Tuesday, January 02, 2007

Just in case …………………

Part 1

……………. you are asked to provide an example of liberal media bias, here’s a good one. The following is a selection from the
New York Times’ official obituary of Gerald R. Ford.

“Ronald Reagan's state funeral in 2004 was the first since Lyndon B. Johnson died in 1973. With Ford’s death, there are now just three living former presidents: Jimmy Carter, 82, who succeeded Ford; George H.W. Bush, 82, father of the current president who served 1989-93; and Bill Clinton, 60, who served two terms before George W. Bush was inaugurated following the disputed 2000 election and a 5-4 Supreme Court decision decision in his favor.”

Working a political attack into an obituary is quite a feat. In light of examples like this, can one seriously argue that the liberal education and media establishments are ever silent? In reality, the liberal establishment is constantly working an increasingly dangerous angle in an effort to frame the public debate. While it is difficult for the average Republican to conceive of a Presidential obituary as an opportunity to undermine a political enemy such thoughts come naturally to an institution that now exists only as a propaganda device for the far left.

Part 2

………………… the new Democrat majority is laying the groundwork for even more tax increases. It looks like Iowa road funds are running out of money and where else would the Democrats turn but you, the Iowa taxpayer?

Good to know that they are looking toward good government as a solution to the State’s fiscal problems.


Drew said...

That line IS pretty ridiculous. I thought you were taking it out of context or something, but nope. I mean I don't think Bush was legitimately elected either but it didn't seem relevant to the article at all.

RF said...


“…now exists only as a propaganda device for the far left.” – What exactly is your definition of “far left”?

With liberal media, it seems to me like you are talking about the same pussies that after 9/11 gave this administration a complete free pass and only cared about their access to the administration and their scoops & interviews. Also, talk radio provides quite a medium for right-wing propaganda, several hours a day. Before elections, those guys are doing straight electioneering for R’s. The liberal media myth is very convenient for R’s to have around.

I still have to agree with you and Drew about this particular example. An obituary is no place for political commentary like that.

RF said...


Completely off topic, but I was wondering how you feel about gays in the military? I'm just curious, as the topic was in the news today.

Anonymous said...

So now according to Sporer we should not maintain our roads because it raises taxes. If costs rise for everything yet income stays the same then cuts should be made . I propose that I235 be turned into a toll road so that those who use it pay for the priveledge. I also propose that all those rural republican farmers be responsible for maintaining the roads in their areas. Maybe all the land developers should be responsible to maintain the roads that lead to their suburban communities. Maybe we should return to rail service to all towns so that we won't spend money on roads.
Roads have become a governmental service because private enterprise can not provide access to transportation services to everyone.
It is just another Sporer distortion! So Ted are you going to plow your own way to your office? Not bloody likely!

Wes said...

You’ll also note the absence of Richard Nixon’s funeral in 1994 on that obit.

As to the taxation issue, I’m amazed that it would come as any surprise to anyone that now in office; Chet Culver will turn toward enormous tax hikes to pay for his spending plans …. Did you watch him in ANY of his debates? The only response that passed his oafish lips when asked about how he intended to pay for his massive expansion of spending was “I’ll raise the cigarette tax.”

At a time when government spending and political cronyism have crippled not only the people’s trust in government, but our very ability to pay for that government, our ingenious Governor elect plans to EXPAND the size and scope of government! It is time for the Republican Party to get serious about leadership in state government because it looks like the next for years will be marked by incompetent blunder after incompetent blunder in Terrace Hill. The tax hike to fund the failing roads fund is just the beginning.

Anyone who commutes to work along I80 or I35, or drives in rural areas can see the gross incompetence that seems to plague the DOT. Yet, rather than showing leadership,
and taking strong decisive action to clean up the Iowa DOT, Culver’s “throw money at the problem and hope it solves its self” approach is only predictable of a man who spent the last 8 years running a state agency that was such an abysmal failure that individual county auditors had to step up and do most the work Culver’s office was supposed to be doing. Without at least some direction from Republican legislative leaders, Iowa is in for a long and costly 4 years under Culver.

Anonymous said...

No one disagrees that roads need maintained. However, as usual, this is just a cover story like raising the minimum wage is really a cover story to give unions more money.

It's HOW you get the money to which we object.

How about we eliminate the new CIETC? How about we just fire Jonothan Wilson? How about we stop funding all these nepotism and croney filled non-profits?

How about we eliminate the completely ineffective DHS?

There are plenty of places to take the money rather than preparing us for the inevitable tax increase.

Anonymous said...

Anon 8:02
Why do democRATS lack intellectual curiosity?

Do you really always only have one tool in the kit to solve problems? Is it ALWAYS raise taxes? Don't you guys EVER fix anything? It seems to just get worse and worse and worse - necessitating more and more money.

Money that goes down the democRAT rathole.

Anonymous said...

how did the road funds run out of money? was this another of vilsacks accounts he raided, like the tobaccco fund, the senior living trust fund, etc etc? How about vilsack raise the money he took from these funds before he funds his presidential campaign.

Hawkeyegirl said...

I absolutely LOVE the way the Dems/libs use talk radio to defend liberal media bias on TV and in newspapers.

The New York Times is a NEWSpaper - "All the news that's fit to print" - right???. Not "All the news as interpreted by our reporters."

Talk radio programs don't purport to report the news - they discuss it, lay down opinions about it and mash it around. It's a forum for opinions - everyone's opinions.

NEWSpapers are supposed to report the news, not inject opinion or write with a certain bias.

Quit your whining about talk radio and address the issue.

i'm all for free speech unless you disagree with me said...

and speaking of the free speech party. Guess what happened to them today? Their free speech was abridged by the anti free speechers they themselves created to attack republicans.
House Democrats tried to unveil their lobbying reform package today, but their press conference was drowned out by chants from anti-war activists who want Congress to stop funding the Iraq war before taking on other issues."


This is scary though. I wonder how long it will take them to cave in and vote to defund the war. The far lefties have really taken over.


Big-killer said...

Just a heads up regarding Nixon's funeral. The NY Times was correct or right (Can you believe it???).

Nixon opted out of a "STATE" funeral in DC

RF said...


You are right about the difference between talk radio and newspapers. However, the fact that radio stations give a lot of time to right wing talk shows is a fact and has a real effect on our political world. I promise never to mention talk radio when you folks quit your constant whining about the supposed left wing media bias. For the most part, MSM is bending over backwards trying to be balanced in news reporting. It seems to me that there is always “left wing bias” when the facts are not favorable to R’s.

The sad thing is, I believe we are now so polarized that we have two sets of realities. If you think something is balanced and “reality,” I will surely think it’s biased. If I see something as balanced, you are sure to see it biased. Definitely makes it hard to find common ground when we can’t even agree on facts and reality.

Nicole said...

FYI: liberals can have talk radio shows too. They don't however because no one wants to listen to them.

Anonymous said...

rf - you make it sound like the radio stations "give" away the time to conservative talk show hosts. They pay for those time slots and produce listenership. Rush gets over 2 million a day listening to his commentary - opinion. He isn't a news reporter. He's an opinionmaker - you know..free speech and all.

It's a professional crime what the supposed professional NEWS reporters do. They report their opinions as NEWS. It's malpractice.

Air America fell part because they have no listenership. They went bankrupt because they couldn't get sponsors because NO ONE WAS LISTENING!

NEWS is different than opinion.

Oh my, Now that I said that, I realize what the problem is.

Democrats think the opinion of Al Franken is actually NEWS! They don't know the difference between news and opinion. To them, in the MSM, it's the same thing. No wonder they don't recognize the difference.

Anonymous said...

Remember when the poll came out that more democrats got their news from Jon Stewart (a comedian!!!!) than from any other "NEWS" source.

Democrats think Jon Stewart is a NEWSreporter.

RF said...

I already acknowledged the difference between talk radio programming and news. There is no argument there. And I really don’t have a problem with right wing talk radio. The reason why liberal talk radio is not blossoming is pretty clear to me. The "everything is black/white, good/evil attitude" that fuels the talk radio format does not go well with our world view. I was merely pointing out the existence and dominance of right wing talk radio. What annoys me is the constant R whining about the supposed liberal media bias.

RF said...

Sadly, in the past few years there have been times when the Daily Show (a comedy!!!!)has been the only "news" source of any kind willing to tell it like it is. So much for the liberal media bias. - I know this is a predictably partisan point of view, but that's how many on my side of the fence honestly feel.

semaphore said...

The reason left wing talk radio doesn't work is that the audience for idiotic, left wing, anti-American ranting is actually very small. The left wing is not a majority in this country, outside of the MSM and academia. The last election was the result of the Republicans failure to represent the majority of Americans who are not, strangely enough, anti-American. It was not because most Americans simply woke up one morning and realized what they really, really needed was a governmental handout.
The left wing is made up primarily of spoiled brats who think that they are entitled to have everything that they want, and to bark at the evil country that gives them everything they want. I blame the parents.

Anonymous said...

Rf - I think you just proved the point. Democrats don't know what is news and what is satire. They don't know the difference between news and opinion. The daily show isn't telling it like it is. It's telling a joke.

Although, you may be on to something. Now that I say that, I think I understand what the problem is...the liberal platform IS a joke. It can't reside in talk radio because it's smoke and mirrors and not reality.

Teddy used to have a bumper sticker that read "Reality matters - vote Republican". Now, I understand why he says that.

Anonymous said...

The Greatest Generation that ever lived begat the weakest generation that ever lived. It's time for the generation that defined themselves by their self-centered narcissistic anthem "sex, drugs and rock and roll" to retire.

rf said...

Anon 5:53,

Either you completely missed my point or you don't understand that connection to facts & reality is what makes satire funny. If you don't follow the news, the Daily Show is not funny.

The Real Sporer said...

rf is right about that. the daily show has some of the best satire. and it doesn't to kill us to laugh at ourselves.

although they do some really funny stuff about W, the funniest thing ever on the show was Kerry not recognizing that he was on a comedy show. stewart literally almost peed himself, and so did i.

the Colbert bit on Michael Jackson's acquittal was as funny as anything even Dennis Miller does. Jackson's lawyer issued a statement that really said, "Little boys will no longer be allowed to run loose at Neverland", to which Colbert added "from now on they will be kept in cages". I spit out pop i laughed so hard.

Kenboiraq said...


I was traveling back to Iraq so I missed a few days hence the late response.

I don't really care about gays in the military per se but I don't want them to suddenly make it a social cause. Truthfully, I've known many homosexuals (mostly lesbians) serving very well within the military. I don't believe it will be a good thing for them to bring a same sex partner to a formal function and perhaps we could just end all military formals to solve that one - they aren't that fun anyway in today's PC world.

My main concern is gays filing nonstop dignity and respect issues with IG's or EO. We already have a non stop parade of substandard soldiers filing such claims with the overwhelming majority of those claims against White Male superiors filed by minority Females. This is not good as such filings are brutal on the careers of good officers many of whom leave the service rather than endure repeated investigations. Another tactic is to simply give fantastic preferrential treatment to obvious troublemakers and force the rest of your soldiers to bear far more than reasonable.

I expect gay soldiers will heavily lean on such tactics if given open status in the military.

Other than that I care nothing for anyone able to pull a trigger and kill bad guys.

Kenboiraq said...

My last statement might mislead so I will clarify. I am all for anyone able to pull their share and kill bad guys. Many of my best soldiers stand out as possible homosexuals but none seemed like they would make it a cause. I've worked for homosexuals (some openly while others were only strongly suspected) and I have no problems with gay people. Religiously I feel it is a bad thing considering it is a pretty hard lifestyle to reconcile with Christianity but that has nothing to do with a person's work ethic.

Don't Ask Don't Tell was a fantastic policy allowing homosexuals patriotic enough to fight for this country to do so without fear of harassment. The ones kicked out of the military exposed themselves wearing their sexuality as a badge of honor and defied the military to kick them out. I suspect most in that category care much more about homosexuality than for patriotism.

Rest assured, opening the military up to a gay agenda will not be good.

RF said...

Thanks for sharing your views. I must admit I was positively surprised by your relative open-mindedness. Good for you.

Kenboiraq said...

Pragmatic Reality is always best.

Anonymous said...

reality matters - vote republican