O'Reilly evidence

quote:

---

The "misperception" survey that is referenced earlier is kind of a one-sided thing. Someone who is against the war on Iraq would be much more likely to say that the world was against Bush, that Hussein had nothing to do with 9/11 or al Qaeda, and whatever that 3rd thing was. So, that survey, while proving that Fox listeners are moved by bias and believing things aren't true, really doesn't prove that NPR listener's don't have a liberal bias. A liberal bias would make them almost immune to such misperceptions.

---

Remember, in the survey, both Fox watchers and NPR listners agreed on what the Bush administration was saying about the war.It's just that NPR listeners were more likely to have more accurate views of the facts regarding Iraq, and this included conservatives who listened to NPR.

Hmm. Most, or perhaps even all, of the staunch Republicans I have known were church people, and the abortion issue by itself pretty much sealed their party for them. Some were Rush listeners (Rush is on during the day, not at night, so this wouldn't be a large percentage of the Republicans I've known), and those tended to be defenders of the Bush's no matter what. That was rarely true, however, of non-Rush listeners. They had their own issues, and they were not the same as Rush's, and Republican congresses & presidents were judged on those issues.Admittedly, though, this would have been a pretty radical crowd, probably not representative of the Republican party as a whole, but nonetheless a pretty large group of people that could easily have been won to the Libertarian party had it ever had a viable candidate.Couple more things, but that's for the next post...

1.) What's happening to that cat in your picture?2.) We went to the bookstore today, and what should be out on the sidewalk at a major discount but Al Franken's Liars book. I got it and bore with the sore disappointment at leaving behind Dean Karnazes biography, which was four times the price. Sigh...I think the most astonishing I managed to read at the store and on the way home is that Sean Hannity is so popular or that Rush spoke highly of him. I've only heard him three or four times, and his intense confidence makes him somewhat interesting, but everything about him--voice, inflection, style, content--says he's a tabloid reporter, a wannabe at best. I was surprised even last week when I saw that clip of him interviewing Howard Dean. How'd he get into the Democratic Convention?It felt a lot like the time I was in Germany in the mid-80's and this famous, top-rated American show was going to come on AFN for the first time. We went to a friend's house so we could see what this acclaimed comedy was. It was Rosie, and our jaws hit the floor. We wondered what had become of our beloved home country while we'd been in Europe, that such mindless drivel was a top-rated show.Sean Hannity is a real, honest-to-goodness reporter??? Now that's a surprise.If you'd really wanted to get me to cave in on Fox News, you should have told me he's one of their top guys on TV. I'd have been speechless.I read several chapters of Franken's book with a very non-open attitude. I have to admit, though, the only thing I could fault him on was his suggestion that O'Reilly's 37% figure on blacks in Florida universities came from nowhere, when it is indeed the correct figure for minorities. Nonetheless, Franken's point was the way O'Reilly shut down his guest's statistics, when the guest was right and O'Reilly was wrong, and that point was valid.I appreciated Franken referring to his own style as honest but vicious at one point. I was also utterly shocked at his quotes from O'Reilly's book (can't remember the name) when he got on O'Reilly about O'Reilly's attacks on Ludicrous (I'm spelling that wrong, but I can't remember the right way). Of course, a young lady, a friend of ours, chose that page to look over my shoulder to see what I was reading. I had to tell her, "You don't want to read this page."And I SURE appreciated his comments on end notes, which irritate the daylights out of me.I'm going to find more info on liberal and conservative bias and come back to this. Franken does a good job addressing the non-existence of the liberal bias in the media. A very good job.

You know, TL, I really do admire your attitude about most things.You really are a true seeker of knowledge.I'll have to read the book again so we can continue to discuss it.

I almost forgot...Merlin is getting his armpits scratched along with a belly rub.He likes that.(the name of that image on our computer is "cat yoga".)

I see a lot of stereotyping on this forum regarding conservatives / republicans. It must feel good to think one has figured them out as a group. Once the stereotypes are entrenched, it's very easy to explain any media event in that context.First, it’s just plain wrong to paint such a broad brush and second, the EXACT same thing happens on the other side.

quote:

---

In my own experience with relatives and other people who are Republicans, they tend to defend and cheerlead for "the team", with all of the rationalization and post hoc reasoning and making excuses that such team mentality entails. They are "defending the faith", as it were. Bush and Co. are right, the Republicans in Congress are right, in everything any of them do, and the follower's job is to defend and justify to themselves and others the actions, even if that means being willfully ignorant.

---

I can take your post and substitute the words republicans for democrats, and Bush and Co. for Clinton and Co., and you would have the exact same mantra espoused by the republicans during the Clinton years.We should remember that the political pendulum never stays at one end very long. Soon enough, the country will grow weary of the republicans and the time will be ripe for a democrat to take over. In every case since WWII, a two term president has been succeeded by a president from the opposition party. I would say the odds are good that a democrat will get elected in ’08.

quote:

---

I don't think a lot of the Republicans I know have actually thought through their positions themselves, considering many different alternatives and the pros and cons of each. They are just a member of the faithful throngs who follow because it feels good to them. .

---

Ah yes, political hubris knows no boundaries.

quote:

---

I see a lot of stereotyping on this forum regarding conservatives / republicans. It must feel good to think one has figured ?them? out as a group. Once the stereotypes are entrenched, it's very easy to explain any media event in that context.

---

I don't believe I have done this. I believe I have specifically spoken of my personal experiences with conservatives/Republicans.

quote:

---

First, it?s just plain wrong to paint such a broad brush and second, the EXACT same thing happens on the other side.

---

Show me the Democratic equivalent to Fox News, Paul Wolfowitz, and Tom DeLay, and I might believe that it is EXACTLY the same.Remember, I'm the one who characterized Carville as a partisan Democratic cheerleader, so your accusation of one-sidedness on my part is a bit weak.

quote:

---

I can take your post and substitute the words ?republicans? for ?democrats?, and ?Bush and Co.? for ?Clinton and Co.?, and you would have the exact same mantra espoused by the republicans during the Clinton years.

---

But I wasn't talking broadly in the above statement.I clearly qualified my statement as referring to "my experience with relatives and other Republicans."

quote:

---

We should remember that the political pendulum never stays at one end very long. Soon enough, the country will grow weary of the republicans and the time will be ripe for a democrat to take over. In every case since WWII, a two term president has been succeeded by a president from the opposition party. I would say the odds are good that a democrat will get elected in ?08.

---

I don't know. With the voting and voter registration fraud shenanigans that have been going on I am not too sure. I live in Michigan, so I have seen locally what the Republicans are willing to do to stay in power.

quote:

---

Ah yes, political hubris knows no boundaries.

---

Look, I am talking about the specific people in my life who have self-identified as Republican, and I am talking about the specific issues I have discussed with them, and I am telling you that they all have pretty much spouted the party line on all of them.I can't really help that, now can I?

I said:

quote:

---

In every case since WWII, a two term president has been succeeded by a president from the opposition party. I would say the odds are good that a democrat will get elected in ’08.

---

Oops, I forgot about Bush Sr. following Reagan's two terms.Hmmm.. the democratic presidential drought may not end any time soon after all.

quote:

---

Look, I am talking about the specific people in my life who have self-identified as Republican, and I am talking about the specific issues I have discussed with them, and I am telling you that they all have pretty much spouted the party line on all of them.

​

I can't really help that, now can I?

---

No, you can't really help that if that's the type of people you associate with.

quote:

---

No, you can't really help that if that's the type of people you associate with.

---

Those are almost the only kinds of Republicans I know these days, and I certainly can't help but associate with them as they are coworkers and family members.You know, people that you know in everyday life.So, do you acknowledge that I am not stereotyping to all republicans and am reporting my own experience?

quote:

---

So, do you acknowledge that I am not stereotyping to all republicans and am reporting my own experience?

---

I can't say one way or the other if you are sterotyping since I don't know your associates. If you say you are not then that may be the case.My question to you then; Do you ever extrapolate your personal opinions regarding the republicans that you know to the broader group of republicans that you don't know?We're getting off topic, admins may be lurking.

One more note on the book. I read a little more late last night so that I would have something to do while I enjoyed a 2nd bowl of cherry vanilla ice cream mixed approximately 70-30 with chocolate syrup after the kids had gone to bed (if it had been real Hershey's in a can, it would have been 50-50).Franken quotes a survey group (PEW something) for the 2000 election showing that media stories were more negative towards Gore than towards Bush. (The same group shows the opposite during the Kerry/Bush campaign.)What a shock to find out Gore really did "invent" the internet.LOL! (There's some exagerration and facetiousness in the above statement, but it's true!)That was right up there with finding out that J.R.R. Tolkien the Great (I think LOTR was divinely inspired...really) agreed with Gore that the combustion engine was the worse thing that ever happened to man.

quote:

---

...agreed with Gore that the combustion engine was the worse thing that ever happened to man.

---

How so?

Hi, Monk...I have a video at home about Tolkien, that's called, uh, uh...shoot...Maybe it's called "Creating Middle Earth." I'll check.Anyway, it talks about the area around Tolkien's home town and how he hated seeing it become industrialized, and it says that's the reason that all the bad guys in LOTR destroy everything that's green for the sake of factories. In that video they say he hated the combustion engine. I don't remember the exact quote. I just remember thinking it interesting that Tolkien agreed with Gore on that point.

quote:

---

My question to you then; Do you ever extrapolate your personal opinions regarding the republicans that you know to the broader group of republicans that you don't know?

---

I try not to.I know that all Republicans are not like the people I know. I know that there are some very reasonable Republican lawmakers like Arlen Specter and John McCain that I respect and admire, although I do not always agree with all of their views.The group that I tend to paint with a broader brush, rather justifiably, I think, are the Far Right religious fundamentalists and the NeoCons. I include Bush, Cheney, and many of the Republican House and Senate leadership in this group.Like any extremists, they tend to not tolerate much dissent among themselves, so they really do lend themselves to actually being "all the same" compared to more moderate people.