Skip to comments.Resolved: We need conservative presence in traditional media. The internet isn't enough.
Posted on 11/07/2006 10:50:36 PM PST by RPTMS
The main-stream media, the old media, the liberal media, whatever you want to call them, have shown that they can still screw this country up when they really want to.
It's the party of ABE Lincoln, NOT Lincoln Chafee....throw out RINOs and return to our roots.
Yes, let's throw out our RINOs...it's going to be one of the pleasures left to us.
The problem is not the media. It isn't Bush either.
I blame this election on two people:
Bob Ney, Mark Foley.
Why hasn't this happened? Its hilarious to hear how the GOP is "the rich" but no one has built an empire like Ted Turner (CNN)....as we all know, Fox News was just a clever marketing plan by The Aussie.
We had one? A "message" I mean?
If so, could have fooled me.
Sure the MSM was in the tank for the Dhimis and stabbed us in the back, the front, the side and every which way they could, but I think if we had been unified behind an actual agenda, (like the 1994 Contract) we would have done much better.
Hate to admit this, but Newt's looking awfull good, right about now.
I think that is a great idea! Maybe we could get a reporter in every House District!
I'm posting this article to reinforce my previous comments on this thread. Mr. Ponte has it spot on, our real enemy is not the Democrats, its the media that ptotects tham and shills for them. This is an excellent piece you ought to read for a better understanding of what we are up against.
Vote Against the Mainstream Media
Monday, Nov. 6, 2006
The lords who rule America's liberal press are unelected. We get no direct vote in who runs the New York Times, CBS, or Newsweek.
But on Tuesday we can indirectly cast our ballots against the mainstream media's unchecked power by voting against its liberal politicians.
The media's dishonesty is now undeniable. As scholar Thomas Sowell wrote, in this year's elections "the mainstream media are not simply observers and reporters but active partisans."
A new study by the non-partisan Center for Media and Public Affairs in Washington, D.C., analyzed midterm election coverage on the ABC, CBS and NBC evening newscasts between September 5 and October 22. The study found during these seven key weeks following Labor Day, 167 such stories were broadcast. These big three network gave Democratic candidates coverage that was 77 percent positive. Republican candidates got the opposite coverage that was 88 percent negative.
This year it has become difficult to tell where partisan Democratic press releases end and news coverage by mainstream journalists begins. They sound identical, as if fabricated in the same Left wing propaganda factory.
A 2005 University of California Los Angeles-led study found that 18 of the nation's top 20 media outlets skewed their news coverage significantly to the Left.
"I suspected that many media outlets would tilt to the left because surveys have shown that reporters tend to vote more Democrat than Republican," said UCLA political scientist Tim Groseclose, the study's lead author. "But I was surprised at just how pronounced the distinctions are."
Story Continues Below
Of the two media outlets that did not tilt Left, the UCLA-led study found, the Fox News Channel program "Special Report with Brit Hume" indeed "proved to be right of center," and Fox News is "often cited by liberals as an egregious example of a right-wing outlet."
However, the study continued, ABC's "World News Tonight" and NBC's "Nightly News" which present themselves as unbiased newscasts - are about as far left of center as the Fox is right of center.
News consumers are being deceived, fed tainted information, and manipulated to advance the ideological agendas of the Left. Like "The Matrix," Left wing media concocts an Orwellian false reality of lies and half-truths designed to elect Democrats. In 2004 editor Evan Thomas (grandson of longtime Socialist Party presidential candidate Norman Thomas) of liberal Newsweek Magazine estimated that the mainstream media tilt in favor of Democratic presidential standard bearer John F. Kerry would "be worth maybe 15 points" on election day.
Media's brainwashing hypnotic spell can be broken. Experts, e.g., have exposed how the Los Angeles Times, New York Times and other media concoct polls that deliberately "oversample" Democrats to produce results unfavorable to Republicans.
But the Left wing media controls most channels of communication reaching the public and it can throw up distorting mirrors and lies faster than truth tellers can discredit these falsehoods. For example:
New Stock Market Report - Limited Time Offer!
Top 7 Funds at Vanguard to Buy; 10 to Sell --Free!
Profit From Warren Buffett's Big Bet
Stop Drinking Water Now
The liberal media beginning last Friday has been touting an editorial in the military careerist-oriented Army Times, sister publication of the Military Times, Navy Times, Air Force Times and Marine Times, calling for the resignation of President George W. Bush's Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld.
The news stories about this seem orchestrated to persuade voters that America's military is turning against the Bush Iraq policy. Unreported, however, is that these are not military-edited publications. They are owned, edited and written by Gannett, the same liberal company that publishes USA Today, a left-of-center newspaper according to the UCLA-led study.
Last Friday Vanity Fair Magazine made news with a press release quoting several neo-conservative Bush advisors. Their quotes, from its forthcoming January issue, suggest that Bush Iraq policy was mistaken and has failed.
Several of those quoted Richard Pearle, David Frum, Eliot A. Cohen and Michael Rubin wrote over the weekend in National Review that their words were deceptively edited and distorted. ""Vanity Fair set my words in its own context in its press release," wrote Frum. "They added words outside the quote marks to change the plain meaning of quotations."
In any event, wrote these neocons, Vanity Fair told them that nothing they said would be made public prior to the November election. "Vanity Fair's agenda was a pre-election hit job," wrote Rubin, "and I guess some of us quoted are at fault for believing too much in integrity."
Integrity? The Editor-in-Chief of Vanity Fair is Graydon Carter, who in February 2001 was in Havana with CBS chieftain Les Moonves, CEO of MTV Tom Freston and head of the William Morris talent agency Jim Wiatt for an intimate party with Fidel Castro. One of the attendees described this tropical prison with 11 million inmate slaves as "the most romantic, soulful and sexy country I've ever been to in my life."
Vanity Fair's sister Conde Nast magazine is The New Yorker, whose investigative reporter Seymour Hersh made news days ago by hyperbolically telling students at McGill University in Montreal that "There has never been an American army as violent and murderous as the one in Iraq."
Hersh was awarded a Pulitzer Prize for his expose of the Vietnam War's My Lai massacre. But Hersh during the 1960s got his start with the Left wing Dispatch News Service. Hersh's politics have remained so leftward and critical of the United States that when he worked for the New York Times, its then-Executive Editor A.M. Rosenthal routinely referred to Hersh as "my little commie." Such are the people manipulating our news and public opinion.
NBC's cable network MSNBC now permits Keith Olbermann, a third-rate sportscaster with delusions of being the reincarnation of Edward R. Murrow, to broadcast an entirely unbalanced hour-long ad for the Democratic Party five nights each week an NBC campaign contribution worth millions of dollars. And ABC's Political Director Mark Halperin (about whom more in a future column) acknowledges that 70 percent of his ABC colleagues have a pro-Democratic liberal bias.
Tuesday's election will show whether the liberal media can manipulate our democracy by slanting their news coverage. By defeating their candidates, you can vote against the Left wing media.
What we need is a fair and balanced WIRE SERVICE.
The origin of most of the daily news agenda comes out of AP, Reuters, AFP, etc reports.
Nearly every major paper in America simply repackages the hard news generated by these wire services.
And the agenda set by these news stories is largely followed by the network and cable TV news.
The media reporting on Iraq is the single reason most responsible for the Rats taking power.
And like Vietnam, that reporting is a travesty, one with a nefarious political agenda.
In Oklahoma we returned our three Republican Congressmen and one new Congresswoman Mary Fallin who replaced Istook.
At the Statewide level, we took a bath. Worst run campaigns ever. We won ONE race. There was no coherent message at all and no one was on the same page.
I certaintly never knew a theme. It seemed like a Dem campaign in that our whole message seemed to be "they are worse than us." We didn't put out our program much.
Now we need to stand up and fight and go recruit good candidates to run in 2008! We also need to make our remaining Senators grow a backbone like Senators Inhofe and Coburn have from Oklahoma. I am tired of the spineless leaders in the House and Senate.
What galls me is when Republicans get in trouble, they resign but Dems stay in office. I would like to take Foley, Ney, and others and wring their necks. In the future we need to vet our candidates!
Very well said!
As far as I am concerned my donations to RNC, NRSC, and NRCC could easily go for this. I think it is a great idea and we should explore the possibilities.
Tonight my daughter who writes for the University of Oklahoma Daily needed some interviews for the paper so I was going around the OK GOP Watch Party getting her interviews on the phone. She got one with our new Congressman elect Mary Fallin which was a real coup for her. I asked Mary if she would mind doing an interview with the OU Daily and she said she would love to do one. Made my daughter's day.
Sorry, but that was a moment of bad media judgement which cost him votes and gave the opposition fodder for their attack machine.
Something which every candidate needs to be schooled in avoiding in the future, imo.
Exactly! There was no message that they ran on that I heard. I thought Hastert did a horrible job as speaker and the Foley deal along with Ney hurt really bad. Abramhoff came up and bit us if you ask me. The Dims managed to make us the party of corruption and we let them IMHO.
I think we need to do a lessons learned to not make the same mistakes again, and we could put that out right here about what worked in some places and didn't in others. I think we need new heads of RNC, NRSC, NRCC and a lot of State Parties especially ours in OK!
Congressional Republicans in OK did great. Our statewide candidates were the worst ever and we only won one race. Our Governor candidate was the worst I have ever seen in any state. We did keep the OK and tie the OK Senate for the first time ever in the Senate, but statewide we got clobbered because the wrong person headed the ticket thanks to the OK Chairman taking out the best candidate in the primary with his kumbyya approach!
You can publish things, get it out there, even if it's just paper on a bar to catch slops. You'll have a resource that other papers and yes, websites, can mine. Most of it can be done on a volunteer basis, and publishing costs for a hundred thousand papers is about $10k a month. Less than what is raised to run FreeRepublic each month
I've been pondering something similar. My vision was to put a proper newspaper in a swing state with a dying newspaper, like kansas city and build from there, moving in where the old media is dying off. Whatever comes, I'm in.
I say it is time we went on the offensive here on FR and did something about just what you are saying.
You are so right! We need to vet our candidates and we need to teach them how to react to media nuisances!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.