Conservative media often permits no dissent
Why is it that Conservative news media are afraid to let dissenting opinions be heard? Here are examples of what I am talking about. Rush Limbaugh's radio program uses a 3-minute delay so that they can, in effect, turn what is billed as a live show into a stage-managed Limbaugh rump-kissing phantasmagoria. If an intelligent voice of dissent does get through the screeners they just dump the call and then build their delay back up at the next break. Of course, every once in a while a dissenter gets through but it is always someone so limited in their verbal abilities that Limbaugh makes them look stupid. That is because they have been hand-picked victims to feed to Limbaugh.
I have also noticed that some Conservative Blogs NEVER have dissenting commentary to their posts. That must be because they do not permit direct posting but, rather, review posts prior to allowing them to be posted. I have registered on several openly Conservative blogs and "so-called" internet-only news sites and have tried to post dissent to no avail. What are they afraid of? If they are right, why do they not have the true courage of their convictions to allow dissent?
I am proud that this blog, though openly pro-Sestak (for increasingly valid reasons since its inception), there are numerous posts of comments that are openly pro-Weldon. Truth is never afraid of words, no matter how inflammatory.
I have also noticed that some Conservative Blogs NEVER have dissenting commentary to their posts. That must be because they do not permit direct posting but, rather, review posts prior to allowing them to be posted. I have registered on several openly Conservative blogs and "so-called" internet-only news sites and have tried to post dissent to no avail. What are they afraid of? If they are right, why do they not have the true courage of their convictions to allow dissent?
I am proud that this blog, though openly pro-Sestak (for increasingly valid reasons since its inception), there are numerous posts of comments that are openly pro-Weldon. Truth is never afraid of words, no matter how inflammatory.
posted by Ruth Lespho at 8:58 AM
21 Comments:
The vast majority of them block and censor trackbacks so you NEVER see a dissenting view, and the rest don't allow comments. Those that do "ban" dissenters with impunity.
Personally, I think anonymous comments are the WORST. THING. EVER. I would love to find out that all the anonymous GOP/Weldon sockpuppets were either coming from say Denver, DC, or Texas, or perhaps some of his various clients of the Weldon cartel. You should turn off anonymous commenting, and enable IP logging.
As someone who has commented here anonymously (as a Sestak supporter) since pretty much Day 1, let me explain in one word why:
Laziness.
I simply don't/can't/won't take the time to open an account here and log in each time I feel like adding something to the discussion.
Since there is an easy option to simply write at the moment, make my comment and leave, that's what I do. If that option wasn't available, I'd probably sign up and post via a login...or perhaps I'd just read and keep my keyboard out of it. But, for example, I also post at DailyKos under a login and I do it because there is no alternative.
For me, it has nothing to do with anonymity, since you can be pretty safely anonymous either way. It's just a matter of ease of use.
I think the anonymous commenting has invited a lot of troll-ish behavior, but that same behavior has given the editors a lot of ammo.
1) Anonymous Sestak supporter, even if you are too lazy to sign up, you can just sign your name at the end of your post.
2) As for the trolls... I eat those losers for breakfast. Burp!
By the same token I was trying to post an anti-Sestak comment on YouTube twice (!) and it would not register. So if you live in a glass house - do not throw stones.
If you're looking to pick up some fights on conservative blogs, go to www.freerepublic.com.
I've been banned from freeperville.
Repeatedly.
Here is the ultimate test for the liberal media.
If by the end of this week all major blue outlets do not have GIs response to Kerry on their cover page, I officially refuse to discuss this topic anymore.
http://www.nypost.com/seven/11022006/news/nationalnews/gis_drop_smart_bomb_on_kerry_nationalnews_todd_venezia_in_n_y____and_ian_bishop_in_washington.htm
Um, Kerry apologized for his in-poor-taste joke.
End of discussion.
Enlighten me! What was this joke about? There was no joke. He said what he said.
Sadly, his apology was not much better ... "I sincerely regret that my words were misinterpreted... "
Even kids understand that "I'm sorry you're so dumb you didn't get my joke" is not an apology.
End of story.
The Republicans have nothing to run on now. They've realized, too late, their "smear and fear" campaign for 2006 has failed. Six years of GOP control in Washington has failed. So now, in an eleventh-hour desperate move, they're trying to make this election about John Kerry, who isn't even running. They're desperately trying to Swift Boat the race again. But, as Barnum said, you can't fool all the people all the time. This election is not about John Kerry. It's about the failure of the Republicans in the past six years. Here at home in the Seventh District, it's about the failed leadership of Corrupt Curt Weldon. America is awake now to the failed Republican agenda. They won't be fooled again. End of story.
Let the repugnants waste their time on this. The more they talk about this, the less time they are spending talking to the public about their vision for the future (that's right--they have none). Anyway, we all know that Kerry meant that George Bush, Cheyney and rummt did not do their homework and because of their failure, we are stuck in Iraq wiht no way out. Notice that the repugnants know the people want a way out, but they still offer none, except to leave us at the mercy of the insurgents in Iraq. What happened to welcomed by the Iraq people as heroes? that was years ago when Saddam's statue fell. Since that time, we are seena s an occupying force. I just feel sorry for our boys and girls that the repugnants got tuck there by the repugnants lack of judgment and a plan. I have only heard the Democrats even offer a plan to turn the country over.
Whynotus,whats the Democratic plan for turning over Iraq?
The plan:
Step 1) Replace Rumsfeld with competent person.
Step 2) Get the REAL opinion of the commanders, not the opinions they are being ordered to give. Find out what troop levels they REALLY need.
Step 3) Get a hold of the REAL assessment of the Iraq situation from the analysts (not a doctored version by White House political staff).
Step 4) Get back all the wasted fraud money from Bush/Cheney contractors.
Step 5) Give our allies a bigger role by giving them a bigger say so efforts are truly multi-national. This reduces the anti-American fuel on the fire.
Step 6) Train Iraqi security forces outside the country, using our allies.
Step 7) Swap out our fatigued National Guard troops to Europe and swap in career military Army.
Step 8) Make strong/clear anti-torture laws that support and re-affirm our commitment to Geneva Convention.
These steps will reduce the problems in Iraq to a more manageable/stable level where real diplomats can do their jobs. The current Bush attitude treats any disagreement as "my-way or the highway".
To the person who cited a problem with YouTube: You name one not openly liberal site on which you could not post. I can name 50 liberal/left-leaning/Democrat sites where you can, like this one. I can name 30 right-leaning/conservative/Republican where you can't.
To the other poster who says that liberal media have to present GIs response to Kerry comment to have any credibility, please listen to Rush Hannity O'Reilly and tell me what kind of balance you see or hear there. Get real, please before your brain implodes from the pressure shrinking it.
BTW, you know that there's a blackout for the deployed military too? The only can get vetted and approved information, from trusted sources, like Rush, Drudge, or FreeRepublic. Any websites that haven't signed the loyalty pledge are blocked.
Let's not pretend that both sides are equal, ok.
To get things back to local -- I know it pains you folks to leave the comfort of your national DNC talking points -- if you read the local papers with an honest eye, you cannot dispute the pervasive and liberal media bias. Take the FBI investigation of Weldon. Whether you support him, as I do, or hate him, as most of you do, you cannot deny that there is a reason that the papers -- day after day -- ran articles on the investigation. What may have been a story when it first broke -- nothing has developed since then --yet the papers continue to run articles about it in an effort to keep it alive. Even when there is nothing "new" to report. That is bias. Plain and simple. How about the fact that the Delco Times runs negative article after negative article (except Gil Spencer) about Weldon and has not once criticized Sestak? Can't you see the hypocrisy. It is right before your eyes.
They ran articles because it was news in an exciting race (and that Weldon's a big holier-than-thou hypocrit). It sells papers. (I thought you GOP guys liked capitalism.)
There is ongoing investigation of years of corruption. Some of the connections come out in drips. A dripping faucet will eventually overflow a bucket.
There was plenty of right-wing media bias when the reporters fell for the false patriotism of refusing to question questionable decisions in the run up to the war.
Speaking of talking points... RNC talking points, that is...
This is classic RNC spin: try to get everyone's eye off the real issue and blame some liberal bogeyman.
The real issue is Weldon's potential corruption and investigation by the FBI and Justice Department.
That is the ONLY ISSUE. Discussion of the media is irrelevant. The media isn't a candidate in this campaign.
If the GOP doesn't like media coverage of corruption investigations, then it shouldn't field corrupt candidates.
No one but Weldon can be blamed for this corruption investigation. He didn't have to cozy up to Serbian warlords and Russian hoodlums. No one forced him to do that. He made that decision.
Now he has to live with the consequences of his actions.
It's not The Inquirer's fault or John Kerry's fault or Michael J. Fox's fault.
It's Curt Weldon's fault. His and his alone.
Not Fooled Again -- By the tone and words of your message, you would think that Curt Weldon has already been tried and convicted of a crime. Does "innocent until proven guilty" mean anything to you or do only Democrats get the benefit of the doubt until there is a reason to doubt? See, e.g., William Jefferson (D-La.)
You really don't know what you are talking about - take it from someone who does. Phil Heron, Bill Bender and the rest of the libs at the Daily Times are not the second coming of Woodward and Bernstein. For a change, how about waiting for the facts - and by facts I mean the truth. Not your own assessment of rank speculation or attempt to cobble together any "fact" you can dig up to make a "story".
Does "innocent until proven guilty" mean anything to you
Not in the voting booth. If someone looks and acts like a crook -- as Weldon does -- then he should be voted out of office. The same holds true for Jefferson. Send 'em both packing.
Precisely! Due process in the legal system is something that every American deserves. I believe in that more profoundly than Mr. Weldon does.
But then, I felt that the relationship between Weldon and the lobbying operations of his daughter and his real estate agent friend didn't pass the simple ethical "sniff" test long before I knew the FBI was on the trail.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home