WJ this morning

[malaise]

If the Dems do better than the Gay Old Party, that will be an improvement. Fess up DUer:rofl: :rofl: What a great call - better than coffee this morning.

Dems need to point out that invading Iraq violated all laws and ethics so Nancy did well by supporting Murtha.

[KharmaTrain]

1. It's Fascist Friday...Off To It's Usual Droll Start

Somehow it's the Democrats that have to reform Congress...as if this is some re-decorating the curtains. Brian reads a hatchet piece on USA Turday that attacks Pelosi and tries to slime Murtha and all Democrats. It mentions Murtha's involvement in Abscam and then put the fact he (was acquitted of all charges) in parethesis...typical corporate media guilt by association.

And of course what Murtha did 30 years ago is far more corrupt than anything DeLay, Ney, Cunningham, Foley, Pombo, Doolittle, Sherwood, Weldon and the list keeps growing. Of course, Brian "forgets" to mention that...and then downplays how corruption was a major issue. The impression is Democrats are just as corrupt thus won't do a thing.

The attacks on Pelosi are fast and furious. I hope she rams it all up their poop chutes in the first 100 hours in January.

As always, you can count on C-SPAN to be the first to astroturf the GOOP MOD....especially when its Fascist Friday

[snappyturtle]

2. I have WJ on too and.....

can hardly listen.I think WJ is biased.....Dems get a few good digs in but........their guests, the articles they read are anti-Dem. What is the big deal about the Dems having a Democratic election to decide between Murtha and Hoyer? I thought Pelosi handled it well and Murtha was gracious in defeat and they're united to move forward. But all I've been hearing for nearly 24 hours is Pelosi is damaged for life. Do you sense this too?

[KharmaTrain]

6. I Watch To Catch The Talking Points...

I've posted on this many times...C-SPAN is funded by the major cable companies...primarily large GOOP donors and was set up by Gingrich, Richard Viguerie and others who felt the "media was liberal" and used the public service angle to create a small forum. Gingrich used C-SPAN in the 80s to give "after hour" speeches...some of them over an hour in length (to an empty house chamber) that started to draw an audience and greatly helped that asshat's rise in the party ranks. C-SPAN made him a star.

F.A.I.R. did a study on C-SPAN's Right wing bias...which you can read right here

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2780

C-SPAN has never responded to this report.

Also this is the only program that cites the Washington Moonie Slimes as a credible newspaper.

My interest in the show (besides there being zero to watch elsewhere) is picking up on the astroturfing this show does on behalf of the Repugnicans. Be assured any Democratic Party squabble will be given lots of play while Repugnican scandals are dealt with reluctantly. Callers can slime Bill Clinton or now Nancy Pelosi or John Murtha and get out all their attack points, while someone who mentions boooosh's AWOL or call into accountability any number of scandals and they're dispatched and dismissed quickly.

The stars of the show, of course, are the callers. Gotta love most the Democrats who get on as they are usually articulate and well informed. Repugnicans...those are my favorites. The more vitriol, the more racist, sexist, homophobic, elitist the better...they are a daily reminder of what we have to keep fighting against. Call it a daily affirmation.

Cheers...

[KoKo]

11. I didn't know about a connection with Gingrich and Viguerie to C-Span's

founding. For some reason I always thought it was part of the Cable Deal to provide one channel devoted to Government. But, it makes sense that Brian didn't manage to do this on his own that there was an ulterior motive. Although I didn't notice Brian turning until Bush got in. It seemed before that he was pretty unbiased.

I suppose I thought the place was run by the "Think Tanks," missing the Gingrich/Vigurie connection. Do you have any info about Brian? I've done some searches in the past and all I can find is that he was in the Military and someone called in and wished him well with his new wife a few months ago. :shrug:

[KharmaTrain]

18. Here's Something For Your Reading & Dining Pleasure

Not much on the web about Brian's background. I first heard about him in the mid 70's with his "National Review"...a publication that slammed the "waste" on the broadcasting bands (mostly picking on long-haired hippie radio stations that played songs mentioning drugs and sex).

His bio says he worked in the Nixon White House and then went off to "think tank" land after that. It was at this time he came up with the C-SPAN concept...creating a Public Service network that carried House and other Washington activities. Initially it was bi-partisan so it could get the permission to bring cameras into the House, but it was always a tool of the Cable television industry. At first to fulfill a "public service" requirement as part of their franchise agreements. This also got C-SPAN put on virtually every cable system in the country. Not a bad deal.

Here's the F.A.I.R. article from a year ago...that looks at where things have gone:

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2764

Cheers...

[KoKo]

20. Thanks...

:hi:

[Strelnikov_]

24. Sounds Like NPR

Callers can slime Bill Clinton or now Nancy Pelosi or John Murtha and get out all their attack points, while someone who mentions boooosh's AWOL or call into accountability any number of scandals and they're dispatched and dismissed quickly.

Following is my letter to the local NPR affiliate regarding propaganda during the '04 campaign.

. . .

I am writing to express my disgust with the rightward shift of your station, and NPR, over the last year. It appears to me that you have fallen into the "earth is flat, opinions differ" approach to GOP/right-wing journalism. I have heard many comments over the last year that called into question the integrity of your staff, but on today’s ‘Talk of Iowa’, specifically, the ‘Dr. Politics’ show; my ‘line in the sand’ was finally crossed.

On last weeks segment, K. Perkins and Dr. Schmidt allowed an obviously far right individual to rant on for what seemed like 10 min. During this tirade, near the end, the right-wing smear that Sen. Max Cleland was somehow not deserving of ‘decorated veteran’ status because his injuries were the result of an accident (a smear first put forth by Ann Coulter) was presented. The hosts of the program did not intercede at any point during this tirade. Actually, this individual went further than Ms. Coulter in claiming that Sen. Cleland was responsible for killing two other soldiers and blowing up a helicopter in the accident.

Now, on this week’s program, a caller expressed concern that one of the hosts should have questioned the individual denigrating Sen. Cleland regarding the factual basis of the statements. To this, Dr. Schmidt replied that this is an opinion show, and that the caller is responsible for the accuracy of their statements.

My experience with your station, and these two individuals in particular, is that anything stated by the right leaning is taken at face value, while the veracity of any statements by anyone left leaning is called into question. And when I say left leaning, I mean anyone not presenting a party line GOP/right-wing position.

Examples? Well, here is one.

On the June 29th, 2004 ‘Talk of Iowa’ program, with K. Perkins and a stand-in for Dr. Schmidt, the following transpired.

The movie Fahrenheit 9/11 was being discussed. Some (partial) quotes from the above commentators are as follows:

"I would compare it to Oliver Stone's film JFK . . . "

"I haven't seen the film, but the art of propaganda . . ."

A number of people called in supporting the film, noting that it is being misrepresented by the mainstream media, that it is not comparable to "JFK", that it is eye-opening, etc.

After a number of these calls where Ms. Perkins expressed her skepticism with the caller’s position, she stated, "we are journalists, and are supposed to be skeptical."

Later in this program a caller noted that fourteen massive bases are being built in Iraq by the U.S. for permanent basing of U.S. Forces. At this, Ms. Perkins grilled the caller as to the source of this information, and then pontificated again on how she is a journalist and must have sources for information. That is, of course, unless the information supports the GOP/right-wing position.

(By the way, the information on the bases is out there, the same way that it was clear in early summer of 2002 that we were invading Iraq. But if you are looking for a Washington Post article on them, forget it. But I guess since you are modern journalists, you need to wait until there is an ‘investigative’ press release before you report.)

And I am not even going to mention where Dr. Schmidt today noted that the Kerry daughters were booed at the MTV awards, but did not mention that the Bush daughters were also booed. Nor the recent FAIR study documenting NPR's preference for GOP/right-wing leaning guests.

The above incidents are simply the more egregious examples of GOP/right-wing bias that I remember. Like all marriages that end in divorce, the partners gradually grow apart, as result of the cumulative effect of differences, as we obviously have done.

I am a long time contributor to NPR in the various communities I have lived in over the years. I did not pledge the last drive due to my perception of your rightward shift. Basically, I was monitoring to see if this was a short-term aberration.

As of today, I am done with you, and NPR. I request that you remove my name for your membership rolls, and cease any future mailings from your organization, as I have no interest in associating myself with a Fox News knock off. Lets just see how many member contributions you can garner from the GOP/right-wing.

“If you give the people the choice of a Republican and a Republican, they will choose the Republican every time”.

[leftchick]

16. C-Span Biased???? Brian said No Way! FAIR says otherwise!

Failing at Its "No. 1 Goal"
Lack of balance at C-SPAN’s Washington Journal

By Steve Rendall


<snip>

Despite C-SPAN’s stated goals, Extra!’s study found Washington Journal skewing rightward, favoring Republican and right-of-center interview subjects by considerable margins over Democratic and left-of-center guests. The study also found that women, people of color and public interest viewpoints were substantially underrepresented.

Overall, people of European ancestry made up 85 percent of Washington Journal’s guestlist—563 out of 663. (Extra! was able to identify the ethnic background of more than 99 percent of guests.) People of African (26) and Asian (24) heritage accounted for 4 percent each, while those of Middle Eastern (22) and Latin American (18) descent represented 3 percent each. No Native Americans were identifiable on the guestlist from November 1, 2004 to April 30, 2005.

Looking just at U.S. guests with identifiable ethnicities (617 in all), European-Americans were even better represented, at 88 percent. African-Americans and Latinos held steady at 4 percent and 3 percent, respectively. Americans of Middle Eastern descent and Asian-Americans were each about 1 percent of guests. According to the U.S. Census, about 70 percent of Americans are white and non-Latino; about 12 percent each are Latinos of all races, and non-Latino African-Americans; about 4 percent are Asian-American and 1 percent are Native American. (Middle Eastern descent is not a census category.)

On gender, Washington Journal was even more imbalanced when compared to the general population, with a guestlist that was 80 percent male (533 guests) and 20 percent female (130), a four-to-one imbalance. Furthermore, 69 percent of guests were white males (457), while just 3 percent were women of color.

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2764

[Vinca]

3. Why is Murtha constantly connected to Abscam, despite

being cleared, but Keating is never mentioned in the same breath as McCain? It must be that darn liberal media.

[malaise]

4. Call and ask Brian the Rethug n/t

[KharmaTrain]

7. You Noticed That, Too????

McCains hands were all over the S & L and Lincoln Guaranteed Savings mess. If I'm not mistaken, he was reprimanded in that case. And, yep, narry a word.

[Vinca]

8. Didn't he actually pocket cash on the floor of the Senate? nt

[KharmaTrain]

9. Check This Out About McCain & His Friend Keating....

http://www.azcentral.com/specials/special39/articles/1003mccainbook5.html

A couple of juicy bits...

In 1982, during McCain's first run for the House, Keating held a fund-raiser for him, collecting more than $11,000 from 40 employees of American Continental Corp. McCain would spend more than $550,000 to win the primary and the general election.

In 1983, during McCain's second House race, Keating hosted a $1,000-a-plate dinner for McCain, though he had no serious competition and coasted into his second term. When McCain pushed for the Senate in 1986, Keating was there with more than $50,000.

By 1987, McCain had received about $112,000 in political contributions from Keating and his associates.

and one more...

''Keating gave me the clear impression that he expected me to do more,'' McCain said later. ''He had several specific requests.''

When Keating questioned his courage, McCain invoked his POW experience. He told Keating that he didn't spend 5 1/2 years in the Hanoi Hilton to be called a coward.

The two argued, then Keating stormed out.

Despite the dust-up, McCain attended not one but two meetings with the regulators. McCain later explained that he thought it was the right thing to do, because Keating was a constituent.

McCain would live to regret it.

Gotta love that last line.

Surely some political oppo researcher has this arrow already in his quiver...ready to shoot it at McCain next year in the primaries.

[zbdent]

10. When "dems have to reform Congress" comes up

point out that we just saw what professional corruption can achieve in an efficient manner - as soon as the Repukes took power, they started taking bribes (not the "12 years" that the media allows ...), and it is going to take a good while to clean up the elephant dung in the halls of Congress ...

[DemonFighterLives]

5. Briankeeps flipping up the picture of Murtha looking sad

Repug. callers are totally oblivious to what is happening around them. Liberal Media! :rofl: Corruption rampant in the dem. party. :rofl:

Switching topics to war. Money, money.

[KharmaTrain]

12. Emmett Tyrell...Scaife's Sockpuppet

And one of Bri's good buddies. This goon gets an hour to revise history and spit venom.

So he thinks the Shah was really a good guy? That booosh's last inaugural was "elloquent".

Brian just lets him ramble...I'm sure they're long time drinkie-drinkie buddies.

[qanda]

13. Did you hear that last caller

I can hardly type, I'm laughing so hard. He demolished Tyrell and Tyrell barely knew how to respond. I loved the part about how come we didn't invade Wyoming and Idaho after the Oklahoma City bombing-- "that's where all the white people hang out!" LOL

[ProfessorGAC]

15. Wish I'd Been Able To See and Hear That Call

Couldn't watch this morning. Had an international (Pac Rim) video conference and had to leave the house at 3:45am. Jonesin' for my WJ fix this morning. Glad you transcribed that call. Got a chuckle. Thanks.
The Professor

[Kindigger]

14. Never seen this guy before but....

I'm not sure whether to puke or laugh. I've NEVER heard anyone so f'ing delusional in my life, but I can't turn it off...its like passing a car wreck. :crazy:

[KharmaTrain]

17. Editor Of The Scaiffe Spectator...

One of the worst right wing hate rags out there...funded by Richard Mellon-Scaiffe. This was the rag that printed the stories about Troopergate that David Brock later refuted. They also were tied in with the Rutherford Institute that funded the Paula Jones fiasco.

I'm hoping someone drops a house on this bastard...do the world a favor.

[KharmaTrain]

19. Well That Was Quite A Trip To The Twilight Zone...

It's scary to think Tyrell is considered "credible" and spend most the hour insulting and fighting with the callers.

Can anyone remember the last time Brian brought on a Progressive or Liberal editor or writer like a Joe Conason or Kristina Van Huevel?

Now he's on to rehashing the Murtha non-story. Looks like the Swiftboating of Murtha isn't done yet.

[bigtree]

21. Tyrell's a sly old dog. Always scheming, always twisting the facts

to club liberals and progressives and elevate his precious republicans. He's getting on though. His petty empire is under full assault.

Brian does get liberals to come on, but they always pair them with rabid conservatives as if they were afraid we might effectively make our point with our arguably stronger progressive arguments.

[ProfessorGAC]

22. Not Completely True

Katrina has been many times, and she ALWAYS appears alone. Same with Eric Alterman, although he hasn't been on in a while. But, when he did appear fairly regularly, he was did a solo.

The difference isn't so much one of structure. The difference is that those two don't have to lie to maintain their presence as the center of gravity. People like Hewitt (yesterday) and Tyrell have nothing other than fabrications that lean toward their own preconceived, and idiotic beliefs.
The Professor

[bigtree]

23. thanks for the clarification.

I wish I'd caught those

[Coexist]

25. caller: the NYT is NOT a liberal newspaper

Lamb: then what is it.

You had to see his eyes when he said it.

[sniffa]

26. yay for gay

that ain't cooL.

[KoKo]

27. Kick for good info about C-Span on this thread! n/t