What Liberal Media? Coverage Of Reid Land Deal Surpasses Hastert Land Deal

[JABBS]

Click here for more information.

<snip>

CNN has given 50 times as much coverage to a controversial land deal by Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid’s (D-NV) than to a land deal made by House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-IL).

Meanwhile, Fox News Channel has mentioned the Reid land deal nine times, but has brought up the Hastert deal just three.

Strangely similar numbers, no?

[mark414]

1. even though reid's was totally legal and there was no massive windfall

whereas hastert's stunk of abuse of power for profit

oh well, that's that liberal media i guess...

[JABBS]

4. not totally legal

Reid did make mistakes, but he also apologized and quickly rectified it, whereas Hastert has done neither.

[mark414]

5. ahh okay

thanks for clearing that up, i must've read it wrong

[JABBS]

6. the disconnect is that even as

the reid deal gets greater coverage, the conservative media is telling listeners/viewers that it isn't getting coverage. it's ironic, because by telling viewers something isn't getting coverage, they are in fact giving it coverage.

then again, conservative radio/television rarely relies on logic.

[Gabi Hayes]

2. pretty disgusting, isn't it? it's why I consider the M$M to be MORE

dangerous to the country than Bush. they'll still be there after this version of corporate fascism is long gone, making things even worse, if possible, than they are now.

here's a good story on Hastert's deal, delineating how he got what he got, and how many MILLIONS he's profiting by, as well as a call for his resignation

written by somebody from the AEI, no less!

http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:BcyFuDfGydcJ:www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml%3Fi%3Dw061002%26s%3Dlillyornstein100606+worse+than+foleygate&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1

[LostInAnomie]

3. It's so they can claim that they are giving equal time to party scandals.

Even though they degree of the scandals aren't even close they will still try to give equivalent air time to them. It isn't fair, and the media shouldn't do it, but they are scared of being called "liberal" by the RW noise machine.

It's like during the debates in 2004. Bush would make dozens of misleading or fabricated claims with great consequences to the public understanding. But, to avoid looking like they were purposely going after Bush* for being a liar they would find some statistical claim Kerry made where he used projections instead of current numbers and say he was making dishonest claims.

[blm]

7. Their artificially crafted faux balance. Give swiftliars all the time

they wanted.

Reason why: Just to balance the fact that public heard for many years that Kerry had been a war hero.

[JABBS]

8. check out this wacked out conservative response

MrToffeeLovesYa wrote ...

Liberals are missing the point.

Wake up, liberals. Conservatives are increasing the number of times the Harry Reid scandal gets mentioned, simply by mentioning how many times the Reid scandal hasn't been mentioned. It's a brilliant strategy.

Conservatives can only carry the ball so far. They need the media to pick up the ball and carry it across the goal line -- even if they have to carry the media across the goal line to score.

The problem for liberals is that their commentators aren't mentioning the Denny Hastert land deal enough times -- probably because they are spending so much time mentioning Hastert's alleged role in covering up the Mark Foley page scandal. Bam!

Conservatives can't do liberals' work for them. If liberals want to see the number of times the Hastert land deal is mentioned increase, they need Olbermann, Cafferty, Colmes and the rest to start mentioning how little coverage the Hastert land deal has received, and then hope that the mainstream media will start covering that lack of coverage, if not the actual land deal itself.

As former President Clinton said this week, "Politics is a contact sport." Wake up and smell reality, liberals. Just because conservatives know how to hit below the belt, early and often, doesn't mean that liberals should assume that they have to lay on the ground, writhing in pain and holding their privates. Pow!