Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Racist Down...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Racist Down...

    Isn't this a shame?

    Al Sharpton has been 'demoted' by MSNBC.

    About time...

    http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment...y/?intcmp=hpff

  • #2
    MSNBC also got rid of Ed Schultz and several other Progressive talking heads due to the poor performance of their shows. MSNBC is headed the way of Air America, Al Franken's Progressive talk radio.

    Maybe Progressives should get a clue from all this. Their views and politics are just not very popular with most people not to mention their in-your-face holier than thou ranting. It killed Air America. It killed Newsweak, err Newsweek. It's killing Time and MSNBC. The Nation magazine has eked out a living as a small time publication for decades espousing Progressive views.

    Progressives in America have never had much more than 20% of the population supporting them and often less. But, let them get into power or succeed in the courts and the damage that results is almost boundless.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
      MSNBC also got rid of Ed Schultz and several other Progressive talking heads due to the poor performance of their shows. MSNBC is headed the way of Air America, Al Franken's Progressive talk radio.

      Maybe Progressives should get a clue from all this. Their views and politics are just not very popular with most people not to mention their in-your-face holier than thou ranting. It killed Air America. It killed Newsweak, err Newsweek. It's killing Time and MSNBC. The Nation magazine has eked out a living as a small time publication for decades espousing Progressive views.

      Progressives in America have never had much more than 20% of the population supporting them and often less. But, let them get into power or succeed in the courts and the damage that results is almost boundless.

      I would submit that one of the reasons why liberal entities aren't as successful as conservative ones is that the liberal has far more options.
      He doesn't need an openly liberal entity to tell him the other side of the story when the MSM will do it for him.

      For instance, this morning I googled "palin and Gifford" as I was curious about whether the media demanded that Palin answer for the shooting of Giffords.
      What I saw at the ABC and CBS sites was enough to please any liberal. Both sites were linking Palin to the shooting and gave plenty of space to the people who blamed her directly. The fact that it was an utterly ridiculous charge didn't matter, it was reported as news.

      Today, on CNNMoney's site you will find 2 anti-Trump articles.
      http://money.cnn.com/

      One is about how mad ricky martin is at trump the other is Univision's low opinion of trump.
      Ricky Martin's opinions on anything still constitute news?
      Last edited by Cambronnne; 28 Aug 15, 07:42.
      Avatar is General Gerard, courtesy of Zouave.

      Churchill to Chamberlain: you had a choice between war and dishonor. You chose dishonor, and you will have war.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
        MSNBC also got rid of Ed Schultz and several other Progressive talking heads due to the poor performance of their shows. MSNBC is headed the way of Air America, Al Franken's Progressive talk radio.

        Maybe Progressives should get a clue from all this. Their views and politics are just not very popular with most people not to mention their in-your-face holier than thou ranting. It killed Air America. It killed Newsweak, err Newsweek. It's killing Time and MSNBC. The Nation magazine has eked out a living as a small time publication for decades espousing Progressive views.

        Progressives in America have never had much more than 20% of the population supporting them and often less. But, let them get into power or succeed in the courts and the damage that results is almost boundless.
        I think the internet is more to blame for the death of news magazines like Newsweek and Time.

        As for the shock jocks, it takes more and more these days to shock Americans, let alone even get their interest or attention.
        Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes? Who is watching the watchers?

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
          MSNBC is headed the way of Air America, Al Franken's Progressive tak radio.
          Let's hope no money intended for Boy's and Girl's Club is routed to MSNBC.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Cambronnne View Post
            I would submit that one of the reasons why liberal entities aren't as successful as conservative ones is that the liberal has far more options.
            He doesn't need an openly liberal entity to tell him the other side of the story when the MSM will do it for him.
            I'd counter it is because they are aggressive, emotional, often vulgar, and usually dismissive to the point of insulting of any opposing opinion. There are exceptions of course, like Thom Hartmann, but as a rule they are hard to take for more than a few minutes at a time.

            Stephanie Miller is like that. So is Randi Rhodes. She's been tossed off the air by the FCC more than Don Imus. Come on, the Secret Service investigated her for threats on the air against a sitting President (Bush). Ed Schultz is an obnoxious blowhard that makes Rush Limbaugh look docile.

            When you come on like a drunk (Stephanie Miller has said she is on her show more than once for example) obnoxious relative that's shown up uninvited you tend to turn people off. Randi Rhodes thinks that bathroom humor will make her listeners more inclined to continue to support her show.
            Ed Schultz runs his mouth then has to spend all sorts of time explaining how he really didn't mean he extolled his listeners to commit voter fraud for example.

            And, yes, it doesn't help that the MSM is overwhelmingly Left of Center either.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
              I think the internet is more to blame for the death of news magazines like Newsweek and Time.

              As for the shock jocks, it takes more and more these days to shock Americans, let alone even get their interest or attention.
              Roger That, on both points!
              Trying hard to be the Man, that my Dog believes I am!

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post

                Progressives in America have never had much more than 20% of the population supporting them and often less. But, let them get into power or succeed in the courts and the damage that results is almost boundless.
                Originally posted by Cambronnne View Post
                I would submit that one of the reasons why liberal entities aren't as successful as conservative ones is that the liberal has far more options.
                He doesn't need an openly liberal entity to tell him the other side of the story when the MSM will do it for him.

                For instance, this morning I googled "palin and Gifford" as I was curious about whether the media demanded that Palin answer for the shooting of Giffords.
                What I saw at the ABC and CBS sites was enough to please any liberal. Both sites were linking Palin to the shooting and gave plenty of space to the people who blamed her directly. The fact that it was an utterly ridiculous charge didn't matter, it was reported as news.

                Today, on CNNMoney's site you will find 2 anti-Trump articles.
                http://money.cnn.com/

                One is about how mad ricky martin is at trump the other is Univision's low opinion of trump.
                Ricky Martin's opinions on anything still constitute news?
                If liberals/Progressives constitute only 20% of the population how come they dominate the news media?

                What do you considered balanced? Is, for example, Fox News fair and balanced?
                "The thing about quotes on the internet is that you cannot confirm their
                validity." - Abraham Lincoln.
                "Nothing's going to change while one side it lying about the cause and the other is lying about the solution" - Me

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Massena View Post
                  Isn't this a shame?
                  Yeah, it will surely disappoint the couple of dozen people who watch his show.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by E.D. Morel View Post
                    If liberals/Progressives constitute only 20% of the population how come they dominate the news media?

                    What do you considered balanced? Is, for example, Fox News fair and balanced?
                    The traditional major news outlets -- New York Times, Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, ABC, NBC, CBS, AP, UPI, and some of the newer outlets like CNN -- recruit overwhelmingly from only a small number of universities: University of Missouri School of Journalism, Columbia University School of Journalism, New York University, University of California at Los Angeles, University of Southern California, and the other seven members of the Ivy League. That's a very small pool from which to recruit, and so it should come as no surprise that those outlets are strikingly similar in tone and sentiment, as well as style.
                    I was married for two ******* years! Hell would be like Club Med! - Sam Kinison

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by E.D. Morel View Post
                      If liberals/Progressives constitute only 20% of the population how come they dominate the news media?
                      I am fairly long in the tooth and as far as I remember in the late 50s, 60s, 70s the three TV news outlets then ( ABC, CBS and NBC) have always had a left slant to them, I understood this even as an apolitical young man, this is nothing new to me.
                      Trying hard to be the Man, that my Dog believes I am!

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Massena View Post
                        ...Al Sharpton has been 'demoted' by MSNBC...
                        He'll sue 'em for discrimination.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by E.D. Morel View Post
                          If liberals/Progressives constitute only 20% of the population how come they dominate the news media?

                          What do you considered balanced? Is, for example, Fox News fair and balanced?

                          Your reference to Fox largely proves my point.
                          You instantly thought of Fox because it differs from all the other stations and the reason it differs is because it does not present the news from the same point of view as the other stations. If it did, you would not have ever taken notice of that station.


                          I am talking about journalists, not the general population.
                          7% are conservative
                          http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...n-a-decade-ago

                          And the proportion of liberals to conservatives in the press, either 3-to-1 or 4-to-1, has stayed the same. That liberals are dominant is now beyond dispute.

                          http://www.cbsnews.com/news/evidence...liberal-media/
                          Avatar is General Gerard, courtesy of Zouave.

                          Churchill to Chamberlain: you had a choice between war and dishonor. You chose dishonor, and you will have war.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Liberals see racism where it does not exist,fabricate it when they can't find it and ignore it within their own ranks .

                            What's the difference between a parasite and a liberal ? The spelling .

                            Liberalism is a totalitarian ideology which will result in the suicide of the West .

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Yes. Yes, and yes.

                              GG
                              "The will of a section rooted in self interest, should not outweigh the vital interests of a whole people." -Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain-

                              "Fanatics of any sort are dangerous." -GG-

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              • Snowshoveler
                                Attack against Saudi Arabia
                                by Snowshoveler
                                Saudi Arabia’s oil infrastructure was attacked by around 10 armed drones by Yemens Houthi rebels and has caused SA to lose half their oil production....
                                Yesterday, 17:56
                              • hobo9
                                C-123B
                                by hobo9
                                Would anyone know the wheel and tire sizes (NLG & MLG) for the Fairchild C-123B Provider?
                                Thank you,
                                P.N....
                                Yesterday, 17:22
                              • Mountain Man
                                Here Comes The Gas Gouge!
                                by Mountain Man
                                Drone strike on Saudi oil fields...the perfect excuse for another round of gas price hikes. And I'll bet all that "excess capacity" just magically...
                                Yesterday, 16:30
                              Working...
                              X