Tuesday, February 7, 2012
A Prism of Her Own Making
Why is it that Rachel Maddow only likes to connect some of the dots and not all of the dots? I mean, is it simply because she's a partisan stooge? Or is it more the fact that she's a lunatic and/or a bald-faced liar? I mean, there's gotta be something going on here..........................................................................................Let me provide you an example. Back in 2009, Ms. Maddow made a big deal over the fact that Dick Armey (admittedly, an asshole) and his group, Freedom Works, were opposing Mr. Obama's health-care bill. She also noted that Mr. Armey's law firm, DLA Piper, had done some work for a pharmaceutical firm called Medicine's Company. Her assertion (absent even a scintilla of evidence, mind, you) was that somehow the drug companies were calling the shots here and that Mr. Armey was more than likely shilling for them.........................................................................................Yeah, well, guess what, people - WRONG! Not only was Medicines Company not opposing the heath-care bill, they actually supported it to the tune of causing a breakup between Armey and the law firm. If Ms. Maddow had done even a modicum of research on this issue, she would have concluded that the health-care bill was actually a bonanza for the drug companies and that Mr. Armey's views on health-care reform were NOT those of his by then FORMER law firm and their big corporate client. Nope, folks, those folks were on President Obama's side. Go figure, huh?..........................................................................................P.S. How 'bout this for a radical suggestion? Instead of putting these partisan ramrods like Maddow, Hannity, O'Reilly, etc. into the positions of hosting these shows, we put some, you know, ACTUAL JOURNALISTS AND REPORTERS into them? I mean, sure the lackeys can still come on and spew their drivel and shit but, no, not to the point where they can continues to dictate story-lines/content and spred conspiracy theories. We'd be controlling the mayhem, in other words.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
We used to have actual Journalists and reporters doing the shows. Then, the media companies made the news departments into profit centers and the news became entertainment, not news.
CNN seems to be the last holdout, Jerry, and I try to reward them with my viewership. I must confess, though, that I sometimes break down and wonder, "So, what in the hell is that O'Reilly fellow doing now" and, just like a train-wreck, I watch.
Will: How 'bout this for a radical suggestion? Instead of putting these partisan ramrods like... we put some, you know, actual journalists and reporters into them?
Wow, I bet that never occurred to them. I think you should fire off some concerned emails pronto. I bet both networks take your suggestion seriously and it won't be long before pundit-driven news/opinion programs will be a thing of the past.
I don't watch CNN. Don't care for it.
Good point Jerry. I just happen to have authored a post on this topic recently. It's titled, The News Wasn't Always Reported for Profit.
I was obviously being sarcastic, wd. Jerry's right. It's all about the ratings now.
Will: Instead of putting these partisan ramrods like Maddow...
Rachel Maddow: "I am a liberal, [but] I'm not a partisan, not a Democratic Party hack. I'm not trying to advance anybody's agenda".
She's an ideologue who massages the facts to fit her ideology. This was a story that she couldn't have possibly gotten any wronger and hate-filled sponges like you just lap it up.
Rachel Maddow tells the truth (although she may occasionally get it wrong, just like anybody else). I wouldn't watch otherwise. I don't want "massaged" facts.
I don't recall seeing this particular story, so I doubt I lapped it up. I'm not into that anyway.
What about all those books bashing Obama and the Democrats you read religiously? I'm talking about that one by the liar Petey and the other by Timothy P. Carney titled "Obamanomics"... the one with the TOTALLY nonpartisan subtitle, "How Barack Obama Is Bankrupting You and Enriching His Wall Street Friends, Corporate Lobbyists, and Union Bosses".
I'm positive there are no massaged facts in there....................................................................................................................................... NOT.
Mr. Carney's facts come from opensecrets.org and the New York Times and he has a strong history of bashing BOTH parties. Maddow - she just basically made that "story" up out of whole cloth. And I told you that I read books from ALL perspectives; the Thomas Ricks book that totally bashes Bush and Kevin Philips's books that are very highly critical of Republicans in general. But go ahead and lie like you usually do.
You bash me for criticizing Democrats for not being Liberal enough, but Carney criticizes Republicans for not being Conservative enough and you shower him with kudos? Didn't you say something in the past about being consistent?
And I don't know why you keep bringing up where the facts come from in Carney's highly partisan book come from. I said they were massaged, not made up. And of course I'd also question his conclusions.
If Obama is as corrupt as Carney charges -- why the hell would you even consider voting from him?
Obama out-raised McCain 3-4 to 1 from the health-care conglomerates. How exactly did he massage THAT fact?......And not all of the criticisms that libertarians throw at Republicans comes from the right. They also criticize the grand-old party from the left when it comes to foreign policy and civil liberties. Your attempt to pigeon-hole Mr. Carney (who I think that you would actually like on certain levels - he sounds very anti-corporate lobbying and influence, for example) is most unfortunate.
Post a Comment