|
Post by HOLIDAY on Apr 10, 2024 18:42:11 GMT -5
I mostly have stopped listening to NPR, not because they've gotten too liberal, but because they continue to treat presidential politics like a horse race and they continue to do "both sides" stories when one side is clearly leading us to a crisis of freedom and democracy. A small percentage of their funding comes from taxpayers. Most comes from listener support, but a lot comes from major underwriters who often seem to have the clout to slightly skew their coverage. There's a reason why many in the media business now refer to them as National Petroleum Radio. Tommy,…you sound like the bitches on the View, just so triggered they can’t bear to hear any opinion but their own. Perhaps you need some medication to deal with your anxiety.
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Apr 10, 2024 18:42:30 GMT -5
There's a reason why many in the media business now refer to them as National Petroleum Radio. Or "Nice Polite Republicans".
|
|
|
Post by HOLIDAY on Apr 10, 2024 18:43:23 GMT -5
What does this entire thread to tell you? Democrats could care less about free speech or differences in opinion. They want to hear their own opinion 24 hours a day and they have no courage otherwise. They’re cowards.
|
|
|
Post by volleyguy on Apr 10, 2024 18:44:00 GMT -5
What does this entire thread to tell you? Democrats could care less about free speech or differences in opinion. They want to hear their own opinion 24 hours a day and they have no courage otherwise. They’re cowards. Blah blah blah blah blah
|
|
|
Post by jsquare on Apr 10, 2024 18:44:57 GMT -5
What does this entire thread to tell you? Democrats could care less about free speech or differences in opinion. They want to hear their own opinion 24 hours a day and they have no courage otherwise. They’re cowards. says the guy who refuses to address facts.
|
|
|
Post by AmeriCanvbdad on Apr 10, 2024 20:36:31 GMT -5
said by a liberal who worked/ works there. Where does Berliner say he's a liberal? From the outside it's certainly not how I would describe someone doing the right wing grift tour. I was certain that he said it in the interview, I saw, but I could be mistaken. He does say that from the survey he took there were no Republicans and he didn't identify himself as the lone republican or conservative on staff. Just cuz he's smart enough to say what a certain segment of the population wants to hear doesn't mean he wholeheartedly agrees with them. You can be a liberal and be on Fox. They have a few.
|
|
|
Post by AmeriCanvbdad on Apr 10, 2024 20:40:55 GMT -5
Stop trying to bury this one where no one will notice. Any time an elected candidate wins with a minority total of the vote, it’s news worthy. If it wasn’t you and news media like CNN wouldn’t prattle on incessantly about Trump losing the popular vote. How much has each news organization spent time on the 2016 presidential results, where the winner got 46.09% of the vote? And the loser got 48.16%? Neither a majority. And the “loser” who should have no policies implemented by the winner? And voter turnout was 60%, so another 40% did not even vote. If news organizations did not report on the lack of a majority winning, they are biased? Or really 190 million or so people not voting for the “winner”? Hoo boy, I thought no one could be more in the weeds than square and here you come giving 'em a run for their money. Tell you what, how about you treat this like a Christopher Nolan movie and start from my most recent post and work backwards. Maybe that will clear up your confusion about what I'm talking about, and then again, maybe not.
|
|
|
Post by AmeriCanvbdad on Apr 10, 2024 20:44:05 GMT -5
I mostly have stopped listening to NPR, not because they've gotten too liberal, but because they continue to treat presidential politics like a horse race and they continue to do "both sides" stories when one side is clearly leading us to a crisis of freedom and democracy. A small percentage of their funding comes from taxpayers. Most comes from listener support, but a lot comes from major underwriters who often seem to have the clout to slightly skew their coverage. There's a reason why many in the media business now refer to them as National Petroleum Radio. Tommy,…you sound like the bitches on the View, just so triggered they can’t bear to hear any opinion but their own. Perhaps you need some medication to deal with your anxiety. I know that you're going to do you, but aggressively name calling the women on The View because you don't like them is as misogynistic as square's slurs for Melania Trump or when ironhammer called the girls he couldn't date in high school B's because they went out with guys he didn't approve of.
|
|
|
Post by geddyleeridesagain on Apr 10, 2024 20:44:22 GMT -5
I mostly have stopped listening to NPR, not because they've gotten too liberal, but because they continue to treat presidential politics like a horse race and they continue to do "both sides" stories when one side is clearly leading us to a crisis of freedom and democracy. A small percentage of their funding comes from taxpayers. Most comes from listener support, but a lot comes from major underwriters who often seem to have the clout to slightly skew their coverage. There's a reason why many in the media business now refer to them as National Petroleum Radio. Tommy,… you sound like the bitches on the View, just so triggered they can’t bear to hear any opinion but their own. Perhaps you need some medication to deal with your anxiety. Hey, AmeriCanvbdad, see what I'm talking about? What is it about The View that gets conservatives collective undies in a bunch? It's a little weird, TBH. Also, hat tip to Holiday for helping to prove my point. Again.
|
|
|
Post by AmeriCanvbdad on Apr 10, 2024 20:55:37 GMT -5
Tommy,… you sound like the bitches on the View, just so triggered they can’t bear to hear any opinion but their own. Perhaps you need some medication to deal with your anxiety. Hey, AmeriCanvbdad , see what I'm talking about? What is it about The View that gets conservatives collective undies in a bunch? It's a little weird, TBH. Also, hat tip to Holiday for helping to prove my point. Again. Granted I don't have much use for the panelists on The View (neither does Gutfeld's audience) but it's not because they're women. It's because they are obnoxiously opinionated and seem to have zero objectivity. Don't have much use for Bill Mahr either but it's not because he's (was) a redhead. This will trigger Baby Gap but both sides have people that we would all be better off without. Again, interesting that you can clearly identify that where The Five and Gutfeld's show are concerned (even though I bet you've never watched 10 episodes of it) but were hesitant to acknowledge the same of The View. To each, their own I suppose.
|
|
|
Post by geddyleeridesagain on Apr 10, 2024 21:00:52 GMT -5
Hey, AmeriCanvbdad , see what I'm talking about? What is it about The View that gets conservatives collective undies in a bunch? It's a little weird, TBH. Also, hat tip to Holiday for helping to prove my point. Again. Granted I don't have much use for the panelists on The View (neither does Gutfeld's audience) but it's not because they're women. It's because they are obnoxiously opinionated and seem to have zero objectivity. Don't have much use for Bill Mahr either but it's not because he's (was) a redhead. This will trigger Baby Gap but both sides have people that we would all be better off without. Again, interesting that you can clearly identify that where The Five and Gutfeld's show are concerned (even though I bet you've never watched 10 episodes of it) but were hesitant to acknowledge the same of The View. To each, their own I suppose. Ten episodes? Hmm. Collectively, maybe somewhere in that general neighborhood. Probably a little less. I've never seen an episode of The View, so it's a little difficult for me to form much of an opinion of it, other than understanding the only real connection it has with The Five is the number of panelists. Meh, whatever. There's more than just a whiff of misogyny in the air here on the topic of The View, the largest piece of it emanating from Western Nebraska.
|
|
|
Post by geddyleeridesagain on Apr 10, 2024 21:28:39 GMT -5
I mean...this stuff enrages Republicans? "I have an ongoing game of Words With Friends on my iPad with Martina Navratilova," Navarro said during a Hot Topics discussion — the latest celebrity name-drop from the cohost, who often brings up her friendships with the likes of Gloria Estefan, Eva Longoria, and more.
"Of course," Joy Behar said. "Do you know anybody who's not famous?" Goldberg's eyes then shot skyward as she leaned back in her chair, letting her arms fall to her sides as if she'd lost consciousness.
"She lives in Miami. She's a friend of mine," Navarro replied, adding that "Susie Davis" is Behar's "best friend" — though she actually meant Curb Your Enthusiasm star Susie Essman, Behar's actual bestie.
Goldberg remained in her faux-unconscious state for approximately 20 seconds, maintaining her posture even as the show's theme song began to play, signaling an impending commercial break.
Then the Oscar-winning Ghost actress resurrected herself, looked to the camera, and said, "We'll be right back" before placing her head in her hand and shaking it back and forth before the show cut to ads." Her fake Wednesday collapse marks the third time Goldberg has played into the physical bit over the past year. She first fell to the table in November 2023 and then did it again in January of this year.www.yahoo.com/entertainment/whoopi-goldberg-collapses-view-ana-180000258.htmlHey, isn't Ana Navarro a conservative writer?
|
|
|
Post by vbman100 on Apr 10, 2024 21:29:55 GMT -5
How much has each news organization spent time on the 2016 presidential results, where the winner got 46.09% of the vote? And the loser got 48.16%? Neither a majority. And the “loser” who should have no policies implemented by the winner? And voter turnout was 60%, so another 40% did not even vote. If news organizations did not report on the lack of a majority winning, they are biased? Or really 190 million or so people not voting for the “winner”? Hoo boy, I thought no one could be more in the weeds than square and here you come giving 'em a run for their money. Tell you what, how about you treat this like a Christopher Nolan movie and start from my most recent post and work backwards. Maybe that will clear up your confusion about what I'm talking about, and then again, maybe not. I am confused by you again. You wrote: “Regardless, when it comes to an election, if you want to report the whole story, mentioning that the majority of candidates didn’t want the eventual winner is something should be reported. Your willingness to ignore the whole of a story because you don’t like parts of it is telling. Tell the whole story (bias free) and let people decide. But you’re the one who wouldn’t report such a fact when it should be duly noted.” So I assumed you were saying if a news organization does not make a point about the winner of an election not receiving the majority, it is biased somehow. I will say news organizations addressed the difference in voting for one candidate over another. But hardly ever discuss not reaching a majority. And certainly not about 190 million or so not voting for the winner of the 2016 presidential election. Or 200 million not voting for the winner of the 2020. That is a fact too, correct?
|
|
|
Post by HOLIDAY on Apr 10, 2024 21:47:59 GMT -5
Classic ladies of the view comments. Sunny Hostin claimed that the Eclipse was due to climate change.Opinionated and stupid. That’s a rare combination.
|
|
|
Post by geddyleeridesagain on Apr 10, 2024 22:25:41 GMT -5
Classic ladies of the view comments. Sunny Hostin claimed that the Eclipse was due to climate change.Opinionated and stupid. That’s a rare combination. Never heard of her. On the other hand... Hoo, baby, MTG be crazy.
|
|