This NYT Article on Air America Is Brilliant

[Guest Cerebus]

which probably produce more politically active conservative minds than the college system produces politically active liberal minds, before you bring that up

 

I agree with everything in your post Jobber, except for that. You mean to tell me that the Project of the New American Century and the Cato Institute affects MORE minds than the college education system? Please.

[Guest MikeSC]

And it tanked. Quickly. It's been an unmitigated disaster

Oh sure. It's a mess, but I find it an entertaining mess, that's all.

 

What do conservatives have that APPROACHES Hollywood?

 

Gee, I really don't know. I was thinking hard about it and everything, but I guess there really have been no conservative entertainers out there.

Wow, blew the entire "conservatives in Hollywood" load there.

(Hint: Despite reports to the contrary, nobody under 40 cares about Barbara Streisand anymore. Nobody under 25 really cares about Alec Baldwin either. While not everyone mentioned above necessarily has name value to that audience either, to say that most people would give a rat's ass about Barb's politics and lets that sway them is kind of a shocker. Nor do I think every country artist out there is conservative, but a big majority of them are for sure.)

Unfortunately, you have "mainstream" celebs who are big in leftist circles. Find a liberal "cause" where Hollywood actors play a tiny role.

 

BTW, it's not like kids listen to Arnold politically, either.

Now all you need is a Michael Moore to make movies filled with half-truths while calling Kerry a traitor or deserter or whatever. Thankfully, your side is armed with a large variety of windbags that appear on TV a lot thanks to the large number of think-tanks you run (which probably produce more politically active conservative minds than the college system produces politically active liberal minds, before you bring that up.)

Actually, the world of conservative thought is a small one, as chances to advancement to OTHER media is virtually impossible.

 

It's FUNNY that no Republican gets the "non-partisan" nod that, say, Tim Russert gives. or even Chris Matthews. Heck, Dan Rather called the 1994 House elections a gigantic "temper tantrum".

 

Liberals maange to appear on TV without having their political leanings mentioned. Do conservatives EVER get that benefit?

What conservative paper APPROACHES the level of "prestige" as the NY Times (even AFTER their massive scandal)?

 

http://online.wsj.com/home

 

That was easy.

The NY Times basically decides what the networks cover --- like it or not. WSJ does not.

Does FSN make up for the slant of NBC, CBS, and ABC

 

That exists only in your head, pal.

Or in the head of anybody who studies the topic.

-=Mike

...JOTW, if they agree with you, you're going to think they're mainstream and non-biased

[Dr. Tyler; Captain America 0]

Liberals maange to appear on TV without having their political leanings mentioned. Do conservatives EVER get that benefit?

 

The NY Times basically decides what the networks cover --- like it or not. WSJ does not.

 

Or in the head of anybody who studies the topic.

 

Oh. My. God.

 

Do you like, EVER back anything up, or do you expect us to all just accept it on your word?

[Jobber of the Week 0]

Wow, blew the entire "conservatives in Hollywood" load there.

Well, there's a lot more of them out there. However, Republicans tend to take a very vocal approach against celebrities endorsing political causes, so the ones who are there are rather secretive about it. You set the tone ("Shut up and perform!"), you live with the result.

 

As far as I'm concerned, the "Hollywood liberals" have earned their fortune like anyone else. Many people on both the left and right are born or married into millions or billions of dollars. All it takes is a couple of oil barons or top-class executives to find much more deeper pockets than a pack of celebrities, anyway.

 

Unfortunately, you have "mainstream" celebs who are big in leftist circles.

 

The last time I can remember a Hollywood type promoting a left cause was Rosie's wedding in SF. And she really burnt a lot of bridges and lost a lot of public opinion in the last five years.

 

And none of the left-leaning famous people are ever holding any office. All the ones who do hold office are Republicans. Reagan, Arnie, Sonny Bono. The Dems have had... John Glenn?

 

Find a liberal "cause" where Hollywood actors play a tiny role.

 

Find any event where famous people play a tiny role. It's nearly impossible for them. Michael Jackson is a freak with a fraction of the fans he used to have but he still can't go to the supermarket without getting mobbed.

 

BTW, it's not like kids listen to Arnold politically, either.

 

He's certainly setting himself up in that position. He's still really popular as a politician:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?...16/GOVERNOR.TMP

 

[The governor,] in just six months in office has already racked up an 89 percent approval rating among GOP voters -- and 56 percent approval from Democrats.

 

So far he's actually delivering on cutting through the bull and trying to deliver a balanced budget. There was some skepticism after all the hype died down (and he did do a number of fundraisers to special interests despite promises that he had enough money already, but anyone who thought he wouldn't was foolish), but now everyone's applauding him again.

 

And certainly the guy who played The Terminator is more relevant to pop culture today than Rosie or Babs.

 

Also in TV celebs, Dennis Miller drew ratings for CNBC (we'll see if they hold up), while we all remember the complete bomb Donahue was for that station's other channel. Bruce Willis talked about singing up for the military until a bunch of people (including President Bush, gee, wonder how he arragned a phone call with him?) told him he was too old.

 

And don't forget NASCAR.

 

It's FUNNY that no Republican gets the "non-partisan" nod that, say, Tim Russert gives. or even Chris Matthews.

 

You'd know Chris Matthews was a Democrat if you read his book. It's not like it's some hidden secret.

 

Liberals maange to appear on TV without having their political leanings mentioned. Do conservatives EVER get that benefit?

 

Uhm, yeah. I've seen Ann Coulter appearances where's introduced as "newspaper columnist, Ann Coulter" or "political pundit, Ann Coulter." Around the time she released her book, yes, she was called a conservative, but when your title claims that liberals are being treasonous, it's kind of hard to avoid that title. Hannity, Rush, and that bunch are often called conservatives, but their show is quite loud and proud about it. G. Gordon Liddy, who doesn't jump up and down for attention like the last guys mentioned, can appear on talk shows without his political leaning being brought up.

 

The only guy who I hear being labeled conservative more often than not when referenced is Bill O'Reilly. However, he discredits the moderate opinion by insisting to have one, so I have no love lost for that.

 

The NY Times basically decides what the networks cover --- like it or not.

 

I always thought that was the AP, which makes up a majority of the printed news read nationwide. BTW, the President of the AP is asking major media to start working together in lobbying Washington to not be so secretive. Interpret that as however you wish.

 

...JOTW, if they agree with you, you're going to think they're mainstream and non-biased

 

Bullshit. I hold a lot of unpopular opinions. I rarely see anyone on TV speak of religion like I do. Jesse Ventura once called it a crutch for the weak-minded and got heavily slagged for it, but that's as close as it came.

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

Dan Rather called the 1994 House elections a gigantic "temper tantrum"

You might be mistaking Rather for Brokaw -- I know Tommy Boy said that.

 

That's all...