How Simple Is It To Hide The Truth....?

[PoliticalChic]

As the saying goes, one can always tell what the left is doing by what they claim the other side is doing.
Dalton Trumbo, case in point.....free speech aficionado???

11. Dalton Trumbo.... a principled patriot standing up for free speech!
Not.

His raison d'être was to deprive the other side of their free speech. And he did.



a. DalonTrumbo, like any good communist,began a blacklisting of the other side before he became subject of an anti-communist blacklisting. The scholar Kenneth Billingsley found that Trumbo wrote inThe Daily Workerabout films which he said communist influence in Hollywood had prevented from being made:among them were proposed adaptations ofArthur Koestler's anti-totalitarianworksDarkness at NoonandThe Yogi and the Commissar,which described the rise of communism in Russia.
Kenneth Billingsley, "Hollywood's Missing Movies: Why American films have ignored life under communism",Reason Magazine, June 2000



b. Communists in high positions in Hollywood were able to see to it that ant-Communist works never made it to the screen. Writing in "The Worker," Dalton Trumbo bragged about de facto anti-Communist blacklisting.

"We have produced a few fine films in Hollywood, a great many of which were vulgar and opportunistic and a few downright vicious. If you tell me Hollywood, in contrast with the novel and the theater, has produced nothing so provocative or so progressive asFreedom RoadorDeep Are the Roots, I will grant you the point, but I may also add that neither has Hollywood produced anything so untrue or so reactionary asThe Yogi and the Commissar,Out of the Night,Report on the Russians,There Shall Be No Night, orAdventures of a Young Man. Nor does Hollywood's forthcoming schedule include such tempting items as James T. FarrellBernard Clare, Victor A. KravchenkoI Chose Freedom, or the so-called biography of Stalin by Leon Trotsky." FrontPage Magazine - Orwell vs. Communism



b. In reality, Dalton Trumbo supported "Communist and fascist aggression across the globe and conspiring to make the United States a totalitarian Red regime. Trumbo, in truth, was a full-fledged Stalinist whose supposed love of freedom led him to side with three of the most barbarous dictators in the 20th century: Joseph Stalin, Adolph Hitler and North Korea’s Kim Il-sung.


He was a full-blooded Red, party card and all, who worked hard to graft a Soviet-style system, with all its lovely qualities, upon his country of birth. And he would have used force and violence—or so his utterances would suggest—if he had been summoned to do so by his boss in Moscow. " http://media.glennbeck.com/blaze/mag/august2015theblazemag.pdf


Yet....a hero to Hollywood, and to the Left.

They hate America.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

That is what matters in an election. Guess Ann forgot to tell you that part...

So....turns out I am -----as usual-----100% correct about the hero Senator who shined the spotlight on the communists in Roosevelt's administration.


And America agreed.

"During the 1950s, the Gallup Organization responded to new issues and personalities as they related to the ongoing superpower struggle. Joseph McCarthy entered the public opinion polls for the first time, and won initial approval. Fifty percent agreed with McCarthy in a March 1950 survey that there were communists working in the State Department.Note 45 A June 1950 poll found 45 percent expressed unqualified approval of McCarthy saying "he is anxious to rid us of communists and he is right"; 16 percent expressed qualified approval with remarks such as "there must be some foundation for his charges, but they are greatly exaggerated"; 31 percent disbelieved McCarthy saying he is "a rabble-rouser seeking personal glory who is trying to get reelected"; 8 percent were unsure what to make of McCarthy."
Cold War International History Conference: Paper by John White

He was a pig, who died young and disgraced. Give it up.

Beating you from pillar to post was sooooo much fun....I should keep you on retainer.

As usual, you declare victory, after losing.

I'd tell you only start threads on things that you know something about, but we'd never see you here again...

I beat you black and blue....as usual.

I stated that no innocent American was ever ruined by Senator Joseph McCarthy.
And, proved it....

You named two individuals....the first a proven communist, the second merely a socialist who decided it was better to change jobs than to remain in government....which was McCarthy's aim.


Any reader will see that I am an expert on the subject.....

...and you, a liar.



That's the case, isn't it.

Neither were communists, and neither ever faced trial as the charges against they were false, and later dropped.

 

[PoliticalChic]

So....turns out I am -----as usual-----100% correct about the hero Senator who shined the spotlight on the communists in Roosevelt's administration.


And America agreed.

"During the 1950s, the Gallup Organization responded to new issues and personalities as they related to the ongoing superpower struggle. Joseph McCarthy entered the public opinion polls for the first time, and won initial approval. Fifty percent agreed with McCarthy in a March 1950 survey that there were communists working in the State Department.Note 45 A June 1950 poll found 45 percent expressed unqualified approval of McCarthy saying "he is anxious to rid us of communists and he is right"; 16 percent expressed qualified approval with remarks such as "there must be some foundation for his charges, but they are greatly exaggerated"; 31 percent disbelieved McCarthy saying he is "a rabble-rouser seeking personal glory who is trying to get reelected"; 8 percent were unsure what to make of McCarthy."
Cold War International History Conference: Paper by John White

He was a pig, who died young and disgraced. Give it up.

Beating you from pillar to post was sooooo much fun....I should keep you on retainer.

As usual, you declare victory, after losing.

I'd tell you only start threads on things that you know something about, but we'd never see you here again...

I beat you black and blue....as usual.

I stated that no innocent American was ever ruined by Senator Joseph McCarthy.
And, proved it....

You named two individuals....the first a proven communist, the second merely a socialist who decided it was better to change jobs than to remain in government....which was McCarthy's aim.


Any reader will see that I am an expert on the subject.....

...and you, a liar.



That's the case, isn't it.

Neither were communists, and neither ever faced trial as the charges against they were false, and later dropped.

Why did you imagine that you needed to re-prove that you are a liar???

Why?

 

[nat4900]

As usual, you declare victory, after losing.

I'd tell you only start threads on things that you know something about, but we'd never see you here again...

One cannot really "debate" with someone who actually admires Joe McCarthy (or his new fangled incarnation, Ted Cruz)...Its like the old adage about wrestling with pigs.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

As usual, you declare victory, after losing.

I'd tell you only start threads on things that you know something about, but we'd never see you here again...

One cannot really "debate" with someone who actually admires Joe McCarthy (or his new fangled incarnation, Ted Cruz)...Its like the old adage about wrestling with pigs.

She never debates. That's not a skill of hers. Mostly she pastes whatever Ann Coulter says is important, with no understanding of why Coulter is wrong.

She will next say, Ann is never wrong.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The left doesn't control the media.

It goes along with her rewriting history.

If conservatives think liberals control the tv networks, CBS, NBC, ABC, whatever, why don't conservatives just buy them out?
Why don't conservatives just start 3 competing networks, and make them as conservative as they want?

Less crying, more trying.

Why do conservatives not get into education?

They'd rather demonize it.

 

[PoliticalChic]

As usual, you declare victory, after losing.

I'd tell you only start threads on things that you know something about, but we'd never see you here again...

One cannot really "debate" with someone who actually admires Joe McCarthy (or his new fangled incarnation, Ted Cruz)...Its like the old adage about wrestling with pigs.

I don't debate.

I simply outline why I am correct....as you've learned.

Hence, "One cannot really "debate" with someone who actually admires Joe McCarthy."

OK...you're dismissed.

 

[healthmyths]

The left doesn't control the media.

1) In 2008 85% of media donated money to Democrats!
1,160 (85%) of the 1,353 of the Senior executives, on-air personalities, producers, reporters, editors, writers and other self-identifying employees of ABC, CBS and NBC contributed more than $1 million to Democrats candidates and campaign committees in 2008, according to an analysis by The Examiner of data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics.
Obama, Democrats got 88 percent of 2008 contributions by TV network execs, writers, reporters

And then the MSM responded to Romney with these BIASED stories.
2) 130,213 stories can't be swept under the rug that show that the Democrat Bias is very evident!
Study of 130,213 stories shows Obama bias in 2012 election BY PAUL BEDARD | MARCH 16, 2015 | 10:49 AM
A sweeping study of some 130,213 news articles on the 2012 presidential match between President Obama and Mitt Romney has proven anew
that there was a strong pro-Democratic bias in the U.S. and international press.
The study, published in the authoritative journal Big Data Society, also tested the campaign themes the media focused on and determined that Obama succeeded in stealing the economic issue from Republican Romney.
"Overall, media reporting contained more frequently positive statements about the Democrats than the Republicans.
Overall, the Republicans were more frequently the object of negative statements," wrote the study authors, Their conclusion:
"The Republican Party is the most divisive subject in the campaign, and is portrayed in a more negative fashion than the Democrats."
Paul Bedard, the Washington Examiner's "Washington Secrets" columnist, can be contacted at [email protected].
Smooch: Study of 130,213 stories shows Obama bias in 2012 election

If you were right, and you're not,

1. whose fault is it that liberals control the media?

2. what does that control consist of, and how would one political philosophy obtain that control over another?

3. where is the illegality in liberals 'controlling' the media, as you claim?

First of all you don't agree that 1,160 (85%) of the 1,353 of the Senior executives, on-air personalities, producers, reporters, editors, writers and other self-identifying employees of ABC, CBS and NBC contributed more than $1 million to Democrats candidates and campaign committees in 2008, or an independent analysis of
130,213 stories just made it up??

A1. The fault lies with people of my generation who were in college in the 60s as I was and also I was in journalism courses that had classmates that would become later to be editors/producers of news. These people were members of SDS/Weathermen which I'm sure you have no knowledge as to who they are!
These SDS/weathermen (Bill Ayers/ Bernardine Dorhn were founders) reporters now editors support the Democrat party and even the Socialist Sanders today!
"Intellectual" elites who look at us in the "fly over country" as needing to be taken care of and all we need is vote Democrat.

A2. My god... the control is that most idiots like you read only headlines/30 second sound bites. You NEVER read/watch anything deeper and it is
THESE headlines (in my journalism days the adage "if it bleeds it leads") is what YOU read and get all excited WITHOUT reading the rest of the story!

A3. It ISN"T ILLEGAL and I never said it was! I am pointing out that the liberal biased MSM has influenced people like you so much that we have that idiot who
told idiots like you that he was going to lie to you and that he depended on the "stupidity of the American Voter" to advance his destructive agenda.

I mean have you ever had a MSM dissect Obama's statement "I don’t have to explain to you that nearly 46 million Americans don’t have health insurance coverage today."
THERE never were 46 million uninsured Americans!
A) 10 million were not citizens! B) 14 million bEFORE ACA were eligible for Medicaid.. due to Obama's ineptness they never knew! C) 18 million under 34 never
wanted or needed health insurance but to put them into the 46 million was a LIE!

But idiots like you and the others believed that number and the facts prove differently!

 

[PoliticalChic]

The left doesn't control the media.

1) In 2008 85% of media donated money to Democrats!
1,160 (85%) of the 1,353 of the Senior executives, on-air personalities, producers, reporters, editors, writers and other self-identifying employees of ABC, CBS and NBC contributed more than $1 million to Democrats candidates and campaign committees in 2008, according to an analysis by The Examiner of data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics.
Obama, Democrats got 88 percent of 2008 contributions by TV network execs, writers, reporters

And then the MSM responded to Romney with these BIASED stories.
2) 130,213 stories can't be swept under the rug that show that the Democrat Bias is very evident!
Study of 130,213 stories shows Obama bias in 2012 election BY PAUL BEDARD | MARCH 16, 2015 | 10:49 AM
A sweeping study of some 130,213 news articles on the 2012 presidential match between President Obama and Mitt Romney has proven anew
that there was a strong pro-Democratic bias in the U.S. and international press.
The study, published in the authoritative journal Big Data Society, also tested the campaign themes the media focused on and determined that Obama succeeded in stealing the economic issue from Republican Romney.
"Overall, media reporting contained more frequently positive statements about the Democrats than the Republicans.
Overall, the Republicans were more frequently the object of negative statements," wrote the study authors, Their conclusion:
"The Republican Party is the most divisive subject in the campaign, and is portrayed in a more negative fashion than the Democrats."
Paul Bedard, the Washington Examiner's "Washington Secrets" columnist, can be contacted at [email protected].
Smooch: Study of 130,213 stories shows Obama bias in 2012 election

If you were right, and you're not,

1. whose fault is it that liberals control the media?

2. what does that control consist of, and how would one political philosophy obtain that control over another?

3. where is the illegality in liberals 'controlling' the media, as you claim?

First of all you don't agree that 1,160 (85%) of the 1,353 of the Senior executives, on-air personalities, producers, reporters, editors, writers and other self-identifying employees of ABC, CBS and NBC contributed more than $1 million to Democrats candidates and campaign committees in 2008, or an independent analysis of
130,213 stories just made it up??

A1. The fault lies with people of my generation who were in college in the 60s as I was and also I was in journalism courses that had classmates that would become later to be editors/producers of news. These people were members of SDS/Weathermen which I'm sure you have no knowledge as to who they are!
These SDS/weathermen (Bill Ayers/ Bernardine Dorhn were founders) reporters now editors support the Democrat party and even the Socialist Sanders today!
"Intellectual" elites who look at us in the "fly over country" as needing to be taken care of and all we need is vote Democrat.

A2. My god... the control is that most idiots like you read only headlines/30 second sound bites. You NEVER read/watch anything deeper and it is
THESE headlines (in my journalism days the adage "if it bleeds it leads") is what YOU read and get all excited WITHOUT reading the rest of the story!

A3. It ISN"T ILLEGAL and I never said it was! I am pointing out that the liberal biased MSM has influenced people like you so much that we have that idiot who
told idiots like you that he was going to lie to you and that he depended on the "stupidity of the American Voter" to advance his destructive agenda.

I mean have you ever had a MSM dissect Obama's statement "I don’t have to explain to you that nearly 46 million Americans don’t have health insurance coverage today."
THERE never were 46 million uninsured Americans!
A) 10 million were not citizens! B) 14 million bEFORE ACA were eligible for Medicaid.. due to Obama's ineptness they never knew! C) 18 million under 34 never
wanted or needed health insurance but to put them into the 46 million was a LIE!

But idiots like you and the others believed that number and the facts prove differently!

They don't necessarily agree.....

....they just don't care about the sorts of things that motivate our side.....truth, accuracy, morality.

Look....they voted for a rapist, a traitor, a murderer.


Unfortunately they're taking the rest of us down with them.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The left doesn't control the media.

1) In 2008 85% of media donated money to Democrats!
1,160 (85%) of the 1,353 of the Senior executives, on-air personalities, producers, reporters, editors, writers and other self-identifying employees of ABC, CBS and NBC contributed more than $1 million to Democrats candidates and campaign committees in 2008, according to an analysis by The Examiner of data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics.
Obama, Democrats got 88 percent of 2008 contributions by TV network execs, writers, reporters

And then the MSM responded to Romney with these BIASED stories.
2) 130,213 stories can't be swept under the rug that show that the Democrat Bias is very evident!
Study of 130,213 stories shows Obama bias in 2012 election BY PAUL BEDARD | MARCH 16, 2015 | 10:49 AM
A sweeping study of some 130,213 news articles on the 2012 presidential match between President Obama and Mitt Romney has proven anew
that there was a strong pro-Democratic bias in the U.S. and international press.
The study, published in the authoritative journal Big Data Society, also tested the campaign themes the media focused on and determined that Obama succeeded in stealing the economic issue from Republican Romney.
"Overall, media reporting contained more frequently positive statements about the Democrats than the Republicans.
Overall, the Republicans were more frequently the object of negative statements," wrote the study authors, Their conclusion:
"The Republican Party is the most divisive subject in the campaign, and is portrayed in a more negative fashion than the Democrats."
Paul Bedard, the Washington Examiner's "Washington Secrets" columnist, can be contacted at [email protected].
Smooch: Study of 130,213 stories shows Obama bias in 2012 election

If you were right, and you're not,

1. whose fault is it that liberals control the media?

2. what does that control consist of, and how would one political philosophy obtain that control over another?

3. where is the illegality in liberals 'controlling' the media, as you claim?

First of all you don't agree that 1,160 (85%) of the 1,353 of the Senior executives, on-air personalities, producers, reporters, editors, writers and other self-identifying employees of ABC, CBS and NBC contributed more than $1 million to Democrats candidates and campaign committees in 2008, or an independent analysis of
130,213 stories just made it up??

A1. The fault lies with people of my generation who were in college in the 60s as I was and also I was in journalism courses that had classmates that would become later to be editors/producers of news. These people were members of SDS/Weathermen which I'm sure you have no knowledge as to who they are!
These SDS/weathermen (Bill Ayers/ Bernardine Dorhn were founders) reporters now editors support the Democrat party and even the Socialist Sanders today!
"Intellectual" elites who look at us in the "fly over country" as needing to be taken care of and all we need is vote Democrat.

A2. My god... the control is that most idiots like you read only headlines/30 second sound bites. You NEVER read/watch anything deeper and it is
THESE headlines (in my journalism days the adage "if it bleeds it leads") is what YOU read and get all excited WITHOUT reading the rest of the story!

A3. It ISN"T ILLEGAL and I never said it was! I am pointing out that the liberal biased MSM has influenced people like you so much that we have that idiot who
told idiots like you that he was going to lie to you and that he depended on the "stupidity of the American Voter" to advance his destructive agenda.

I mean have you ever had a MSM dissect Obama's statement "I don’t have to explain to you that nearly 46 million Americans don’t have health insurance coverage today."
THERE never were 46 million uninsured Americans!
A) 10 million were not citizens! B) 14 million bEFORE ACA were eligible for Medicaid.. due to Obama's ineptness they never knew! C) 18 million under 34 never
wanted or needed health insurance but to put them into the 46 million was a LIE!

But idiots like you and the others believed that number and the facts prove differently!

So what?

If liberals control the media, why do they allow almost all of talk radio to be conservative?

Answer that question.

 

[NYcarbineer]

[



I don't debate.

.

Jesus Christ on a bicycle! She finally admits it.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

[



I don't debate.

.

Jesus Christ on a bicycle! She finally admits it.

True enough although it should read, Are not capable of debate...

 

[NYcarbineer]

[



I don't debate.

.

Jesus Christ on a bicycle! She finally admits it.

True enough although it should read, Are not capable of debate...

That goes without saying. She doesn't just not debate, she has no idea what debate is.

But she does wonders showing the people who read this site what the true face of conservatism looks like...

...she and Steve McGarrett.

 

[healthmyths]

The left doesn't control the media.

1) In 2008 85% of media donated money to Democrats!
1,160 (85%) of the 1,353 of the Senior executives, on-air personalities, producers, reporters, editors, writers and other self-identifying employees of ABC, CBS and NBC contributed more than $1 million to Democrats candidates and campaign committees in 2008, according to an analysis by The Examiner of data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics.
Obama, Democrats got 88 percent of 2008 contributions by TV network execs, writers, reporters

And then the MSM responded to Romney with these BIASED stories.
2) 130,213 stories can't be swept under the rug that show that the Democrat Bias is very evident!
Study of 130,213 stories shows Obama bias in 2012 election BY PAUL BEDARD | MARCH 16, 2015 | 10:49 AM
A sweeping study of some 130,213 news articles on the 2012 presidential match between President Obama and Mitt Romney has proven anew
that there was a strong pro-Democratic bias in the U.S. and international press.
The study, published in the authoritative journal Big Data Society, also tested the campaign themes the media focused on and determined that Obama succeeded in stealing the economic issue from Republican Romney.
"Overall, media reporting contained more frequently positive statements about the Democrats than the Republicans.
Overall, the Republicans were more frequently the object of negative statements," wrote the study authors, Their conclusion:
"The Republican Party is the most divisive subject in the campaign, and is portrayed in a more negative fashion than the Democrats."
Paul Bedard, the Washington Examiner's "Washington Secrets" columnist, can be contacted at [email protected].
Smooch: Study of 130,213 stories shows Obama bias in 2012 election

If you were right, and you're not,

1. whose fault is it that liberals control the media?

2. what does that control consist of, and how would one political philosophy obtain that control over another?

3. where is the illegality in liberals 'controlling' the media, as you claim?

First of all you don't agree that 1,160 (85%) of the 1,353 of the Senior executives, on-air personalities, producers, reporters, editors, writers and other self-identifying employees of ABC, CBS and NBC contributed more than $1 million to Democrats candidates and campaign committees in 2008, or an independent analysis of
130,213 stories just made it up??

A1. The fault lies with people of my generation who were in college in the 60s as I was and also I was in journalism courses that had classmates that would become later to be editors/producers of news. These people were members of SDS/Weathermen which I'm sure you have no knowledge as to who they are!
These SDS/weathermen (Bill Ayers/ Bernardine Dorhn were founders) reporters now editors support the Democrat party and even the Socialist Sanders today!
"Intellectual" elites who look at us in the "fly over country" as needing to be taken care of and all we need is vote Democrat.

A2. My god... the control is that most idiots like you read only headlines/30 second sound bites. You NEVER read/watch anything deeper and it is
THESE headlines (in my journalism days the adage "if it bleeds it leads") is what YOU read and get all excited WITHOUT reading the rest of the story!

A3. It ISN"T ILLEGAL and I never said it was! I am pointing out that the liberal biased MSM has influenced people like you so much that we have that idiot who
told idiots like you that he was going to lie to you and that he depended on the "stupidity of the American Voter" to advance his destructive agenda.

I mean have you ever had a MSM dissect Obama's statement "I don’t have to explain to you that nearly 46 million Americans don’t have health insurance coverage today."
THERE never were 46 million uninsured Americans!
A) 10 million were not citizens! B) 14 million bEFORE ACA were eligible for Medicaid.. due to Obama's ineptness they never knew! C) 18 million under 34 never
wanted or needed health insurance but to put them into the 46 million was a LIE!

But idiots like you and the others believed that number and the facts prove differently!

So what?

If liberals control the media, why do they allow almost all of talk radio to be conservative?

Answer that question.

You are right. Almost all talk radio is conservative but the liberals have consistently wanted FCC to control radio!

"But now, I believe I have found the legal means to put Talk Radio on trial at the FCC -- and perhaps eventually at the Supreme Court.

There is a little known regulation at the FCC called the Zapple Doctrine, which is an offshoot of the Fairness Doctrine and of Section 315(a) of the Communications Act, which says that, in the 60 days prior to an election, if a broadcaster offers free airtime to one major party candidate, it must offer free airtime to the other major party candidate. Zapple expands this definition to include supporters of candidates."
Putting Talk Radio on Trial at the FCC

Heard anyone on talk radio asking MSM to be censored? NO. Nor do I want them censored.
I want idiots like you to be informed though because YOU are influenced by the MSM...i.e. do you think Huffington Post is biased?

The FCC must use its power to draw a clear distinction between fact and opinion in order to protect the public's access to "bonafide" news on our public airwaves. Safeguarding the public interest is the FCC’s sacred obligation.

FCC Commissioners: Please stand up to the media corporations that want to control what "We the People" can hear on our public airwaves. Don't allow them to make a mockery of America's First Amendment by conferring "bonafide news" status on talk radio, or by granting entertainers like Rush Limbaugh equal status with legitimate news reporters.
Sign the petition: Tell the FCC: Talk Radio is NOT Bonafide News!

Here’s the serious issue: We live in a nation in which to a significant degree media is controlled by large multinational corporations. We live in a nation in which 95 percent of talk radio is right wing, including in areas where Republicans have almost no support.

The Senator’s comments harken back to the debates about the “Fairness Doctrine,” a longtime FCC policy that required broadcasters to give equal time to opposing viewpoints on controversial issues. Though the policy was ended in 1987 (and formally eliminated in 2011), it still engenders debate. Conservatives, who dominate talk radio to the tune of 90% of all programming, strongly oppose government intervention in the market–and their speech–while some liberals, frustrated with their ability to compete, support a “balance” of viewpoints.
Bernie Sanders Wants to Censor Talk Radio - TheCollegeConservative

YOU know why? Because conservatives like me believe in the Constitution and the freedom of the press.
Heard ANYONE on talk radio funding or asking for MSM to be controlled by the federal government?

PLEASE find me anywhere talk radio has been pushing for censoring or controlling the MSM?

 

[NYcarbineer]

The left doesn't control the media.

1) In 2008 85% of media donated money to Democrats!
1,160 (85%) of the 1,353 of the Senior executives, on-air personalities, producers, reporters, editors, writers and other self-identifying employees of ABC, CBS and NBC contributed more than $1 million to Democrats candidates and campaign committees in 2008, according to an analysis by The Examiner of data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics.
Obama, Democrats got 88 percent of 2008 contributions by TV network execs, writers, reporters

And then the MSM responded to Romney with these BIASED stories.
2) 130,213 stories can't be swept under the rug that show that the Democrat Bias is very evident!
Study of 130,213 stories shows Obama bias in 2012 election BY PAUL BEDARD | MARCH 16, 2015 | 10:49 AM
A sweeping study of some 130,213 news articles on the 2012 presidential match between President Obama and Mitt Romney has proven anew
that there was a strong pro-Democratic bias in the U.S. and international press.
The study, published in the authoritative journal Big Data Society, also tested the campaign themes the media focused on and determined that Obama succeeded in stealing the economic issue from Republican Romney.
"Overall, media reporting contained more frequently positive statements about the Democrats than the Republicans.
Overall, the Republicans were more frequently the object of negative statements," wrote the study authors, Their conclusion:
"The Republican Party is the most divisive subject in the campaign, and is portrayed in a more negative fashion than the Democrats."
Paul Bedard, the Washington Examiner's "Washington Secrets" columnist, can be contacted at [email protected].
Smooch: Study of 130,213 stories shows Obama bias in 2012 election

If you were right, and you're not,

1. whose fault is it that liberals control the media?

2. what does that control consist of, and how would one political philosophy obtain that control over another?

3. where is the illegality in liberals 'controlling' the media, as you claim?

First of all you don't agree that 1,160 (85%) of the 1,353 of the Senior executives, on-air personalities, producers, reporters, editors, writers and other self-identifying employees of ABC, CBS and NBC contributed more than $1 million to Democrats candidates and campaign committees in 2008, or an independent analysis of
130,213 stories just made it up??

A1. The fault lies with people of my generation who were in college in the 60s as I was and also I was in journalism courses that had classmates that would become later to be editors/producers of news. These people were members of SDS/Weathermen which I'm sure you have no knowledge as to who they are!
These SDS/weathermen (Bill Ayers/ Bernardine Dorhn were founders) reporters now editors support the Democrat party and even the Socialist Sanders today!
"Intellectual" elites who look at us in the "fly over country" as needing to be taken care of and all we need is vote Democrat.

A2. My god... the control is that most idiots like you read only headlines/30 second sound bites. You NEVER read/watch anything deeper and it is
THESE headlines (in my journalism days the adage "if it bleeds it leads") is what YOU read and get all excited WITHOUT reading the rest of the story!

A3. It ISN"T ILLEGAL and I never said it was! I am pointing out that the liberal biased MSM has influenced people like you so much that we have that idiot who
told idiots like you that he was going to lie to you and that he depended on the "stupidity of the American Voter" to advance his destructive agenda.

I mean have you ever had a MSM dissect Obama's statement "I don’t have to explain to you that nearly 46 million Americans don’t have health insurance coverage today."
THERE never were 46 million uninsured Americans!
A) 10 million were not citizens! B) 14 million bEFORE ACA were eligible for Medicaid.. due to Obama's ineptness they never knew! C) 18 million under 34 never
wanted or needed health insurance but to put them into the 46 million was a LIE!

But idiots like you and the others believed that number and the facts prove differently!

So what?

If liberals control the media, why do they allow almost all of talk radio to be conservative?

Answer that question.

You are right. Almost all talk radio is conservative but the liberals have consistently wanted FCC to control radio!

"But now, I believe I have found the legal means to put Talk Radio on trial at the FCC -- and perhaps eventually at the Supreme Court.

There is a little known regulation at the FCC called the Zapple Doctrine, which is an offshoot of the Fairness Doctrine and of Section 315(a) of the Communications Act, which says that, in the 60 days prior to an election, if a broadcaster offers free airtime to one major party candidate, it must offer free airtime to the other major party candidate. Zapple expands this definition to include supporters of candidates."
Putting Talk Radio on Trial at the FCC

Heard anyone on talk radio asking MSM to be censored? NO. Nor do I want them censored.
I want idiots like you to be informed though because YOU are influenced by the MSM...i.e. do you think Huffington Post is biased?

The FCC must use its power to draw a clear distinction between fact and opinion in order to protect the public's access to "bonafide" news on our public airwaves. Safeguarding the public interest is the FCC’s sacred obligation.

FCC Commissioners: Please stand up to the media corporations that want to control what "We the People" can hear on our public airwaves. Don't allow them to make a mockery of America's First Amendment by conferring "bonafide news" status on talk radio, or by granting entertainers like Rush Limbaugh equal status with legitimate news reporters.
Sign the petition: Tell the FCC: Talk Radio is NOT Bonafide News!

Here’s the serious issue: We live in a nation in which to a significant degree media is controlled by large multinational corporations. We live in a nation in which 95 percent of talk radio is right wing, including in areas where Republicans have almost no support.

The Senator’s comments harken back to the debates about the “Fairness Doctrine,” a longtime FCC policy that required broadcasters to give equal time to opposing viewpoints on controversial issues. Though the policy was ended in 1987 (and formally eliminated in 2011), it still engenders debate. Conservatives, who dominate talk radio to the tune of 90% of all programming, strongly oppose government intervention in the market–and their speech–while some liberals, frustrated with their ability to compete, support a “balance” of viewpoints.
Bernie Sanders Wants to Censor Talk Radio - TheCollegeConservative

YOU know why? Because conservatives like me believe in the Constitution and the freedom of the press.
Heard ANYONE on talk radio funding or asking for MSM to be controlled by the federal government?

PLEASE find me anywhere talk radio has been pushing for censoring or controlling the MSM?

Now that you've admitted liberals don't control the media outlet of talk radio, let's move on.

Liberals do not control the internet, the biggest media outlet. Any dispute?

 

[healthmyths]

1) In 2008 85% of media donated money to Democrats!
1,160 (85%) of the 1,353 of the Senior executives, on-air personalities, producers, reporters, editors, writers and other self-identifying employees of ABC, CBS and NBC contributed more than $1 million to Democrats candidates and campaign committees in 2008, according to an analysis by The Examiner of data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics.
Obama, Democrats got 88 percent of 2008 contributions by TV network execs, writers, reporters

And then the MSM responded to Romney with these BIASED stories.
2) 130,213 stories can't be swept under the rug that show that the Democrat Bias is very evident!
Study of 130,213 stories shows Obama bias in 2012 election BY PAUL BEDARD | MARCH 16, 2015 | 10:49 AM
A sweeping study of some 130,213 news articles on the 2012 presidential match between President Obama and Mitt Romney has proven anew
that there was a strong pro-Democratic bias in the U.S. and international press.
The study, published in the authoritative journal Big Data Society, also tested the campaign themes the media focused on and determined that Obama succeeded in stealing the economic issue from Republican Romney.
"Overall, media reporting contained more frequently positive statements about the Democrats than the Republicans.
Overall, the Republicans were more frequently the object of negative statements," wrote the study authors, Their conclusion:
"The Republican Party is the most divisive subject in the campaign, and is portrayed in a more negative fashion than the Democrats."
Paul Bedard, the Washington Examiner's "Washington Secrets" columnist, can be contacted at [email protected].
Smooch: Study of 130,213 stories shows Obama bias in 2012 election

If you were right, and you're not,

1. whose fault is it that liberals control the media?

2. what does that control consist of, and how would one political philosophy obtain that control over another?

3. where is the illegality in liberals 'controlling' the media, as you claim?

First of all you don't agree that 1,160 (85%) of the 1,353 of the Senior executives, on-air personalities, producers, reporters, editors, writers and other self-identifying employees of ABC, CBS and NBC contributed more than $1 million to Democrats candidates and campaign committees in 2008, or an independent analysis of
130,213 stories just made it up??

A1. The fault lies with people of my generation who were in college in the 60s as I was and also I was in journalism courses that had classmates that would become later to be editors/producers of news. These people were members of SDS/Weathermen which I'm sure you have no knowledge as to who they are!
These SDS/weathermen (Bill Ayers/ Bernardine Dorhn were founders) reporters now editors support the Democrat party and even the Socialist Sanders today!
"Intellectual" elites who look at us in the "fly over country" as needing to be taken care of and all we need is vote Democrat.

A2. My god... the control is that most idiots like you read only headlines/30 second sound bites. You NEVER read/watch anything deeper and it is
THESE headlines (in my journalism days the adage "if it bleeds it leads") is what YOU read and get all excited WITHOUT reading the rest of the story!

A3. It ISN"T ILLEGAL and I never said it was! I am pointing out that the liberal biased MSM has influenced people like you so much that we have that idiot who
told idiots like you that he was going to lie to you and that he depended on the "stupidity of the American Voter" to advance his destructive agenda.

I mean have you ever had a MSM dissect Obama's statement "I don’t have to explain to you that nearly 46 million Americans don’t have health insurance coverage today."
THERE never were 46 million uninsured Americans!
A) 10 million were not citizens! B) 14 million bEFORE ACA were eligible for Medicaid.. due to Obama's ineptness they never knew! C) 18 million under 34 never
wanted or needed health insurance but to put them into the 46 million was a LIE!

But idiots like you and the others believed that number and the facts prove differently!

So what?

If liberals control the media, why do they allow almost all of talk radio to be conservative?

Answer that question.

You are right. Almost all talk radio is conservative but the liberals have consistently wanted FCC to control radio!

"But now, I believe I have found the legal means to put Talk Radio on trial at the FCC -- and perhaps eventually at the Supreme Court.

There is a little known regulation at the FCC called the Zapple Doctrine, which is an offshoot of the Fairness Doctrine and of Section 315(a) of the Communications Act, which says that, in the 60 days prior to an election, if a broadcaster offers free airtime to one major party candidate, it must offer free airtime to the other major party candidate. Zapple expands this definition to include supporters of candidates."
Putting Talk Radio on Trial at the FCC

Heard anyone on talk radio asking MSM to be censored? NO. Nor do I want them censored.
I want idiots like you to be informed though because YOU are influenced by the MSM...i.e. do you think Huffington Post is biased?

The FCC must use its power to draw a clear distinction between fact and opinion in order to protect the public's access to "bonafide" news on our public airwaves. Safeguarding the public interest is the FCC’s sacred obligation.

FCC Commissioners: Please stand up to the media corporations that want to control what "We the People" can hear on our public airwaves. Don't allow them to make a mockery of America's First Amendment by conferring "bonafide news" status on talk radio, or by granting entertainers like Rush Limbaugh equal status with legitimate news reporters.
Sign the petition: Tell the FCC: Talk Radio is NOT Bonafide News!

Here’s the serious issue: We live in a nation in which to a significant degree media is controlled by large multinational corporations. We live in a nation in which 95 percent of talk radio is right wing, including in areas where Republicans have almost no support.

The Senator’s comments harken back to the debates about the “Fairness Doctrine,” a longtime FCC policy that required broadcasters to give equal time to opposing viewpoints on controversial issues. Though the policy was ended in 1987 (and formally eliminated in 2011), it still engenders debate. Conservatives, who dominate talk radio to the tune of 90% of all programming, strongly oppose government intervention in the market–and their speech–while some liberals, frustrated with their ability to compete, support a “balance” of viewpoints.
Bernie Sanders Wants to Censor Talk Radio - TheCollegeConservative

YOU know why? Because conservatives like me believe in the Constitution and the freedom of the press.
Heard ANYONE on talk radio funding or asking for MSM to be controlled by the federal government?

PLEASE find me anywhere talk radio has been pushing for censoring or controlling the MSM?

Now that you've admitted liberals don't control the media outlet of talk radio, let's move on.

Liberals do not control the internet, the biggest media outlet. Any dispute?

NO dispute NOW!!! But again.. liberals are after the government to do the following:
Angry liberals are set to descend on the Federal Communications Commission to disgrace themselves by shouting down the proceedings. The lead group involved, Free Press, has sent out an invitation asking people to bring "pots, pans or whatever else you can bang on so the FCC hears our message loud and clear." Banging on pots and pans as an exercise in clarity? It gets better: "Together we'll dance, drum and shout that the agency must throw out its destructive plan and reclassify broadband as a telecommunications service. This is the only way to restore real Net Neutrality."

"Restore" is an odd word choice, because the reclassification of broadband Internet as a Title II telecommunications service, also known, ironically, as POTS (Plain Old Telephone Service), would bring about total government economic control on the Internet that has never previously existed.
- Neutrality Nuts Won't Be Happy Until Government Controls the Internet

As far as "controlling the Media" the MSM which consists of network/cable tv/ NYT,LATimes, Washington Post (Bezos flaming liberal owner) are biased.
Never said "controlled by the way, that is YOUR words. I've shown you several studies none of which you read that describe the BIAS!
But you still won't believe even when the likes of The Editor of NewsWeek, Evan Thomas was once asked about George Bush and this is his response.
"our job is to bash the president[Bush], that's what we do." Evan Thomas responding to a question on whether the media's unfair to Bush on the TV talk show Inside Washington, February 2, 2007.He-Could-Go-All-The-Way: 'Today' Cheers Obama's Football Play
RIGHT HIS job was to BASH Bush. He is a journalist. Unbiased. Objective. Professional. RIGHT??
But when it came to Obama???
This same hard-nosed "bashing journalist- Editor of NewsWeek gushed about Obama.....
"I mean in a way Obama’s standing above the country, above – above the world, he’s sort of God."
Newsweek’s Evan Thomas: Obama Is ‘Sort of God’

A professional NEWS editor calling a mortal man "sort of God"??? That's not reporting, that's gushing!
NewsWeek is a biased MSM magazine.

 

[NYcarbineer]

If you were right, and you're not,

1. whose fault is it that liberals control the media?

2. what does that control consist of, and how would one political philosophy obtain that control over another?

3. where is the illegality in liberals 'controlling' the media, as you claim?

First of all you don't agree that 1,160 (85%) of the 1,353 of the Senior executives, on-air personalities, producers, reporters, editors, writers and other self-identifying employees of ABC, CBS and NBC contributed more than $1 million to Democrats candidates and campaign committees in 2008, or an independent analysis of
130,213 stories just made it up??

A1. The fault lies with people of my generation who were in college in the 60s as I was and also I was in journalism courses that had classmates that would become later to be editors/producers of news. These people were members of SDS/Weathermen which I'm sure you have no knowledge as to who they are!
These SDS/weathermen (Bill Ayers/ Bernardine Dorhn were founders) reporters now editors support the Democrat party and even the Socialist Sanders today!
"Intellectual" elites who look at us in the "fly over country" as needing to be taken care of and all we need is vote Democrat.

A2. My god... the control is that most idiots like you read only headlines/30 second sound bites. You NEVER read/watch anything deeper and it is
THESE headlines (in my journalism days the adage "if it bleeds it leads") is what YOU read and get all excited WITHOUT reading the rest of the story!

A3. It ISN"T ILLEGAL and I never said it was! I am pointing out that the liberal biased MSM has influenced people like you so much that we have that idiot who
told idiots like you that he was going to lie to you and that he depended on the "stupidity of the American Voter" to advance his destructive agenda.

I mean have you ever had a MSM dissect Obama's statement "I don’t have to explain to you that nearly 46 million Americans don’t have health insurance coverage today."
THERE never were 46 million uninsured Americans!
A) 10 million were not citizens! B) 14 million bEFORE ACA were eligible for Medicaid.. due to Obama's ineptness they never knew! C) 18 million under 34 never
wanted or needed health insurance but to put them into the 46 million was a LIE!

But idiots like you and the others believed that number and the facts prove differently!

So what?

If liberals control the media, why do they allow almost all of talk radio to be conservative?

Answer that question.

You are right. Almost all talk radio is conservative but the liberals have consistently wanted FCC to control radio!

"But now, I believe I have found the legal means to put Talk Radio on trial at the FCC -- and perhaps eventually at the Supreme Court.

There is a little known regulation at the FCC called the Zapple Doctrine, which is an offshoot of the Fairness Doctrine and of Section 315(a) of the Communications Act, which says that, in the 60 days prior to an election, if a broadcaster offers free airtime to one major party candidate, it must offer free airtime to the other major party candidate. Zapple expands this definition to include supporters of candidates."
Putting Talk Radio on Trial at the FCC

Heard anyone on talk radio asking MSM to be censored? NO. Nor do I want them censored.
I want idiots like you to be informed though because YOU are influenced by the MSM...i.e. do you think Huffington Post is biased?

The FCC must use its power to draw a clear distinction between fact and opinion in order to protect the public's access to "bonafide" news on our public airwaves. Safeguarding the public interest is the FCC’s sacred obligation.

FCC Commissioners: Please stand up to the media corporations that want to control what "We the People" can hear on our public airwaves. Don't allow them to make a mockery of America's First Amendment by conferring "bonafide news" status on talk radio, or by granting entertainers like Rush Limbaugh equal status with legitimate news reporters.
Sign the petition: Tell the FCC: Talk Radio is NOT Bonafide News!

Here’s the serious issue: We live in a nation in which to a significant degree media is controlled by large multinational corporations. We live in a nation in which 95 percent of talk radio is right wing, including in areas where Republicans have almost no support.

The Senator’s comments harken back to the debates about the “Fairness Doctrine,” a longtime FCC policy that required broadcasters to give equal time to opposing viewpoints on controversial issues. Though the policy was ended in 1987 (and formally eliminated in 2011), it still engenders debate. Conservatives, who dominate talk radio to the tune of 90% of all programming, strongly oppose government intervention in the market–and their speech–while some liberals, frustrated with their ability to compete, support a “balance” of viewpoints.
Bernie Sanders Wants to Censor Talk Radio - TheCollegeConservative

YOU know why? Because conservatives like me believe in the Constitution and the freedom of the press.
Heard ANYONE on talk radio funding or asking for MSM to be controlled by the federal government?

PLEASE find me anywhere talk radio has been pushing for censoring or controlling the MSM?

Now that you've admitted liberals don't control the media outlet of talk radio, let's move on.

Liberals do not control the internet, the biggest media outlet. Any dispute?

NO dispute NOW!!! But again.. liberals are after the government to do the following:
Angry liberals are set to descend on the Federal Communications Commission to disgrace themselves by shouting down the proceedings. The lead group involved, Free Press, has sent out an invitation asking people to bring "pots, pans or whatever else you can bang on so the FCC hears our message loud and clear." Banging on pots and pans as an exercise in clarity? It gets better: "Together we'll dance, drum and shout that the agency must throw out its destructive plan and reclassify broadband as a telecommunications service. This is the only way to restore real Net Neutrality."

"Restore" is an odd word choice, because the reclassification of broadband Internet as a Title II telecommunications service, also known, ironically, as POTS (Plain Old Telephone Service), would bring about total government economic control on the Internet that has never previously existed.
- Neutrality Nuts Won't Be Happy Until Government Controls the Internet

As far as "controlling the Media" the MSM which consists of network/cable tv/ NYT,LATimes, Washington Post (Bezos flaming liberal owner) are biased.
Never said "controlled by the way, that is YOUR words. I've shown you several studies none of which you read that describe the BIAS!
But you still won't believe even when the likes of The Editor of NewsWeek, Evan Thomas was once asked about George Bush and this is his response.
"our job is to bash the president[Bush], that's what we do." Evan Thomas responding to a question on whether the media's unfair to Bush on the TV talk show Inside Washington, February 2, 2007.He-Could-Go-All-The-Way: 'Today' Cheers Obama's Football Play
RIGHT HIS job was to BASH Bush. He is a journalist. Unbiased. Objective. Professional. RIGHT??
But when it came to Obama???
This same hard-nosed "bashing journalist- Editor of NewsWeek gushed about Obama.....
"I mean in a way Obama’s standing above the country, above – above the world, he’s sort of God."
Newsweek’s Evan Thomas: Obama Is ‘Sort of God’

A professional NEWS editor calling a mortal man "sort of God"??? That's not reporting, that's gushing!
NewsWeek is a biased MSM magazine.

Okay so you concede that liberals do not control talk radio, they do not control the internet.

Next, cable news. Liberals do not control cable news. If they did would Foxnews be number one? Any disputes?

 

[Seawytch]

Liberals don't control the media, ratings do...and that's everything that is wrong with our media.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Seems, if you're into dictatorships for a penny, you're in for a pound....Trumbo opposed Hitler...right up until Stalin formed a pact with Adolph.

Remember: Here's the plan: if Dalton Trumbo is a hero....then Joseph McCarthy is a villain.
But.....if Trumbo is a villain.......guess what?




12. " Trumbo thundered against the huge dangers of fascism that faced America and the world, but his concern fell into deep remission when Stalin made his pact with Hitler in August of 1939. .... How did Dalton exhibit his great love of freedom and deeply held anti-fascist views? He sided with both Stalin and the Fuehrer, accepting the new Stalinist line that Hitler was no longer a menace to Moscow and was actually helping the Soviet Union as he was destroying the “bourgeois” nations in the West.


President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, a favorite of the Communists before the pact because of his anti-Nazi policy, was now guilty of “treason” and “black treason” for providing the English with military assistance in its life-and-death struggle with the German warlord. According to Trumbo, we had no real quarrel with Hitler, anyway, but with imperial England. No drop of American blood, he argued, should be risked for the selfish and deceitful British, ...


He publicly favored the Communist-instigated strikes against our defense industries, put on skits resuming his “treason” charge against Roosevelt and enthusiastically backed the Communist-led pickets around the White House calling for the emasculation of our military. ...His message in “Johnny Got His Gun” and “The Remarkable Andrew” was perfectly in tune with the fresh Soviet line that was coursing through the Soviet-controlled Comintern, which governed Communist parties worldwide. The Comintern’s head in 1939 was Georgi Dimitrov, who directed the CPUSA boss Earl Browder to abandon the anti-Hitler strategy.... Browder received two messages from the Comintern boss. Hitler, it turned out, was now a splendid partner in the spilling of innocent blood.


.... as documented by Philip Jaffe in his 1975 book “The Rise and Fall of American Communism,” the fight against fascism was now “secondary,” for the main struggle was now “against capitalism,” the “bourgeoisie” and the “imperialists” in Western Europe and the United States..... Hitler is delivering a magnificent blow against the West, and Communists worldwide must assist him in his endeavor. The way the Soviets decided to help Hitler shatter the bourgeoisie was to suddenly downplay Nazi Germany as a global threat and demonize Hitler’s enemies—" http://media.glennbeck.com/blaze/mag/august2015theblazemag.pdf

Dalton Trumbo....some American, huh?
Yet.....a hero to the Left.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Hitler and Stalin...BFF....well, until June 21, 1941

And Dalton Trumbo followed Moscow's instructions to a 'T"!!!


13. "Meanwhile, Ukrainians were eating their shoes and watching their children starve to death in Stalin’s orchestrated famine and Jews were being hauled off to the gas chambers by Hitler. Both regimes championed by Trumbo and the other Hollywood 10.



Trumbo ferociously opposed fighting Hitler, accusing FDR of “treason,” even “black treason” (commies were very melodramatic) for giving England military assistance to fight Hitler. After Germany attacked mother Russia, Trumbo was suddenly full of war fervor, but after the war, Trumbo returned to denouncing Winston Churchill as a “fascist” for some untoward remarks he’d made about the beloved Soviet Union.




It’s really heart-wrenching that Trumbo had to suffer the unspeakable horror of writing under a pseudonym. He was never “vindicated” – again in the words of THR – but he did return to writing major screenplays under his own name, a comeback unavailable to the Hitler and Stalin’s victims, because, you see, they were dead." Hitler-Appeasing, FDR-Hating Trumbo Sweeps Hollywood!





Now....let's go over the propaganda line that the simpletons swallowed...

Dalton Trumbo...

a. He was a principled patriot standing up for free speech!

b. His 'blacklisting' was a horrid penalty ... he couldn't work or earn a living!

c. His political outlook was simply his own, based on love of America, and of humanity.


None of that is the case.



And....Senator Joseph McCarthy....slandered innocent Americans....ruined the lives of innocent Americans....

....well.....


None of that is the case, either.