) my daily newspaper endorsed trump.

i suspect that in general major newspapers in most red states will endorse republicans most of the time. the major news of this election are all the daily newspapers endorsing clinton for the first time in 75 years, or since LBJ against goldwater. that speaks to the number of major dailies that lean republican.

it’s simply a myth to suggest that major newspapers across the country are overwhelmingly liberal. how could that be true since states are so overwhelmingly republican in their legislatures?

and it just doesn’t matter! once you’re off the editorial page and you’re reading the news, these are professionals doing a professional job, just like professional attorneys, accountants and businessmen. i would have no trouble reading news printed in chicago tribune, arizona republic, las vegas review-journal, dallas morning news, wall street journal, st. louis post-dispatch, christian science monitor, what have you, even if they don’t share the same editorial views i hold.

29

and it just doesn’t matter! once you’re off the editorial page and you’re reading the news, these are professionals doing a professional job

Once more: It’s not about the editorial pages. It’s about the news reporting, and it does matter, and they aren’t doing a professional job.

30

“You can tone down the hyperbole and recognize that President Obama criticized the media far more than Trump has done.”

false equivalency. embarrassingly false. not even a close call.

obama went farther than he should have in his battles with the press (as many presidents do). but look at what you just wrote. you cited james risen, a new york times reporter. i take your point precisely. just please don’t in the future call NYT investigative reporters the “liberal press.”

when obama overreached, it was the press who forced him back. it was the so-called “liberal” press who accused him most harshly when obama’s press office was out of line. (because, of course, the professional press wasn’t liberal. it was simply the press, doing its job, as risen did his job.)

because of your attachment to the law i hope that your calling trump a buffoon, but defending the substance of everything he does or says, becomes difficult for you at some point.

31

“Yeah? Is he a traitor? Is that an impeachable offense?”

we don’t yet know. we’ll see what the FBI comes up with. i was quite willing to trust the FBI’s judgment when it came to hillary. let’s see if you trust the FBI’s judgment when it comes to trump, manafort and flynn. (i will.)

“Lay off the kool aid, Dan.”

i’ll make you a deal. i’ll lay off the kool aid. you stop being an appeaser.

32

“You can tone down the hyperbole and recognize that President Obama criticized the media far more than Trump has done.”

false equivalency. embarrassingly false. not even a close call.

Well of course it isn’t. But you are such a Donkey hack that you cannot even see straight any more. I cannot recall another person in the LR who was so blinded by political bias. Reading your posts lately, I really hope you are trolling. Otherwise, you have really lost it.

33

i was quite willing to trust the FBI’s judgment when it came to hillary. let’s see if you trust the FBI’s judgment when it comes to trump, manafort and flynn.

Yeah, shockingly, you were quite willing to trust the FBI’s judgement when it came to Clinton, because in the FBI’s judgement, she committed a black letter crime, but shouldn’t be prosecuted for it. Very brave of you.

I didn’t trust the FBI’s judgement there, because it was a flat out joke.

I’ve already said that if some Russian connection pans out, it’s impeachable.

That’s not what we’re talking about here, though. You’re saying the president is directly contravening the 1st amendment. I’m asking you if he should be impeached for that. (Hint: The answer is that he shouldn’t be, because he’s not contravening the 1st amendment.)

34

Just like, by the way, he’s not undermining the judicial system.

35

“But you are such a Donkey hack that you cannot even see straight any more.”

in point of fact, in every election since the year 2000 i have pulled the lever for a republican. i’m happy to name them. i pulled the lever for one just this past november.

what i value more than the party, or the policy, is the process. here we have an unprecedented attack on the process. the process is under assault. the great thing about the donald is he is extremely clear what side he is on, and what side everyone else is on. he makes it very easy for you and me. all we have to do is stand on whichever side of the line donald draws for us.

36

what i value more than the party, or the policy, is the process.

lol. You are fond of flattering yourself with that trope, but it isn’t true.

Trump is precisely abiding by the process in the case of his travel ban, for example. It’s been an exemplary case of how the president is checked by the power of the courts. You still hyperventilated over him calling a judge “so called.”

37

Like every other institution, the press needs to earn its respect. They don’t get it automatically. Respect comes from fair, honest and impartial reporting. That’s not what they’ve been delivering. They give us “news” that’s often fake, biased and furthers their liberal agenda. Finally, someone is calling them on it, and they’re acting like stuck pigs. They’ve made their own bed of distrust. They need to drain their own swamp.

38

“But you are such a Donkey hack that you cannot even see straight any more.”

in point of fact, in every election since the year 2000 i have pulled the lever for a republican. i’m happy to name them. i pulled the lever for one just this past november.

LOL! Yep, I do as well. I pull the lever for a Donkey every election – Sheriff David Clarke.

You’d love him!

Ha! Ha! Ha!

39

“Very brave of you.”

i nevertheless failed to criticize comey for his 11th hour announcement that very possibly turned the election. in for a penny, in for a pound, i say. (i thought i’d bring that up in case you forgot it.)

the only reason this guy is not overtly, constitutionally, violating the first amendment is that he can’t (yet) get away with it. he is nevertheless doing everything he can to undermine it. you really should stop defending him.