I wonder how Judith Miller...
 

They are after her for supporting the WMD in Iraq.

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
likes it under the bus?

Snippet of Bill Keller's Email memo:

"I wish that when I learned Judy Miller had been subpoenaed as a
witness in the leak investigation, I had sat her down for a thorough
debriefing, and followed up with some reporting of my own. It is a
natural and proper instinct to defend reporters when the government
seeks to interfere in our work. And under other circumstances it might
have been fine to entrust the details _ the substance of the
confidential interviews, the notes _ to lawyers who would be handling
the case. But in this case I missed what should have been significant
alarm bells. Until Fitzgerald came after her, I didn't know that Judy
had been one of the reporters on the receiving end of the anti-Wilson
whisper campaign. I should have wondered why I was learning this from
the special counsel, a year after the fact. (In November of 2003 Phil
Taubman tried to ascertain whether any of our correspondents had been
offered similar leaks. As we reported last Sunday, Judy seems to have
misled Phil Taubman about the extent of her involvement.) This alone
should have been enough to make me probe deeper."

From The Washington Post:

http://tinyurl.com/9v5h3

I fully expect Our Lady of Op/Ed Virginity Maureen Dowd to be driving
the bus and Frank Rich to be selling tickets for the ride.

Side note: Makes the "Old Gray Lady" and "Newspaper of Record" a
little suspect eh, what?

I wonder how Judith Miller...
 

On Sat, 22 Oct 2005 09:46:30 -0400, P. Fritz wrote:

They are after her for supporting the WMD in Iraq.

What WMD? She was behaving like a mouthpiece for this administration. A
competent and independent media is a very important check, as in checks
and balances, in a democracy. The NYT failed, among others, and 2,000
young Americans are dead. Hopefully, they will get back on track. They
could use Knight Ridder as an example.

http://www.ajr.org/article_printable.asp?id=3725

I wonder how Judith Miller...
 

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 22 Oct 2005 09:46:30 -0400, P. Fritz wrote:

They are after her for supporting the WMD in Iraq.

What WMD? She was behaving like a mouthpiece for this administration. A
competent and independent media is a very important check, as in checks
and balances, in a democracy. The NYT failed, among others, and 2,000
young Americans are dead. Hopefully, they will get back on track. They
could use Knight Ridder as an example.

http://www.ajr.org/article_printable.asp?id=3725

90% of the "independent" media you speak of is biased to the left.

I wonder how Judith Miller...
 

On Mon, 24 Oct 2005 07:44:02 -0400, Bert Robbins wrote:


90% of the "independent" media you speak of is biased to the left.

Only 90% ? A little simplistic, don't you think? No one speaks with an
objective voice, and the media in this country doesn't speak with one
voice. Is Rush biased left? What about NewsMax? Fox News?

Labeling media is a way of trivializing it. Propaganda spinners have used
the trick for years. It doesn't flush. Media has always spoken with many
voices. If you are truly looking for bias, you might consider left/right
isn't the only bias.

http://rhetorica.net/bias.htm

I wonder how Judith Miller...
 

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 24 Oct 2005 07:44:02 -0400, Bert Robbins wrote:


90% of the "independent" media you speak of is biased to the left.

Only 90% ? A little simplistic, don't you think? No one speaks with an
objective voice, and the media in this country doesn't speak with one
voice. Is Rush biased left? What about NewsMax? Fox News?

Labeling media is a way of trivializing it. Propaganda spinners have used
the trick for years. It doesn't flush. Media has always spoken with many
voices. If you are truly looking for bias, you might consider left/right
isn't the only bias.

http://rhetorica.net/bias.htm

True true, but until you acknowledge the bias and see it as bias you are not
getting a real view of the world. Those of us on the right acknowledge the
bias of Fox News, but those on the left don't think that the other news
medias lean to the left. That's a serious problem!!

I wonder how Judith Miller...
 

"Jeff Rigby" wrote in message
...

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 24 Oct 2005 07:44:02 -0400, Bert Robbins wrote:


90% of the "independent" media you speak of is biased to the left.

Only 90% ? A little simplistic, don't you think? No one speaks with
an
objective voice, and the media in this country doesn't speak with one
voice. Is Rush biased left? What about NewsMax? Fox News?

Labeling media is a way of trivializing it. Propaganda spinners have
used
the trick for years. It doesn't flush. Media has always spoken with
many
voices. If you are truly looking for bias, you might consider
left/right
isn't the only bias.

http://rhetorica.net/bias.htm

True true, but until you acknowledge the bias and see it as bias you are
not
getting a real view of the world. Those of us on the right acknowledge
the
bias of Fox News, but those on the left don't think that the other news
medias lean to the left. That's a serious problem!!

What is funny is how the liebrals continue to lump talk show hosts and news
reporters in the same group.......it is the only way to give any sort of
validity to their position.

I wonder how Judith Miller...
 

"Jeff Rigby" wrote in message
...

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 24 Oct 2005 07:44:02 -0400, Bert Robbins wrote:


90% of the "independent" media you speak of is biased to the left.

Only 90% ? A little simplistic, don't you think? No one speaks with an
objective voice, and the media in this country doesn't speak with one
voice. Is Rush biased left? What about NewsMax? Fox News?

Labeling media is a way of trivializing it. Propaganda spinners have
used
the trick for years. It doesn't flush. Media has always spoken with
many
voices. If you are truly looking for bias, you might consider left/right
isn't the only bias.

http://rhetorica.net/bias.htm

True true, but until you acknowledge the bias and see it as bias you are
not getting a real view of the world. Those of us on the right
acknowledge the bias of Fox News, but those on the left don't think that
the other news medias lean to the left. That's a serious problem!!


A more serious problem is that many people who think "the media" is
left-biased never actually read or listen to those media, and are simply
repeating what they've been told to. For instance, rumor has it that NPR
rarely, if ever mentions anything positive about Iraq. That's odd, because I
hear them mention something positive at least a couple of times a week. Are
the droolers listening to a totally different NPR Morning Edition than I am?
Of course not. They simply don't listen.

Another example: I believe it was April of 2004 when a drooler in rec.guns
demanded that no self-respecting gun owner support public radio because they
never ran stories about hunting or fishing. Bull****. I searched their site.
There had been six or seven stories since the beginning of the year, all of
them completely positive. Again, the droolers don't listen.

I wonder how Judith Miller...
 

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 24 Oct 2005 17:53:03 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

~~ snippage ~`

A more serious problem is that many people who think "the media" is
left-biased never actually read or listen to those media, and are simply
repeating what they've been told to.

Certainly, NPR is more left than right, but they can, occasionally, do
the right thing (get it - right thing - RIGHT thing?) and at least
attempt to be fair and balanced.

My major complaint is that while "Morning Edition" is more balanced in
it's total reportage, news and features wise, "All Things Considered"
isn't.

Finally, ever listen to WFCR in Amherst? It's like listening to Radio
Tirana in it's hey day.

The problem is that for the most part, conservatives will admit they are
conservative, liebrals will constantly claim the are "fair and balanced.

I wonder how Judith Miller...
 

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 24 Oct 2005 17:53:03 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

~~ snippage ~`

A more serious problem is that many people who think "the media" is
left-biased never actually read or listen to those media, and are simply
repeating what they've been told to.

Certainly, NPR is more left than right, but they can, occasionally, do
the right thing (get it - right thing - RIGHT thing?) and at least
attempt to be fair and balanced.

My major complaint is that while "Morning Edition" is more balanced in
it's total reportage, news and features wise, "All Things Considered"
isn't.

Finally, ever listen to WFCR in Amherst? It's like listening to Radio
Tirana in it's hey day.

Hmmm....."Warriors for Christ Radio" - sounds like it's right up my alley.
burp

I wonder how Judith Miller...
 

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 24 Oct 2005 19:10:23 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:


"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
. ..
On Mon, 24 Oct 2005 17:53:03 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

~~ snippage ~`

A more serious problem is that many people who think "the media" is
left-biased never actually read or listen to those media, and are simply
repeating what they've been told to.

Certainly, NPR is more left than right, but they can, occasionally, do
the right thing (get it - right thing - RIGHT thing?) and at least
attempt to be fair and balanced.

My major complaint is that while "Morning Edition" is more balanced in
it's total reportage, news and features wise, "All Things Considered"
isn't.

Finally, ever listen to WFCR in Amherst? It's like listening to Radio
Tirana in it's hey day.

Hmmm....."Warriors for Christ Radio" - sounds like it's right up my alley.
burp

More like W Five College Radio - Smith, Amherst, UMASS, Hampshire and
Mt. Holyoke.

You couldn't find a more group of compatible left wing schools even if
you walked into the Harvard Coop and screamed "Saddam Rules"!!!

Are we looking at the same organization? www.wfcr.com

I wonder how Judith Miller...
 

Tom,
Are these schools any more liberal than any colleges?

I went to a NE college in the 70's with a strong SDS chapter, heck they even
took over the Admin. building, but most of the SDS students have moved to
the center, and some are actually conservative.



"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:

More like W Five College Radio - Smith, Amherst, UMASS, Hampshire and
Mt. Holyoke.

You couldn't find a more group of compatible left wing schools even if
you walked into the Harvard Coop and screamed "Saddam Rules"!!!


Left wing schools? What are the criteria for a left-wing school in the
context you are using here?

I wonder how Judith Miller...
 

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 24 Oct 2005 07:44:02 -0400, Bert Robbins wrote:


90% of the "independent" media you speak of is biased to the left.

Only 90% ? A little simplistic, don't you think? No one speaks with an
objective voice, and the media in this country doesn't speak with one
voice. Is Rush biased left? What about NewsMax? Fox News?

Simplistic? No. Realistic? Yes.

Rush is not a journalist and he doesn't claim to be one either.

NewsMax is biased towards the right and Fox News is towards the right side
of the middle of the road. If Fox News was just another left leaning cable
network then nobody would ever watch them. Fox News leans to the right to be
different and to get noticed.

Labeling media is a way of trivializing it. Propaganda spinners have used
the trick for years. It doesn't flush. Media has always spoken with many
voices. If you are truly looking for bias, you might consider left/right
isn't the only bias.

The media has trivialized itself in that they are, for the most part, trying
to be a part of the Democratic Party.

I wonder how Judith Miller...
 

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"Jeff Rigby" wrote in message
...

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 24 Oct 2005 07:44:02 -0400, Bert Robbins wrote:


90% of the "independent" media you speak of is biased to the left.

Only 90% ? A little simplistic, don't you think? No one speaks with
an
objective voice, and the media in this country doesn't speak with one
voice. Is Rush biased left? What about NewsMax? Fox News?

Labeling media is a way of trivializing it. Propaganda spinners have
used
the trick for years. It doesn't flush. Media has always spoken with
many
voices. If you are truly looking for bias, you might consider
left/right
isn't the only bias.

http://rhetorica.net/bias.htm

True true, but until you acknowledge the bias and see it as bias you are
not getting a real view of the world. Those of us on the right
acknowledge the bias of Fox News, but those on the left don't think that
the other news medias lean to the left. That's a serious problem!!


A more serious problem is that many people who think "the media" is
left-biased never actually read or listen to those media, and are simply
repeating what they've been told to. For instance, rumor has it that NPR
rarely, if ever mentions anything positive about Iraq. That's odd, because
I hear them mention something positive at least a couple of times a week.
Are the droolers listening to a totally different NPR Morning Edition than
I am? Of course not. They simply don't listen.

How many times a week does NPR say negative things about Iraq? I'd be
willing to bet it is a larger number more than "a couple of times a week."

I wonder how Judith Miller...
 

"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"Jeff Rigby" wrote in message
...

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 24 Oct 2005 07:44:02 -0400, Bert Robbins wrote:


90% of the "independent" media you speak of is biased to the left.

Only 90% ? A little simplistic, don't you think? No one speaks with
an
objective voice, and the media in this country doesn't speak with one
voice. Is Rush biased left? What about NewsMax? Fox News?

Labeling media is a way of trivializing it. Propaganda spinners have
used
the trick for years. It doesn't flush. Media has always spoken with
many
voices. If you are truly looking for bias, you might consider
left/right
isn't the only bias.

http://rhetorica.net/bias.htm

True true, but until you acknowledge the bias and see it as bias you are
not getting a real view of the world. Those of us on the right
acknowledge the bias of Fox News, but those on the left don't think that
the other news medias lean to the left. That's a serious problem!!


A more serious problem is that many people who think "the media" is
left-biased never actually read or listen to those media, and are simply
repeating what they've been told to. For instance, rumor has it that NPR
rarely, if ever mentions anything positive about Iraq. That's odd,
because I hear them mention something positive at least a couple of times
a week. Are the droolers listening to a totally different NPR Morning
Edition than I am? Of course not. They simply don't listen.

How many times a week does NPR say negative things about Iraq? I'd be
willing to bet it is a larger number more than "a couple of times a week."

Why don't you listen and find out. You might learn something.

I wonder how Judith Miller...
 

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"Jeff Rigby" wrote in message
...

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 24 Oct 2005 07:44:02 -0400, Bert Robbins wrote:


90% of the "independent" media you speak of is biased to the left.

Only 90% ? A little simplistic, don't you think? No one speaks with
an
objective voice, and the media in this country doesn't speak with one
voice. Is Rush biased left? What about NewsMax? Fox News?

Labeling media is a way of trivializing it. Propaganda spinners have
used
the trick for years. It doesn't flush. Media has always spoken with
many
voices. If you are truly looking for bias, you might consider
left/right
isn't the only bias.

http://rhetorica.net/bias.htm

True true, but until you acknowledge the bias and see it as bias you
are not getting a real view of the world. Those of us on the right
acknowledge the bias of Fox News, but those on the left don't think
that the other news medias lean to the left. That's a serious
problem!!


A more serious problem is that many people who think "the media" is
left-biased never actually read or listen to those media, and are simply
repeating what they've been told to. For instance, rumor has it that NPR
rarely, if ever mentions anything positive about Iraq. That's odd,
because I hear them mention something positive at least a couple of
times a week. Are the droolers listening to a totally different NPR
Morning Edition than I am? Of course not. They simply don't listen.

How many times a week does NPR say negative things about Iraq? I'd be
willing to bet it is a larger number more than "a couple of times a
week."

Why don't you listen and find out. You might learn something.

I don't have time to waste listening to the DNC's only radio outlet.

I wonder how Judith Miller...
 

"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"Jeff Rigby" wrote in message
...

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 24 Oct 2005 07:44:02 -0400, Bert Robbins wrote:


90% of the "independent" media you speak of is biased to the left.

Only 90% ? A little simplistic, don't you think? No one speaks
with an
objective voice, and the media in this country doesn't speak with
one
voice. Is Rush biased left? What about NewsMax? Fox News?

Labeling media is a way of trivializing it. Propaganda spinners have
used
the trick for years. It doesn't flush. Media has always spoken with
many
voices. If you are truly looking for bias, you might consider
left/right
isn't the only bias.

http://rhetorica.net/bias.htm

True true, but until you acknowledge the bias and see it as bias you
are not getting a real view of the world. Those of us on the right
acknowledge the bias of Fox News, but those on the left don't think
that the other news medias lean to the left. That's a serious
problem!!


A more serious problem is that many people who think "the media" is
left-biased never actually read or listen to those media, and are
simply repeating what they've been told to. For instance, rumor has it
that NPR rarely, if ever mentions anything positive about Iraq. That's
odd, because I hear them mention something positive at least a couple
of times a week. Are the droolers listening to a totally different NPR
Morning Edition than I am? Of course not. They simply don't listen.

How many times a week does NPR say negative things about Iraq? I'd be
willing to bet it is a larger number more than "a couple of times a
week."

Why don't you listen and find out. You might learn something.

I don't have time to waste listening to the DNC's only radio outlet.



Fine. Then shut your cake hole. You've just admitted to repeating what
someone else told you to say about certain media. If you don't listen, you
cannot possibly know what they broadcast.

I wonder how Judith Miller...
 

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"Jeff Rigby" wrote in message
...

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 24 Oct 2005 07:44:02 -0400, Bert Robbins wrote:


90% of the "independent" media you speak of is biased to the left.

Only 90% ? A little simplistic, don't you think? No one speaks
with an
objective voice, and the media in this country doesn't speak with
one
voice. Is Rush biased left? What about NewsMax? Fox News?

Labeling media is a way of trivializing it. Propaganda spinners
have used
the trick for years. It doesn't flush. Media has always spoken
with many
voices. If you are truly looking for bias, you might consider
left/right
isn't the only bias.

http://rhetorica.net/bias.htm

True true, but until you acknowledge the bias and see it as bias you
are not getting a real view of the world. Those of us on the right
acknowledge the bias of Fox News, but those on the left don't think
that the other news medias lean to the left. That's a serious
problem!!


A more serious problem is that many people who think "the media" is
left-biased never actually read or listen to those media, and are
simply repeating what they've been told to. For instance, rumor has it
that NPR rarely, if ever mentions anything positive about Iraq. That's
odd, because I hear them mention something positive at least a couple
of times a week. Are the droolers listening to a totally different NPR
Morning Edition than I am? Of course not. They simply don't listen.

How many times a week does NPR say negative things about Iraq? I'd be
willing to bet it is a larger number more than "a couple of times a
week."

Why don't you listen and find out. You might learn something.

I don't have time to waste listening to the DNC's only radio outlet.



Fine. Then shut your cake hole. You've just admitted to repeating what
someone else told you to say about certain media. If you don't listen, you
cannot possibly know what they broadcast.

So, you listen to Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and the other right of center
entertainers?

I wonder how Judith Miller...
 

"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"Jeff Rigby" wrote in message
...

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 24 Oct 2005 07:44:02 -0400, Bert Robbins wrote:


90% of the "independent" media you speak of is biased to the left.

Only 90% ? A little simplistic, don't you think? No one speaks
with an
objective voice, and the media in this country doesn't speak with
one
voice. Is Rush biased left? What about NewsMax? Fox News?

Labeling media is a way of trivializing it. Propaganda spinners
have used
the trick for years. It doesn't flush. Media has always spoken
with many
voices. If you are truly looking for bias, you might consider
left/right
isn't the only bias.

http://rhetorica.net/bias.htm

True true, but until you acknowledge the bias and see it as bias you
are not getting a real view of the world. Those of us on the right
acknowledge the bias of Fox News, but those on the left don't think
that the other news medias lean to the left. That's a serious
problem!!


A more serious problem is that many people who think "the media" is
left-biased never actually read or listen to those media, and are
simply repeating what they've been told to. For instance, rumor has
it that NPR rarely, if ever mentions anything positive about Iraq.
That's odd, because I hear them mention something positive at least a
couple of times a week. Are the droolers listening to a totally
different NPR Morning Edition than I am? Of course not. They simply
don't listen.

How many times a week does NPR say negative things about Iraq? I'd be
willing to bet it is a larger number more than "a couple of times a
week."

Why don't you listen and find out. You might learn something.

I don't have time to waste listening to the DNC's only radio outlet.



Fine. Then shut your cake hole. You've just admitted to repeating what
someone else told you to say about certain media. If you don't listen,
you cannot possibly know what they broadcast.

So, you listen to Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and the other right of
center entertainers?


I can get their message by listening to you. It saves time.

I wonder how Judith Miller...
 

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"Jeff Rigby" wrote in message
...

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 24 Oct 2005 07:44:02 -0400, Bert Robbins wrote:


90% of the "independent" media you speak of is biased to the
left.

Only 90% ? A little simplistic, don't you think? No one speaks
with an
objective voice, and the media in this country doesn't speak with
one
voice. Is Rush biased left? What about NewsMax? Fox News?

Labeling media is a way of trivializing it. Propaganda spinners
have used
the trick for years. It doesn't flush. Media has always spoken
with many
voices. If you are truly looking for bias, you might consider
left/right
isn't the only bias.

http://rhetorica.net/bias.htm

True true, but until you acknowledge the bias and see it as bias
you are not getting a real view of the world. Those of us on the
right acknowledge the bias of Fox News, but those on the left don't
think that the other news medias lean to the left. That's a
serious problem!!


A more serious problem is that many people who think "the media" is
left-biased never actually read or listen to those media, and are
simply repeating what they've been told to. For instance, rumor has
it that NPR rarely, if ever mentions anything positive about Iraq.
That's odd, because I hear them mention something positive at least
a couple of times a week. Are the droolers listening to a totally
different NPR Morning Edition than I am? Of course not. They simply
don't listen.

How many times a week does NPR say negative things about Iraq? I'd be
willing to bet it is a larger number more than "a couple of times a
week."

Why don't you listen and find out. You might learn something.

I don't have time to waste listening to the DNC's only radio outlet.



Fine. Then shut your cake hole. You've just admitted to repeating what
someone else told you to say about certain media. If you don't listen,
you cannot possibly know what they broadcast.

So, you listen to Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and the other right of
center entertainers?


I can get their message by listening to you. It saves time.

Same here, why waste time listening to NPR when all you spew is liberal
crap.