PDA

View Full Version : NO Media Bias!



OGShocker
06-15-2004, 07:01 AM
From the Drudge report.
TWISTED: LA Times Poll Had Sample With 38% Democrats, 25% Republicans
Tue Jun 15 2004 10:13:47 ET
Sen. John Kerry "has taken big lead," according "to an L.A. Times poll."
But the Times poll that showed Kerry "beating Bush by 7 points" has created a controversy over whether the poll's sample accurately reflects the population as whole, ROLL CALL reports on Tuesday.
"Not counting independents, the Times' results were calculated on a sample made up of 38 percent Democrats and 25 percent Republicans -- a huge and unheard-of margin," ROLL CALL claims.
Developing...

HighRoller
06-15-2004, 12:35 PM
Why doees that surprise or shock anyone? After all, we are talking about the same publication that had polls showing that Gay Davis wouldn't be recalled and that Bustamante would "soundly defeat" Schwarzenegger. The polls in the L.A times are their attempt to tell you how you should vote, not any kind of accurate data.

Lake Pirate
06-15-2004, 12:37 PM
Between the L.A. Times and the Drudge Report how can you decide which source is the least biased?

OGShocker
06-15-2004, 12:45 PM
I trust Drudge more than the LA Slimes. Drudge gives a list of places in which to read from. The LA Slimes print editorials as news.
Who broke Lewinsky?
Who pointed us to China missle technology stories?
Who pressed hard BOTH sides of the war in Iraq?
A. Drudge.
Who claimed the CIA promoted Crack sales in the inner cities?
A. LA Times.
I would go on but I need to go back to work;)

Lake Pirate
06-15-2004, 12:54 PM
The Drudge doesn't break stories, they link to sites that do. Unfortuneately they only link to stories that support conservative views. There is essentially nothing wrong with that, as long as they tell you. However, Drudge espouses their agendas as a news source instead of a political party defending their views. I've read some good stories there but I always consider the source. The same could be said of almost any news source when you think about it. (Fox comes to mind) so...never mind. ;)

Dr. Eagle
06-15-2004, 12:57 PM
Originally posted by OGShocker
From the Drudge report.
TWISTED: LA Times Poll Had Sample With 38% Democrats, 25% Republicans
Tue Jun 15 2004 10:13:47 ET
Sen. John Kerry "has taken big lead," according "to an L.A. Times poll."
But the Times poll that showed Kerry "beating Bush by 7 points" has created a controversy over whether the poll's sample accurately reflects the population as whole, ROLL CALL reports on Tuesday.
"Not counting independents, the Times' results were calculated on a sample made up of 38 percent Democrats and 25 percent Republicans -- a huge and unheard-of margin," ROLL CALL claims.
Developing...
You know what is funny is now that I have been working down here in LA and read the LA times, you can tell from the headlines if it is a wire service (AP, Reuters or other) or a times staff writer. I saw that headline and said..... bet it is a times staff writer... Bingo.
All the bad news stories about Iraq, times staff writers... Bad news stories about the deficit spending, social security, you name it all blamed on George W. and by times staff writers.
It really is the most biased publication on a consistent basis I have seen in California. I keep trying to get the folks to subscribe to the Register, but are just used to the times... Oh well!

OGShocker
06-15-2004, 01:29 PM
Originally posted by Lake Pirate
The Drudge doesn't break stories, they link to sites that do. Unfortuneately they only link to stories that support conservative views. There is essentially nothing wrong with that, as long as they tell you. However, Drudge espouses their agendas as a news source instead of a political party defending their views. I've read some good stories there but I always consider the source. The same could be said of almost any news source when you think about it. (Fox comes to mind) so...never mind. ;)
How can you be so wrong on so many levels in one post?
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Drudge doesn't break stories, they link to sites that do.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wrong. Matt drudge heard Newsweek was sitting on the Lewinsky story. He broke it wide open, forcing Newsweek to publish.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unfortuneately they only link to stories that support conservative views.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Again, Drudge links to news stories from AP WORLD
AP NATIONAL
AP WASHINGTON
AP BUSINESS
AP ENTERTAINMENT
AP ON THE HOUR
AP HEADLINES
AP BREAKING
AP/REUTERS PHOTO WIRE
AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE
AFP INTERNATIONAL
AFP NEWS WRAP
REUTERS WORLD NEWS HIGHLIGHTS
REUTERS DIGEST
REUTERS WORLD
REUTERS POLITICS
REUTERS ODD
UPI NATIONAL
UPI WORLD
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Drudge espouses their agendas as a news source instead of a political party defending their views.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Drudge "espouses" his own agenda. He is who he is. Who is "their"?
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I've read some good stories there but I always consider the source.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You should try to see who that "source" is when clicking on one of Drudges links.
__________________
Thank you for the banter.

Dr. Eagle
06-15-2004, 01:32 PM
Originally posted by Lake Pirate
The Drudge doesn't break stories, they link to sites that do. Unfortuneately they only link to stories that support conservative views. There is essentially nothing wrong with that, as long as they tell you. However, Drudge espouses their agendas as a news source instead of a political party defending their views. I've read some good stories there but I always consider the source. The same could be said of almost any news source when you think about it. (Fox comes to mind) so...never mind. ;)
So does CNN..... the Carrey News Network......:p

HighRoller
06-15-2004, 01:35 PM
I think Drudge takes stories that would normally buried and either brekas them himself or forces others to fish or cut bait. Sure, he's a little right leaning IMO, but he's fair. He doesn't bury important stories on page A22 like the LA Times. How about the new factory job numbers, did they make the front third of the paper? I bet not....

OGShocker
06-15-2004, 03:16 PM
WOW! No response? Facts f u c k e' m up everytime!

Lake Pirate
06-15-2004, 03:21 PM
I'm wrong all the time, but I can deal with it. Matt Drudge links to STORIES that support a conservative view not SITES. On that I am right. As far as breaking the Lewinsky story...hmmm. You're telling me the world would never have heard about it without Matt Drudge? He may have taken credit, but the liklihood that the story would have been buried is... minute. Let us remember the GOP was spending millions trying to nail Clinton. That story would have been broken with or without Drudge. I already alluded to the fact that most papers have a political agenda, so it's kinda hard to nail me as a Drudge basher. This whole two party system is nothing but back stabbing bullshit secret agendas with a win at any cost mentality that is destroying the Democracy our parents fought to defend. Baby boomers (me included) are the weakest most politically correct bullshit artists to ever come down the pike. And to think...we were s'pose to be the "cool" generation.

Lake Pirate
06-15-2004, 03:23 PM
WOW! No response? Facts f u c k e' m up everytime!
I wouldn't get too full of myself there pardner. I hardly consider bias, arrogance and hearsay as facts.

Lake Pirate
06-15-2004, 03:38 PM
This may be difficult for you but... try opening your mind to what the Drudge Report has become. Breaking a story first is entirely different than bringing a story to light that would never be read.
http://www.tvnewslies.org/html/dangerous_drudge.html
I am not trying to insult you, rather I am trying to get you to see the bigger picture. I have no problem admitting when I'm wrong. I am fearful of people that think they are never wrong but...that's another thread.

HighRoller
06-15-2004, 03:42 PM
LP, you say the Lewinski story would have never been buried. Well, did you know that there are countless other women who have come forward and alleged sexual misconduct against Clinton? Where are their stories? NBC even interviewed a woman who said Clinton raped her. They did the interview then promptly spiked the story because the White House threatened GE(NBC's parent company) Newsweek had the full facts of the Lewinsky story, and what did they do? Decided not to run it because of their ideology and loyalty to Clinton. So don't be so sure that, given enough time and a chance, the Lewinsky story wouldn't have ended up like the rape story.

Lake Pirate
06-15-2004, 03:53 PM
It's possible, but neither of us will ever know? I do know that during Clinton's tenure, there was a babe a week paraded across the television, saying he did this or that to them. I disagree that stories were buried. I think the stories just lost their attraction after so many times. it became a credibility issue for the television stations. Let's face it... around girl number seven or eight the station themselves were questioning how they would be perceived in spite of whatever veracity the story had. It's kinda like reporting a guy that saved a school bus full of children had a bad check. At some point...you're gonna look like an asshole.

OGShocker
06-16-2004, 06:02 AM
Originally posted by Lake Pirate
http://www.tvnewslies.org/html/dangerous_drudge.html
You sent me to a page filled with Bush hate? That is "Fair and Balanced".:rolleyes:
Your not wrong. I seems to me you are just another uninformed highly educated liberal who enjoys sending your money to the government.
I do have one final question.
Where will you boat when boating is deemed to be too loud, too un-friendly to a small population of fish and too dangerous for your personal safety? This s**t is already happening here in California and we all ruled by liberals.
I know this is off topic but, I started this thread so I hope you won't mind.
Have a great day in that special place you live. It must be nice in your world.

OGShocker
06-16-2004, 06:32 AM
Originally posted by ShockwaveBob
I love threads on internet forums where 1/2 of the voting population tells the other 1/2 how wrong they are and how they should vote.
OGShocker, how many republican voters are in your family? Take solace in knowing that my entire family will more than cancel them all out. ;)
Y'all get what you vote for.
Hey I don't think I ever thank you guys for Grey Davis.

dmontzsta
06-16-2004, 06:36 AM
Media = suck.

boxscore
06-16-2004, 06:41 AM
Back to the original topic... The LA Times is a p.o.s. rag of a newspaper. Do I still drop a couple quarters to read the sports page? Yes. But Section A is a total mess. Someone was spot on when they made the comment about wire reports versus staff writers product. Would FOX news please do a nat'l publication?... I'd drop more than a couple quarters on that.

Lake Pirate
06-16-2004, 07:48 AM
In my world there is balance. I told you full out at the beginning of this thread that every rag has an agenda so you must consider the source. I offered you an alternative viewpoint to Drudge which would have to be biased to be alternative...and you're shocked? My life is not dictated by a party and their ridiculous agendas. I voted for Reagan and I voted for Clinton. I am not a blind partisan pushing party votes because I think I'm cool or smart. I believe the spotted owl needed saving and I believe red meat needs to be farmed. I make my own decisions and I stand behind them.
Let me guess... when you were a kid someone told you being a Republican meant you were successful and smart so you've voted blindly ever since? You should be proud. As far as boating I go fast and I am loud. In the marina I am polite and quiet. I think for myself.

OGShocker
06-16-2004, 08:32 AM
Originally posted by Lake Pirate
In my world there is balance. I told you full out at the beginning of this thread that every rag has an agenda so you must consider the source. I offered you an alternative viewpoint to Drudge which would have to be biased to be alternative...and you're shocked?
When was the last time Drudge linked a President of the United States to Hitler? You site had NO problem doing so to this President. This is HATE SPEECH. Are you so blind that you cannot see the difference?
Let me guess... when you were a kid someone told you being a Republican meant you were successful and smart so you've voted blindly ever since? [/QUOTE]
You would be wrong again.
These words brought me to my happy place. I was four years old. I have heard them all my life. I remember sitting with my family (all democrats) and seeing this face, this man, on our little black and white TV. I did not understand what he was saying. I did not know who he was. When I was old enough to understand (16) for me. I heard these words again. They forever changed me.I am a republican but more over I am a Federalist.
I'll tell you who's words these are later.
I am going to talk of controversial things. I make no apology for this.
It's time we asked ourselves if we still know the freedoms intended for us by the Founding Fathers. James Madison said, "We base all our experiments on the capacity of mankind for self government."
This idea? that government was beholden to the people, that it had no other source of power is still the newest, most unique idea in all the long history of man's relation to man. This is the issue of this election: Whether we believe in our capacity for self-government or whether we abandon the American Revolution and confess that a little intellectual elite in a far-distant capital can plan our lives for us better than we can plan them ourselves.
You and I are told we must choose between a left or right, but I suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There is only an up or down. Up to man's age-old dream-the maximum of individual freedom consistent with order or down to the ant heap of totalitarianism. Regardless of their sincerity, their humanitarian motives, those who would sacrifice freedom for security have embarked on this downward path. Plutarch warned, "The real destroyer of the liberties of the people is he who spreads among them bounties, donations and benefits."
The Founding Fathers knew a government can't control the economy without controlling people. And they knew when a government sets out to do that, it must use force and coercion to achieve its purpose. So we have come to a time for choosing.
Public servants say, always with the best of intentions, "What greater service we could render if only we had a little more money and a little more power." But the truth is that outside of its legitimate function, government does nothing as well or as economically as the private sector.
Yet any time you and I question the schemes of the do-gooders, we're denounced as being opposed to their humanitarian goals. It seems impossible to legitimately debate their solutions with the assumption that all of us share the desire to help the less fortunate. They tell us we're always "against," never "for" anything.
We are for a provision that destitution should not follow unemployment by reason of old age, and to that end we have accepted Social Security as a step toward meeting the problem. However, we are against those entrusted with this program when they practice deception regarding its fiscal shortcomings, when they charge that any criticism of the program means that we want to end payments....
We are for aiding our allies by sharing our material blessings with nations which share our fundamental beliefs, but we are against doling out money government to government, creating bureaucracy, if not socialism, all over the world.
We need true tax reform that will at least make a start toward I restoring for our children the American Dream that wealth is denied to no one, that each individual has the right to fly as high as his strength and ability will take him.... But we can not have such reform while our tax policy is engineered by people who view the tax as a means of achieving changes in our social structure....
Have we the courage and the will to face up to the immorality and discrimination of the progressive tax, and demand a return to traditional proportionate taxation? . . . Today in our country the tax collector's share is 37 cents of -very dollar earned. Freedom has never been so fragile, so close to slipping from our grasp.
Are you willing to spend time studying the issues, making yourself aware, and then conveying that information to family and friends? Will you resist the temptation to get a government handout for your community? Realize that the doctor's fight against socialized medicine is your fight. We can't socialize the doctors without socializing the patients. Recognize that government invasion of public power is eventually an assault upon your own business. If some among you fear taking a stand because you are afraid of reprisals from customers, clients, or even government, recognize that you are just feeding the crocodile hoping he'll eat you last.
If all of this seems like a great deal of trouble, think what's at stake. We are faced with the most evil enemy mankind has known in his long climb from the swamp to the stars. There can be no security anywhere in the free world if there is no fiscal and economic stability within the United States. Those who ask us to trade our freedom for the soup kitchen of the welfare state are architects of a policy of accommodation.
They say the world has become too complex for simple answers. They are wrong. There are no easy answers, but there are simple answers. We must have the courage to do what we know is morally right. Winston Churchill said that "the destiny of man is not measured by material computation. When great forces are on the move in the world, we learn we are spirits-not animals." And he said, "There is something going on in time and space, and beyond time and space, which, whether we like it or not, spells duty."
You and I have a rendezvous with destiny. We will preserve for our children this, the last best hope of man on earth, or we will sentence them to take the first step into a thousand years of darkness. If we fail, at least let our children and our children's children say of us we justified our brief moment here. We did all that could be done.
Sorry for the use of so much Bandwidth;)

Lake Pirate
06-16-2004, 09:10 AM
That is a nice speech but remember.... a politicians words have little to do with their actions. There are good and bad within both parties. Essentially our generation has corrupted the two party system. It's no longer about a vision for America. It's about success for the party...at any cost. To blindly vote the agenda of a particular party in this day and age to me...is unamerican. Good luck with your hatred of liberals and your incessant need to think you are smarter because you are a die hard conservative.

OGShocker
06-16-2004, 09:20 AM
RP,
That speech was given by Ronald W. Reagan in 1964.
I have no room in my life for hate. I do have a vision that is different that yours.
Enjoy your time here on the Hot Boat forums. I think you'll fit in just fine.
OGS

Lake Pirate
06-16-2004, 09:27 AM
And another pretty speech. Unfortunately words don't carry the weight they should in today's society. The problem isn't government and it isn't subversives. It is us, the baby boomers. For the return of decent government and shared goals for America the responsibility lies with Generation "X." We had our chance and we blew it. We are the religious zealots. We are the oppressive Christian right. We are the bamboozling government. We are the tight assed politically correct. We sucked when given the chance to make our mark. The dissention in politics we have caused is irrepairable. The next generation must take the helm and start all over. Pretend we never existed and rebuild the government and the american attitude toward government if there is going to be hope for the future of this country. The Hippies (the now generation), The yuppies and all the rest of us are the worst of american political history.

Dave C
06-16-2004, 09:30 AM
bickering about this is pointless.
I read a lot of different publications/points of view, usually on the same story. Its interesting to see how the author inputs their opinion.
List of my usual sources (and what I consider their orientation, yours may differ).
KPFA - far left (good conspiracy theories)
SF Chronicle, also far left.
NPR - left of center.
Rush- right
Michael Savage - right
NY times - yes, left
WSJ - right.
Reuters - left of center.
Drudge - right.
etc., etc.

Dr. Eagle
06-16-2004, 09:32 AM
Originally posted by Lake Pirate
And another pretty speech. Unfortunately words don't carry the weight they should in today's society. The problem isn't government and it isn't subversives. It is us, the baby boomers. For the return of decent government and shared goals for America the responsibility lies with Generation "X." We had our chance and we blew it. We are the religious zealots. We are the oppressive Christian right. We are the bamboozling government. We are the tight assed politically correct. We sucked when given the chance to make our mark. The dissention in politics we have caused is irrepairable. The next generation must take the helm and start all over. Pretend we never existed and rebuild the government and the american attitude toward government if there is going to be hope for the future of this country. The Hippies (the now generation), The yuppies and all the rest of us are the worst of american political history.
I would say speak for yourself. I am an agnostic, so Religious Right? I am a conservative politically, yes but that has to do with my thought that Government is just as insidious as evil corporations, or other most other societal issues.
I think your gloom and doom represent what is wrong with America.

Lake Pirate
06-16-2004, 09:40 AM
Actually I am not all gloom and doom. This thread represents the gap that exists between the average american voter. The left is way too left and the right is way too right. They hate each other and are willing to do almost anything to destroy or beat the other party. In my opinion there is almost a civil war going on within the government, with itself. On the bright side... I see hope within our children. History dictates they will almost always do the opposite of their parents. Hopefully, that means they will scrap all the bullshit lines we have drawn in the sand and recreate what our forefathers meant for America. How's that for optimism?

OGShocker
06-16-2004, 09:42 AM
There is another pretty speech.:D

Dr. Eagle
06-16-2004, 09:48 AM
Originally posted by Lake Pirate
Actually I am not all gloom and doom. This thread represents the gap that exists between the average american voter. The left is way too left and the right is way too right. They hate each other and are willing to do almost anything to destroy or beat the other party. In my opinion there is almost a civil war going on within the government, with itself. On the bright side... I see hope within our children. History dictates they will almost always do the opposite of their parents. Hopefully, that means they will scrap all the bullshit lines we have drawn in the sand and recreate what our forefathers meant for America. How's that for optimism?
You are right about the gap between the left and right. The depth of division has deepend in the last 10 -12 years. However I see the left as the more divisive force. Why?
The conventional is always necessarily wrong. Nothing that is in place now is right or good enough.
In California, the Republicans have tried and tried to negotiate with the Democrats and because of such a majority the democrats took the tack that they didn't need to.
Hence we are in a hole here...
Honestly, I prefer a government deadlocked to a large extent because then they don't get much done. When they do get things done, they usually do things that remove our freedoms a little at a time. Gun laws, noise regulations, emissions regulations, restrictive zoning, you name it... they hinder our freedoms.
Honestly, I could see a civil war in this country in the next 20 years... if things don't improve. It means people have to work together.

Lake Pirate
06-16-2004, 09:55 AM
At least I write my own speeches. :D
I couldn't agree more Dr Eagle. I have been spun into the defender of the left on this thread when in fact, it couldn't be further from the truth. As I said, I voted for Reagan and would again today. About the only thing I'm totally against is blind allegiance whether t be left or right. There aren't many free thinkers amongst our generation (quite ironically) and I guess that's what I am defending. The right to think independantly.

Dr. Eagle
06-16-2004, 10:24 AM
Originally posted by Lake Pirate
At least I write my own speeches. :D
I couldn't agree more Dr Eagle. I have been spun into the defender of the left on this thread when in fact, it couldn't be further from the truth. As I said, I voted for Reagan and would again today. About the only thing I'm totally against is blind allegiance whether t be left or right. There aren't many free thinkers amongst our generation (quite ironically) and I guess that's what I am defending. The right to think independantly.
Ditto...
I wrote that...

RiverPirate
06-16-2004, 05:24 PM
Not to change the subject, er I mean getting back to the subject. The LA Times is a F--king Communist newspaper. I quit reading it years ago.:mad:

Lake Pirate
06-16-2004, 05:32 PM
I read Pravda and the Young Republican's Newsletter.

LASERRAY
06-16-2004, 05:47 PM
My head is going to explode from all this B.S. :D
The L.A. Times isn't fit for a dog to take a dump on.:yuk: