Fox News Does Better Even Among Democrats


News Busters posted something that goes well with an old graph I post often… sort of like a “rub in your face fact” I like to put on the screen to irk passerbys. Here is the NB post followed by the graph:

According to a recent poll, likely voters get their political news primarily from cable television. Among cable channels, 42 percent, a plurality, watch Fox News for its political coverage. Only 12 percent said they watched MSNBC. What’s more, most likely voters don’t like or have never heard of MSNBC’s prime time talent.

The poll, conducted by Politico and George Washington University, used a sample split evenly between political parties – even slightly favoring Democrats in some areas: 41 percent of respondents identified as Republicans, while 42 percent said they were Democrats. Forty-four percent said they usually vote for Republicans, while 46 percent answered Democrats. Forty-eight percent voted for Obama, while only 45 percent voted for McCain.

Even among this group, Fox News is by far the most popular cable outlet. CNN comes in at second, with 30 percent. A sorry MSNBC brings up the rear.

MEDIAite goes further with the stats:

Also not surprising: Fox News hosts wield a great deal of influence over the political discourse in this country:

Bill O’Reilly was rated as having, by far, the greatest positive impact, with 49 percent of respondents rating him positively, and 32 percent negatively. Glenn Beck was the second most-positively rated personality, with 38 percent of respondents saying he had a positive impact, and 32 percent saying he had a negative impact.

Rush Limbaugh meanwhile is losing steam and far more people dislike him than like him (36%-52%). Here’s the surprising part however: Very few people polled had heard of Rachel Maddow.

MSNBC’s personalities were largely ranked as unknown by respondents: 70 percent said they had never heard of Ed Schultz, 55 percent said they had never heard of Rachel Maddow and 42 percent said they had never heard of Keith Olbermann…

…(read more)…

ABC-NBC-CBS Percentages Regarding Mosque at Ground-Zero

NewsBusters writes about the medias shift against their viewers:

By a wide margin — 66 percent to 29 percent, according to the most recent ABC News/ Washington Post poll — the public is opposed to building that proposed $100 million Islamic cultural center near the site of the destroyed World Trade Towers. This is not a lightly-held opinion: more than half (53%) told ABC news they are “strongly opposed” to building it near Ground Zero, vs. only 14 percent who report being “strongly” in favor.

[….]

Compare this sentiment to the medias:

Biased Media-Another Example

Here is a list of terms liberals apply to virtually every idea or action with which they differ:

  • Racist
  • Sexist
  • Homophobic
  • Islamophobic
  • Imperialist
  • Bigoted
  • Intolerant

And here is the list of one-word descriptions of what liberals are for:

  • Peace
  • Fairness
  • Tolerance
  • The poor
  • The disenfranchised
  • The environment

Read more: RPT Deck O’ Race Cars (PJTV), and Dennis Prager

BBC Comes Clean-Again

Media bias has been a point of accusation by conservatives of the media for many years now. I have at times proven this connection true, but it is always nice when “the accused” come out and admit it – again – as in the case of the BBC:

BBC Chief Admits ‘Massive’ Left-wing Bias, Vows to Remedy Imbalance

…BBC Director General Mark Thompson admitted to the UK Daily Mail in an article today that Britain’s state-run news outlet has had a “massive” left-wing bias. He insisted, though, that the network is taking steps to remedy the ideological slant.

BBC has a history of promoting the ultra-leftist agenda on most issues. But to see the channel’s top dog admit it in an interview with the Daily Mail was quite a sight.

[….]

The Daily Mail’s Paul Revoir reported today:

The TV chief also admitted there had been a ‘struggle’ to achieve impartiality and that staff were ‘ mystified’ by the early years of Margaret Thatcher’s government.

But he claimed there was now ‘much less overt tribalism’ among the current crop of young journalists, and said in recent times the corporation was a ‘broader church’.

He claimed there was now an ‘honourable tradition of journalists from the right’ working for the corporation.

His comments, made in the New Statesman magazine, are one of the clearest admissions of political bias from such a senior member of its staff.

The BBC has long been accused of being institutionally biased towards the Left, and an internal report from 2007 said it had to make greater efforts to avoid liberal bias.

Talk about honesty!

But while the BBC is looking into ways to remedy its “massive” slant to the left, swaths of the American news media have yet to even acknowledge that that slant exists.

…(read more)…


Percentages of Bias

Here the media really – truly shows its colors:

Obama, Democrats got 88 percent of 2008 contributions by TV network execs, writers, reporters

Senior executives, on-air personalities, producers, reporters, editors, writers and other self-identifying employees of ABC, CBS and NBC contributed more than $1 million to Democratic candidates and campaign committees in 2008, according to an analysis by The Examiner of data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics.

The Democratic total of $1,020,816 was given by 1,160 employees of the three major broadcast television networks, with an average contribution of $880.

By contrast, only 193 of the employees contributed to Republican candidates and campaign committees, for a total of $142,863. The average Republican contribution was $744.

[….]

The data on contributions by broadcast network employees was compiled by CRP at the request of The Examiner and included all 2008 contributions by individuals who identified their employer as one of the three networks or subsidiaries. The data does not include contributions by employees of the three networks who did not identify their employer.

The CRP is the organization behind OpenSecrets.org, the web site that for more than a decade has put campaign finance data within reach of anybody with an Internet connection.

President Obama received 710 such contributions worth a total of $461,898, for an average contribution of $651 from the network employees. Republican presidential nominee Sen. John McCain received only 39 contributions totaling $26,926, for an average donation of $709….

…(read more)…

Muslim Cabbie Stabbed by Leftie (Update: When Film Students Attack)

Here is Michelle Malkin’s recent post and appearance on Fox & Friends this morning:

Another day, another left-wing rush to Fox-bashing, right-wing demonizing judgment…

As you may have heard, a Muslim cabbie was stabbed in a terrible incident in NYC today.

The reportedly drunk perpetrator worked/volunteered for a liberal interfaith film company and there is zero evidence that he is a Fox News fan, Glenn Beck listener, Republican voter, or conservative blog reader.

No matter. The left-wing media couldn’t wait to indict the Right.

University of Michigan professor Juan Cole headlines his screed: Republican National Committee Slashes New York Muslim Cabbie.

The Village Voice asked hopefully before providing grudging updates: Was the Muslim Cab Driver Slashing the First “Ground Zero Mosque” Hate Crime?

[….]

They cannot help themselves. Wasn’t it just a few hours ago that I blogged about another act of Democrat vandalism falsely blamed on the the Tea Party? Why yes, yes it was.

From GOP fake hate crime hoaxer Ashley Todd to suicide census worker Bill Sparkman, there remains an unrestrained impulse among too many to falsely scream political violence when it doesn’t exist — and to ignore it where it does exist. There also remains a stubborn double standard and refusal on the Left to acknowledge when its side fakes the hate.

But like I said just a few hours ago and like I’ll certainly have to say again and again and again in the future: Being a Tea Party-bashing liberal means never having to say you’re sorry for smearing conservative dissent.

…(read more)…

 

 

 


Discussing Mosques and Men

Here is a response to a conversation elsewhere. I originally was going to post this in multiple pieces on FaceBook, but it would have been too many posts. I post it here only because my comments section here at RPT and my response here are not limited to certain amounts of spaces or words. Enjoy, although as usual, I am long-winded. I should be a professor!

Sean, no one was lost at the Burlington Coat Factory (where the COMMUNITY CENTER, not “mosque” will be based). If we are to follow your logic, I guess no Catholic churches should be located within a few blocks of daycare centers, no? Anyway, I am a New Yorker and I also realize polls can be made to indicate almost anything. Most of the people I know think it is more important to hold up sacred tenants of our constitution than to cave in to very misguided xenophobia. There have been a LOT of people bussed in to protest and the anti-Islamic rhetoric is very damaging.

ttp://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2010/08/25/cab_stabbing_update/index.html

Thanks Nora for hopping into this conversation. This can be an emotional topic, so know that even though I cannot see your facial expressions, hear concern, humor, or consternation in your tone — I afford you the best of intentions. I do wish to, however, point out some mistakes in your thinking. I may take a post or two to do so as I respect where you are coming from… so bear with me. FIRST POINT, there will be a mosque in the community center. In fact, it will be the top two floors and be tall enough to view the site of the Twin-Towers. That’s number one.

NUMBER TWO, I wish to discuss this issue of molestation by priests that you intimated about.

School counselors, dentists, Buddhist monks, foster parents, and the like — all have abused children. Men who are pedophiles look for positions of AUTHORITY OVER [*not yelling, emphasizing*] children that afford MOMENTS OF PRIVACY with these same children. Dentists do not violate children or women in the name of dentistry. Buddhists monks do not sodomize children in the name of Siddhartha. School counselors in the name of psychology, foster parents in the name of Dr. Spock, etc, … you get the point.  Likewise, priests do not violate children in the name of Christ. (The many terrorist attacks are in the name of something… can you tell me what Nora?)


Thousands of Deadly Islamic Terror Attacks Since 9/11

So I hope you can see that mentioning churches next to schools is a non-sequitur, I think we can agree that any church moving priests (Catholicism) or pastors (Protestantism) from one parish or church to another is a problem that has to be dealt with. Just like teachers who have the same issues levied towards them are moved from district-to-district (N.E.A.).

b) [Stats] here is a portion of a post on my site (http://religiopoliticaltalk.com/ – CNN):

  • When asked if they“support or oppose the proposal to build the Cordoba House,” New Yorkers said they oppose the facility, which is expected to cost $100 million, by a 63-27 percent margin. At the same time, by a 64-to-28 percent margin, New Yorkers say Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf has the constitutional right to build it. A majority of every demographic group – by party, region, age, gender, political philosophy – agrees that there is a Constitutional right to proceed,” said Siena College pollster Steven Greenberg. “Even a majority of those who oppose building the mosque agree by a margin of 51-42 percent that they have the right to build it.”

These polls hit to what I and almost all conservatives have said, “yes they can build their Constitutionally, however, they should — if truly wanting to build bridges — build a bit further away.” Not a building where they found pieces of bodies from the plane and Tower of that first strike, as well as pieces of the plane. But the people of New York are making their choice… and if the elite in N.Y. continue on the road they are, in November many of these Democrats will be out. As is it looks as if we may take back the Senate AND House. So, keep it up Dems.

Time Editor Interviewed About America’s “Islamophobia” from Papa Giorgio on Vimeo.

c) Xenophobia has nothing to do with this argument. Everyone I know of (Sean Hannity, Michelle Malkin, Rush Limbaugh, [insert name here]) is making the same argument almost all moderate Muslims are making. To wit I would hope you look into this phenomenon, that is Muslims that stand against this mosque (Even More Muslims Come Out Against This Mosque). I included some links in that post to previous posts highlighting Muslims speaking out against this Mosques location. They are well worth reading/listening to. Obviously these religious Muslims are not xenophobic. It is similar to the stories I heard thrown in my face about heterosexual crimes (homophobia) committed against gays. However, what is often overlooked (like all the news stories of dentists, school counselors, Buddhists monks, etc — it is in the medias blood to highlight the Catholic version of these crimes) is that there are crimes committed by homosexuals towards heterosexuals as well. see for instance this story I posted quite some time ago:

These stories have no bearing on the morality (morally right or wrong) of racism, Homophobia, Heterophobia, Islamophobia, or xenophobia. So posting a story about a Muslim being stabbed would be like me showing the many stories of successful and attempted honor killings of women in the name of Islam, in America. The underwear bomber, the Fort Hood shooter, the family that converted to Islam and was stockpiling 27,000 thousand rounds of ammunition to commit Jihad. However, all those have no bearing on our particular dilemma [sorta]. Posting a stabbing also shows that this mosque is not building bridges, like moderate Muslims say it isn’t. (In other words, you would be proving my position.)

UPDATE (another video added):

This story has changed and I wanted to make sure people coming to this post are aware of it. I will post the video here as well as the insight as I posted it elsewhere:

Very quickly, I just posted on this Cabbie incident. He was stabbed by a leftist [that backfired a bit, both by whom did the stabbing AND that this mosque is not building bridges but causing film students to attack]:

http://religiopoliticaltalk.com/2010/08/muslim-cabbie-stabbed-by-leftie/

 

d) I wanted to deal with a few outlying issues here that are not necessarily geared towards you Nora.

i. More and more info has come out about this Imam even since the last time I said “more and more information has come out about this Imam.” (See for instance: Fact and Common Sense vs. Bad History and Analogies) So knowing what is plainly laid out in this and other places, what is the reason they want this place when they have been offered tax breaks, discounts, and offers of other properties close by. According to Muslims who have come out against this property it is to look (literally) at the spot that these Twin Towers were attacked and brought down. That is fellow Muslims words, not mine.

ii. Many people do not ask themselves this simple question about the founding of religions. “What were the founders of the major religions like.” Asking questions about the nature of these religions and their founder is not racist, xenophobic, etc. So let’s do this. Here is a favorite quote of mine:

The nine founders among the eleven living religions in the world had characters which attracted many devoted followers during their own lifetime, and still larger numbers during the centuries of subsequent history. They were humble in certain respects, yet they were also confident of a great re­ligious mission. Two of the nine, Mahavira and Buddha, were men so strongminded and self-reliant that, according to the records, they displayed no need of any divine help, though they both taught the inexorable cosmic law of Karma. They are not reported as having possessed any consciousness of a supreme personal deity. Yet they have been strangely deified by their followers. Indeed, they themselves have been wor­shipped, even with multitudinous idols.

All of the nine founders of religion, with the exception of Jesus Christ, are reported in their respective sacred scriptures as having passed through a preliminary period of uncertainty, or of searching for religious light. Confucius, late in life, confessed his own sense of shortcomings and his desire for further improvement in knowledge and character. All the founders of the non-Christian religions evinced inconsistencies in their personal character; some of them altered their prac­tical policies under change of circumstances.

Jesus Christ alone is reported as having had a consistent God consciousness, a consistent character himself, and a con­sistent program for his religion. The most remarkable and valuable aspect of the personality of Jesus Christ is the com­prehensiveness and universal availability of his character, as well as its own loftiness, consistency, and sinlessness.

Robert Hume, The World’s Living Religions (New York, NY: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1959), 285-286.

So this is where I like to ask persons if they would want followers of Christ to be more Christ like and followers of Muhammad to be more Muhammad like? When Peter cut the Roman soldiers ear off, Jesus healed it. Muhammad order the cutting of and personally engaged in the slitting of [700-to-900] men, women, and children’s throats. Jesus broke Jewish tradition by allowing children into the inner circles to exemplify them in regards to faith. Muhammad married a six-year old and consummated the marriage when she was nine. Did you need more examples?

iii. Comparison of Scripture. Some quick facts. Scripture in Islamic tradition is prescriptive. In the Biblical sense it is descriptive. This simple comparison goes a long way to explain why most of the terrorists in the world today are Islamic. Another explanation for this phenomenon is that in the Islamic fundamentalist tradition, verses in their Scripture. I guess the best way to exemplify this is with this final posting in a debate where a Muslim was trying to explain his faith to others. However, I showed him I had an in-depth understanding of his view of his scripture. Here is my response which is cataloged at my site Discussing God:

Kursat,

You see, unlike the Bible, the Qu’ran abrogates its “verses” and depending on what time period they were written (and depending on if the Muslim community was weaker than it was later), these later verses take over in importance (replaced with something “better”) in application for the Muslim.

So, Kursat, is this Sura Meccan? More specifically, is it the fifth and sixth years of the Prophet’s Mission? There is even a period after this in Mecca. After this period was Medina, right?

For those who are not aware of this abrogation (stated in the Qu’ran) and are use to thinking of Scriptures in a “Western” manner, this Sura you gave sounds great. But if one understands the full implications of 2:106 and 16:101. Then this changes the ballgame a bit, doesn’t it Kursat?

Obviously Kursat didn’t return because he was not a moderate Muslim. Moderates look at the Qur’an as descriptive and they reject the idea that these verses in the Qur’an are placed in any chronological importance. THUS, the later verses about Jihad in Islamic fundamentalism DO NOT trump the one’s about peace. It is these types of moderates that are sounding the alarm over this Imam and placement of the mosque. It are these Muslims we should be supporting.