Media Bias and the ERA
There is no shortage of biased reporting in today's media, but once in a while what you know happened is so different from what some reporter puts in a newspaper that you just have to make note of it. I really sense a divide in this country between people who only get their information from newspapers and those who hear the conservative side of things through blogs or whatever. There is a gap of knowledge and perception of reality that is vast and growing. It is getting to where the two groups of Americans are having a hard time talking to each other because they are coming from such different places.
Jon Lyon's story, and I do mean STORY, not article, about the defeat of the ERA amendment is a case in point.
(continued, click THURDSAY and scroll down for rest of article)
posted by Mark Moore (Moderator) at Thursday, February 08, 2007
12 Comments:
Lyon gave one real opponent of the bill, the great Phyliss Shafley, ONE SENTENCE in the artice. The rest of the quotes in the entire article were from people who supported the bill.
Gee, the bill failed to pass, that is a lot of quotes to give the losing team. Even the one quote from a legislator who voted against the bill was pro-ERA. He quoted a guy (Alan Maxwell) who basically said he only voted it down because his constituients wanted him too, not because he believed the objectors. There there was another quote or two that made the objectors sound like shrill alarmists.
That's not reporting. It's fishwrap. All reports indicated Phyliss Schafley and company destroyed Pryor's arguments in that hearing. The arguments against the bill were not bogus, they were dead-on accurate. That's how a bill which started with 66 co-sponsors and the support of every state-wide Executive branch offical fails to get out of committee.
In a world populated by actual reporters, that would have been the story- how a bill with that much momentum gets stopped. Lyon's story- once again, it is a story, not a report or article- makes it seem like the only reason it lost was because of groundless speculation. Folks, mere speculation can't stop a runaway frieght train, and that is what this thing was until Debbie Pelley, Eagle Forum, and company stopped it.
I have had a legislator tell me that many legislators felt like they were mislead into supporting this thing. There is some anger over it too. They thought they were only voting for a statement of support for women, not trying to amend the constitution. That was confirmed by a non-legislator source who should know.
No mention that at least five states have rescinded their orginial decision to ratify the amendment once they figured out what activist judges would do with it. No mention that 26 state's made mention of the time limit in their ratifications. The article only says "Congress could vote to extend the deadline again retroactively". Snort! Retroactively extending a deadline? Better look that word up, I don't think it means what he thinks it means.
Blog readers, you can help defend liberty and truth, and help us win the war on ignorance and disinformation. Find someone who is getting their information from a newspaper and introduce them to blogs.
Kudos to Pat Briney and this very well prepared piece of literature:
http://ar.gopwing.com/eraposition.html
Mark,
I fixed your story for you, there seemed to be some problems in the spelling:
There is no shortage of biased reporting in today's media, but once in a while what you know happened is so different from what some reporter puts in a newspaper that you just have to make note of it. I really sense a divide in this country between people who only get their information from newspapers, television, infotainment(Hannity, Rush, etc.) and those who hear the liberal side of things through blogs or whatever. There is a gap of knowledge and perception of reality that is vast and growing. It is getting to where the two groups of Americans are having a hard time talking to each other because they are coming from such different places.
There, that is much better.
Which could explain the fact that sociofascists like you, Rob, don't know what you're talking about. Because you DO only get the liberal talking points from the mainstream media who are nothing more than agenda-driven socialists. Anytime anyone puts another viewpoint out there for you, you can't handle it. But hey, the truth hurts, right?
I'm like your president, I don't read newspapers (I choose not to whereas he just cannot) because most are owned by people rich Republicans.
By the way, I appreciate you ripping off and distorting the phrase "Christofascist" I coined some time ago. You know what they say about imitation and flattery.
Thanks for flattering me, Rob. If I recall I used Atheistofascist in blog comments more than two years ago.
Rob, you are such an ignorant, arrogant socialist. You know absolutely nothing!!! Oh, and most of the papers are owned by "rich Republicans"? Hardly!! The Washington Post, NY Times, etc. are far left wing, socialist, America-hating pieces of trash. But I suppose you'd just LOVE to read those. Of course assuming that you can read; you are obviously a victim of the public school system. And yes, President Bush can read. He knows more than you EVER, EVER will. He has more intelligence in his little finger than you could ever even hope to have....but I hear that a lot of liberals love to hang on to hope. It never gets them anywhere, but hey, go for it anyway LOSER!!!!
Don't get in a shouting match with ole' chrome-dome. Keep in mind that when you argue with an idiot they will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.
Don't get mad at him using his talking points (i.e. rich Republicans). After all that's all he's got. You wouldn't want to take away the only thing a man has in his intellectual basket would you? If so you truly are an evil Republican!
Once again, I hope I am not doing all this work so people can get on here and exchange personal insults.
PLEASE elevate the debate folks. If someone is wrong, there must be a REASON they are wrong. Tell them that reason instead of calling them names.
The reason that they're wrong is that they're a bunch of mind-numbed liberal robots who are incapable of thinking for themselves and actually forming an intelligent thought.
I spent several years studying political science and Constitutional Law at an accredited University. What have you done gop?
gopin08 I think you are missing my point. That was just more name-calling. Give an example of a policy or activity that DEMONSTRATES they are mind-numbed robots.
Post a Comment
<< Home