Okay, I'll admit it...CNN is looking pretty liberal

[SpicyMcVoodoo]

at least with their "Broken Government" special they keep running...it might as well be an infomercial for the Democratic party. But honestly, this is the first time I've ever seen something blatantly pro-Democrat on CNN. Everything else seems pretty centrist and fair.

[Nonphixion]

It looks like they're not going to sit back and watch the disaster anymore, I think one can speak for most of the population in saying we've ALL had enough of that from Hurricane Katrina

They're saying; we need to change governmental directions here where we have the chance.

[JaJae]

Yes, but when a news media outlet endorses a party and slams another repeatedly, they're choosing sides. Fox isn't even that biased. They don't run specials called "Broken Party" and point out the fact that the Democrats haven't done anything in the past six years.

There are people who subscribe to both parties and have their own reasons for it. CNN's job is to report the news, not blatantly persuade people to vote for a particular party they endorse.

[SpicyMcVoodoo]

Originally Posted by JaJae

Fox isn't even that biased. They don't run specials called "Broken Party" and point out the fact that the Democrats haven't done anything in the past six years.

FOXNews.com - Hannity on America - Specials

They just run "Hannity on America."

And then there are:

FOXNews.com - Winning Iraq: The Untold Story - Specials

FOXNews.com - Can We Live Without God? - Specials

FOXNews.com - 'Iran: The Nuclear Threat' - Specials

FOXNews.com - Iran and the Bomb - Specials

FOXNews.com - Global Warming: The Debate Continues - Specials

And I'm sure these are very objective and don't have any explicit or implicit purpose to make Republicans look good.

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by SpicyMcVoodoo

FOXNews.com - Hannity on America - Specials

They just run "Hannity on America."

CNN's opinion shows aren't very centrist either. But Fox hasn't run a Fox Sponsored special slamming the Democrats for a full hour outside their normal programming that I'm aware of. CNN gets their licks in on the GOP constantly.

[SpicyMcVoodoo]

Originally Posted by JaJae

But Fox hasn't run a Fox Sponsored special slamming the Democrats for a full hour outside their normal programming that I'm aware of.

You're right, they just tend to run specials for a full hour that flatter Republicans...how is that any better than CNN slamming Republicans?

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by SpicyMcVoodoo

You're right, they just tend to run specials for a full hour that flatter Republicans...how is that any better than CNN slamming Republicans?

The liberal stations constantly run stations that flatter the Dems. It's one thing to flatter a party it's another to outright destroy the opposing party to the depths that would make the Dixie Chicks jealous.

[SpicyMcVoodoo]

Originally Posted by JaJae

The liberal stations constantly run stations that flatter the Dems. It's one thing to flatter a party it's another to outright destroy the opposing party to the depths that would make the Dixie Chicks jealous.

Then again, CNN also carries Glen Beck, which is an hour long show DAILY which is about as Republican as Rush Limbaugh. I'm not aware of FNC giving any blatant liberals their own hour-long daily show. The closest they have is Colmes, who is drowned out by his master Hannity.

[motivez]

Seems more like reality and news than liberal bias to me? I think most of the nation is aware that there is something rotten in DC and it should have a light shined on it by the news media.

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by motivez

Seems more like reality and news than liberal bias to me? I think most of the nation is aware that there is something rotten in DC and it should have a light shined on it by the news media.

I could say it's reality that the Democratic party is broken considering they haven't done much for the past 6 years other than obstruct and slander the GOP. And Fox could make a documentary on that if they wanted to. But doing so just before elections shows a clear bias.

[motivez]

What's wrong with obstruction? The Democrats should be obstructing when it means blocking some of the idiotic legislation that Bush wants passed..

If anything, I'd say they haven't been obstructionist ENOUGH because they were scared about how they'd look on national security if they blocked more Bush legislation..

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by motivez

What's wrong with obstruction? The Democrats should be obstructing when it means blocking some of the idiotic legislation that Bush wants passed..

If anything, I'd say they haven't been obstructionist ENOUGH because they were scared about how they'd look on national security if they blocked more Bush legislation..

Nothing is wrong with obstruction. But obstruction with no solutions shows lack of direction within the party. Do we want a party in power with no solutions or plans and has been focused solely on obstruction progress? You can say the "progress" was flawed, but without solutions you're not really doing much of anything other than keeping the road going down a negative path.

[motivez]

Their solutions have no means of passing. None, whatsoever.

So, their goal should be to block as many bad policies as possible while getting compromises on things that need to be passed. If their only means to get Republicans to sit down to the table is to do all they can to block their legislation, then that's what they should be doing.

I see nothing wrong with that. I think they have had solutions, they just don't have a unified voice like the GOP does because there's a much broader range of opinion in the Democratic party as to how things should be done.

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by motivez

Their solutions have no means of passing. None, whatsoever.

You can say that, but they haven't even tried. If they presented a solution and it gained popularity within the American public it could very well pass. But nobody really knows for sure because for the past 6 years it's never been tried.

Why should I vote for a party that has no solutions or plan?

I know where Bush and the GOP stands on Iraq, the economy, the environment, gay marriage, illegal immigration.

I'm not too sure where the DNC stands or what their goals would be if they gained power. It makes voting for them a gamble. According the Dems our economy is broken. How are they going to fix it? That worries me. They just keep saying it's broken, but they have no solutions. For all I know they could do something silly like roll back the tax cuts and raise taxes.

[motivez]

There's been evidence that the Republicans have completely shut out the Democrats on certain committees when bills were being drafted, etc.. one was out today talking about how they said "Why are you even arguing this? You wont be in the room when the decision is made.."

They could have tried to be different and they could have done a lot of things better, but the reality is that had they tried, it would have been framed the same way that everything else has been by the GOP.. weak on security, pro-terrorist, cut and run, etc..

Again, I think they have plenty of plans and they've released a "first 100 days in office" if they regain control, beyond that they've released a broad but somewhat generic list of goals (intentionally IMO so that the Republicans can't latch on to one thing and turn out their base with idiotic talking points).

I think their problem is speaking with a unified voice. There are a bunch of different ideas, and platforms, etc.

You said you know where Bush / GOP stands on Iraq, economy, enviornment, gay marriage, illegal immigration.. That's because they've broken it down into a party wide catch phrase for each issue.

Stay the course [on a dead end road]
Cut Taxes [for the rich]
Boost the economy [for the investor class and executives]
Clean air act [loosen regulations]
Gay Marriage = Horse Marriage = Affront to Jesus

and so forth.

They have to be more nuanced because they realize that these issues are complicated, I'd dare say they're no as simple minded as those currently in charge of the country.

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by motivez

They have to be more nuanced because they realize that these issues are complicated, I'd dare say they're no as simple minded as those currently in charge of the country.

Yes they broke it down to easy to understand terms. But at least we know where they stand. Of course it's complicated, but that doesn't mean they can't let us know where they stand. These issues are always complicated in politics. Why all of a sudden is it too complicated for the Democrats to let the American populace know where they stand on these issues?

The Republicans may overpower them in the political realm at the moment. But they surely haven't silenced their voice. Democrats get more positive media coverage, they have plenty of outlets to get their message out there. The problem is, they don't have one other than slander against GOP policies.

[motivez]

It's not too complicated, it's that the American people want soundbytes and fast food politics. They don't want to wait around for 30 minutes for a steak when they can get a Big Mac in less than 30 seconds that'll still fill their stomach.

Look at Kerry in '04. Say what you want about him, but he was attacked for being too smart, too educated, too elite. For being too nuanced when it came to issues. For being unable to break it into a simple 10 second soundbyte for media consumption..

Democrats are horrible at that, and it's when you have true "big tent party" like they do, you get a wide range of beliefs that make it hard to speak with a unified voice that simplifies shit down to the lowest common denominator for the average American that spends less time watching the news than they do reading about reality television.

[6SpeedTA95]

Originally Posted by motivez

It's not too complicated, it's that the American people want soundbytes and fast food politics. They don't want to wait around for 30 minutes for a steak when they can get a Big Mac in less than 30 seconds that'll still fill their stomach.

Look at Kerry in '04. Say what you want about him, but he was attacked for being too smart, too educated, too elite. For being too nuanced when it came to issues. For being unable to break it into a simple 10 second soundbyte for media consumption..

Democrats are horrible at that, and it's when you have true "big tent party" like they do, you get a wide range of beliefs that make it hard to speak with a unified voice that simplifies shit down to the lowest common denominator for the average American that spends less time watching the news than they do reading about reality television.

I dont recall kerry ever being attacked for being "too smart" what the fuck is that? Too elite yes, he was attacked for that because he's an elitist. Being an elitist has nothing to do with being smart or vice versa.

[6SpeedTA95]

Originally Posted by motivez

Democrats are horrible at that, and it's when you have true "big tent party" like they do, you get a wide range of beliefs that make it hard to speak with a unified voice that simplifies shit down to the lowest common denominator for the average American that spends less time watching the news than they do reading about reality television.

Big tent? The same big tent that shits all over guys like lieberman? That goes all out to get names of good prominent democrats taken off the ballot, forced out of politics or forced into another party? That big tent party? The democrats have been hijacked by the far left, they're no big tent party, they're a tow the party line or get railroaded party.