Tuesday, November 07, 2006

Kudos to CNN



I always tune in to the “opposition” networks, the major liberal media outlets ABC, CBS, NBC, PBS, CNN, MSNBC and the BBC. I do this to open my mind to the other side, to learn whatever I can that they have to teach, and glean whatever truth they may have in their biased presentations. Most of the time I cringe while I’m listening, as I hear another slanted story, another bash of Bush, their describing the war in Iraq as a “travesty,” their questioning the great economy, and so on. Their idea of “balanced” is to describe, constantly, what the Republicans are doing to get elected again, instead of talking about the issues. The ratio of guests is about 3 liberals to 1 conservative. They avoid talking about the things that are important to the nation, and instead harp on Democratic anxieties and fears.

You can always tell if you’re listening to a liberal station, or a truth station, by the content of the show. If the show is emphasizing voter fraud, it’s a liberal show. If they’re preaching “Broken Government,” it’s a liberal show. If the emphasis is on war casualties, how bad the war in Iraq is going, the national debt, voter dissatisfaction, the desire of the electorate for change, Republican corruption and so on, it’s a liberal show.

The truth stations are FOX, and, well, that’s all, and a handful of shows on the other stations, like The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer, Scarborough Country, and a few others with at least an attempt at balance, like This Week with George Stephanopoulos, and The Mclaughlin Report.

You know you’re listening to a truth station because they talk about the issues that are most on the mind of voters. They actually discuss terrorism, taxes, globalization, and the economy. They report corruption, but they don’t see it as a partisan issue. They investigate things like voter fraud, but without the hysteria. They talk about what’s going wrong in Iraq, but they seek solutions instead of just blame. They usually give equal time to liberals and conservatives.

Last night I was pleasantly surprised. I watched CNN’s election coverage, and it was a presentation of truth, for a change.

click to show/hide the rest of the post


The guests were, on the left, James Carville and Larry King, truth meister David Gergen, and all-around-nice-guy conservative J.C. Watts.

Kudos to CNN. Everybody on the panel actually spoke truth. For example, when asked why Democrats were complaining so much about voter fraud, Democrat Carville answered (paraphrase), “It’s because we’ve lost so many elections recently. The party that loses the elections is the one to complain,” he said, and laughed. How refreshing. The whole show was like this. Everyone was respectful and got along well. There was no bashing. They discussed the election possibilities without rancor and without slant.

One of the reasons for the quality of this show was the mix. For a change, it wasn’t heavily overbalanced with liberals. Plus, adding J.C. Watts brought dignity, and including David Gergen brought credibility. I could watch and enjoy shows like this all day long. I don’t mind if this type of show would present something critical of the government, or critical of conservatives. The presentation would be balanced. I could hear the message.

Message to CNN. This show was a winner. Use it as a model. I don’t mind if you lean left. I admit FOX leans right. Just throw a bone to the right once in awhile, and toss in a little truth from time to time, and I’ll be happy. I guarantee your ratings will go up too.

Rock


(*Wikipedia is always my source unless indicated.)

Subscribe to my feed
                                          

Join me in the war on error, in the fight for truth, justice, and the American way! Support this site! Wanna swap links? It’ll help us both. Truth—The No Spin Politically Incorrect Zone


click to hide most of this post



10 comments:

Phil said...

Black and white politics? must be pretty predictable. Its either going to be a republican or democrat. Either one is going to be behind the news you watch, sometimes even both (Rupert Murdoch hosted both hillary clinton and John McCains fundraisers). If this is the case arent you happy knowing that you may have lost this election but next time you will win it (maybe) and then lose it? Its all cyclical so surely theres no need to get to upset? taxes go up and down, American soldiers have died overseas for a hundred years or more, and corruption is as old as the hills (everywhere). nothing much changes.

What are your thoughts Mr Rock?

Cheers

SGT DUB said...

First, may I say of course, J.C. Watts is from Oklahoma, a good conservative, and I met him once at a FCA breakfast when he was the quarterback for OU. I believe if he wants, he will have an even brighter future in politics. Of course, i mentioned james Carville on my blog the other day and even though I don't agree with a lot of what he says, I have much respect for his intelligence and ability to pitch his side. What I think I did notice about the show, what little I got to watch while over here, was that the "score board" was geared towards how many seats the Democrats needed to take victory. But with AFN changing the coverage up every 30 minutes, I can't say if it was CNN or FOX. Well, like you said, Republicans only have themselves to blame, and for at least 2 years, we will give the Democrats the "chance to fix things" However, I feel it'll take at least 1 year for them to stop gloating.

paz y amor said...

You know it's funny. I'm quietly happy that Repubs got the boot because I've been VERY unhappy with the way the Repubs have run the country, but it really doesn't matter. Both parties are mostly crusty old rich White guys who work for the same people (other crusty rich white guys) and considering that most of the funding for the election came from corporations, it's unlikely anything will change. But I can hope...

paz y amor said...

One other thing: I noticed that the tone of coverage on CNN seemed upbeat and excited while the coverage on Fox"news" seemed gloomy and dull almost as if they were reporting that someone died. I kept flipping back and forth, but I couldn't stay on Fox, it was almost depressing...

Rock said...

Phil, thanks for your comments. You are the kind of bright, philosophical person I love to meet. You said:

Black and white politics? must be pretty predictable. Its either going to be a republican or democrat. Either one is going to be behind the news you watch, sometimes even both (Rupert Murdoch hosted both hillary clinton and John McCains fundraisers).

Murdoch I guess is playing it like many industrialists, who donate to both parties, or--if we are generous--he actually likes Hillary and McCain. CNN plays with conservatism sometimes, I believe, because it gets them higher ratings. If the "cycle" in the public turns conservative, the media will follow, and vice versa.

Its all cyclical so surely theres no need to get to upset? taxes go up and down, American soldiers have died overseas for a hundred years or more, and corruption is as old as the hills (everywhere). nothing much changes.

You may be right, but I believe there are also events and megatrends that are not cyclical. For example, nuclear proliferation will lead to something happening in the future that is unlike anything we've ever experienced. Either the Earth will band together to control this thing, or we will have a nuclear catastrophe. That will not be a cyclical event. It will be cataclysmic, on the order of a comet hitting the earth.

I like your philosophical stoicism, and I believe you're mostly right. On the other hand, again, sometimes things really do change, forever.

America, for example, has always swung back and forth between liberalism and conservatism, but the center might move at any time. America might become another Norway, if the center of the pendulum creeps or lurches left. This can happen with unfettered immigration like we have now, and no way to assimilate so many people who have values from other perspectives.

Then, we will become a socialist nation, with swings between conservative and liberal socialism, instead of swings between conservative and liberal capitalism. There will still be cycles, but with a different center.

Wars, too, are always worth getting upset about. The Civil War, perhaps, was our most devastating war, but each war is costly, in lives and treasure.

Yes, I agree, war is cyclical. I hold out hope, though, that we can intervene somehow in this cycle. God gave us an impossible conundrum. Sometimes we must kill in order to survive. Yet, we must avoid killing if we can. How we handle this issue is decisive for our survival, and our morality.

Radical Islam has riled a peace-loving America. For there to be a Pax-Americana, if there ever will be, we must defeat the terrorists in war. We are in the war part of civilization's cycle.

I lived in Israel for ten years, from 1978 to 1988, during a peace cycle. Peace cycles are better.

Rock said...

Sgt Dub, nice to hear from you again. You said:

First, may I say of course, J.C. Watts is from Oklahoma, a good conservative, and I met him once at a FCA breakfast when he was the quarterback for OU. I believe if he wants, he will have an even brighter future in politics.

I love the guy. He can engage those on the left and right, and he is fair and a seeker of truth, right up my alley.

Of course, i mentioned james Carville on my blog the other day and even though I don't agree with a lot of what he says, I have much respect for his intelligence and ability to pitch his side

I agree, plus--he married a Republican. Can't get much smarter than that.

What I think I did notice about the show, what little I got to watch while over here, was that the "score board" was geared towards how many seats the Democrats needed to take victory.

I didn't catch this, but this just shows that they can't help themselves entirely. They are liberal to the bone, but at least they were trying to be balanced on this particular show.

Well, like you said, Republicans only have themselves to blame, and for at least 2 years, we will give the Democrats the "chance to fix things" However, I feel it'll take at least 1 year for them to stop gloating.

Yeah, probably. My liberal friends were insisting even up until yesterday that they didn't have a chance to win, because of voter fraud. I guess they won't be using that mantra for awhile. Now if we can just expose their other mantras for the world to see.

I wish them well. I do know that some people, and even parties, grow into power with dignity. Some scoundrels become great human beings, and vice versa. The great Ulysees Grant became a lousy president. The unassuming haberdasher Harry Truman became a lion. Can the demagogic left transform into decent human beings? We'll see. I'll give them a chance.

Thanks again, Sgt Dub, and God be with you.

Phil said...

Thanks for the insight into the media and cycles. There is no universal rhyme or reason to pilitics, and not being american makes your system particulary hard to comprehend.

However I fail to understand about your concern for a shift from capitalism to socialism. From an outsiders point of view that would seem extremely unlikey. Your not a socialist country and the democrats in two houses arnt going to make it socialist. I mean it will certainly 'appear' that you are becoming more socialist since voter turn out rates in the under 30's were highest for 20 years. And we all know that the youth rebel from their praents view (conservative). But this isnt a swing towards socialism, this is a swing towards democracy (which America seems to like and bring too people overseas). Now nobody could argue that having a high voter turn out rate is a bad thing could they? In fact Americas voter turn out rate is one of the worst in the world. So therefore, the higher the voter turn out rate, the more realistic the representation in your two houses.

So as I was saying before it may appear to be a 'left' turn but its democratic capitalism at its best, and it should be the way America should present itself to the world (voter turn out rate) before America go invading more countries with the promise of bringing democracy.

Just some thoughts, yes I am trying to stoke debate, but in no way am I trying to provoke an arguement. I find debate the best way for me to learn to articulate my thoughts and bring them more cohesively to others.

Cheers

Rock said...

Hi paz. You said:

I'm quietly happy that Repubs got the boot because I've been VERY unhappy with the way the Repubs have run the country, but it really doesn't matter.

Actually, I’m happy they got the boot, too, but for different reasons. They were corrupt, and they did not listen to their base. They weren’t true conservatives.

Both parties are mostly crusty old rich White guys who work for the same people (other crusty rich white guys)

Au contraire, the Republicans have many African-American and Hispanic leaders now, paz, and I continue to be surprised that people don’t notice this. The new Speaker of the House is a woman. The next President might be a woman. Things are not the same as always, not by a long stretch. Continuing demographic changes will ensure, also, that these changes continue. It is inevitable.

and considering that most of the funding for the election came from corporations, it's unlikely anything will change. But I can hope..

When you get kicked out of office, paz, that grabs your attention, no matter where your funding comes from. The Republicans have been chastised, and the Democrats are put on notice. There will be changes, but whether they will be in the “right” directions or not, we’ll see. We can always vote the bums out again, and again, and again. I do give the American people credit for some kind of wisdom in doing this, despite corporations and gerrymandering.

Rock said...

Phil, nice to hear from you again. You said:

However I fail to understand about your concern for a shift from capitalism to socialism. From an outsiders point of view that would seem extremely unlikely. Your not a socialist country and the democrats in two houses aren't going to make it socialist. I mean it will certainly 'appear' that you are becoming more socialist since voter turn out rates in the under 30's were highest for 20 years. And we all know that the youth rebel from their parents view (conservative). But this isn’t a swing towards socialism, this is a swing towards democracy (which America seems to like and bring too people overseas). Now nobody could argue that having a high voter turn out rate is a bad thing could they?

We’ll know if you’re right in the next 10 years. Hillary Clinton, one possible president, has already introduced a socialist health care system to congress, when her husband was president. Now, she might have enough support to pass it. We’ll see. I think we are in danger of going socialist, and I just don’t see that this will benefit the people it’s intended to help. I remember my English former girlfriend having to wait for over a year for proper treatment of her broken arm in England.

In fact Americas voter turn out rate is one of the worst in the world.

I know I’m a minority in my beliefs on this, but I feel that not voting is also a vote. It means “I vote for none-of-the-above,” which I believe is valid. It means, for example, “Neither candidate you presented represents my ideas.” People stay at home and don’t vote also when they are satisfied with the status quo. If they feel passionately about something, like about getting out of Iraq, they will take the time to go and vote. If things are okay, they stay home. Another reason they stay home is if they feel things are hopeless. They see no way out of problems—like the war on terror, for example.

Iraqis voted in much higher numbers than we do, because they were passionate about wanting a country and peace. Cubans vote near 100%, and Venezuelans, because they’re forced to—or at least forced by social pressure. In America, if they reinstituted the military draft, you’d see young people lining up in droves to vote—against the people that brought the draft.

Thanks for your comments.

Rock

Rock said...

paz, hello again. You said:

One other thing: I noticed that the tone of coverage on CNN seemed upbeat and excited while the coverage on Fox"news" seemed gloomy and dull almost as if they were reporting that someone died. I kept flipping back and forth, but I couldn't stay on Fox, it was almost depressing...

I admit that FOX is biased to the right. I think that's not just okay, but it's about time, since all the other networks are leftist.

Thanks.