Where Is This Decade’s Murdoch or Limbaugh?
“Thank you, Dick Cheney.” So says Captain Danny Ross of the Major Case Squad when the massive data mining of credit card transactions provides him with a valuable lead in a terrorist investigation.
Ross is a fictional character speaking in the season finale of Law Order: Criminal Intent, and Eric Bogosian’s line reading is laced with inappropriate sarcasm. Still, the acknowledgment of Cheney’s role in protecting us rings true. “Yes — thank you, Dick Cheney.” You can almost hear the audience responding, without the irony.
It’s certainly a line you won’t hear on the news programs of the major networks or CNN unfortunately, amidst efforts to overturn the surveillance, interrogation, and counterterrorism policies proven so effective in the years after 9/11.
Brief glimpses of socio-political insight are startling on our TV networks, because they are so unexpected. The cheerful, optimistic, and traditional No. 1 Ladies Detective Agency is a stranger in HBO’s strange land of sex-saturated cynicism and celebrated transgression. When an old Huell Howser documentary savaging Castro’s Cuba turns up in rerun on public broadcasting, the host’s astonishment at the madness he finds is no more than ours that the show somehow slipped past the goalie guarding the PBS net.
Must it be this way? Inclusion of conservative perspectives has made Fox News a significant profit engine for parent News Corp. Conservative voices have kept AM radio from landing next to the 8-track on the ash heap of media history. News Corp’s Wall Street Journal is one of the nation’s few profitable newspaper and online combinations. Wouldn’t it make good business sense for more media channels, especially news and information outlets, to follow their lead?
It certainly would make sense for conservatives and other free-market proponents to develop larger audiences independent of Murdoch (who is 78) and the whims of his future descendants. There’s certainly a niche for one more center-right Big Media entity. I’m not talking about another small, elite, subsidized magazine or another high-quality but second-tier radio group.
I’m talking Big Media.
Big Media is evolving. To News Corp., Time-Warner, NBC, CBS, and Disney, add Google (including YouTube) and Apple, whose iPhone apps and iTunes podcasts may become the equivalent of the AP wire of yesteryear. Big Media companies don’t just shape our entertainment choices. Many route the attention grabbing “story of the day” so crucial in political life.
Three hundred sixty-five stories of the day each year have a cumulative effect. Years of Big Media saturation bombing took an electoral toll on Republicans in this decade. The litany of media misery over Katrina, “torture,” and Iraq plus the daily vilification of Bush/Cheney’s second term all laid the foundation for political upheaval. Barack Obama’s superstar candidacy did the rest in the first election of the American Idol era — a time of limitless hope, instant celebrity, and voting on raw emotion.
As Republicans seek policy alternatives and electable candidates, a media reboot is also essential. When new leaders score political points, will the tally be registered? Let’s pick up our scorecards and assess the competition.
Begin with PBS and NPR, and imagine what it’s like to hear those sources and no other. Throw in the New York Times and the New Yorker magazine, and some ignore all the rest and consider themselves informed, educated voters in the media capital. Big Media doesn’t have to be huge if they’re positioned for influence. These particular outfits are well-defended from institutional adversaries, so don’t expect to compete on their home turf.
Jump the demographic spectrum and you’ll find college freshmen claiming to get their politics mostly from sly references on Comedy Central and HBO. Lots of talent is on display, despite the one-way street politics. What a waste.
Between those demographic extremes, you’ll find a vast chunk of mainstream, suburban, “white collar,” and professional Americans. Many work all day, so they don’t hear talk radio or read blogs. Think of the typical swing voter, who spends her day attending PowerPoint teleconferences, analyzing mammograms, or annotating spreadsheets.
Honduras?
Hiking the Appalachian Trail?
How about instead of creating another centrist media like fox you create a real counter and tap into a completely untapped market… ie the right wing. Beck is bringing in big numbers because he taps into a group that has never had anyone on TV in the last 30+ years… the right wing.
Much like fox tapped into the complete unmarketed sector of the centrists and center right a new media can tap into the center right and rightwing…
But that assumes that the TV market will expand… which is doubtful TV viewer ship has not heavily expanded and is for the most part capped at X number of viewers split between the networks… now of course FOX being centrist has the most viewership much of which moved from the leftwing-far leftwing programs on the other news channels.
The simple fact is as long as FOX stays centrist with a mix of center right/left their will be no room for any other “big” media at least not on TV.
robotech master. I agree. Beck is connecting with millions for a reason! Just watch the left try to shut it all down!
Excellent blog!
A welcome informative and well developed article on a subject I have long fretted over: What can be done to break major media out of the single-party. socialism-for-granted fixation that holds it in thrall? It is the key to restoring reason to our governance. It won’t happen from inside. The inmates have taken over the asylum. But whose got the big bucks, the big cojones and the unapologetic capitalistic drive to draw the elitist, college educated masses out of their socialist-utopian infatuated haze?
Most baffling is that the owners of the major newspapers – at least 95% of them, heirs to aggressive capitalist publishers who built their circulation on a commitment to honest reportage – have turned their inheritance over to academic bone-heads who perceive their role as promoting a poliitical cause instead of printing raw news and leaving their readers to make their own judgments. They want no identification with capitalism or entreprenurial thinking. My city was long served by two newspapers. The demographs were 45% Democrat, 40% Republican. Common sense would tell them that. to serve the advertisers who used them they should appeal to both partisans. But for two generations they strove to out-Left each other until one failed the other is beyond moribund.
Murdoch built Fox and bought WSJ. I have always wondered why he hasn’t launched a National Journal. served by the same presses and distribution fleet, as well as columnists and feature writers. with skeleton local staffs feeding in city reportage.
Today’s Journalism schools do not teach journalism- they teach propaganda. Their graduates are proudly anti-capitalist, ideologues, guilt-filed because of their parents’ wealth, dedicating themselves to “making ours a better world” – a Euro-Socialist style paradise, unsullied by business greed. We’ll never change them. They are committed to Deconstruction and statism.
Iam in complete accord with your conclusion: we need a bold aggressive individual or group, in the mold of Murdoch or Trump and with access to the resources of a Soros or Bill Gates, to build a new journalism, capitalizing on new technologies in communication, to cut out and replace the cancerous rot of our retrograde MSM.
In the meantime, VIVA FOX!
#3 robo – Beck is not on the Right. He is a libertarian. He’s a small government guy, period. He is, thus, fiscally conservative and socially liberal. Smallest possible government without descending into anarchy. I think that makes him Center-Right. His numbers are massive. His 5PM EST show is rivalling O’Reilly’s Primetime show in numbers. He’s a monster!
Hannity is far Right, for comparison. He does not do near as well as Beck, despite his long-established show and name. Beck and O’Reilly appeal to the Center.
There is room for challengers. The fact is that the market would expand as the media regains its credibility. Not gonna happen, though. They are committed ideologues. What it would take, is for Conservatives to decide to quit shunning government and the Media. They need to get as active in government, media, and the courts as the Left has all these years. Call it the Long Counter-March through our institutions.
The person to keep an eye on is Kellen Guida, CEO of Parcbench Media. (www.Parcbench.com) He was also the organizer of the New York City Tea Party. Parcbench was also one of the 5 media outlets (along with Fcx, CNN, MSNBC and NPR) on the Tea Party Express bus…not bad for a pop culture news site that launched on July 15th of this year.
Watch this guy…and talk to me in a year.
(Honorable mentions: Matt Drudge & Andrew Breitbart. Their stars have already risen, with Breitbart delving more into multiple media these days.)
Andrew Breitbart and his ‘Big Hollywood’ and ‘Big Government’ efforts seem to be off to a very fine start.
Jim, I have asked this question (to myself mostly, although…repeatedly in this very space…at PJM)at least a thousand times.
It is a business move that seems to have success written all over it.
It gives voice to a group that has been nearly strangled out of existence for almost 40 years.
Our “news” is diseased, rotting in the lapdog media’s septic tank …given to us through a filtration system that exacerbates the toxic waste of leftism.
Our “entertainment” is equally filtered through the leftist prism…giving us the one note, echo chamber sameness…tedious and predictable.
Mindless lemmings lap this up…but the center is becoming not just bored by it, but also growing increasingly impatient that their voice is represented…well,…nowhere.
Tapping into this fresh air reservoir would seem to be a wise and natural invention of necessity.
All I can come up with to my thousandth time…somebody is blocking this and it isn’t worth the time, effort and money to break the stranglehold.
May I respectfully submit that PJM’s own Bill Whittle has everything it takes to become a major voice? His short, “infomercial” method of connecting current events to historical philosophy is attention-getting and educational. Given the current state of ignorance in this country, that latter is an important component. Bill presents well, writes better, and has the engaging on-screen persona of a major news anchor. If he has the “fire in the belly”, he can take his show all the way to the top.
“Beck and O’Reilly appeal to the Center.”
Hmm…Beck thinks ACORN is corrupt while O’Reilly thinks ACORN is no big deal.
Beck thinks the 9/12 DC March was massive while O’Reilly thinks it was small.
Beck thinks the Greenies are Creepy while O’Reilly is a Creepy Greenie.
The only thing common between the two is the only thing they both care about….TV-Land ratings.
I can understand why the Center is muddled in confusion, existing without conviction of sound principles particularly when the Center relies upon plastic-fantastic TV-Land Talking-Heads, whose only concern is their TV-Land ratings, to inform and educate.
“Conservatives to decide to quit shunning government and the Media. They need to get as active in government, media, and the courts as the Left has all these years.”
If we do this then we become the same big government, propagandizing Big Brother media which defines the Left.
How about encouraging Americas to think about how government naturally tend towards oppressive tyranny and that TV-Land Entertainment is an addiction worse than heroin.
It used to be said that ‘religion is the opiate of the masses’, now it is said that ‘TV-Land Entertainment is the opiate of the masses’
Listen, when Americans pull their collective head out of Jon Stewart and Bill Maher’s collective anal cavity then 95% of those Americans whose eyeballs are glued to their TV sets will no longer be living in a nightmare.
It is sad commentary on our American culture which spends most of its watching a box showing fakes, frauds and BS Artists.
No wonder the Center is muddled, confused, out-of balance.
Sorry, but using heritage.org, a right wing crackpot site, as a source of info for bolstering an argument doesn’t exactly work, especially in regards to serious matters. Whether any of the post-9/11 Bush/Cheney, Big Brother, counterterrorism stuff actually provided any measurable results beyond just simply being more vigilant and heads-up on investigations is very, very iffy at best. For example, the very first instance of a “thwarted attack” that the Heritage article brings up is outright laughable: Richard Reid, the “Shoe Bomber” — it’s just a few months after 9/11 and some crazy looking guy on a plane is trying to light his shoes on fire with matches. Yeah, thank God for Cheney for helping to stop that. Gawd….
Successor to Murdoch network? You readers are there right now. The news does not have to be presented via an ideological framework. It just has to be presented, and the rest of us can apply our own ideology as needed.
“Where Is This Decade’s Murdoch or Limbaugh?”
Fear not, I have the answer. Murdoch was at the Values Votes Summit. Rush is on Dancing with the Stars.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/23/moral-kombat-jon-stewart_n_295769.html
14. BC:
Sorry, but using heritage.org, a right wing crackpot site, as a source of info for bolstering an argument doesn’t exactly work, especially in regards to serious matters.
Heritage is one of the most solid and reputable organizations out there.
And BC is a deceitful liar. There’s no point in trying to sugar coat it.
8. Michael Fidanza:
‘(Honorable mentions: Matt Drudge & Andrew Breitbart. Their stars have already risen . . .’
But Drudge is gay. Can you have that in your family?
There is no center on Fox. It’s all right all the time. Those rare moments of common sense liberal thought are nothing more than markers laid down so Fox can point to them and say, “See, I said something liberal. We’re fair and balanced.”
It’s incredibly transparent to everyone not blinded by ideology.
last year, when trying to talk some sense into some family member’s who’d been drinking the kool-aide (including a conservative-independent), I pointed out the terrorist threat, and at least we could know McCain would a) understand it was real, and b) do what he could to keep us safe. (They didn’t want to hear about obeymugabe’s threats to terrorists).
So, while conservatives who understand the threat of terroisim in this country is real – kool-aide drinkers of ANY type are too wrapped up in their hatred of all things Bush or Cheney to appreciate what they had to do to try and protect this country from a very real threat.
Is there a job in this? I am looking.
I will help you with some educated electoral math. Please pay attention. The loony libertarian(t-bag), pro Banking, big business, free market right has no chance of getting more than ten percent of the vote. The far right has no chance of getting more than ten percent of the vote. The center right has no chance of getting more than ten/twenty percent of the vote. And the center to neo con, educated east/west coasters are down to about ten percent with many leaving the party or being invited (kicked out) to leave the republican party. I usually dont give advice to political parties (im independent) but I would go for a loony right (limbaugh) type because of the entertainment aspect.
Poor Citizen, the days of voting in America are over.
I just hope the Socialists that have seized power in America think like you do. If they do, then the current administration will allow an election and get voted out of power.
You do realize that if the 2010 election was held yesterday, the Democrats would have lost control of Cngress? Polls give generic Republicans a +4% edge.
Sara can beat Berry. The current administration understands all that, being able to read the polls as well as almost anybody. That is why I expect this administration to suspend the Constitution for 90 days, as is allowed by Law.
That is when America makes the switch from ballots to bullets.
What are your chances of winning the shootout?
There would not be a democrat party without the MSM propping it up.
I have never understood why a liberal media is called mainstream when 80% of americans call themselves moderate or conservative? Liberals have highjacked the word mainstream for decades, and we let them get away with it.
Gotta go with Beck, Drudge, Brietbart and PJ Media. The big thinkers are VDH, Mark Steyn and Byron York. Libertarian is closer to the founding principals than current day conservatism. A mixing of the two into a supersaturated potion of republicanism, judeo christian values types, homeschoolers and political conservatives. Independents recognize that ‘freedoms’ are better respected in a Republican government than a ‘social justice’ government and will side giving a chance at a restoration of the Republic. Down with the 17th amendment!!
Very nice post I enjoyed reading it
Well, I’ve said this before. What we need is news for grownups. Fox News is a disgrace.
We need a 24/7 WSJ channel. I think news corp could do it. IMAO it should steal the stylistic thunder from NPR and wed it to the perspective of the WSJ.In depth reporting–meaning reporting not based on sound bytes. No flash animation, no T&A, no ranters, no shouting matches. The problem with it? It would be boring, its ratings would not merit the cost. Alas.
Everyone reread exdem13 (no.15). I believe informed people will make the right decisions, since they will realize their ox is being gored.
Why waste all that energy and capital on old media when investments in new media yield much higher returns. We needed the reactionary legacy media to crumble faster so that new media no longer depends on it for validation. Don’t try to change it – burn it down.
BTW, per the Fox News criticisms, apply the same standards to MSM.
Breitbart and/or Beck. True patriots!
Well Mr. Kearney, it seems like most commenters think we need a stronger vehicle to espouse their particular brand of far right, right, center right or centrist politics. And here I thought your case was for one that “moved beyond the merely political to serve a broad range of human information and entertainment”.
It sounds as if our culture has developed an electorate that does not really want to have a medium that “serves a broad range” and balances reportage across the full spectrum, but only a bigger and louder one that talks their talk. Don’t give us balanced information on which to form an opinion: we’ve already made up our minds. So just shout louder and bash the bastards harder!
More of what we already have.
It is increasingly evident that the election of 2008 has brought a schism in our two-party system, a polarization that is going to be very hard to heal. I get nervous with political leaders who casually brag that they “bring guns to knife fights”. That’s a long way from Lyndon Johnson’s “Come, et us reason together”.
stuart williamson — Thanks for the replies. I also have wondered why the WSJ (or USA Today) doesn’t include local sections at least in major markets. But the logistics of print doom the daily local paper as we knew it. Customized content is so much easier with the internet.
Yes, our major media entities need to dwell more in the broader section of our lives than the explicitly political. Women’s magazines like “O” (and most of the others, my wife tells me) have all kinds of liberal politics between the lines. Oprah’s sway over publishing is well documented. Her support of Obama moved swing voters, I’m sure. Her emotionally charged broadcasts move people and her altruistic intentions cause women to trust her. If you own a major television station group, you have the power to launch such a program to compete in the afternoon timeslots. But of course you must find a super talent as well. And that’s just one example.
Let’s not despair about grabbing a heartier slice of the mainstream communication pie. The anguish of impassioned commenters is understandable. My proposals don’t ask much from the media consumer right now. They’ve already spoken with their loyalty to Rush, Fox, and the WSJ. Now it’s time for the industrial leaders note the groundswell, and expand the range of offerings.
As the effects of Obama’s interventions become known, business leaders and major investors need to take a stand in favor of economic freedom.
I found them! They’re in Kentucky!
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/23/census-worker-hanged-with_n_297114.html
And so it begins.
I will be the first to admit that Fox Pundits lean to the right. But still till today I have no idea where News Anchor Shep Smith leans politically as is the case with Cafferty and many others on various networks. As far as being fair and balanced I will point out that anyone who is interested in seeing debate between left and right must watch Fox. You will see O’Reilly debate Lanny Davis or Hannity debate Rev Wright or Geraldine Ferraro etc. On CNN you will see an all liberal panel of Cafferty, Blitzer, Malveaux, Jeff Toobin and racist Roland Martin. Olbermann NEVER has opposing views and Matthews does on occasion.
Oh, the irony . . .
http://www.buzzfeed.com/expresident/nothing-gets-by-greta
Was SHE in Kentucky yesterday?
exdem13 – No, we’re not there right now. I’m talking about Big Media, and the power it has to reach a mass audience and support high profile programming like the series 24 (in its heyday), Special Report, O’Reilly, and now John Stossel’s superb documentaries.
I agree that the news doesn’t have to be presented in an ideological framework. Editorial judgements do require perspective, and as Bernard Goldberg documented so well in Bias and elsewhere, CBS, NBC, ABC, the New York Times, PBS, NPR etc. are making the wrong calls too often.
The big media outlets are forever giving us advice which is not explicitly political, but bears on values. Are out of wedlock pregnancies perfectly alright? Do we reflexively shame CEOs but excuse people who lied about their income on mortgage applications? Must sexuality be present in every workplace depicted in a work of fiction? Does the mystery novel where the enviornmentalists are the bad guys get made into a feature film?
While it is each of our responsibility, as you suggest, to be our own selective consumers in the media environment, the market should respond actively to group choices. Sometimes it hasn’t, for ideological reasons. So a market correction is in order.
Now & Then- How old are you? Does you mother still let you play on the computer after dinner? Shouldn’t you be taking a nap by now?
The St. Louis P-D has a storied history, but is now reduced to reporting mostly local stories on the front page. Some hard news, some soft.
Very much like our “suburban” newspaper used to do for free.
I’ve wondered if they would abandon their allegiance to the liberal view and did straight reporting of, say, healthcare reform what their circ numbers would look like. Could they ever get “conservatives” to buy the paper, would they lose the libs?
Or maybe it wouldn’t make any difference to the bottom line. Lee Enterprises is about 2 dollars a share (up a lot from the low!!)
11. Steve Walton:
“May I respectfully submit that PJM’s own Bill Whittle has everything it takes to become a major voice?”
I could not possibly agree more. I think Bill Whittle is the complete package: I could watch and listen to him read the phone book, the guy is brilliant and convincing, and he understands what he is trying to do and how to do it. Imagine if you had a guy like him in charge of NBC 2.0, or whatever…
Steve Walton – Whittle’s piece on iconography is outstanding.
http://www.pjtv.com/video/Afterburner_with_Bill_Whittle/__The_Power_%26_Danger_of_Iconography%3A_The_Resistance_Steals_Obama%27s_Weapons/2317/
I can still remember left-wing billionaire Ted Turner saying in 1996 that CNN would put Fox News out of business in 6 months. And now Fox News has 3 to 4 times more viewers than CNN, as well as MSNBC. Also, Glenn Beck has 5 times more viewers than his nearest competitor. I know this drives the totalitarian left crazy, and nothing is more fun than driving the lunatic left up a wall.
To 7. Marc Malone
Your confused… first beck is not quite liberatian yet.. but he is moving further to the right. Libertarians are right wing/ far right wing THEY ARE NOT CENTRISTS.
Hannity is pretty far from being right wing. In fact you’d be hard pressed to label him right of center.
Hannity is borderline a religious tool sometimes. Religion more so when you talk the about the big 3 in 1(ie jews, chirstians, muslim) are all classic left of center, leftwing, far leftwing… depending on what year it is and what religious line they follow.
Beck is not oppressively religious about issues at least no where near hannity or even o’riely for that makes him more rightwing then either.
But he’s still not rightwing yet he’s mostly center right while ppl like hannity or o’riely are more centrist/left of center.
steveg – I was at that conference, The Western Show, in Anaheim. What Ted actually said was that he would “squish” Rupert “like a bug.”
Well, Murdoch squishes CNN every day, and Ted’s bank account got squished in the ill-advised AOL Time Warner merger.
But you know, TW’s cable network portfolio includes TNT and TBS, a couple of the best run and most profitable channels on all of television. They are models for how to best utilize library and acquired entertainment programs, paving the way for original fare. It helps of course when you’ve got classics like Everybody Loves Raymond, the first seven years of Seinfeld, and the first nine years of Law & Order, which never grow stale.
Ted Turner, of course, deserves credit for inventing the concept of 24/7 global TV news (with a non-union newsroom), ad-supported satellite networks, and much more. There is much to be learned in the media field from innovative, half-crazy liberals. Ted was quite conservative, originally. If he hadn’t met Jane Fonda, maybe there never would have been a Fox News.
22. Poor Citizen: “I usually dont give advice to political parties (im independent)…”
Yeah, a totally centrist mindset is the impression that you give off from your posts here, especially this last one. Forgive us if we take that with a HUGE grain of salt.
Just come out from behind the flimsy charade like “Now and Then” and unleash those manufactured Move On/DNC talking points. It’ll feel so much more natural than masquerading as an “independent” who just happens to troll conservative forums with leftist propaganda comment after comment.
Try Andrew Wilkow on XM Radio
3. robotech – You posit that since Fox is centrist there is not room for another center/right Big Media entity. I respectfully disagree, because while Fox’s panels and hard news reporting strive for balance, the high profile prime time hosts like O’Reilly and Hannity are fairly consistently conservative. Not that there’s anything wrong with that.
A more important bias on Fox is the tabloid hue which comes into clear focus whenever the opportunity to jump into the fray presents itself. They’re good at it, the audience knows it, and it’s as much a part of the business model as Fox’s openness to the conservative perspective.
I’m not suggesting they change, but that there is a gap because of the vast untapped audience, including many swing voters of an upper-middle socioeconomic profile, who have better things to think about than (this week’s references) Kanye West’s bad behavior, the specifics on Mackenzie Phillips, a Kardashian wedding, or another random murder.
A reformed CBS, ABC, or NBC News would not have to stain itself with tabloid drek to attract the middle class center. It would have to seek out stories like “When Work Doesn’t Pay For The Middle Class” from the new Forbes, which demonstrates in human terms how needs-based government programs and tax grab-backs are undermining the middle class work ethic.
More importantly, a new center-right entity could exert a larger cultural footprint. We need stories which extol job creators, celebrate our traditional national identity, and make a dynamic, amusing case for good behavior in everyday life. In a sense you could say we need to take back “the establishment” from the “counterculture.”
Where are the new media leaders? THIS decade? You must mean this CENTURY!
Limbaugh and Murdoch predate the educational system that destroyed the possibility of new entrants.
Both men missed the the Cold War enemy propaganda that got stuffed into three generations by the media and academia. Murdoch was born to early to get much Left indoctrination, and as an Aussie, he started out with Amrican-like precepts. Limbaugh, though born later, comes from Missouri, the American heartland, which got the “message” late.
The mob from which any replacement candidates would arise has NO education in civilzation’s historical verities, nor in logic nor in hard sciences.
Our teachers have gifted the mob with precepts amounting to nothing more than rigid gestalts formed from unknowable fragments of images. History for them is “Like in WWII when Tom Cruise said to Jessica Simpson, like something else and stuff.” Furthermore, thought control by PC and MC locked their minds
Don’t expect anyone in the last three generations to build a new media empire. It’s over.
The Greek-Roman-Renaissance-Enlightenment-Industrialization historical trajectory plummets. Go Galt.
The reason Fox and “right wing talk radio” is so successful is they are the only sources for any semblance of THE TRUTH! Every other network is simply cheerleading for the SOCIALIST agenda of Obama or any other lefty like Clinton, or just pick a democrat. How about that supreme drunken jerk TED Kennedy who NEVER authored a bill that was PRO AMERICAN CITIZEN!He was all about illegals, or more taxes on the hardest working people, or lets GIVE AWAY SOCIAL SECURITY FUNDS(we don’t contribute anyway hahahahaha!). Yeah Ted, thanks a lot! Do you hear any negatives about Clinton and henchmen like Barney Frank or Janet Reno causing the real estate meltdown with their policies…anyone can be qualified for a mortgage even though they CAN’T PAY FOR IT?! Are you kidding me?! Every talk show host on the right is made fun of by the socialist media. Michael Savage is right…liberalism IS a mental disorder. Want PROOF? The original “FAT BASTARD”, Michael Moore, has a new movie bashing (again!) capitalism. Excuse me FB, it appears you became very wealthy under capitalism. If we were always a SOCIALIST country, you would be completely UNKNOWN and BROKE! So put your money where your liberal mouth is FB, since you claim “the little guy” does not get a fair share of the pie, its time to CUT UP YOUR PIE and distribute it among those less fortunate! As a matter of fact, ALL YOU HOLLYWOOD LIBS need to get with the program and jump right into socialism, which is coming at us like a runaway freight train anyway with Obama, and give away all your millions ’cause you don’t deserve your wealth anyway cause you made it ON THE BACKS OF PO PEOPLE! Put your money where your ignorant, fat, socialist mouthes are!
“When leaders with Murdoch-deep pockets surface to invest in more informative”
You mean people like George Soros?
I’ll pass, thanks. I’ll take the Tea Party Movement any day over media moguls flying in to save the Republic.
48. Dave McDuffie:
So much McZeal, so little McBrains.
I’m pretty sure that murdoch is still this decade’s murdoch. That guy hasn’t put a foot wrong in a while.
I’ll have you know that his first job was running a paper in my home town
#42 robotech master says O’reilly and Hannity are center left?
O’Reilly, maybe, but even he’s usually more conservative, or as he likes to say: “traditional”.
Hannity is about as conservative as it gets, to the point of not seeing straight when it comes to criticizing other conservatives/republicans when they should be criticized.
Beck has and does criticize republicans and does not toe any party line.
Scorecard: Hannity: blind partisan
O’Reilly:Tries too hard to be fair and balanced,even when not
warranted.
Beck: Follows the facts regardless. Constitutionalists.
It’s not about left or right— Democrat or Republic—, it’s about Black or White, Power and Money— Riders and Punks; which side are you on?
thank u for the article.keep it up.
Thank you for sharing such an article. Anyways, you can
check out my site to learn more:http://www.southerncaliforniaurology.com/
The article is wonderfully written and the way
the points were sent across is very understandable.
Nice post. Many thanks for sharing this.
It’s useful!
Thanks a lot for sharing this post with us.
Fantastic website