More Liberal media bias
 

CNN and Sinclair broadcast group

http://www.presstelegram.com/Stories/0,1413,204~21474~2457488,00.html

http://www.bluelemur.com/index.php?p=335

let it go; there are media outlets with liberal biaas, there are media outlets with conservative bias (watch FOX News some time, or read the Op-Ed page of the WALL STREET JOURNAL).

I am tired of each side thinking that the other side are the only ones that do this.

I know, this is so lame.
The director, Carlton Sherwood, did some propoganda films for Tom Ridge and the Unification Church back in the day.
The whole think wreaks of Karl Rove.

The story:
http://kirghizlight.blogspot.com/2004_10_01_kirghizlight_archive.html#1097346064519 96228

His resume:
http://www.disinfopedia.org/wiki.phtml?title=Carlton_Sherwood

Mike Moore shows footage of Shrub reading "My Pet Goat" and people scream of bias and slant. These douche-bags bring up conjecture, rumor, and opinion from 30 years ago (over a noble cause even!!!) and sell it as truth. This is a new low for the GOP.

This goes WAY beyond liberal/conservative bias of news reporters; it's an unabashed "Hail Mary pass" on the democratic political process. They, (Sinclair group), are forcing all of their stations to run this smear film 2 days before the election, w/ no time for anyone in it to adequately respond.

I hope that it backfires and wins Kerry votes, I think it will. I also hope that the owner of Sinclair winds up in a wood-chipper somehow. :mad:

I can't see that as a likely result.

Although most Uh-mericans are tired of hearing about Vietnam, some seem to relish re-living it.

But take encouragement from the fact that "Fahrenheit 9/11" is out on DVD and tape, and that "Going Upriver" is getting some exposure.

Smear? Did he actually do the things in the movie? Hmmmm

Sounds like a documentary to me.

Why is your own poison is always the most vile:) Enjoy

Translated:

But take encouragement from the fact that we have Michael Moore packaging lies, innuendo and smear in the form of "Fahrenheit 9/11"and is out on DVD and tape, and that "Going Upriver" is getting some exposure. . . cuz we got nut'n else.

I was interested to note that the accusation was that he prolonged the war in Vietnam.

I thought the standard accusation was that he aided the enemy and caused the war to be lost (because the US pulled out).

Since the US hadn't won when it pulled out, how could he have prolonged the war? It's just ridiculous. The code of honour BS is everything that is wrong (and I guess right, at the same time) about the military...

This is obviously a biased piece of journalism and should be banned. Any media person wanting to provide biased news reporting should do so covertly, just like it has been done and accepted for decades now by CBS/ABC/NBC/CNN/NY Times/Wash Post/Time/NEWSWEEK/etc. ........

You know, I've seen AP called "liberal biased".

Yet FoxNews.com provides AP reports, and is known (and unashamedly) conservative biased.

Does that not make AP unbiased?

The writers at the AP are left leaning, but they do report all the news. Some things can't be spun.

all the news?

When's the last time you saw an AP report with the word "Terrorist" instead of "militants" or "extremists"?

remember awhile back when they erroneously reported the obvious cheers when Bush gave his best wishes to Clinton as boos? Then they retracted the story and called them "Ooh's", then they retracted again without any mention at all.

Bryan,

Don't misunderstand, I admit the AP is left leaning and do the very verbage gymnastics you describe. My point was they cover virtually everything that happens in the world, which is why they are a common source. They're basically a clearing-house.

Terrorist: a radical who employs terror as a political weapon; usually organizes with other terrorists in small cells; often uses religion as a cover for terrorist activities (from dictionary.com)

Militant: A fighting, warring, or aggressive person or party. (from dictionary.com)

The Iraqi fighters are just pissed that we're trampling all over their local power structures and are fighting back. They're not interested in fighting along side OBL to take down America.

So Mat, tell me something. Are these "Iraqi fighters" the same people that are "streaming across the borders, INTO Iraq"?

Kinda makes a guy wonder, doesn't it?

Randy

If Canada was invaded occupied by North Korea, and US troops were sent to help, would those troops be considered terrorists? Maybe by the North Koreans.

The word "terrorist" is being over-used. It's a nice McCarthy-esque label for anyone you don't like. - everyone that doesn't line up single file behind GWB and the NeoCons is conveniently labelled a "terrorist" or a "terrorist supporter." "Insurgent" is another over-used word. Any Iraqui that doesn't lay down in the street and the the US waltz off with their country is an insurgent.

I wonder if the British press used that term in the 1770's - "Colonial insurgents dumped a ship full of tea into the harbor last week ..."

That is a pitiful analogy. No other countries are sending soldiers to help the Iraqi terrorists.....other terrorists are sneaking into Iraq to perform terrorist acts.