If it’s Sunday, it’s mostly white males.
If it’s Sunday, it’s mostly white males.
“Not only are the Sunday morning talk shows on the broadcast networks dominated by conservative opinion and commentary, the four programs — NBC’s Meet the Press, ABC’s This Week, CBS’ Face the Nation, and Fox Broadcasting Co.’s Fox News Sunday — feature guest lists that are overwhelmingly white and overwhelmingly male.” Media Matters reports:
A breakdown of the guests who appeared on the Sunday shows in 2005 and 2006 shows that men dominate these shows. In fact, men outnumber women by a 4-to-1 ratio on average.
The divide is even starker when it comes to race/ethnicity: On average, there were nearly seven white guests for every guest of any other race/ethnicity. On Meet the Press and Face the Nation, there were nearly nine white guests for every guest of another race/ethnicity.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
white = right
(meaning, that is, namely, both conservative and correct)
May 14th, 2007 at 11:05 amHonkey’s
May 14th, 2007 at 11:05 amThe women are all at church, praying.
May 14th, 2007 at 11:05 amThe men are at home, still stuck to the upholstery, right where they were left Saturday night
The women are all at church, praying.
The men are at home, still stuck to the upholstery, right where they were left Saturday night
Comment by heyzeus — May 14, 2007 @ 11:05 am
You left out hungover, stewing in own juices
May 14th, 2007 at 11:08 amNo need to try and explain your meaning , Mr. Accident, we got it.
May 14th, 2007 at 11:09 amHow dare U ? the authorita of the white right?
May 14th, 2007 at 11:10 amActually, white males don’t like those shows, females do, of all colors. White males like to watch sports, violence, and chicks doin’ each other, period. But white males on t.v. give chicks, of all colors, reassurance with their manly strength and confidence.
May 14th, 2007 at 11:10 amMy first reaction is, “Gee like we didn’t already know that!” But then I remembered that there are a lot of folks that refuse to see what is right in front of their faces. I guess we do need MM to remind us of the blatantly obvious.
May 14th, 2007 at 11:10 amWhenever I want to know what ‘real American’s think.’ I turn on the TV to watch a never ending parade of 50+ year old, pudgy, pasty white guys.
Everyone knows that they’re the only one’s with opinions that matter.
The Sunday lineup is almost as old/white/pudgy/pasty/balding as the candidates in the Republican debate the other week.
May 14th, 2007 at 11:10 amThat’s just because men are superior to women. Simple fact. More men are more intelligible than women are.
So quiet with your queer talk, homo-librals.
May 14th, 2007 at 11:12 amThat was implied, Mr. Irrelevant.
May 14th, 2007 at 11:12 amNo need to try and explain your meaning , Mr. Accident, we got it.
Comment by heyzeus — May 14, 2007 @ 11:09 am
My meaning… Oh, ya see, the superior white race is naturally correct in any/ever decision they make, exempli gratia: GW Bush’s decisions in Iraq
May 14th, 2007 at 11:13 amYo don’t be hatin’ me and the hommies allways watch face the nation.
May 14th, 2007 at 11:13 amWhat women aren’t at church are in the kitchen barefoot and pregnant. That’s the neocon way.
May 14th, 2007 at 11:13 amI don’t get it…
Shouldn’t all these conservative families be in church on Sunday morning?
May 14th, 2007 at 11:15 am#10…. Scott J…
“More men are more intelligible than woman are”
AHAHAHAHAHA stupid git!
May 14th, 2007 at 11:17 amGo back and at least get your GED before trying to converse with the world outside your video game infested basement!
AHAHAHAHA
What women aren’t at church are in the kitchen barefoot and pregnant. That’s the neocon way.
Comment by Proud Dem — May 14, 2007 @ 11:13 am
Hell Yeah, brother!
know’mtalkin’bout?
May 14th, 2007 at 11:18 amA bunch of white mails sitting around talking about how Great it is to be rich. Sounds like the Republican Presidential Debate to me…
May 14th, 2007 at 11:20 amSo quiet with your queer talk, homo-librals.
Comment by Scott J
The last time I looked,Jeff Gannon,Ken Mehlman,Mark Foley,Karl Rove,Mary Cheney and others, are part of your team.
May 14th, 2007 at 11:20 amMeet the Press? You mean Meet the Punkinhead don’t you?
May 14th, 2007 at 11:20 am#15 Trip, Church and sex are 2 thing’s the reich winger’s like to talk about but most, rarely do….That’s their big problem, most are to ugly and stupid for inteligent ladies to talk to or have sex with…Blessings
May 14th, 2007 at 11:24 amComment by Scott J — May 14, 2007 @ 11:12 am
How’d you like to be the new President, brother?
May 14th, 2007 at 11:25 amThat darn “liberal media”, they’re always trying to shove diversity down our throats.
May 14th, 2007 at 11:26 amMeet the Press? You mean Meet the Punkinhead don’t you?
Comment by klyde — May 14, 2007 @ 11:20 am
Heyooo…. oh no, Punkinhead?… really?… I woulda gone with Punka$$b!tch, you punkb!tch
May 14th, 2007 at 11:26 amThat darn “liberal mediaâ€, they’re always trying to shove diversity down our throats.
Comment by pete592 — May 14, 2007 @ 11:26 am
Hell yeah, brother, how’d you like ta be the next Vice-President?
May 14th, 2007 at 11:27 amIf it’s Sunday, it’s da man.
May 14th, 2007 at 11:29 amYes, TP, blame whitey for all the evil in the world.
BOO-F*CKING-HOO
Why don’t you pass some new legislation making a requirement for the news to be all female? TV is for females anyway. American Females are already married to the govt. Keep it up.
What’s next in Femerica? Anti-bullying legislation – yep I’m sure men were behind that one.
You’ll soon notice that this march towards matriarchy in the USA is going to result in zero men around to defend privileged, entitled, pampered and ultimately spoiled american women from an enemy. Too bad. You made your bed …
May 14th, 2007 at 11:31 amI advise Men, once again, to opt-out of the system, don’t play the game, and go your own way.
If this country is made up of mostly white males, then what the hell is the big deal? Last time I checked, we have freedom of the press, so as long as the networks can stay in business, they can put on TV whatever the hell they want!
@∞Ω
“Honkey’s”
You’re an ingnorant racist.
May 14th, 2007 at 11:32 amWhat Think Progress failed to note is that the guests on the Sunday talk shows are also overwhelmingly pro war. It is extremely rare for these programs to present an antiwar point of view. Nowhere on these less than enlightened programs will one find an Amy Goodman or a Howard Zinn or a Staughton Lynd or a Cindy Sheehan or a Lt. Watada or an Anthony Arnove [who wrote Iraq-The Logic of Withdrawal] or an Ralph Nader or Norman Solomon or any members of the IVAW [Iraq Veterans Against the War] or David Cortright [who wrote Soldiers in Revolt-GI Resistance During the Vietnam War], et al.
Why are these people not seen and heard on these programs? What are these talk shows so afraid of? In the buildup to the war, there were only three or four antiwar voices presented on television. Sadly, it appears that the more things change, the more they remain the same.
May 14th, 2007 at 11:32 amComment by trevor — May 14, 2007 @ 11:32 am
Trevor’s right, all you dirty monkeys, stop ya bitchin’
May 14th, 2007 at 11:35 amI advise Men, once again, to opt-out of the system, don’t play the game, and go your own way.
Comment by jonny — May 14, 2007 @ 11:31 am
jonny,
Try no to be so frightened of girls. We don’t bite…..much.
May 14th, 2007 at 11:35 amYes, TP, blame whitey for all the evil in the world.
BOO-F*CKING-HOO
Why don’t you pass some new legislation making a requirement for the news to be all female? TV is for females anyway. American Females are already married to the govt. Keep it up.
What’s next in Femerica? Anti-bullying legislation – yep I’m sure men were behind that one.
You’ll soon notice that this march towards matriarchy in the USA is going to result in zero men around to defend privileged, entitled, pampered and ultimately spoiled american women from an enemy. Too bad. You made your bed …
I advise Men, once again, to opt-out of the system, don’t play the game, and go your own way.
Comment by jonny — May 14, 2007 @ 11:31 am
jonny = genius
May 14th, 2007 at 11:36 amthis issue needs closer scrutiny, because it never raises the question: do white males necessarily express ‘white’ and ‘male’ positions, as opposed to say, ‘female’ and ‘black’ positions? can a man express a ‘feminine’ point of view? can a white express an ‘asian’ point of view?
liberals are often quick to defend racial, ethnic and gender identity, and yet white males are………what?
May 14th, 2007 at 11:38 amWhat women aren’t at church are in the kitchen barefoot and pregnant. That’s the neocon way.
Comment by Proud Dem — May 14, 2007 @ 11:13 am
Hell Yeah, brother!
know’mtalkin’bout?
Comment by Mr. President
I am female, schmuck. Leave it to the Chimpy in Chief not to know the difference.
May 14th, 2007 at 11:38 amTry no to be so frightened of girls. We don’t bite…..much.
Comment by Zooey — May 14, 2007 @ 11:35 am
That’s part of the problem Zooey. Now ya know why we gotta call in the dominatrix
May 14th, 2007 at 11:39 amYou’ll soon notice that this march towards matriarchy in the USA is going to result in zero men around to defend privileged, entitled, pampered and ultimately spoiled american women from an enemy. Too bad. You made your bed …
this pretty much sums up the politics, and not the gender, of the speaker. and that was my above point….
May 14th, 2007 at 11:40 amNow ya know why we gotta call in the dominatrix
fyi: there is no such word, ‘dominatrix’. look it up…..
May 14th, 2007 at 11:41 amThose shows are pathetic. Mostly a bunch of self-congratulatory, former frat boys with the “I got mine, so f*ck everybody else” mindset.
The White House is using them as its propaganda machine.
This country has been sent down the toilet, and yet they are shocked that the American public would every consider electing anyone but a white man.
I’ve recently unplugged all of the TV’s in my house and highly recommend it.
May 14th, 2007 at 11:50 am“Crazy white people”
May 14th, 2007 at 11:53 amI advise Men, once again, to opt-out of the system, don’t play the game, and go your own way.
Comment by jonny — May 14, 2007 @ 11:31 am
(Head west, men, there are some significant cliffs at the edge of the ocean, take the plunge, and follow the setting sun.
May 14th, 2007 at 11:54 amYou’ll be free at last.)
I think that these figures are irrelevant without showing the relative number of experts available at large grouped by race. This is not a problem of selectivity, its a problem of minority educational disadvantage. Knocking these shows is equivalent to complaining about a symptom of a larger problem.
May 14th, 2007 at 11:55 am# 33 bill said: liberals are often quick to defend racial, ethnic and gender identity, and yet white males are………what?
white males are…uhh… everywhere! Have ya turned on the TV much? You’d think they owned the stations or something!!
May 14th, 2007 at 11:55 amI wonder what kind of rational white male could vote Democratic when its clear their party doesn’t like them.
Unless one is homo anyway.
May 14th, 2007 at 12:00 pmWow, this is all you got? Well, here comes phase 2 of the “Fairness Doctrine”.
ROTFL
May 14th, 2007 at 12:11 pmAs usual, it looks like our conservative trolls prefer the company of men to that of women. Manly men doing manly things in a manful way. Women? They don’t need women. They’ve got men!
m12 asks what kind of rational white male could vote Democratic. The answer, m12, is that some men actually LIKE women. I like women. I have a wife and a daughter, and I like them both. I value their opinion. You, m12, evidently don’t like women. We have a name for a guy like that.
May 14th, 2007 at 12:14 pmHappy Guy: “Wow, this is all you got?”
Yep. Nothing to see here. You can move on to another site now. Please.
May 14th, 2007 at 12:15 pm#45
What does liking women have to do with voting Democratic? Are you really this hung up about your right to abortions?
May 14th, 2007 at 12:21 pm#18
Right, since Bill Clinton was a black man.
May 14th, 2007 at 12:24 pmThe reason you only see white male conservatives is because that is what the white male conservative network owners want to see.
If you paid billions of dollars to control every aspect of the media, would you want to see the people you are scares of talking on your television?
May 14th, 2007 at 12:26 pmSo, TP, what’s your point? Are you insinuating that these shows are racist or sexist? Have you compared these rates to the white and male rates within the Government, or within Washington thinktanks?
If the government and Washington insiders are dominated by white males, wouldn’t it make sense that Sunday morning talk shows are as well?
Seems like you’re casting vague aspersions without doing any real research here.
May 14th, 2007 at 12:30 pmm12: “I wonder what kind of rational white male could vote Democratic when its clear their party doesn’t like them.”
m12, five minutes later: “What does liking women have to do with voting Democratic?”
Look, dude, if you prefer the company of men to that of women, if you prefer the sound of mens’ voices to that of women, if you prefer the political and social arguments men make to that of women, maybe it’s not too much of a stretch to say that you prefer men to women. Most of the men I have known who feel that way are gay, that’s all. Just thought you should know.
Bonus question of the day: Why is the modern neocon movement so gay?
May 14th, 2007 at 12:31 pmNaturally, if your guests are mostly Conservative, their racial makeup is going to me largely rich white men. This can’t be a surprise to anyone.
May 14th, 2007 at 12:34 pmEvilCorn: “So, TP, what’s your point? Are you insinuating that these shows are racist or sexist?”
That’s correct, Einstein. The numbers speak for themselves. Does TP have to spell it out for you in large capitals? The point, since you are evidently too clueless to figure it out for yourself, is yes, the beltway media and Washington DC is dominated by white males. And, it’s not a “vague aspertion”. The charts and numbers are all there. News flash: some Americans would like to see a greater variety of opinion on our public media.
May 14th, 2007 at 12:38 pm#51
I don’t have any preference in company. Ann Coulter is very interesting to listen to. Keith Olbermann is not.
May 14th, 2007 at 12:39 pmJust to give you some information from the US Census Bureau.
White persons, percent, 2005 80.2%
Black persons, percent, 2005 12.8%
Asian persons, percent, 2005 4.3%
Hispanic , percent, 2005 14.4%
Looks like Fox News Sunday is the most balanced and even overweights the percentage of blacks. All of those shows seem to disregard Hispanics, though.
May 14th, 2007 at 12:40 pmI would like to know why this incredibly useful chart doesn’t break down “white” into subcategories like Scottish, Scandanavian, Greek, Russian, etc. Oh yeah, liberals hate the color white. White is not a color and therefore white people are not “people of color” and are despised and blamed for the evils of the world.
Liberals don’t follow Dr. King’s message to look upon the content of ones character not on the color of their skin (or gender, or orientation, etc.). Think Regress is clearly bigoted and doesn’t try to hide its bigotry against older white men. Somehow liberals are stupid enough to feel good inside if they see a diverse crowd. Would you not be satisfied with a group made up of all Asians or all Gays? Of course you would! So it’s not diversity, it’s that you hate white men because in your mind you think the old boys network wields all power and keeps others down. As we watch the Bush Administration present the most “diverse” cabinet in US history, not a word is mentioned because diversity is really just a code word for hating conservatives and those that have used their self-reliant philosophy to makes something of themselves. They clearly prove that anything is possible and expose your lies that it is “The Man” that is keeping people down. Unfortunately for you, your false belief system hides the fact that there really is no “glass ceiling”. There really is nothing holding people down. It’s all in your mind and it isn’t true.
May 14th, 2007 at 12:41 pmListen up everyone! Eric’s thoughtful new rule: If you are concerned about the fact that white males dominate our media, you are a bigot! How much longer do we have to watch the sad plight of our conservative white males? How much longer do our sad, white males have to be subjected to racial bigotry? Thank’s Eric. I can see your point – white males are the ultimate victims here.
May 14th, 2007 at 12:51 pm“That’s correct, Einstein. The numbers speak for themselves. Does TP have to spell it out for you in large capitals? The point, since you are evidently too clueless to figure it out for yourself, is yes, the beltway media and Washington DC is dominated by white males. And, it’s not a “vague aspertionâ€. The charts and numbers are all there. News flash: some Americans would like to see a greater variety of opinion on our public media.”
But would you like to see a greater variety of opinion at the expense of having a less informed opinion?
I’ve got no issues with diversity, but if the people “in the know” tend to be while males, then that’s your problem, not the fact that the talk shows tend to have while males as guests — after all, they’re in the business of having informed people on the show. Complaining about the effect while ignoring the cause isn’t very useful.
My point is that TP is being lazy by just showing the breakdown of guests without doing any research into why the guest ratios break down like they do. They’re insinuating racism without actually having the balls to come out and call them racist, or doing the work to determine whether they’re racist or not. It’s lazy, sensationalistic journalism.
May 14th, 2007 at 12:53 pmEvil: “I’ve got no issues with diversity, but if the people “in the know†tend to be while males, then that’s your problem”
Does the term “circular argument” ring a bell? If you really think there aren’t more women who are “in the know,” then that’s YOUR problem – you have no respect for women.
May 14th, 2007 at 12:57 pm#32
Why do you think we have a gender gap in politics, Mr. President?
The feminists have spewed all this stuff about female independence. You have 25+ unmarried working women who can’t find a husband, so they want the government to be their husband instead.
May 14th, 2007 at 12:59 pmDoes the term “circular argument†ring a bell? If you really think there aren’t more women who are “in the know,†then that’s YOUR problem – you have no respect for women.
You misread what I was saying.
I didn’t mean that it’s “your problem” as in it’s a problem with you and not me, I meant it more like “there’s your problem”, as in THAT is the problem that you should be focusing on.
The talk shows are going to invite people who are players in the DC game. If those players tend to be white men, then the problem is that the players tend to be white men, not that talk shows tend to invite those white men on their show.
May 14th, 2007 at 1:06 pmm12: “The feminists have spewed all this stuff about female independence. You have 25+ unmarried working women who can’t find a husband, so they want the government to be their husband instead.”
Again, why is the neocon movement so gay?
May 14th, 2007 at 1:12 pmI don’t know… It’s like those men believe that everybody should be equal or something. Scary thought! What’s wrong with them?
/sarcasm off
May 14th, 2007 at 1:12 pmI don’t know… It’s like those men believe that everybody should be equal or something. Scary thought! What’s wrong with them?
Equal at what?
May 14th, 2007 at 1:16 pmI’m backing Evilcornbread here. There is nothing wrong with pointing out the disenfranchisement of minorities in this country, but TP is simply spewing statistics that are not normalized for the other environmental factors directly relating to this issue. I think if that normalization were shown, you’d find that there is little or no preference given to white males, based on the proportions of race and sex of the pool of available commentators.
This site consistently shows an inability to look at problems from all the angles and pin the said problem on the right people. You want more black commentators? I think that’d be great. Don’t talk to NBC about this, though. Fix the public schools. This has little or nothing to do with the networks.
May 14th, 2007 at 1:27 pmHere’s a question for TP:
Since you clearly think that these percentages are evidence of racism and sexism, what SHOULD the numbers look like? What percentages do you think make sense? Even distribution across genders and ethnicities? Corresponding to census data? Proportional to government-held positions? Mirroring Congress?
Somehow I suspect they don’t have the answer to that question, and simply want to stir up some good old righteous indignation without doing any research or even having a constructive point to this post at all. I thought you were fighting against “Braindead Media”, not contributing to it.
May 14th, 2007 at 1:28 pmand, m12, you’re really an idiot. Everyone on here is writing in a comment submission box, and you’re sitting here critiquing everyone’s use of pronouns, dependent clauses, etc. because no one is looking to write a book here. Piss off. Really. You’ve not put forth a cohesive argument since starting to post here. You aren’t rattling any liberal nerves here. No one cares how riveting your small, conservative mind finds Ann Coulter.
May 14th, 2007 at 1:30 pmI don’t have any preference in company. Ann Coulter is very interesting to listen to. Keith Olbermann is not.
Comment by m12 — May 14, 2007 @ 12:39 pm
Maybe because Ann Coulter has a bigger adam’s apple than Olbermann she seems more virile to you. I say that because you got my gaydar going haywire.
May 14th, 2007 at 1:30 pmEvilcornbread – The proportion should approximate the percentage in the general population. There are more than 20% females in the USA, you know…
May 14th, 2007 at 1:33 pmWe’ve got a lot of namecalling going on here by using the term “gay” as an insult. Let’s all recall that this is a progressive site, and giving “gay” a negative connotation is not exactly a progressive ideal. Gay people kind of hate that.
May 14th, 2007 at 1:37 pmWhite persons, percent, 2005 80.2%
Black persons, percent, 2005 12.8%
Asian persons, percent, 2005 4.3%
Hispanic , percent, 2005 14.4%
Looks like Fox News Sunday is the most balanced and even overweights the percentage of blacks. All of those shows seem to disregard Hispanics, though.
Comment by muckdog — May 14, 2007 @ 12:40 pm
I see that you left out that 50.7% are female. Typical.
May 14th, 2007 at 1:38 pm#37:
bill, are you really all there? A simple define search on google turned up a couple of references to the word dominatrix… look it up.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=define%3A+dominatrix
May 14th, 2007 at 1:42 pmParrot:
Sorry, but that is just not true. The percentage of women in the American public is not equal to the percentage of those that have an expert’s perspective in the realm of politics. The same goes for any field, and there are others that females dominate more. A more proper measure would perhaps be the percentage makeup of women employed by the government, and all political organizations. Again, to actually prove anything with numbers, they must be comparable to a standard such as the one I mentioned. Empiricism is always your friend when trying to prove a point.
May 14th, 2007 at 1:43 pmThis doesn’t look too good for Timmy, does it. I actually expected Russert to be as bad as Fox. It turns out he is slightly worse.
May 14th, 2007 at 1:51 pmAn America without representation in true media fashion. Apparently we haven’t come far since the 1960’s. Maybe it is time to revisit those times of enlightenment.
May 14th, 2007 at 2:06 pmStand and shout. You will be heard.
“We’ve got a lot of namecalling going on here by using the term “gay†as an insult.”
I can’t speak for anyone else, but asking the question, “why is the neocon movement so gay?” is not “namecalling.” I have noticed a great deal of “manlove” and “womanhate” in the positions of neocons. The neocon movement includes Jeff Gannon, Ken Melman, Ted Haggard, Matt Drudge, Josh Bolton and the Repub congressman who hit on young male pages (I forget his name). Just last month, on FOX news they were celebrating a young handsome neocon vet who turned out to be another one of these gay prostitutes. There seems to be quite a few closeted, self-loathing gay males among the ranks of powerful neocons.
So my question was why is the neocon movement so gay? Nothing in this question implies a bias against gays on my part. If you see calling someone out as gay as an insult, it is you who has the problem with “gay.”
May 14th, 2007 at 2:25 pm#68
No, its because Ann Coulter says very straightforward, correct, and direct stuff.
I don’t think she is physically attractive, but she is a damn good commentator. Especially that crack on Edwards.
May 14th, 2007 at 2:31 pmBluedog
Sure dude. You go re-read that post and tell me there’s no implied bias against someone who “prefer[s] the sound of mens’ voices to that of women” in that comment. I don’t care. I just consider this a community, and it should be of unified voice. Not sending coded insults in a frat house way over the internet. Pretty sure that your cutesy “bonus question” would piss some people off.
May 14th, 2007 at 2:43 pmYeah, because we all know that white men speak for the entire nation. Shameless.
May 14th, 2007 at 2:44 pmimorgan82, if I said Condi Rice was the most incompetent National Security Advisor in history, would you think I’m a racist or a realist?
May 14th, 2007 at 2:56 pmI would say you’re comparing apples to oranges in terms of the two lines of dialogue.
May 14th, 2007 at 3:00 pmdon’t think she is physically attractive, but she is a damn good commentator. Especially that crack on Edwards.
Comment by m12
That is so gay.
May 14th, 2007 at 3:03 pmNo, its because Ann Coulter says very straightforward, correct, and direct stuff. Comment by m12 — May 14, 2007 @ 2:31 pm
Correct? BAHAHAHAHAHA, that’s so st*pid!!! She’s a screaming hate filled banshee! There’s nothing *correct* about her statements, unless you change her rhetoric so that her descriptions are of Republicans. She keeps calling Democrats *gay*, yet all of the Republicans keep getting drug out of the closet. She keeps calling Democrats *weak*, yet Republicans are all weak, but stubborn – confusing st*pidity and stubbornness with strength!
You poor, lost, confused and st*pid little child! What a riot you are!
I don’t think she is physically attractive, but she is a damn good commentator. Especially that crack on Edwards. Comment by m12 — May 14, 2007 @ 2:31 pm
BAHAHAHAHA, yeah, there’s nothing gay about fearing that any man that’s attractive is *gay*! How badly do you self loathe, anyway, there, closet case?
Sounds like you find Edwards more attractive than Coulter? Well, not surprising! I bet he’d even look better in a dress than she does – after all that stubble of hers really does make her way too Thatcher…
May 14th, 2007 at 3:14 pmdon’t think she is physically attractive, but she is a damn good commentator. Especially that crack on Edwards.
Comment by m12
M12 was revealed as a racist yesterday, and now a homophobe as well.
Why else would he think likening Edwards to a gay person makes Coulter a damn good commentator?
With so many imagined enemies, how does m12 ever find the courage to get out of bed in the morning?
May 14th, 2007 at 4:33 pmimorgan82, OK, point taken. Sorry.
I am interested in what David Brock described in “Blinded By the Right” as a sort of current running through the conservative circles he frequented. He noticed a great deal of closeted, self-loathing behavior. I’ve wondered if this is related to the “authoritarian personality” issue associated with the “28%ers”, that’s all. But, I’ll stop trying to torment conservative trolls with this because I don’t want to insult you or anyone who feels the same way.
May 14th, 2007 at 4:55 pmNooo!
May 14th, 2007 at 5:07 pmIt is not the networks fault that people of color like to sleep late on Sundays.
May 14th, 2007 at 7:51 pmIt’s nice to see that somewhere between the sarcasm and the teenage idiocracy someone can make a legitimate point here. (I’m an elitist bastard, so sue me.)
The reason is that if they told the whole truth, there wouldn’t be any edge. People don’t want to make an informed decision. They just want one handed to them by people they think they should trust. It takes a lot of effort to stay absolutely informed, and frankly, most people care more about eating dinner, watching whatever drama is on TV, and how they are going to pay the bills.
If people can identify even in part with a group, they will listen to what they have to say. Spin the facts one way or another, and you can convince people to believe anything you want them to. That’s politics. Everyone is guilty of it.
Solutions to problems are hard. Much easier to say it is someone else’s fault. Liberals and conservatives have so much in common regarding this, it is absolutely laughable.
May 15th, 2007 at 1:54 amIt’s utterly unfair and embarrassing to other countries that this bigotry exists in the day and age, 2007. America is supposed to stand for equality, “All men are created equal”. The corporate media in the USA stinks to high heaven, in many other ways too besides this particularly disgusting and unfair one. White people are becoming a minority and are only about 50% of the country, so lets start seeing that on Sunday mornings from the corporate pundit dummies please.
May 15th, 2007 at 2:44 amThis is irking me completely.
When is it appropriate to ever say “Majority of black men are found in professional sports,” but always appropriate to point out “majority white men found in political pundit shows”
I hate this…focusing on race, prompting more hatred for what’s obvious, than what’s not. Headlines like this make it more acceptable to hate whiteys, and just “confirms” what alot of people suspect, and makes an uknown face of the enemy, into the perceived opposite race. This is irresponsible.
May 15th, 2007 at 4:31 am..also, Smith…”whites” are not 50%…there are approximately 39 million latinos, and 35 million african-americans…the percentage of whites, vs. a combined number of other ethnicities is still greater than 50%.
That’s not the point. The point, is that “white” people at the bottom, and middle rungs are being stepped on just as much as the next person.
The POINT IS if you had a room full of millionaires, and there was a poor white guy and a wealthy black guy standing outside, which one would be invited in?
It’s a CLASS war…racism still exists…to be black, and enter a department store, feeling like you’re being watched is a shitty thing, but class war is what it breaks down to. I wish poor white republicans would see this.
May 15th, 2007 at 4:35 am..and really, come on…could I point out that Condi and Colin were both major participants in this fake war, and Condi has her name on an oil tanker…would that make the posters of this story feel any better about racial equality?
Here is why this reasoning is wrong: To seek out a “black or latino” person, specifically to be a guest on these cheesy shows, amounts to “we want to know what the african-american and/or latino community thinks abou this,” that is completely racist. There are alot of people would never assume to “speak for their ethnic group” and it’s an incredibly racist/insulting assumption.
May 15th, 2007 at 4:40 amDepends on who’s carrying the drinks.
Who the hell cares if women and hispanics aren’t represented on political talk shows in line with their population demographics ?
Isn’t the NBA a more pressing concen ? Look at the commentators there. Zero women or hispanics.
Is the NBA more racist ? Less representative ? Or at some point do you figure out that those invited to commentate on TV are representative of those in the business of commentating and nothing else.
You’re talking about people commentating on politics. Why not point out that less than 50% of elected representatives are women. Surely that’s more important, no ?
Is this not the public stating that they don’t want to see more women and minorities as the voice of public opinion in the first place ?
Or is who’s invited on TV to do political commentary just representive of who’s in the business of political commentary and nothing more.
May 15th, 2007 at 9:36 am“Who the hell cares if women and hispanics aren’t represented on political talk shows in line with their population demographics ?
Isn’t the NBA a more pressing concen ? Look at the commentators there. Zero women or hispanics. ”
kilo, I care. I don’t give two shits about the NBA. What you fail to realize is the importance of representation of women, and the lack thereof, on political talk show sends a glaring message: “You are not welcome to the White (A**hole) Males Only club”
But don’t worry all…..white America has a limited amount of time left in exposure and power. They know it and that is why they are so scared and turning up their racist tactics. The truth is, white people are the minority in the world; brown people outnumber whites in significant numbers, but whites need to assert their power to boost their low self-esteem. The West has been warned…not everyone is going to take it lying down. Look at the Middle East.
May 15th, 2007 at 11:15 amWho is this lill fanatic? I’m hoping TP isn’t attracting these kinds of racists to their comment board. Sounding like a brown version of David Duke and Tom Metzger. lill, go read Soul on Ice and drain all that white hate out of you. But don’t worry all….? Nice educated language. Please leave America and join your weak-ass third-world countries so you can experience what Eldridge Cleaver did when he went to Africa. We won’t let you come crawling back though like he did. Just got back from NY last week. What a great city. True melting pot of capitalism. True capitalist don’t care what color you are – they just love to compete. Sounds like that is something you’ve never experienced. Go get a degree and enter the workforce and quit blaming your problems on “The Man”.
May 15th, 2007 at 7:33 pm