Posted by Terry Sohl on December 14, 2006 at 10:11 AM
I'm quite disgusted this morning. Senator Tim Johnson (S.Dakota) has a brain hemorrhage, and the primary focus is on the potential shift in control of the Senate, with less play given to his well-being.
We have a Republican governor, Mike Rounds. There's little doubt he'd appoint a Republican to replace Johnson, if it comes to that, effectively shifting control of the Senate to Republicans.
Chris Nelson, SD Secretary of State, has several quotes over the last 24 hours. "There are no restrictions (on party membership) on who the governor can appoint". Incapacitation isn't outlined in SD state law, but Nelson is awfully quick to point out "There would be precedent at the federal level" for ousting Johnson if he's incapacitated in any way.
How nice that within 4 hours of the event, we've got speculation from Republicans that they could force Johnson out if he's incapacitated for any length of time.
In the interest of full disclosure, I'm a card-carrying liberal (the only one in South Dakota, I believe). I'm also realistic though...I know the situation wouldn't change a bit if it were a Republican Senator in a state with a Democratic Governor. Partisan politics on both sides of the aisle disgust me, and I certainly think there's equal levels of slime on both the Democratic and Republican sides.
As for Senator Johnson...this couldn't have happened to a nicer man. My wife, son, and I have met with him several times, as he's a strong proponent of stem-cell research. Stem cell research is the greatest hope of a cure for our son's juvenile diabetes, and in fact, just in the past few weeks, researchers have for the first time coaxed stem cells to transform into insulin-secreting pancreatic cells, a major breakthrough offering hope for Type-1 diabetics.
Senator Johnson has always been willing to meet with us and listen to our story. Without exception, he's greeted us warmly by name, asking us how things have been going, asking about Alexander's health. He's discussed our son's story on the Senate floor. He's been a wonderful representative for South Dakota, puts partisan politics aside if he strongly believes in something, and has purposely avoided the spotlight that many politicians love to focus on themselves.
In short, he's got his flaws as we all do, but for the most part, he's been what a politician SHOULD be.
In contrast, we've also met with our other Senator, John Thune. When we met with him for the first time regarding the stem cell bill that was passed by both houses last Fall, it was painfully, painfully obvious that he knew absolutely nothing about the contents of the bill. His first comment to us after we presented our story? A direct quote..."Well, I can't be expected to vote for that bill...I'm a Republican".
Sadly, that stance seems to be the stance of 90% of Washington politicians. Nothing on the merit of the bill, an obvious lack of knowledge on the CONTENTS of the bill...but quick to spout party line. Wouldn't it be nice if issues were decided on merit, rather than on party agendas? There are certainly issues that are part of the primary Democratic platform that I don't agree with, and get disgusted when "my own" party spouts party line and plows merrily ahead.
I wish Tim Johnson the best, and even if he can't continue his political career, I hope he recovers enough to enjoy a long and happy life. One of his last comments before the hemorrhage occurred? That he was looking forward to time with his family over Christmas.
Wouldn't it be nice if such things were more important than partisan politics?
Here endeth my rant.
Posted by Guy Tal on December 14, 2006 at 10:16 AM
It might serve our politicians well to remember that his country was founded by people who got sick of a corrupt government.
This isn't just a partisan issue, Terry - it's an an issue of how disgustingly involved religion is with American politics.
Posted by Alice Scoggins on December 14, 2006 at 12:17 PM
I was disgusted last night when I heard the headline on NBC news...they barely got the word out that he had had a stroke before diving into the politics of it. Too bad the news didn't tell us a little about Senator Johnson as you did, so we would know somnething about what kind of man he is. I hope he recovers.
Posted by Dale Williams on December 14, 2006 at 12:20 PM
Terry,
It doesn't matter which side of the political aisle you are on in this situation. You are right as there is plenty of slime to go around but this fine senator's life is hanging by a thread and I am much more concerned about him and his family at this point than who controls the senate. My thoughts and prayers are for Senator Johnson and his family and for some sense of civility and respect within the politcal circles...especially during this critical time for your fine senator.
Dale Williams
Posted by Dale Williams on December 14, 2006 at 12:21 PM
Terry,
It doesn't matter which side of the political aisle you are on in this situation. You are right as there is plenty of slime to go around but this fine senator's life is hanging by a thread and I am much more concerned about him and his family at this point than who controls the senate. My thoughts and prayers are for Senator Johnson and his family and for some sense of civility and respect within the politcal circles...especially during this critical time for your fine senator.
Dale Williams
Posted by John W. Wall on December 14, 2006 at 1:06 PM
Thankfully it's not all slime out there. This quote's from Fox News:
One former lawmaker chastised the political playmakers in town for discussing such options so quickly after Johnson was hospitalized.
"This is a pretty mean town and let's just keep him in our prayers," said former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas. "This town is so eat up with power that everybody, you know, that's all they think about. You go to ask somebody for a cup of coffee, they question why you asked, there must be an ulterior motive to you asking.
"Senator Johnson is a really nice man from strong South Dakota stock so I am sure he'll be all right," DeLay added.
The White House also issued a statement wishing the senator a speedy recovery.
"The president and first lady have Senator Johnson and his family in their thoughts and prayers and they wish him a full and speedy recovery," said spokeswoman Dana Perino.
Posted by Terry Sohl on December 14, 2006 at 1:28 PM
Tom DeLay as an example of the one non-slimey politician that's out there?
Fox News as a reliable source for political coverage?
What planet did I wake up on this morning?
Guy
Posted by Terry Sohl on December 14, 2006 at 2:15 PM
Guy,
I find Fox News to be VERY reliable! No matter what issue that comes up, you pretty much know ahead of time what slant Fox will put on it!
They're consistent...what more could you ask for, right?
Posted by Terry Sohl on December 14, 2006 at 3:50 PM
Don't worry Peter...US Politics are a bit alien to those of us that live here as well.
Fox is pretty good with sports coverage!! I must say cricket coverage is lacking here though!
I'm a huge baseball fan though, and given the similarity between the two, I could see myself getting into cricket!
Posted by Kim Kaiser on December 14, 2006 at 5:11 PM
does anyone really think that it would be ANY different if the tables were turned,, I think not...dems are just as greedy, just as corrupt as Repub.. have we forgotten dan rostenkowski,,, traficant from ohio,,Mike Espy,,Edward kennedy,,,,,,and the soon to be WIlliam Jefferson (oh, yeah, i forgot, inncoent till proven gulty, but that works both ways,,,no one has convicted Delay either). Dirty Harry is swapping tax returns and land deals as fast as he can get them covered. Emanual is now being investigaated as to whether he lied about knowing about the Foley emails over a year ago,did nothing about it and concealed that knowledge until politcally advantageous.....
Fox is no more biased than the rest,,,,,just becaue they are the only one that presents a conserv view, of the same news does not make them wrong,,,
WAKE UP PEOPLE!!,, they are ALL corrupt,,not one more than the other,,,it just so happens that on this round, a few repubs have been caught this time around,,,,,,,and given time,,,,the tables will rotate,,,Just wait and see...so many like to look at history repeats itself,, well it will,, all you will have to do is book mark this page, insert the opposite party name, and you will have the same discussion,,,,
Who do you think instigates this "scenarios" ITs the media,,, they dont report, they conject, set up stages for "discussion" and do there very best to polarize,, its good for there business,,,all of them,,, cnn, fox, whoever,,,, you are simply naive if you believe other wise,,,, they should simply "report news" what they do is stir the toilet, and let the fumes agitate,,, and the result is what you have now,,,24 hours of toilet agitation, not news reporting,,,
Posted by Thomas Creel on December 14, 2006 at 5:37 PM
NPN was a better place before politics was allowed into the conversation.
Posted by Terry Sohl on December 14, 2006 at 6:28 PM
Kim,
If you'd read the posts, you'd see that we're ALL saying exactly that...there's corruption and slime on both the Democratic and Republican posts.
However...I'm sorry, but there's simply no way you can state FOX News isn't biased. You yourself state they present a conservative view. I guess that's OK to folks on that side of the ledger, who are always complaining about that darn "liberal media bias".
Funny...I didn't see these same folks complaining about the "liberal media" who crucified Clinton for his personal affairs. No other media network pushes an agenda like FOX does, and it's pretty dang obvious to any objective person.
I suppose it's also that dang media that's to be damned for trying to report the truth about Iraq? You have to blame somebody I guess, other than the folks that are really at fault.
Thomas...Jim very wisely opened up this "hot topics" forum for things like this. Does a conversation such as this belong in the forums? Heck no, and I'm glad Jim cracks down on anyone trying to do so. But to completely ignore issues because there are strong feelings on both sides? That's the absolute worst thing to do.
Posted by Paul Grecian on December 14, 2006 at 6:29 PM
Terry,
I like hearing that at least one public official was on the ball and doing their job well. I'd be equally pleased if he was a Republican. I wish him well.
Paul
Posted by Richard Wong on December 14, 2006 at 6:47 PM
I'm registered as an independent, non-affiliated voter because I hate the concept of political parties. Lincoln Chafee was a Republican congressman from Rhode Island and has been given high marks on most environmental issues unlike the majority of his party and was more in line with the Democrats than his own party in a "blue" state and yet his state voted him out of office this year because of his party affiliation. Also despite the fact that his approval rating was very high. If none of the politicians running for office in that state were affiliated with a political party he'd probably be still in office. How sick is that?
Posted by Kim Kaiser on December 14, 2006 at 8:18 PM
Without Fox, we would only be subject to the other side, and i despise Wolf, Katie and oberman, so there has to be a counterweight to cnn, msnbc, abc, cbs, NYT, those media outlets are all biased, so why the problem with fox,,,just becuase they are baiesed against so many of the participants here personal opinions,,,besides whats wrong with a conservative point of view,
Since you did it, i disclose i have a biased conservative viewpoint,,,, on a lot of things, but like you, i hate the "follow the party line" mentality.. and disagree on some items,,frankly,, if someone ran on a platform of no new taxes, conservation improvement, strong immigration reform,, to name a few,,,, i wouldnt care if was a member of the micky mouse club,,,, thats where i would be leaning,,,so the party line has little to do with it,, i have my list of priority, ck the ones mean something to me,, add em up, and see who gets the nod..
so to conclude,, that one (fox) out of 6 networks that presents a conservative bias shouldnt really be a problem for anyone,, dont watch them, you have so many other choices,,,,,,,or do you really?
they are all guilty of stirring the scenerio pot on this one,,,
Posted by Terry Sohl on December 14, 2006 at 11:02 PM
"The other side"?
By the "other side", I presume you mean the actual facts?
Posted by Terry Sohl on December 14, 2006 at 11:04 PM
Amen Richard. EVERYTHING is party, party, party. It's as if the individual candidates don't matter anymore, it's whether they have a "D" or an "R" after their name.
Posted by Guy Tal on December 14, 2006 at 11:09 PM
Kim, right up to the Reagan years we used to have something called the Fairness Doctrine which was aimed to ensure private interests don't get to monopolize public airwaves (owned by the American people) to promote their own narrow goals. We can all thank Mr. Fowler for the loss of fair reporting.
Posted by Terry Sohl on December 15, 2006 at 12:09 AM
Interesting stuff Guy. I like this quote:
"The FCC stopped enforcing the doctrine in the mid-’80s, well before it formally revoked it."
Hmmm...seems awfully familiar to the EPA's current lack of enforcement over clean air and water acts.
Posted by Kim Kaiser on December 15, 2006 at 12:39 AM
yet to see what is unfair on fox, as opposed to the others....are they the facts as you ascertain them from cnn or cbs... are your really sure their facts are right,,,i watch them harrange republicans in a manner no different than fox does democrats,,,,,what the hell is the difference? ,,i dont see any of fox high end reporters being let off as cbs had to do with Rather and his unsubstantiated reporting methods that led to his demise,,, nor have i seen them release a high grade reporter such as the NYT several years ago for plagerisms that caused big fatcat heads to roll at the NYT,,,,,....i see them cnn and the others as completely biased in the other direction.... and you can quote all the law and script you want,,,,i simply prefer fox,,,,
you have your opinion, i have mine,,,,and we all know about opinions !!
Posted by Terry Sohl on December 15, 2006 at 12:56 AM
No, I'm a complete unbiased wacko left-wing liberal.
;-)
There are always individual cases you could cite for any news organization. Doesn't discount the credibility of the network as a whole.
Despite my cynacism regarding our political system, despite my disdain for the politics of BOTH Republican and Democrats...I just do not see that supposed liberal media bias that the right claims exists for networks like CNN, NPR, etc.
Watching Fox News is for me the equivalent of listening to Rush Limbaugh on radio. I watch or listen to either for about 2 minutes before either becoming outraged, or more commonly, before l simply just start laughing at the absolute ridiculousness that's being spouted.
One thing is for certain...if a network feels the need to come out and state 300 times a day that they're "fair and balanced", in truth, that's the last thing they are.
Posted by Bill Chambers on December 15, 2006 at 8:42 AM
Hi Terry - We're probably on completely opposite ends of the polictical spectrum, but we can still be friendly and respect each other. The problem is that so many can not. It has become a very polarized country and in large part I tend to blame two things: the news media in general and the herd mentality of it's viewers. Far too few people are willing to think for themselves; they would rather believe whatever drivel they hear on broadcasts or websites without any need of substantiation.
RE: Sen. Johnson - Honestly I haven't heard a single person (Republican or Democrat) say anything but supportive and caring things about Tim Johnson - the polictical drama seems to be 100% created by the news media (ALL news media - I'm sure in search of ratings).
RE: Fox News vs. the rest - Everyone sees what they want to see here. I definitely see a very liberal bias in the "mainstream" media, especially in newspapers. Katie Couric pratically peed in her pants over the Dems winning the elections. If she had an "analysis" show that would be fine, but not on a straight news program. The problem is that many people don't know the difference between straight news and analysis. News vs. news - I find Fox neither conservative nor liberal, but more straight reporting. Analysis (Bill O'Reilly, etc. can be biased, just as 60 minutes is biased)
No one is right 100% of the time - not liberals, not conservatives, not dems, not repubs. No one is liberal 100% of the time, nor conservative. I'm very conservative on some things and quite liberal on others. I suspect most people are the same. Maybe I'm a Republicrat or a Democan.
Woe is me, I’ve got the Red State Blues,
I live where folks vote Republican, and watch Fox News.
Where gays can’t get married, and women shouldn’t choose,
And morality is defined by conservative views.
Where invading Iraq was the right thing to do,
And people think Bush really has a clue.
But nobody realizes
How much we’ll all lose…
Posted by Bill Chambers on December 16, 2006 at 8:26 AM
Thanks John for the article link - one of the best I've seen on the subject. Nice to read something on the subject without a left/right slant being injected.
Posted by Kent Staubus on December 20, 2006 at 12:13 AM
I never voted for Johnson, but have met him several times. I do think he's a decent guy, and he's not really "liberal." Certainly not one of the wacko/hating kind for sure. Of all the news outlets I've seen, Fox certainly had the best. One of the "analyst" shows they have went a bit too far for my tastes, but the news crew itself is the most trustworthy I've seen since the 1960s.
I do of course hope Johnson recovers. He's one of the people I'm depending on to continue to counter the "Micheal Moore" extreme wing of the party.
As for religion involved in politics, Hitler, Stalin, and Pol Pot showed us what a truly great country we could have when religious freedom is suppressed.
Kent in SD
Posted by Terry Sohl on December 20, 2006 at 7:22 PM
Just curious Kent...who are the "liberal...wacko/hating" kind? Do you consider anybody that's really far to the left automatically to be a "wacko/hating" kind?
What about Republican Rep. Virgil Goode's comments this week? He's criticizing Democratic Rep. Keith Ellison's choice to use the Koran to take his oath of office, instead of the Bible. How about the statement "If American citizens don't wake up and adopt the Virgil Goode position on immigration there will (GASP!!!) likely be many more Muslims elected to office and demanding the use of the Koran."
GOD FORBID!!! Or should I say "Allah Forbid"!!! A MUSLIM wanting to take an oath on the book outlining his faith, rather than on the Bible!!! How dare he!!
More from Virgil Goode..."I fear that in the next century we will have many more Muslims in the United States if we don't adopt..." Goode's idea on immigration policy.
Hey Virgil, how about we just boot out ANY person in the U.S. that's not a "Christian"? Better yet, let's just boot out everybody that's not a white Christian!!! Wait a minute...I forgot gays...boot them out too!!! That seems to be the message of one hell of a lot of the folks on the opposite end of the spectrum from these "wacko/hating" liberals.
I see one hell of a lot more hate directed from the "Christian Right" than I do from "wacko/hating" liberals. Does "religious freedom" only apply to Christians in this country?
People in the U.S. tend to look at Muslims as basing their faith on hate, all the while pretending to be holier-than-thou because of their Christian background. In the meantime, these same charlatans are actively spreading hatred of gays, supposedly godless liberals, and Muslims...basically anybody that's NOT a white Christian.
Laughable!!!
Got off on a tangent here, because I'd just read this crap that Goode came out with, but please give me a break with the "wacko/hating" kind of liberal. There are "wacko/hating" kinds from all points of the political spectrum.
Religion has NO place in the politics, period. What the radical components of the Christian Right are trying to inject into the U.S. political system is no different than what radical Muslims have tried to inject into some Middle East political systems. Both are based on hatred, intolerance, and rejection of anyone outside a narrowly-defined religious belief.
Religious freedom...you bet! However, ANY kind of iinvolvement of religion into politics is just asking for trouble.
As for religion involved in politics, Hitler, Stalin, and Pol Pot showed us what a truly great country we could have when religious freedom is suppressed.
And a much greater array of examples, from the Spanis Inquisition to Osama Bin Laden showed us what happens when religion and politics are one and the same.
Discussion
28 repliesWe have a Republican governor, Mike Rounds. There's little doubt he'd appoint a Republican to replace Johnson, if it comes to that, effectively shifting control of the Senate to Republicans.
Chris Nelson, SD Secretary of State, has several quotes over the last 24 hours. "There are no restrictions (on party membership) on who the governor can appoint". Incapacitation isn't outlined in SD state law, but Nelson is awfully quick to point out "There would be precedent at the federal level" for ousting Johnson if he's incapacitated in any way.
How nice that within 4 hours of the event, we've got speculation from Republicans that they could force Johnson out if he's incapacitated for any length of time.
In the interest of full disclosure, I'm a card-carrying liberal (the only one in South Dakota, I believe). I'm also realistic though...I know the situation wouldn't change a bit if it were a Republican Senator in a state with a Democratic Governor. Partisan politics on both sides of the aisle disgust me, and I certainly think there's equal levels of slime on both the Democratic and Republican sides.
As for Senator Johnson...this couldn't have happened to a nicer man. My wife, son, and I have met with him several times, as he's a strong proponent of stem-cell research. Stem cell research is the greatest hope of a cure for our son's juvenile diabetes, and in fact, just in the past few weeks, researchers have for the first time coaxed stem cells to transform into insulin-secreting pancreatic cells, a major breakthrough offering hope for Type-1 diabetics.
Senator Johnson has always been willing to meet with us and listen to our story. Without exception, he's greeted us warmly by name, asking us how things have been going, asking about Alexander's health. He's discussed our son's story on the Senate floor. He's been a wonderful representative for South Dakota, puts partisan politics aside if he strongly believes in something, and has purposely avoided the spotlight that many politicians love to focus on themselves.
In short, he's got his flaws as we all do, but for the most part, he's been what a politician SHOULD be.
In contrast, we've also met with our other Senator, John Thune. When we met with him for the first time regarding the stem cell bill that was passed by both houses last Fall, it was painfully, painfully obvious that he knew absolutely nothing about the contents of the bill. His first comment to us after we presented our story? A direct quote..."Well, I can't be expected to vote for that bill...I'm a Republican".
Sadly, that stance seems to be the stance of 90% of Washington politicians. Nothing on the merit of the bill, an obvious lack of knowledge on the CONTENTS of the bill...but quick to spout party line. Wouldn't it be nice if issues were decided on merit, rather than on party agendas? There are certainly issues that are part of the primary Democratic platform that I don't agree with, and get disgusted when "my own" party spouts party line and plows merrily ahead.
I wish Tim Johnson the best, and even if he can't continue his political career, I hope he recovers enough to enjoy a long and happy life. One of his last comments before the hemorrhage occurred? That he was looking forward to time with his family over Christmas.
Wouldn't it be nice if such things were more important than partisan politics?
Here endeth my rant.
Guy
It doesn't matter which side of the political aisle you are on in this situation. You are right as there is plenty of slime to go around but this fine senator's life is hanging by a thread and I am much more concerned about him and his family at this point than who controls the senate. My thoughts and prayers are for Senator Johnson and his family and for some sense of civility and respect within the politcal circles...especially during this critical time for your fine senator.
Dale Williams
It doesn't matter which side of the political aisle you are on in this situation. You are right as there is plenty of slime to go around but this fine senator's life is hanging by a thread and I am much more concerned about him and his family at this point than who controls the senate. My thoughts and prayers are for Senator Johnson and his family and for some sense of civility and respect within the politcal circles...especially during this critical time for your fine senator.
Dale Williams
One former lawmaker chastised the political playmakers in town for discussing such options so quickly after Johnson was hospitalized.
"This is a pretty mean town and let's just keep him in our prayers," said former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas. "This town is so eat up with power that everybody, you know, that's all they think about. You go to ask somebody for a cup of coffee, they question why you asked, there must be an ulterior motive to you asking.
"Senator Johnson is a really nice man from strong South Dakota stock so I am sure he'll be all right," DeLay added.
The White House also issued a statement wishing the senator a speedy recovery.
"The president and first lady have Senator Johnson and his family in their thoughts and prayers and they wish him a full and speedy recovery," said spokeswoman Dana Perino.
What planet did I wake up on this morning?
What planet did I wake up on this morning?
Guy
I find Fox News to be VERY reliable! No matter what issue that comes up, you pretty much know ahead of time what slant Fox will put on it!
They're consistent...what more could you ask for, right?
Fox is pretty good with sports coverage!! I must say cricket coverage is lacking here though!
I'm a huge baseball fan though, and given the similarity between the two, I could see myself getting into cricket!
Fox is no more biased than the rest,,,,,just becaue they are the only one that presents a conserv view, of the same news does not make them wrong,,,
WAKE UP PEOPLE!!,, they are ALL corrupt,,not one more than the other,,,it just so happens that on this round, a few repubs have been caught this time around,,,,,,,and given time,,,,the tables will rotate,,,Just wait and see...so many like to look at history repeats itself,, well it will,, all you will have to do is book mark this page, insert the opposite party name, and you will have the same discussion,,,,
Who do you think instigates this "scenarios" ITs the media,,, they dont report, they conject, set up stages for "discussion" and do there very best to polarize,, its good for there business,,,all of them,,, cnn, fox, whoever,,,, you are simply naive if you believe other wise,,,, they should simply "report news" what they do is stir the toilet, and let the fumes agitate,,, and the result is what you have now,,,24 hours of toilet agitation, not news reporting,,,
If you'd read the posts, you'd see that we're ALL saying exactly that...there's corruption and slime on both the Democratic and Republican posts.
However...I'm sorry, but there's simply no way you can state FOX News isn't biased. You yourself state they present a conservative view. I guess that's OK to folks on that side of the ledger, who are always complaining about that darn "liberal media bias".
Funny...I didn't see these same folks complaining about the "liberal media" who crucified Clinton for his personal affairs. No other media network pushes an agenda like FOX does, and it's pretty dang obvious to any objective person.
I suppose it's also that dang media that's to be damned for trying to report the truth about Iraq? You have to blame somebody I guess, other than the folks that are really at fault.
Thomas...Jim very wisely opened up this "hot topics" forum for things like this. Does a conversation such as this belong in the forums? Heck no, and I'm glad Jim cracks down on anyone trying to do so. But to completely ignore issues because there are strong feelings on both sides? That's the absolute worst thing to do.
I like hearing that at least one public official was on the ball and doing their job well. I'd be equally pleased if he was a Republican. I wish him well.
Paul
Since you did it, i disclose i have a biased conservative viewpoint,,,, on a lot of things, but like you, i hate the "follow the party line" mentality.. and disagree on some items,,frankly,, if someone ran on a platform of no new taxes, conservation improvement, strong immigration reform,, to name a few,,,, i wouldnt care if was a member of the micky mouse club,,,, thats where i would be leaning,,,so the party line has little to do with it,, i have my list of priority, ck the ones mean something to me,, add em up, and see who gets the nod..
so to conclude,, that one (fox) out of 6 networks that presents a conservative bias shouldnt really be a problem for anyone,, dont watch them, you have so many other choices,,,,,,,or do you really?
they are all guilty of stirring the scenerio pot on this one,,,
By the "other side", I presume you mean the actual facts?
Fairness Doctrine on CommonDreams
Fairness Doctrine on Wikipedia
Guy
"The FCC stopped enforcing the doctrine in the mid-’80s, well before it formally revoked it."
Hmmm...seems awfully familiar to the EPA's current lack of enforcement over clean air and water acts.
you have your opinion, i have mine,,,,and we all know about opinions !!
;-)
There are always individual cases you could cite for any news organization. Doesn't discount the credibility of the network as a whole.
Despite my cynacism regarding our political system, despite my disdain for the politics of BOTH Republican and Democrats...I just do not see that supposed liberal media bias that the right claims exists for networks like CNN, NPR, etc.
Watching Fox News is for me the equivalent of listening to Rush Limbaugh on radio. I watch or listen to either for about 2 minutes before either becoming outraged, or more commonly, before l simply just start laughing at the absolute ridiculousness that's being spouted.
One thing is for certain...if a network feels the need to come out and state 300 times a day that they're "fair and balanced", in truth, that's the last thing they are.
RE: Sen. Johnson - Honestly I haven't heard a single person (Republican or Democrat) say anything but supportive and caring things about Tim Johnson - the polictical drama seems to be 100% created by the news media (ALL news media - I'm sure in search of ratings).
RE: Fox News vs. the rest - Everyone sees what they want to see here. I definitely see a very liberal bias in the "mainstream" media, especially in newspapers. Katie Couric pratically peed in her pants over the Dems winning the elections. If she had an "analysis" show that would be fine, but not on a straight news program. The problem is that many people don't know the difference between straight news and analysis. News vs. news - I find Fox neither conservative nor liberal, but more straight reporting. Analysis (Bill O'Reilly, etc. can be biased, just as 60 minutes is biased)
No one is right 100% of the time - not liberals, not conservatives, not dems, not repubs. No one is liberal 100% of the time, nor conservative. I'm very conservative on some things and quite liberal on others. I suspect most people are the same. Maybe I'm a Republicrat or a Democan.
Take care my friend.
I live where folks vote Republican, and watch Fox News.
Where gays can’t get married, and women shouldn’t choose,
And morality is defined by conservative views.
Where invading Iraq was the right thing to do,
And people think Bush really has a clue.
But nobody realizes
How much we’ll all lose…
I do of course hope Johnson recovers. He's one of the people I'm depending on to continue to counter the "Micheal Moore" extreme wing of the party.
As for religion involved in politics, Hitler, Stalin, and Pol Pot showed us what a truly great country we could have when religious freedom is suppressed.
Kent in SD
What about Republican Rep. Virgil Goode's comments this week? He's criticizing Democratic Rep. Keith Ellison's choice to use the Koran to take his oath of office, instead of the Bible. How about the statement "If American citizens don't wake up and adopt the Virgil Goode position on immigration there will (GASP!!!) likely be many more Muslims elected to office and demanding the use of the Koran."
GOD FORBID!!! Or should I say "Allah Forbid"!!! A MUSLIM wanting to take an oath on the book outlining his faith, rather than on the Bible!!! How dare he!!
More from Virgil Goode..."I fear that in the next century we will have many more Muslims in the United States if we don't adopt..." Goode's idea on immigration policy.
Hey Virgil, how about we just boot out ANY person in the U.S. that's not a "Christian"? Better yet, let's just boot out everybody that's not a white Christian!!! Wait a minute...I forgot gays...boot them out too!!! That seems to be the message of one hell of a lot of the folks on the opposite end of the spectrum from these "wacko/hating" liberals.
I see one hell of a lot more hate directed from the "Christian Right" than I do from "wacko/hating" liberals. Does "religious freedom" only apply to Christians in this country?
People in the U.S. tend to look at Muslims as basing their faith on hate, all the while pretending to be holier-than-thou because of their Christian background. In the meantime, these same charlatans are actively spreading hatred of gays, supposedly godless liberals, and Muslims...basically anybody that's NOT a white Christian.
Laughable!!!
Got off on a tangent here, because I'd just read this crap that Goode came out with, but please give me a break with the "wacko/hating" kind of liberal. There are "wacko/hating" kinds from all points of the political spectrum.
Religion has NO place in the politics, period. What the radical components of the Christian Right are trying to inject into the U.S. political system is no different than what radical Muslims have tried to inject into some Middle East political systems. Both are based on hatred, intolerance, and rejection of anyone outside a narrowly-defined religious belief.
Religious freedom...you bet! However, ANY kind of iinvolvement of religion into politics is just asking for trouble.
And a much greater array of examples, from the Spanis Inquisition to Osama Bin Laden showed us what happens when religion and politics are one and the same.
Guy