A ‘bad’ day for ‘American journalism.’
By on Aug 1st, 2007 at 9:46 am
A ‘bad’ day for ‘American journalism.’
“It’s a bad thing for the Journal and American journalism that the Bancroft family could not resist Rupert Murdoch’s generous offer,” said former Dow Jones director Jim Ottaway Jr., who opposed Rupert Murdoch’s takeover of Dow Jones. Another board member, Leslie Hill, “quit the board in protest last night.”
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Bush
Business
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Global Warming
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Iraq
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
McCain
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Technology
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
When they came for the New York Post, I did not speak up because I did not write for the Post, when they came….
Oh, you get the idea. Now they discover Murdoch is bastardizing journalism?
August 1st, 2007 at 9:49 amYes, but Murdoch is actively *trying* to destroy journalism. That’s the point.
August 1st, 2007 at 9:50 amJust another nail in the coffin of newspapers.
August 1st, 2007 at 9:52 amNow the rest of the WSJ reporting can follow in the footsteps of the fascist page (op-ed section).
It’s a good day for robber barons everywhere. I hope Rupert puts a topless woman on page 2.
I bet my ultra-republican co-workers will love the WSJ even more now that it’s a highly respectable Murdoch news product.
August 1st, 2007 at 9:57 amSo? Don’t read the rag – it’ll serve Murdoch right.
August 1st, 2007 at 9:59 amJust another nail in the coffin of newspapers.
Comment by Neon Bunny — August 1, 2007 @ 9:52 am
Why do you think the WH had a special meeting about bloggers?
Ya never know, this WSJ deal just might bankrupt Rupert in the long run. BTW, did you know that Rupert gets a sizable percentage of his income from porn? Yep, a porno King!
August 1st, 2007 at 9:59 amWSJ will now be sold along side the likes of Star and OK Magazine… now i can look informed as i find out about Nicole Richie’s jail happenings! XD
August 1st, 2007 at 10:01 amI wonder if in a few years we’ll be able to find a whole bunch of little “errors” in the stock price listings which, astonishingly seem to always have benefited Rupert and his friends. Does anyone really believe he wouldn’t stoop to such a thing?
August 1st, 2007 at 10:03 amI never watch FAUXNOIZ and will never read this piece of sh*t, even when they give it to me at the hotel.
Not worth the paper it is printed on.
August 1st, 2007 at 10:04 amIf you want to see how stupid corporate america is, they will likely continue to read the WSJ, even knowing it is now a propaganda rag designed to mislead them into making decisions because rupert wants them to.
August 1st, 2007 at 10:07 amidiots are in charge everyone. do what seems appropriate for the end of times. I would have hope but for the idiots that are supposed to be on the opposing side of this battle, but they don’t care either.
I particularly like idiots arguing with idiots. it is the road to the future
#4, Kelso,
Agreed.
I never read the rag, but those ‘Ethically oriented’ Neoturds consider it their bible.
Hah!
A Porn King buys the WSJ.
Fitting, predictable and more of the SSDD.
August 1st, 2007 at 10:08 amThey have been assimilated.
August 1st, 2007 at 10:08 am“Why do you think the WH had a special meeting about bloggers?”
Comment by The Republic of Stupidity — August 1, 2007 @ 9:59 am
It’s why I have some hope for the country and fear increased pressure on the web from corporate interests.
August 1st, 2007 at 10:13 amIt’s why I have some hope for the country and fear increased pressure on the web from corporate interests.
Comment by Neon Bunny — August 1, 2007 @ 10:13 am
Ya sure got that straight, Neon Bunny.
August 1st, 2007 at 10:15 ambad idea for the board member to quit in protest. now murdoch will fill her slot with a lackey, and there will be no dissent. the smarter and more courageous thing to do would have been to stay on and fight.
August 1st, 2007 at 10:15 amMurdoch will be able to promote his own agenda while reducing the status of newspapers in general.
August 1st, 2007 at 10:15 amWaxman just said that a supeana was issued for Kensinger and the the marshalls can’t find him to serve him with it.
August 1st, 2007 at 10:17 amWe all need to ask our Dem candidates if they plan on vigorously enforcing the Sherman anti-trust act. Any triangulation on this question should immediately disqualify them.
August 1st, 2007 at 10:17 amSo I take it none of you read Shelly Banjo’s enlightening article on “faux gras.”
August 1st, 2007 at 10:19 amFaux Gras, brought to you by Faux “News”
We all have to consider the fact that Murdock is an Australian. What better way to destroy America than to buy everything you can to set up corruption throughout every industry he owes. Tell a story (true or not) and repeat it as the president does, and everyone will think it is actually true. Now let’s wait until we get those rag-type magazines input into the WSJ and see what the conservatives are actually doing–they do just as many human degrading things as any other human.
They just think they are better than everyone else. Excuse me, but being a liberal means one thinks for themselves instead of having someone like Murdock and fixnews tell you what to think.
August 1st, 2007 at 10:20 amWaxman just said that a supeana was issued for Kensinger and the the marshalls can’t find him to serve him with it.
Comment by IgnoranceIsNotBliss
He went hunting with Dead-eye Dick.
August 1st, 2007 at 10:21 amactually, texas by midnight, murdoch renounced his australian citizenship in the 80’s so he could own more american media (fcc prevents non-americans from owning such a large % as he does).
he’s an american citizen now.
August 1st, 2007 at 10:24 amalso, texas, i’m not sure what you’re insinuating here. is it that australians are anti-america and want to destroy it? as a dual australian-american citizen, i can tell you nothing could be further from the truth.
August 1st, 2007 at 10:27 amlonesomerobot,
What do you think Murdoch’s goal is in buying the WSJ? Anything more than profit?
August 1st, 2007 at 10:30 amTitle should read:
Sad day for American Liberal Journalism, we thought we had the lock on the American mind but they’ve found ways to circumvent our brain-washing funnel. We thought we could keep American journalism goose-stepping on the left.
Of course that would be a long heading so maybe not.
August 1st, 2007 at 10:33 amPost # 1. ,very well said. This is not only a bad day for journalism., it is a bad day for a “well-informed” public
August 1st, 2007 at 10:33 amAND therefore, for DEMOCRACY! how is knowing about the latest
celebrity du jour going to help keep the public informed about voting, etc?
and it won’t be long before we see the latest tabloid tidbits on page 1.
oh dear lord,
warnings upon warnings about what’s happening and no one seems to be listening….everything is for the Almighty buck. how sad…
Sad day for American Liberal Journalism, we thought we had the lock on the American mind but they’ve found ways to circumvent our brain-washing funnel. We thought we could keep American journalism goose-stepping on the left.
Of course that would be a long heading so maybe not.
Comment by Eric — August 1, 2007 @ 10:33 am
Meaningless comment. Don’t bother arguing it.
August 1st, 2007 at 10:35 amYou can’t argue it, so just say it’s hyberbole and meaningless. Typical liberal tactic.
August 1st, 2007 at 10:37 amMeaningless comment. Don’t bother arguing it.
Comment by The Republic of Stupidity — August 1, 2007 @ 10:35 am
Eric has a way about him — with the meaningless.
August 1st, 2007 at 10:38 amThe WSJ already had a right leaning tilt, so I don’t know if Murdoch owning it will change it that much. I do think that the rules regarding who can own how much, should be reversed. When a handful of companies control the media, they also control the message. It is a huge disservice to the citizens of the US.
August 1st, 2007 at 10:39 amI wonder if we need to worry about the Dow Jones Industrial Average now, too? Could Rupert start messing with that to impact the company mix and sell the potentially skewed results or membership in the company mix to the highest bidder?
NAW!!! He wouldn’t dare impact facts for money would he? Thought not!
August 1st, 2007 at 10:39 amI read somewhere that this could actually diminish the influence of the wingnut WSJ Editorial page. Journalism has been dead for quite some time. It’s really just moderate and reasonable conservatives selling out their voices. Which is probably good for liberals in the end considering that the inevitable backlash to right-wing dominion is already underway.
August 1st, 2007 at 10:40 amEric has a way about him — with the meaningless.
Comment by Zooey — August 1, 2007 @ 10:38 am
There’s nothing factual in what he says. It’s all hyperbole, overblown exaggeration. There’s nothing to reply to or debate.
August 1st, 2007 at 10:40 amOH BOY!!! More cover stories for Lindsay Lohan. Maybe Rupert should get Perez Hilton to run the newspaper.
August 1st, 2007 at 10:41 amOff topic, but it looks like Iraq just slipped back a bit.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070801/ts_nm/iraq_dc;_ylt=AvRetMCTAwOo4sscVQWGhvus0NUE
August 1st, 2007 at 10:41 amThe WSJ op-ed pages have always been filled with ultra-right wing propaganda, but the regular news section is of tremendous quality, perhaps the best in the world. There will still be good reporting, but Murdoch will ruin the reliability of the paper, because somewhere behind the scenes he will be screwing with the news here and there. It will often be a matter of what stories DON’T run more than stories that have been mis-reported.
August 1st, 2007 at 10:44 amliberals are killing themselves all over america
August 1st, 2007 at 10:44 amzooey,
mostly, i think murdoch is just a profit-whore. when i lived in australia i had friends who worked for the australian (a sydney newspaper owned by newscorp). they would jokingly refer to working for “the evil empire” – but were otherwise resigned to it. they knew it was mostly about sensationalizing the news to make a buck.
now, being a rich bastard, of course murdoch has a right-wing bent. that shows in his media. but destroying america would absolutely kill his profit. he’s also very old and set in his ways. but his son (who will run the empire when he’s gone) is actually not so ideologically rigid, in fact arguing recently that global warming was to be taken seriously.
it will be interesting to see if there’s a shift after rupert is gone.
August 1st, 2007 at 10:44 amThat’s unfortunate.
Outside of the editorial page, you could reasonably count on the WSJ for analysis of financial matters…..
In the future, if Saturday morning FOX business shows are any indication, we will be reading that the reason that Company X stock price plummeted is not because they missed earnings, but because stockholders panicked in advance of the DEMs taking the WHite House in ‘08.
August 1st, 2007 at 10:45 amLots of CRS disease going on in this hearing. Surprize, Surprize.
August 1st, 2007 at 10:45 amliberals are killing themselves all over america
Comment by chris — August 1, 2007 @ 10:44 am
Silly & meaningless.
August 1st, 2007 at 10:45 amIs Eric actually suggesting that the WSJ has heretofore been a liberal newspaper?!?!?
August 1st, 2007 at 10:45 amI’ve always had disdain for Murdoch to the bone. What a pure idiot.
If this same board was entrusted with electing the next President, we’d have Cheney in office from 2009-2017.
August 1st, 2007 at 10:46 amIs Eric actually suggesting that the WSJ has heretofore been a liberal newspaper?!?!?
Comment by VerbalKint — August 1, 2007 @ 10:45 am
He didn’t say anything. It was all overblown nonsense. If you start arguing w/ him, you legitimze the nonsense. DON’T take the bait.
August 1st, 2007 at 10:48 amComment by Eric — August 1, 2007 @ 10:33 am
The Wall Street Journal tends to be a conservative paper. If they don’t want Murdoch, then how could you? How could I?
August 1st, 2007 at 10:48 ama highly respectable Murdoch news product
Boy, that’s a multiple, serial oxymoron if I’ve ever seen one!
August 1st, 2007 at 10:49 amwe’d have Cheney in office from 2009-2017.
Comment by Nachos of Justice — August 1, 2007 @ 10:46 am
Actually, they would appoint him for life. The Cons
August 1st, 2007 at 10:49 amMurdoch’s end game is the end of the Fourth Estate.
August 1st, 2007 at 10:51 amVerbalknit, ‘Actually, they would appoint him for life. The Cons’…
Or until his batteries run out.
August 1st, 2007 at 10:53 amIt’s no secret that WSJ has now lost any and all credibility they once had. They’re done.
August 1st, 2007 at 10:53 amFNC the most watched cable news channel,6th most watch cable channel .
CNN 25#
MSNBC behind the food channel
August 1st, 2007 at 10:54 amI watched as much of King’s Cheney interview as I could stomach.
(Less than 5 min.)
This guy has more deferments than heart attacks. His vision of America includes a Dicktator. Everything he touches turns to fecal matter.
I’ll bet he’ll be surprised when they tell him the new batteries were MADE IN CHINA!
August 1st, 2007 at 10:55 amUsing the words “journalism” and “Rupert Murdoch” in the same sentence is rather amusing.
August 1st, 2007 at 10:56 amit will be interesting to see if there’s a shift after rupert is gone.
Comment by lonesomerobot — August 1, 2007 @ 10:44 am
Thanks for that, lonesomerobot. I’ve wondered what Murdoch’s motivations were, and it’s as I thought — money. Another thing I’ve wondered about — he does realize he can’t take it with him? :-D
Here’s a good thought for the next generation of Murdochs.
August 1st, 2007 at 10:59 amliberals are killing themselves all over america
Comment by chris
Trolls are making foolish, sensless comments all over this site.
August 1st, 2007 at 11:01 amI’ve wondered what Murdoch’s motivations were, and it’s as I thought — money. Another thing I’ve wondered about — he does realize he can’t take it with him? :-D
Here’s a good thought for the next generation of Murdochs.
Comment by Zooey — August 1, 2007 @ 10:59 am
Don’t overlook the pursuit of power for its own sake (as a motive).
August 1st, 2007 at 11:01 amliberals are killing themselves all over america -Comment by chris
Neoturds are killing themselves to avoid paying taxes.
August 1st, 2007 at 11:02 amTrolls are making foolish, sensless comments all over this site.
Comment by RUCerious — August 1, 2007 @ 11:01 am
Correct, RUCerious. An empty, meaningless comment, meant to incite emotional replies. Nothing to argue there. IGNORE.
August 1st, 2007 at 11:03 amRUCerious
I like the style of troll wacking today – no direct interaction, just talking about them around their posts. If the troll posts something debatable, we can be direct. If they post nonsense, talk about them.
August 1st, 2007 at 11:03 amliberals are killing themselves all over america
As if. We’re not losing a liberal outlet, nitwit. It’s just that we actually give a crap about something more than money and it’s sad to see yet another American institution corrupted and trashed by radical conservatism. As each institution is neutered and corroded and fails miserably to any longer provide service or function, the American people will know exactly who is responsible, and it ain’t wild-eyed, so-called far left hippies who are in command.
August 1st, 2007 at 11:04 am59,
August 1st, 2007 at 11:06 amWell said, Mr. VP, I salute you!
no worries, zooey :)
never mind the troll garbage here, just meaningless whimpers from advocates of a dying ideology.
“permanent majority” anyone? man it’s funny to dig up that old chestnut. ahhh, the pre-2006 halcyon days when trolls could lie to each other and feel like someone was actually taking them seriously…
August 1st, 2007 at 11:10 amOne of the Bancrofts is an acquaintance through the snotty horsey set and horse show circuit — she was in favor — I reserve judgment. Personally, I do not know how the editorial page of the WSJ could become MORE conservative under Murdoch, but its newstories are really second to none. I read it every day. If it gets vulgar, I bail!
August 1st, 2007 at 11:10 amTrolls are making foolish, sensless comments all over this site.
Comment by RUCerious
yep just look at all the liberal angry on this site
August 1st, 2007 at 11:15 ampermanent majority†anyone? man it’s funny to dig up that old chestnut.
Comment by lonesomerobot — August 1, 2007 @ 11:10 am
Yeah… makes me laugh too. That “permanent majority” sure vaped fast, didn’t it? BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
August 1st, 2007 at 11:16 amI like the style of troll wacking today – no direct interaction, just talking about them around their posts. If the troll posts something debatable, we can be direct. If they post nonsense, talk about them.
Comment by PatrioticLiberalChristian(PLC) — August 1, 2007 @ 11:03 am
I’m enjoying it as well. I think we’ve finally hit on something here.
If we find ourselves tempted to respond to an inane troll — just talk ABOUT them instead!!
August 1st, 2007 at 11:16 amyep just look at all the liberal angry on this site
Comment by chris — August 1, 2007 @ 11:15 am
DON’T feed this troll. DON’T feed this troll. DON’T feed this troll.
August 1st, 2007 at 11:17 amComment by lonesomerobot — August 1, 2007 @ 11:10 am
I am learning to relax about that issue — slowly, but surely. :)
August 1st, 2007 at 11:18 amNeoturds are killing themselves to avoid paying taxes.
Kinda like liberals who make movies and tv shows outside of America to keep from paying taxes?Than they talk shit about Bush’s tax cuts.
August 1st, 2007 at 11:18 amIf the troll posts something debatable, we can be direct. If they post nonsense, talk about them.
Comment by PatrioticLiberalChristian(PLC) — August 1, 2007 @ 11:03 am
I’m enjoying it as well. I think we’ve finally hit on something here.
If we find ourselves tempted to respond to an inane troll — just talk ABOUT them instead!!
Comment by Zooey — August 1, 2007 @ 11:16 am
By Jove, I think you’ve got it!!!!!!
August 1st, 2007 at 11:18 amDON’T feed this troll. DON’T feed this troll. DON’T feed this troll.
Comment by The Republic of Stupidity — August 1, 2007 @ 11:17 am
Stop feeing that troll!! :D
August 1st, 2007 at 11:18 amEric at his nonsense again this morning?
He dropped a good one yesterday on the Tillman thread.
You avoid the illogic I present and then Wayne the pot calls the kettle black.
Comment by Eric — July 31, 2007 @ 7:52 pm
Just priceless…..
August 1st, 2007 at 11:20 amAnd I hope everyone joins me in avoiding the illogic Eric presents.
=D
Kinda like liberals who make movies and tv shows outside of America to keep from paying taxes?Than they talk shit about Bush’s tax cuts.
Comment by chris — August 1, 2007 @ 11:18 am
Careful… this one’s crafty. He’s almost got a point.
August 1st, 2007 at 11:20 amRupert Murdoch
bastardizing journalism,Murdoch is actively *trying* to destroy journalism,Just another nail in the coffin of newspapers.Using the words “journalism†and “Rupert Murdoch†in the same sentence is rather amusing.
please can’t we stop the hate
August 1st, 2007 at 11:22 amBack in 2004, I held my nose and said perhaps it would’nt be so bad if Bush stole another election for many reasons such as he’d reap what he had sown in his second term and no one would look too good following the mess he has made and also he’d effectivly kill the Republican brand, even while at the same time America would surely suffer.
August 1st, 2007 at 11:25 amWell now, even though I loathe Rupert Murdoch because of his tactics and extremist politics, and would much rather see his right wing extremist media empire implode, him taking over the WSJ does have it’s benefits. Before Murdoch owned the WSJ, it was one of the more respected Conservative newspapers in the country. Not anymore it isn’t. Murdoch has effectively destroyed a major Conservative media resource by tarnishing it’s reputation. Murdoch’s anti-Midas touch.
The Wall Street Journal is dead. Long Live the Murdoch Street Journal!
“yep just look at all the liberal angry on this site”
yep, just look at the marginal grammar displayed by trolls on this site.
August 1st, 2007 at 11:25 amRupert Murdoch had success and some failures.
Doesn’t he deserve a chance??Before everyone pounces on him?
August 1st, 2007 at 11:26 amHere are 3 major news outlets covering this huge story:
Bloomberg
http://beta.redlasso.com/Community/ClipPlayer.aspx?i=2a255b07-1a8c-4661-a912-a04e116ffd1f
CNN
http://beta.redlasso.com/Community/ClipPlayer.aspx?i=1b530e09-8ef1-44a0-b017-6ec0176386be
CNBC
August 1st, 2007 at 11:30 amhttp://beta.redlasso.com/Community/ClipPlayer.aspx?i=2602f8e4-3c75-42d7-a861-4e6f9e8a5524
If we find ourselves tempted to respond to an inane troll — just talk ABOUT them instead!!
Comment by Zooey
How can anyone respond to what even one troll claimed was illogic? ( gonna toss this one at Eric every time he posts his nonsense, lmao)
When their comments have no factual basis in this reality, their comments should not be debated but ridiculed.
August 1st, 2007 at 11:32 am76. Just like a … brings a knife to a gunfight.
How naive are you? Good lord.
August 1st, 2007 at 11:34 amI have been boycotting tabloid papaers for years – best way to stop goverment propaganda dont buy Tabloid shite
August 1st, 2007 at 11:35 amI thought liberals were all about tolerance and giving people a chance.
Guess i was wrong.
August 1st, 2007 at 11:37 am76. Just like a … brings a knife to a gunfight.
How naive are you? Good lord.
Comment by Vice President Bush
yep, that boy is trying to start a battle of wits, while he is unarmed.
August 1st, 2007 at 11:37 amI thought
Comment by chris
Don’t go hurting yourself there by overstraining.
August 1st, 2007 at 11:39 amIs Eric actually suggesting that the WSJ has heretofore been a liberal newspaper?!?!?
Comment by VerbalKint
The news pages of the WSJ leaned to the left.
August 1st, 2007 at 11:39 amDon’t go hurting yourself there by overstraining.
Comment by Wayne
Liberals don’t think. They act on emotion.
August 1st, 2007 at 11:40 amplease can’t we stop the hate
Comment by chris — August 1, 2007 @ 11:22 am
I have to say, w/out using naughty words, that I am no fan of Rupert Murdoch.
August 1st, 2007 at 11:41 amThere’s no respect for this so-called “news” mogul:
Florida Appeals Court Ruling : FOX News Lies are not Illegal
Ruling : The media in general has no legal obligation to tell the truth.
Fox employees sued the network for FIRING them for exposing the lies that were being told on Fox about the Bovine Growth Hormone. The Conservative court ruled AGAINST the employees, giving the green light for news outlets to “report, then let you decide”.
The “news” industry has NOTHING to do with reality, it’s a business which only focuses on the “bottom line”.
Will America ever wake up?
August 1st, 2007 at 11:41 am84. Dude you are completely behind the curve. The news pages were simply NOT wingnut radicals and actually DID their jobs as journalists. Of course, this is now the new left.
August 1st, 2007 at 11:42 amRupert Murdoch had success and some failures.
Doesn’t he deserve a chance??Before everyone pounces on him?
Comment by chris — August 1, 2007 @ 11:26 am
People aren’t responding to Murdoch’s succeses or failures. They don’t his politics. Not quite sure why we should “give him a chance”. He’s hardly a struggling underdog. It’s not unfair to call Fox the WH’s own personal network.
August 1st, 2007 at 11:43 amI have to say, w/out using naughty words, that I am no fan of Rupert Murdoch.
Comment by The Republic of Stupidity
I’m a big fan.
August 1st, 2007 at 11:44 amLiberals don’t think. They act on emotion.
Comment by Dan — August 1, 2007 @ 11:40 am
All humans do.
August 1st, 2007 at 11:45 amThe news pages were simply NOT wingnut radicals and actually DID their jobs as journalists. Of course, this is now the new left.
Comment by Vice President Bush
Liberals tend to go into journalism. This is why the news pages of the WSJ lean to the left.
August 1st, 2007 at 11:45 amAll humans do.
Comment by The Republic of Stupidity
Humans tend to think, but not liberals.
August 1st, 2007 at 11:46 amA ‘bad’ day for American Journalism
and a Bad 6.5 years for Democracy, The Constitution and The Bill of Rights!
I hope Larry King gets himself de-loused after last night’s close contact wth Darth “Evil” Cheney.
August 1st, 2007 at 11:46 amLiberals act on emotion?
What about this famous Republican/right wing appeal to emotion?
“The US Constitution is not a suicide pact?”
What about the emotional appeals to “save the babies” at abortion clinincs?
What about the overly emotional appeals for Terri Schiavo.
If the Republicans accuse you of something…..
-GSD
August 1st, 2007 at 11:46 am… like rachel said last night on keith,
he didn’t buy the WSJ to make money…
but there’s no way this deal will “bankrupt” him either…
financially, that is…
August 1st, 2007 at 11:47 am.
It’s not unfair to call CNN and MSNBC the democrats personal networks
August 1st, 2007 at 11:48 amHumans tend to think, but not liberals.
Comment by Dan
What logic! I think you’re destined for a Darwin award.
Keep up the caveman thinking, and I’ll keep listening to those of us with a college degree.
August 1st, 2007 at 11:49 am“The US Constitution is not a suicide pact†– President Lincoln
August 1st, 2007 at 11:49 amMr. Pee by any other name is still, well, just a bunch of spilled urine…
August 1st, 2007 at 11:50 amdepending on one’s personal definition of “success”,
it could be said murdoch has been successful -
at lowering the quality and subsance of actual news
and information…
he has lied about his intents and purposes for
every newspaper he’s bought…
he is a successful propagandist…
August 1st, 2007 at 11:50 am.
The democrat party is a suicide pact
August 1st, 2007 at 11:51 amComment by Philonous — August 1, 2007 @ 11:49 am
Are Nachos on the university mean plan?
August 1st, 2007 at 11:51 amFNC the number 1# CABLE NEWS CHANNEL
August 1st, 2007 at 11:51 amHumans tend to think, but not liberals.
Comment by Dan — August 1, 2007 @ 11:46 am
——————
Indeed, have you heard that:
STUDIES SHOW: FELONS SMARTER THAN LIBERALS
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ucac/20070704/cm_ucac/studiesshowfelonssmarterthanliberals
August 1st, 2007 at 11:52 amFNC the number 1# CABLE NEWS CHANNEL
Comment by chris
So you’re saying they’re the “one number” cable news channel? I think it’s on channel 246 where I live! LOL.
August 1st, 2007 at 11:53 amAre Nachos on the university mean plan?
Comment by Nachos of Justice — August 1, 2007 @ 11:51 am
August 1st, 2007 at 11:53 am———–
Sure!
“Liberals tend to go into journalism”
Don’t you just love the way they make this shit up?
August 1st, 2007 at 11:53 amMr. Pee, can you please wear your depends when posting?
The smell of urine is not pleasant to the majority here…
August 1st, 2007 at 11:54 amComment by Not Canadian — August 1, 2007 @ 11:54 am
Okay.
Is this better?
August 1st, 2007 at 11:56 amComment by Philonous — August 1, 2007 @ 11:52 am
I enjoyed Ann Coulter’s eloquent writing on that topic.
August 1st, 2007 at 11:56 amThe US Constitution is not a suicide pact†– President Lincoln
Comment by Philonous
The US Constitution is just a goddamn piece of paper – Presidnutz Bush
August 1st, 2007 at 11:57 amOkay.
Is this better?
Comment by Philonous
______________
Look, I can post JUST LIKE YOU!!!! (In any of your numerous screen names.)
Really, my 5 year old is better at disguising herself than you, puke troll.
August 1st, 2007 at 11:58 amReally, my 5 year old is better at disguising herself than you, puke troll.
Comment by Not Canadian — August 1, 2007 @ 11:58 am
August 1st, 2007 at 12:00 pm————-
I don’t try to disguise myself.
FNC, False News Crap!
#1 Crapola nationwide!
Fairly Unbalanced, bringing you more stories about rich or missing white girls than any other channel!
Why bother to think, when you have FNC!
Here today, lying again tomorrow!
We all have degrees from MSU, Make Shit Up!
August 1st, 2007 at 12:01 pmNow the WSJ will have a Page 3 girl too….
August 1st, 2007 at 12:01 pmThe US Constitution is just a goddamn piece of paper – Presidnutz Bush
Comment by RUCerious
That quote by Bush really hits the wrong way with people like me who take their oath as seriously today as the day it was sworn to.
“I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.”
August 1st, 2007 at 12:01 pmCan anyone of you PROVE that Murdoch is destroying journalism? I thought not. Oh, and don’t try to associate Fox News with the WSJ. If you do, then you merely engage in hypotheticals, not FACTS.
You all wring your hands and bemoan the fact that a billionaire family sold their stake in a newspaper to another billionaire. What’s wrong with that? The WSJ is a for-profit enterprise after all.
August 1st, 2007 at 12:03 pmFNC the number 1# CABLE NEWS CHANNEL
Had to post it again
August 1st, 2007 at 12:03 pmFNC the number 1# CABLE NEWS CHANNEL
Had to post it again -Comment by chris
FNC, False News Crap!
#1 Crapola nationwide!
Fairly Unbalanced, bringing you more stories about rich or missing white girls than any other channel!
Why bother to think, when you have FNC!
Here today, lying again tomorrow!
We all have degrees from MSU, Make Shit Up! Me, too!
August 1st, 2007 at 12:13 pm119. So frikkin what? And your point is… what? You’re still no 1? LOL. So pathetic.
It’s not news, douche. It’s propaganda. You’re not fooling anyone but yourselves anymore.
August 1st, 2007 at 12:13 pmHad to post it again
Comment by chris
Ignorance is bliss, eh?
Let me correct you, dipsh*t:
-should be “#1″, not “1#”.
And to think you accuse liberals of not thinking!?
TOO CUTE!!!!!
August 1st, 2007 at 12:14 pmFNC the number source of information for sycophant polesmokers.
August 1st, 2007 at 12:14 pmIgnorance is bliss, eh?
Not Canadian it should be dipshit not dipsh*t
And to think you accuse liberals of not thinking!?
TOO CUTE!!!!!
Show me where i accused liberals of not thinking.
Ignorance is bliss, eh?
TOO CUTE!!!!!
August 1st, 2007 at 12:19 pmstudy: psychotics prefer bush
August 1st, 2007 at 12:20 pmComment by chris
By inverse interpolation, your adamant double, re-post of sheer ignorance is a passive aggressive sign that you have a superiority complex with no basis in reality for such.
August 1st, 2007 at 12:22 pmactually, jt, as i mentioned upthread, i have good friends that work for one of murdoch’s papers in australia, and they have told me firsthand how the paper went downhill by engaging in sensationalism rather than journalism after murdoch took over.
August 1st, 2007 at 12:22 pmDear Chris and Dan,
Did you know that you have make an ACTUAL argument here? Are you even trying to convince anyone that you’re right about anything?
You’re losing the battle online big time and you know it. Sometimes I wonder why you nitwits even bother posting anything when you are roundly embarassed, mocked and humiliated here.
August 1st, 2007 at 12:22 pmBy inverse interpolation, your adamant double, re-post of sheer ignorance is a passive aggressive sign that you have a superiority complex with no basis in reality for such.
Comment by Not Canadian
Show me where i said liberals don’t think.
August 1st, 2007 at 12:26 pm“Did you know that you have make an ACTUAL argument here? ”
You mean like this,
This guy has more deferments than heart attacks. His vision of America includes a Dicktator. Everything he touches turns to fecal matter.
August 1st, 2007 at 12:29 pm129. “liberals don’t think”
Comment by Chris
There you just said it – now STFU.
August 1st, 2007 at 12:30 pmIt’s frustrating dealing with moron logic ain’t it?
Way to avoid the question of what FNC being #1 has to do with anything. Wow, FOX is popular. I ask again – who gives a crap and why?
August 1st, 2007 at 12:31 pmThis guy has more deferments than heart attacks. His vision of America includes a Dicktator. Everything he touches turns to fecal matter.
Comment by chris — August 1, 2007 @ 12:29 pm
That’s not an argument. It’s just vitriol. Arguments need to be supported by some sort of evidences.
August 1st, 2007 at 12:33 pmIt’s frustrating dealing with moron logic ain’t it?
Comment by Vice President Bush
Yes i don’t see how people deal with you
August 1st, 2007 at 12:34 pmlonesomerobot
Your comment got the greatest of chuckles! Kind of like, I have a friend who works at FNC, and she tells me that her friends don’t like working there because they switched the coffee.
I WANT FACTS! All you post is hearsay b.s. Geez…if posting a comment based on “what your friends say” is equivalant to facts for you, no wonder you are such a sycophant for the blog b.s. on this site.
August 1st, 2007 at 12:34 pmFNC being #1 has to do with anything
That means more people watch and trust Fox News .
August 1st, 2007 at 12:36 pm135. Obviously you’re too dense to understand sarcasm and mockery. It was meant to imply that you are the moron here.
Care to actually respond like a man?
August 1st, 2007 at 12:36 pmI know this is from Wiki, but an interesting piece on how Ruprecht has political slant on the media he owns.
The Times is a national newspaper published daily in the United Kingdom since 1788. For much of its history, The Times has been regarded as Britain’s newspaper of record. It has played an influential role in politics and shaping public opinion about foreign events.
With its sister paper The Sunday Times, The Times is published by Times Newspapers Limited, a subsidiary of News International, itself wholly owned by the News Corporation group, headed by Rupert Murdoch. Though traditionally a moderately centre-right newspaper and a supporter of the Conservatives, it has supported the Labour party in the last two elections,[1] after Murdoch allied himself with Tony Blair.[2]
August 1st, 2007 at 12:36 pmI meant 134. Sry 135.
August 1st, 2007 at 12:36 pmEnough of the trolls. I’m not responding to their stupidity anymore.
Back to Ruppert – all he is really doing is trying to buy respect, since FOX has long since become a laughingstock.
August 1st, 2007 at 12:39 pmThat means more people watch and trust Fox News .
Comment by Chris — August 1, 2007 @ 12:36 pm
“Splains why the American public is so uninformed these days.
August 1st, 2007 at 12:39 pmWhy does JT need to bold everything it writes?
August 1st, 2007 at 12:40 pmPossibly because there’s nothing of substance there, and it just needs some gussying up?
The ONLY thing high ratings mean to a news organization is more income from advertising. PERIOD. That’s THE ONLY REASON THEY’RE POLLED.
And when a majority of people polled say they watch Fox, you gotta remember:
Just because a majority of people thought that “Achy, Breakey Heart” was a Top 10 hit DOES NOT mean it isn’t a sh*tty song.
August 1st, 2007 at 12:41 pmThat means more people watch and trust Fox News .
Comment by Chris — August 1, 2007 @ 12:36 pm
Watch maybe, trust I doubt. Just because I listen to Rush doesn’t mean I belive it. It has more to do with amusement and the innane. It may be that the Simpsons are on Fox and a whole bunch of Americans are too lazy to even employ their remotes.
August 1st, 2007 at 12:41 pmEnough of the trolls. I’m not responding to their stupidity anymore
That mean your not posting anymore?
August 1st, 2007 at 12:42 pmWhy does JT need to bold everything it writes?
Comment by RUCerious
Old hearing-aid battery?
August 1st, 2007 at 12:43 pmIt may be that the Simpsons are on Fox and a whole bunch of Americans are too lazy to even employ their remotes…
Mmmm, donuts…..
August 1st, 2007 at 12:43 pmOld hearing-aid battery?
Comment by Not Canadian
WHAT? I CAN’T HEAR YOU!!!
August 1st, 2007 at 12:44 pmMmmm, donuts…..
Comment by RUCerious — August 1, 2007 @ 12:43 pm
Of topic but I work a night job in Springfield VT and while driving home early this morning i saw some youngsters scaling the giant yellow hand with donut bestowed upon the town. Seemed “sacrilicious”
August 1st, 2007 at 12:47 pm#144,
August 1st, 2007 at 12:47 pmI think you just summed up this discussion about Fox so even Chris can understand it…maybe.
It may be that the Simpsons are on Fox and a whole bunch of Americans are too lazy to even employ their remotes…
The term is “lead in”.
August 1st, 2007 at 12:48 pm
dbadass(149)
Funny! Did you know that Shelbyville, KY is 25 miles from Simpsonville, KY.
Weird, huh?
August 1st, 2007 at 12:55 pmWeird, huh?
Comment by Not Canadian — August 1, 2007 @ 12:55 pm
Please tell me that there is an Ogdenville and North Haverbrook nearby both with shoddily constructed monorails!
August 1st, 2007 at 12:57 pmIt’s a bad day for American journalism, if you count on the liberal monopoly of print media to help promote your politics.
God forbid there be an opposing view in print media. What are liberals afraid of? Maybe their afraid more people will be exposed to the truth and start to question why it was withheld from them for so long.
August 1st, 2007 at 12:59 pmGod forbid there be an opposing view in print media. What are liberals afraid of? Maybe their afraid more people will be exposed to the truth and start to question why it was withheld from them for so long.
Comment by paul — August 1, 2007 @ 12:59 pm
Irrational, meaningless comment. No facts, nothing to debate here.
August 1st, 2007 at 1:01 pmGod forbid there be an opposing view in print media. What are liberals afraid of? Maybe their afraid more people will be exposed to the truth and start to question why it was withheld from them for so long.
Comment by paul — August 1, 2007 @ 12:59 pm
Maybe it has to do with the fact that folks on the left tend toward higher levels of education and thus are more likely to be consumers of print media while the other end of the spectrum is in front of their televisions. I believe the press/media is still free. If the market supported greater demand for something else shouldn’t it exist? If the market responds as the right so frequently decrees how do they explain their premise that the media is left?
August 1st, 2007 at 1:03 pmIrrational, meaningless comment. No facts, nothing to debate here.
Comment by The Republic of Stupidity — August 1, 2007 @ 1:01 pm
The trolls are broken!
August 1st, 2007 at 1:04 pmLiberal monoply of media? You must be joking.
Who owns the media companies these days? Corporations
Who is in charge of the corporations? Rich white guys
What political party do most rich white guys belong to? Republican
Sooo who do the reporters have to report to? Republicans
No one buys that liberal media crap anymore, dumbass.
August 1st, 2007 at 1:05 pmHere are 3 major news outlets covering this huge story:
Bloomberg
http://beta.redlasso.com/ Community/ ClipPlayer.aspx?i=2a255b07-1a8c-4661-a912-a04e116ffd1f
CNN
http://beta.redlasso.com/ Community/ ClipPlayer.aspx?i=1b530e09-8ef1-44a0-b017-6ec0176386be
CNBC
August 1st, 2007 at 1:06 pmhttp://beta.redlasso.com/ Community/ ClipPlayer.aspx?i=2602f8e4-3c75-42d7-a861-4e6f9e8a5524
The trolls are broken!
Comment by Zooey — August 1, 2007 @ 1:04 pm
Thank you :D!! It works, doesn’t it?
August 1st, 2007 at 1:07 pmtros – except to point out the fact
that it was always well known that the WJS OPINION page
was right/con leaning…
it’s the reputable fact reporting that will now be
lost from the WSJ…
solely to manipulate the market…
you know it…
August 1st, 2007 at 1:07 pm.
you know it…
.
Comment by katy — August 1, 2007 @ 1:07 pm
I’m not quite sure what I said that you’re replying to (the point of copying & pasting the comment) but I ceratinly don’t disagree w/ what you’re saying. I personally think Murdoch’s ultimate motive was to increase his power in the US.
August 1st, 2007 at 1:16 pmchris
Ever hear of Fox News? Rupert’s baby in America.
It is known for being the news profider that…
Defended its right to lie to the American public in court.
I think Rupert has had enough of a chance don’t you?
August 1st, 2007 at 1:17 pmThe trolls are broken!
Comment by Zooey
________________
So THAT’S why I’ve been reading stuff like this:
I !@#s t%ink $^&* *(@) and I don’t care
August 1st, 2007 at 1:17 pmThank you :D!! It works, doesn’t it?
Comment by The Republic of Stupidity — August 1, 2007 @ 1:07 pm
I’m enjoying it very much. :)
August 1st, 2007 at 1:23 pmSo THAT’S why I’ve been reading stuff like this:
I !@#s t%ink $^&* *(@) and I don’t care
Comment by PatrioticLiberalChristian(PLC) — August 1, 2007 @ 1:17 pm
Well…..as long as the “I don’t care” part is there, no one will mistake it for me. Heh.
August 1st, 2007 at 1:24 pmMaybe their afraid more people will be exposed to the truth and start to question why it was withheld from them for so long.
Comment by paul
Welcome here! It’s a HUGE first step for you.
We’ve shown you the light bulb and it’s location. Now it’s up to YOU to flip the switch to “on”. That’s step number two.
August 1st, 2007 at 1:26 pmMaybe it has to do with the fact that folks on the left tend toward higher levels of education and thus are more likely to be consumers of print media while the other end of the spectrum is in front of their televisions.
Judged by their answers to three news knowledge questions2, the most informed audiences belong to the political magazines, Rush Limbaugh’s radio show, the O’Reilly Factor, news magazines, and online news sources. Close behind are the regular audiences for NPR and the Daily Show.
here’s the source:
http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?PageID=1068
August 1st, 2007 at 1:30 pmWell…..as long as the “I don’t care†part is there, no one will mistake it for me. Heh.
Comment by Zooey
_____________________
I hope you didn’t think I might be aiming that post at you! For some reason the remainder of my post (which specified it was about the trolls) got lost in the electronic ether.
August 1st, 2007 at 1:33 pmNot Canadian. I’ve been here probably longer than you. Maybe there’s a little deception here, too. And maybe we could all use a different perspective on occassion. My world is not black and white. Is yours?
August 1st, 2007 at 1:34 pmpaul,
August 1st, 2007 at 1:41 pmI would certainly NEVER claim this site represented all my views and opinions. Perspective is sadly lacking in most partison hardcores, which I am not.
Honestly, I wish a site like this would bring more people together, rather than further separate opposing ideas – true ‘power to the people’.
Here’s more from the Pew poll:
There is little change in opinions of the credibility of most print news sources compared with two years ago, though as with TV and radio, there has been no recovery from a long, downward trend. Just 19% say they believe all or most of what is printed in their daily newspaper, down from 25% in 2000, but unchanged from 2004.
I’m glad that you’re so educated and satisfied with print media. It seems as though your among some of the last true believers. I guess you should start watching television if you want to get at the truth, and not just to find stories that placate your ’sensibilities’.
BTW, when you get some free time, we should get together to compare GMAT scores and college transcripts.
August 1st, 2007 at 1:42 pmComment by paul — August 1, 2007 @ 1:30 pm
Thanks for the link and I will review it in further depth upon return from work this evening. My only concern after just a brief scan was that I do not think that viewership equates with being “the most informed”. I did not see where the data linked news source with comprehension. Admittedly it was just a brief scan. As to you contention that print media lacks alternative views, do you wish to address the contention that the market responds to desires of the masses?
August 1st, 2007 at 1:43 pmI hope you didn’t think I might be aiming that post at you! For some reason the remainder of my post (which specified it was about the trolls) got lost in the electronic ether.
Comment by PatrioticLiberalChristian(PLC) — August 1, 2007 @ 1:33 pm
Nah. I was just making a joke about my potty mouth. :)
August 1st, 2007 at 1:45 pmAs related to the true meaningless of ratings, allow me to repeat myself:
Just because a majority of people thought that “Achy, Breakey Heart†was a Top 10 Hit DOES NOT mean it isn’t a sh*tty song.
August 1st, 2007 at 1:48 pmZooey
Well that “potty mouth” can do an excellent job of “flushing” the troll “turds” out of TP.
August 1st, 2007 at 1:49 pmNot Canadian. I know what your talking about with bringing people together. I personally believe that westerner liberals and conservatives share 95% of their views, but the other 5% are so divisive that we end up with the environment that we have now. At least it gets people fired up and generates debate (I would argue, healthy debate).
Let me also throw this out there. I’m not Christian. But I argue that Christians (as intolerant as they can be sometimes) share much more of the values that progressives have than Islamic fundamentalists do. I believe the current atmosphere of apathy towards Islamic intolerance is simply a result of dissatisfaction with the Bush administration (and his Christian supporters). It is my hope, that the next President (R or D) will not illicit the same devisiveness and we can turn our collective attention to global Islamic intolerance as the common and significant threat to our liberty that it is.
August 1st, 2007 at 1:50 pmBTW, when you get some free time, we should get together to compare GMAT scores and college transcripts.
Comment by paul — August 1, 2007 @ 1:42 pm
If you are adressing me, I’d be glad to. Your contention that I am satisfied with print media shows already faulty logic as it was never stated by myself or anyone else. You seem hurt that you may be somehow less educated. I don’t belive so . No one said that. What was said and I believe Donald Rumsfiled agrees that the left tends toward higher levels of education. I beleive the problem with the data you site is the use of the word “all” as soon as it shows up even with the “or most” caveat, it tends to draw a negative response.
August 1st, 2007 at 1:50 pmJust because a majority of Americans are against the war doesn’t mean that it was a bad idea? Someone should tell TP, so they can stop highlighting the poll.
August 1st, 2007 at 1:52 pmIt is my hope, that the next President (R or D) will not illicit the same devisiveness and we can turn our collective attention to global Islamic intolerance as the common and significant threat to our liberty that it is.
Comment by paul
You took the words right out of my mouth. But how can we achieve this with the current apathy which breeds contempt and corruption?
August 1st, 2007 at 1:55 pmJust because a majority of Americans are against the war doesn’t mean that it was a bad idea? Someone should tell TP, so they can stop highlighting the poll.
Comment by paul — August 1, 2007 @ 1:52 pm
Does this same logic apply to Fox news viewship and the veracity of the information dispensed there?
August 1st, 2007 at 1:57 pmThe more we fear Islam, the more we are at it’s mercy.
Right paul?
August 1st, 2007 at 1:58 pmdbadass. I’ve got nothing but love for you. But here’s you words:
Maybe it has to do with the fact that folks on the left tend toward higher levels of education and thus are more likely to be consumers of print media while the other end of the spectrum is in front of their televisions.
I’m simply pushing back against the insinuation that liberals are more educated than conservatives. When I talk to progressives, I don’t think their ignorant, I just think they believe differently. I also believe (and I am trying to disprove it to myself) that, much like heterosexuality v. homosexuality, you are either born with progressive tendencies or are born with conservative tendencies. I don’t see one as right or wrong; just different. The difference is what has peaked my curiosity and led me here.
August 1st, 2007 at 1:59 pmWell that “potty mouth†can do an excellent job of “flushing†the troll “turds†out of TP.
Comment by PatrioticLiberalChristian(PLC) — August 1, 2007 @ 1:49 pm
I think…..I’m gonna be sick…. :P
August 1st, 2007 at 2:02 pmThe difference is what has peaked my curiosity and led me here.
Comment by paul — August 1, 2007 @ 1:59 pm
…..and he likes liberal women.
August 1st, 2007 at 2:02 pmFear or a healthy respect. If you deny that AIDS exists or discount its seriousness, and blissfully engage in unprotected relationships are you no longer at its mercy?
August 1st, 2007 at 2:03 pmZooey. You got me, but that’s secondary. (you know you’re my favorite).
August 1st, 2007 at 2:03 pmPaul the key word is my statement is “tend”. This tendency is frequently sited by the extreme right as the explaination for liberal thought on college campuses as well as the alleged left media. I am simply asking if that tendency is the basis for the descrepancy you seem to find in print media. I myself am only slightly left of center. As to the nature/nurtue issue it seems a synergy of the two which makes us who we are. Best to you and I for one welcome you here
August 1st, 2007 at 2:05 pm…..and he likes liberal women.
Comment by Zooey — August 1, 2007 @ 2:02 pm
If you mean yourself, everyone does.
August 1st, 2007 at 2:07 pmcheers
If you deny that AIDS exists or discount its seriousness, and blissfully engage in unprotected relationships are you no longer at its mercy?
Comment by paul
Welll you’re no longer at the mercy of “fear” which clouds one’s understanding and acceptence.
August 1st, 2007 at 2:09 pmAnd so it begins… the people with any integrity will quit…
August 1st, 2007 at 2:12 pmnext, the people with no integrity will take over and be swayed by the powers that be… and next thing you know… the WSJ will be Faux news and not really news at all… Paris Hilton on the cover all the time…
If you mean yourself, everyone does.
cheers
Comment by dbadass — August 1, 2007 @ 2:07 pm
Heh. Paul has run his line all the women here at one point or another.
Thanks, dbadass. :)
August 1st, 2007 at 2:12 pm….are you no longer at its mercy?
Comment by paul — August 1, 2007 @ 2:03 pm
Rid yourself of this mind-set, and you might be surprised at the effect.
August 1st, 2007 at 2:14 pmYou took the words right out of my mouth. But how can we achieve this with the current apathy which breeds contempt and corruption?
Comment by Not Canadian — August 1, 2007 @ 1:55 pm
I know most progressives wouldn’t agree, but how about this:
If we understand that politicians are pretty worthless, let’s stop giving them our money. It is really a joke. The most inept bunch of people, taking our money and using it to feather there beds. Yes, you can argue Bush is doing it with the war. But also, democrats with a miriad of social programs. I have had the good fortune to work in government and in the free market. The government is pissing our hard earned dollars away.
August 1st, 2007 at 2:15 pmThe New York Times is in trouble, again. Someone made a comment earlier about educated people tend to read print media more than(implied) stupid uneducated people. Wrong! Nothing could be farther from the truth. It’s actually about equal according to most metropollitan area newspapers. This site is full of , I am better than you, smarter than you, blowhards. The one true thing I am learning about this site, is you are all arrogant, self centered, ugly people. Please keep it up. America is watching, and they are learning who the far left really is. If you think moderate voters are going to be turned on by your hate, keep it up. I am a moderate, and your turning me away from the possibility of voting democratic. We need a third party in the worst way.
August 1st, 2007 at 2:18 pm“What do you think Murdoch’s goal is in buying the WSJ? Anything more than profit?
Comment by Zooey “
It certainly was NOT for profit. He will never turn a profit on the WSJ considering what he paid for it. And, all newspapers are losing propositions these days. He is losing lots of money on all his print holdings. He is not in it for the profit, he is in it for the control.
August 1st, 2007 at 2:28 pmThe New York Times is in trouble, again. Someone made a comment earlier about educated people tend to read print media more than(implied) stupid uneducated people.
Most people buy multiple newspapers especially in metropolitain areas. Being that person, what was said was that it is likely that print is preferred by some. Some of the logic in the statement was based on the large population of professional older people who still focus on print. They also were involved in opening a discussion of the repeated statements of the far right that traditional institutions of knowledge as well as the media are left leaning. I believe those in the discussion understood this. Some like Paul were kind ehough to supply some supporting documents. It is unfortunate that you did not and apologies for your hurt feelings.
August 1st, 2007 at 2:29 pm“If you think moderate voters are going to be turned on by your hate, keep it up. I am a moderate, and your turning me away from the possibility of voting democratic. We need a third party in the worst way.
Comment by Johnny Swank”
If you call yourself a moderate all the other moderates in the world are liberals!
And, the moderates seem to be coming to the side of us “hateful” liberals. Every poll that has been taken recently show that the independents and even some moderate republicans are coming to the side of the “hateful” liberals. I actually have several friends who are Republicans and consider themselves moderates. They are all ashamed to admit that they are Republicans and unless something is done soon to reclaim the Republican party from the neoCONS, they will all be voting Democratic in the next election.
So, dream on little troll and keep telling yourself that the moderates are not going to like the liberals who “hate”. It is the Republicans who they feel are full of lies, hate and obstruction.
August 1st, 2007 at 2:33 pm“And so it begins… the people with any integrity will quit…
next, the people with no integrity will take over and be swayed by the powers that be… and next thing you know… the WSJ will be Faux news and not really news at all… Paris Hilton on the cover all the time…”
There really is nothing that the people on the board can do. Murdoch owns the controlling stock and they will always be outvoted. So, there is no reason to stay on the board if someone has integrity. The reason why Murdoch bought the WSJ is for the power and manipulation he will gain by owning it. And there is nothing anyone can do to stop him as long as there is no government willing to enforce the Sherman Antitrust Act.
August 1st, 2007 at 2:36 pmjohnny sez:
The one true thing I am learning about this site, is you are all arrogant, self centered, ugly people.
that reminds me of one of my favorite recorded bits
that sam seder plays on his show, from a caller:
“uh the problem with YOU people is you think you’re smarter
than us” (a righty caller with stereotypical hick voice),
right after the announcer says “hey conservatives, wanna
dumb down the show? call 866 303 2270″
it always cracked me up… oh, sorry – that was ugly…
…your turning me away from the possibility of voting democratic. We need a third party in the worst way.
yea… that 3rd party will surely work to the dems advantage…
like it always has…
and, as if what you are (or you’re) reading here is turning you away
August 1st, 2007 at 2:44 pmfrom voting democratic… uh huh…
but thanks for your concern…
…
“FNC being #1 has to do with anything
That means more people watch and trust Fox News .
Comment by Chris “
Fox New is not #1 in news viewership. They may be #1 in Cable News viewership but they are way behind the regular news outlets when it comes to viewers. And, Fox viewers only trust Fox News because they are morons who need to have an authority figure tell them what to think and what to believe. Read John Deans Conservatives without Conscience and you will see the perfect definition of why people are conservatives.
August 1st, 2007 at 2:46 pmIt doesn’t take a genius to understand why FAUX SNOOZ is # 1 in cable news channels. If ALL the repubs are watching FAUX then they would draw roughly half of the countries viewers (you know, the sheeple who believe whatever propaganda Billo and Hannity tell them). The other cable news channels (you know, the ones that actually try to be factual and report the truth) are divided up by the other half of viewers easily giving POX the larger viewing percentage. So what does being # one in the ratings prove? Not much. By the way, if Olberman’s “Countdown” is doing so poor in the ratings can anyone offer a reason why the “Fox and Friends” show advertises during his show? Do they really think we’d by the shit they’re selling?
August 1st, 2007 at 2:49 pmbilbobaggins. Am I supposed to believe you views about conservatives, even though you were complaining last night, about how conservative sites, like redstate, don’t allow dissenting opinions. Then I pasted four of your dissenting posts from redstate. Your ‘conservatives are evil and ignorant; while progressives are honest and intellegent’ is at best an overgeneralization and more likely half-baked, wishful thinking.
August 1st, 2007 at 3:19 pmJohn Dean is a convicted felon without a conscience
August 1st, 2007 at 3:53 pmWhy does The New York Times print good news on the economy on page sixteen, and The Wall Street Journal on the front page? The only reason Bill Clinton stayed in office was”The economy stupid.” Same goes for Bush. I know you will spout off housing markets and personal debt, but the true indicators show the economy holding steady, with new job growth and lower unemployment.
Ralph Nader’s third party is what won the election for Bush, a republican. I hear he is running again.
I am turning away(uh huh). The only optimism in the democratic party is “No more Bush”. Great, what next? Please inform me why I should vote Democratic. Please persuade me with what the democrats plan to accomplish. I see they have done a lot over there in the Senate and the House. And don’t blame republicans. Please tell me why you are voting democratic. Give me substance, not whats wrong with republicans. What are the democrats going to do about S.S? What are they going to do about taxes?. What are they going to do about Jihadist Terrorist who want to destroy the western world? What are they going to about crime? Tell me ten things that democrats plan on doing, not promising, to obtain my VOTE!!! Please tell me Katy?
If you listen to the Hate from the left, really, really listen, you might learn something about yourself. You think it’s funny, that’s fine. I’ve got tough skin; bring it on.
August 1st, 2007 at 4:28 pmevery day is a bad day for American “journalism”
that’s why you can’t swing a dead cat without hitting someone who is arguably so ignorant they shouldn’t be allowed to vote.
August 1st, 2007 at 4:37 pmconservative WITH a conscience… thank you, john dean…
Dean pled guilty to obstruction of justice before Watergate trial judge John Sirica on November 30, 1973. He admitted supervising payments of “hush money” to the Watergate burglars, notably E. Howard Hunt, and revealed the existence of Nixon’s enemies list. On August 2, 1974, Sirica handed down a sentence of one to four years in a minimum-security prison. However, when Dean surrendered himself as scheduled on September 3, he was diverted to the custody of U.S. Marshals and kept instead at Fort Holabird (near Baltimore, Maryland) in a special “safe house” holding facility primarily used for witnesses against the Mafia. He spent his days in the offices of the Watergate Special Prosecutor and testifying in the trial of Watergate conspirators Mitchell, Haldeman, Ehrlichman, Robert Mardian, and Kenneth Parkinson, which concluded on January 1, 1975. Dean’s lawyer moved to have his sentence reduced, and on January 8, Sirica granted the motion, adjusting Dean’s sentence to time served.
August 1st, 2007 at 4:54 pm-wiki
.
here, johnny… start reading here for a good start
on getting some ideas that dems have…
http://www.americanprogress.org/projects
and/or
http://www.americanprogressaction.org/issues
pick an issue… any issue…
August 1st, 2007 at 5:01 pm.
Katy, this all sounds great, in Never Never Land. I love the third most important step of the top fifteen ideas; Campus Progress= Propoganda 101. I’m asking you Katy! You seem like a bright girl. no links, answers. Pretend you are Hillary, speak to me, gain my trust, and vote for you why?????
August 1st, 2007 at 5:33 pmsome votes aren’t worth getting
August 1st, 2007 at 5:37 pmnot interested in your game, johnny…
it’s not about ME…
listen to the candidates… use the google…
avoid government sponsered propoganda…
use your common sense… study the constitution…
do the right thing…
August 1st, 2007 at 5:38 pmMurdoch must be doing something right when the lefties start beating their collective chest. “Fair is fair!!!”
By the way….I don’t get my feelings hurt here. I love pointing out the hate you have for your fellow Americans. Just because they do it, that makes it right? The far left and the far right are nothing but a bunch of grown children pretending they are more important than they actually are. These boards prove what divorce and no family values breed. I gurantee most of you who spew your hate, detest one or both of your parents. Come here and hide behind a keyboard, act tough. Why don’t you go beat your fellow American who disagrees with you. Then you’ll really feel powerful. Pathetic, I don’t know why I bother coming here and reading all of the hate for YOUR fellow man/woman. And your to narrow minded to get it.
August 1st, 2007 at 5:45 pm#203
Comment by a patriot acting — August 1, 2007 @ 2:49 pm
You actually watch and listen to Olberman? His show is the defines what it means of viewers being told what to think.
August 1st, 2007 at 5:46 pmThe scum OWN America. What a SHAME!
August 1st, 2007 at 5:57 pmAll about power and influence. Ask any Brit. If you, my fellow Americans, paid attention to what happens in other countries – you would have known what he was about and what he would do to have this power etc. You gave him this power – he has been building it since 1977. Calling him names and making fun of him means nothing. He loves it. It keeps him in the news and confirms his power.
August 1st, 2007 at 6:24 pmYou actually watch and listen to Olberman? His show is the defines what it means of viewers being told what to think. Comment by Tracy — August 1, 2007 @ 5:46 pm
Says the wingnut that listens to Rush, Drudge and O’Reilly and spews what he’s told to think on this blog.
This is nothing but projection from you, you ridiculous little loser. Unlike the asshole pundits you suck off, Olbermann actually covers the full story. If by ‘told what to think’, you mean ‘told to think for yourself’, you’re right. Then again, the subtleties of reality are always lost on loonies, when the unicorn horn of neocroniesm is shoved up your ass.
August 1st, 2007 at 7:25 pm“bilbobaggins. Am I supposed to believe you views about conservatives, even though you were complaining last night, about how conservative sites, like redstate, don’t allow dissenting opinions. Then I pasted four of your dissenting posts from redstate. Your ‘conservatives are evil and ignorant; while progressives are honest and intellegent’ is at best an overgeneralization and more likely half-baked, wishful thinking.”
You think that posting my dissenting posts on redstate.com proves that I was not banned and that they don’t censure. Can you post anything other than the few posts I made within a half an hour period that I made? If not, all that shows is that they left the posts I made when they blocked my account and blocked my ability to even view redstate. The did the same thing the day before when I posted with a different name from a different IP address.
You have proven nothing. And I stand by my views that at least progressive/liberals allow dissenting views on their sites, no matter how ignorant and inane the posts are.
August 1st, 2007 at 8:09 pm“conservative WITH a conscience… thank you, john dean…”
There are a few conservatives out there with a conscience. I know five people who are conservatives and every one of them are ashamed of what their part has become and most say they will vote democratic in the next election. One is actually thinking about changing parties.
August 1st, 2007 at 8:12 pmOnly one, bilbo? Sad.
August 1st, 2007 at 9:11 pm“Only one, bilbo? Sad.
Comment by JPark”
I know, but it is a step in the right direction that they are willing to vote for a Democrat. Anyone want to guess who their favorite Democratic candidate is? Surprisingly, they almost all agree on this one.
August 1st, 2007 at 9:19 pmbilbo, it is not Hillary. Not even Republicans like her. I am guessing Obama. I can’t believe they like my candidate, Edwards (or Feingold if I decide to write in).
August 1st, 2007 at 9:21 pmI would be very amused if they wanted Kerry. They should have taken him when they had the chance.
August 1st, 2007 at 9:22 pmLet’s see WSJ right-wing, Bush propagandist for profit supporting paper taken over by right-wing, Bush supporting propagandist for profit publisher.
What’s going to change? Except Murdock will change his spots as the circulation or right-wing popularity varies. They’ll still report the stock prices right and promote a”big business” is better philosophy.
August 1st, 2007 at 9:34 pmYou are right, Doc. Nothing will change. They will still suck corporate teat. No change.
August 1st, 2007 at 9:40 pmI don’t know why Johnny bothers coming here either. (August 1, 2007 @ 5:45 pm)
August 2nd, 2007 at 3:47 amMust be because he feels the love. Or maybe he’s a little bit masochistic.
bilbobaggins
Most people who call themselves conservatives are actually liberals. They believe in civil rights, oppose torture, and recognise that company’s aren’t run by saints or even long-term thinkers.
They recognise that you don’t get a free lunch and are actually in favour of paying their debts. They don’t like taxes, and would much rather have tax loopholes closed then have to pay higher taxes themselves, but accept that it is frequently better to pay taxes then to let things degrade.
They are genuinely opposed to needless wars, but admit the need for war in exceptional circumstances. They admit that science has brought the world further forward, and a lot faster, then religion ever did. They are profoundly uncomfortable with the religious right, and with people telling them what to think, do, or otherwise believe.
They want their media to report fact as fact and fiction as fiction. They aren’t overly in favour of giving the media the right to lie to them.
They actually, when you get right down to it, don’t care if the gay couple down the street get married or not. They don’t even care that there is a gay couple down the street.
The trouble is, they are also the victims of rightwing hysteria. Nobody does hysteria quite like the rightwing do hysteria.
Because of Rightwing hysteria, they think that “liberals” want to force straight people into gay marriage, religious people into being atheists, force taxes into stratospheric levels in order to pay people to not work, the media into only ever reporting the liberal side of things and the courts into letting murderers go free complete with complementary machine guns.
They have been lied to and swallowed the lie, because they have not gone and looked up what liberal ideology really is.
August 2nd, 2007 at 6:15 am3 cheers Bruce G.!!
August 2nd, 2007 at 11:52 amBruce. Here’s the wikipedia definition:
Broadly speaking, liberalism emphasizes individual rights and equality of opportunity. A liberal society is characterized by freedom of thought for individuals, limitations on power, the rule of law, the free exchange of ideas, a market economy, free private enterprise, and a transparent system of government in which the rights of all citizens are protected.
I believe both parties are guilty of straying from true liberalism. In particular, support for global warming initiatives (Kyoto and other regulations) subverts individual rights for the rights of the state. Also, excessive taxation (redistribution of wealth) for social programs also infringes on individual rights. Modern day democrats are betraying the free exchange of ideas when conservative speakers are shouted down on college campuses, when democrats refuse to debate on Fox, and when liberal organizers try to boycott television programs with the intent of shutting down the speech. Most, who claim to be liberals today, don’t try to limit the power of government (with the exception of the military industrial complex), then generally try to expand governments role in our lives with higher taxes and more government involvement. Market economy and free private enterprise? I’m not sure that even liberals here would debate that they support market forces over government intervention.
I also believe that today’s conservatives betray many liberal ideals, but I’ll those criticisms for you.
August 2nd, 2007 at 12:28 pmWhy is it, that half of my decent posts disapear and my more offensive ones always post? Okay, I stand by the latter, but I would really understand this filtering system worked the other way round.
paul
You are making several false assumptions, you are assuming rights which don’t exist, and aside from that, liberals actually are in favour of limiting the government’s powers. I will explain it all later, for now, I have stuff that needs doing pronto.
August 3rd, 2007 at 10:58 amOkay, I stand by the latter, but I would really understand this filtering system worked the other way round.
Should read
Okay, I stand by the latter, but I would really understand how this filtering system worked better if it was the other way round.
August 3rd, 2007 at 11:21 amBugger it. I have tried to post my response to Paul on a point by point level 5 times now, and it is obvious that the filter was programmed by a moron.
While I am a liberal, I honestly am giving up on this site in disgust at the sheer idiocy displayed not by the trolls, not by any given articles, but by the person who decided on the filter that this site uses.
I may lurk for a while, I may return, but for tonight and this weekend, bugger it.
Oh, and paul if you are looking for reasons, because I did promise them:
You do not have the right to not get taxed, you have the right to freedom of speech, not the right to a free exchange of ideas or for your ideas to be treat with respect, generally liberals are in favour of reducing government’s rights (For example, the government does not have the right to dictate who you can marry) and are in favour of having the government do something if it is cheaper for the government to do it.
If you pay $2 to your government or $20 to your HMO, that 2$ in taxes is still 18$ less then you would be paying that HMO.
Further, free market=anarchy because not everybody suddenly becomes perfectly moral the second they start a business.
August 3rd, 2007 at 2:16 pm“….generally liberals are in favour of reducing government’s rights”
That is total BS on balance. Making more regulations and having the government control more of your life is the matra of the left. You cited one in the opposite direction. I have dozens of examples where liberals in government want more governmental control of the masses. One gun control, two taxes, three entitlements, four social security, ect….. If you want to get into a real discussion about the myth that liberals want less government intrusion into people’s lives I will certainly oblige.
“….and are in favour of having the government do something if it is cheaper for the government to do it.”
But that is almost never the case as a matter of fact.
“If you pay $2 to your government or $20 to your HMO, that 2$ in taxes is still 18$ less then you would be paying that HMO.”
What a BS argument! If you pay the governement that $2 vs. $18 to the HMO the only way that will happen is for your income to be taxed far more to make it look like you are getting a good deal. You go ahead and let the goverment decide who and how your healthcare is provided and let me opt out. Hell no!
“Further, free market=anarchy because not everybody suddenly becomes perfectly moral the second they start a business.”
And you think that the govenrment is moral when it comes to providing services? You want the government to control everything? Nationalized healthcare? How about lets just nationalize the energy industry and every other industy that is vital to the U.S. Are you serious?
August 6th, 2007 at 7:49 pmWell yes, I don’t.
Primarily because what you are describing wouldn’t benefit anyone but would instead be of detriment to NewsCorp and nobody else.
Is that really your understanding of how financial markets work ? That what is in the newspaper dictates how much money you have made ?
What happens if it rains and your copy of the WSJ gets soaked and all the ink runs ? Is your entire stock portfolio wiped out ?
You know what, I bet that on a WWF fan forum they’re not complaining that Sewing Patterns Monthy magazine is being taken over, because none of them read it anyway.
August 7th, 2007 at 8:45 amSo why do any of you care what happens to a newpaper you never read to start with ?