Latest Entry: American Pravda and New York's Sixth Crime Family     Latest Comments: Talk Back Here

« HarryTho 12/29 Natalee Holloway Commentary | Main | High Antioxidant Diet May Delay Age-Related Macular Degeneration »

December 29, 2005

The MSM And It's Hatred Of Bush

Topics: Follies of the Mainstream Media

Steven Den Beste at asks, "Why does the MSM hate President Bush, and why do they seem to be doing everything in their power to sink him?

He then offers that the stock answer is "ideological bias", but then as a second thought, offers a deeper reason - they view him as a threat to their very existence -- and they're right to do so.

The MSM sees itself as "the fourth estate". They have the conceit that the press is a coequal branch of government with the legislative, judicial, and executive branches. The MSM sees itself as being the representative of the people in Washington, a watchdog to keep an eye on the government. And it demands that members of the three estates treat it as a coequal.
Interestingly, he says that we've been viewing a power struggle between the president and the MSM - and there's every reason to believe that the MSM is losing it.

Do you agree? I think that their hatred of President Bush has more to do with the fact that the overwhelming majority of journalists are Democrats, and most Democrats are still in a state of depression over loosing the election. As to why that's the case - it's because they're moonbats!

Posted by Richard at December 29, 2005 6:36 PM

I agree-but do you think Democrats will ever get over bveing sore losers?

Posted by: R. decker at December 29, 2005 9:50 PM

I agree-but do you think Democrats will ever get over being sore losers?

Posted by: R. decker at December 29, 2005 9:51 PM

R,Decker - do I think Democrats will ever get over being sore losers? No, I don't - at least not those of the 35% (of all Americans)that fall into the left of center. It's a deep seeded mindset, and one that not only blinds them to reconcile with the fact that their side lost, but also blinds them to hearing any side but their own liberal agenda of anti-faith, pro-gay, pro-abortion,and anti-war, even war that is waged to save Western civilization, of which sadly, they are indeed a part of - if in name only.

Posted by: Richard at December 29, 2005 10:07 PM

I am a Democrat and I am not a moonbat - whatever that is, unless it is something GOOD.

I was disappointed that Bush won the election because I do not agree with most of his policy positions, even though I do agree with some. I think if Kerry had won that there were be Repubs that would still be sore losers today, don't you? Is human nature, especially for those that really care and pay attention to what is going on.

However, I do support Bush in acheving successful leadership while he is president, because he is MY president too and I want his leadership to be positive for our country. I remember him in my prayers and know that his job is inconceivably difficult. No leader is all good or all bad. I am very much a fiscal conservative and have been extremly negative about what I consider to be his irresponsible fiscal policies. I am also a civil libertarian and think very much like the Libertarian Party re person privacy, minimal government intrusion in one's personal business, and similar issues. I also am a Christian, as are most of the Democrats that I know, and try to live my life according to the example that Christ set forth. I do not see this consistently reflected in many Republican leaders, yet do in may of the Democratics and Dem policy platforms - this is of course, IMO, and it is one of the reasons that I continue to register with the Dem party.

I vote for both Dems and Repubs, dependent on the individual and their policies. I might even vote for Rudy G if he runs for president in 08, contingent on the competition.

I was a Republican for a long time, was raised a Republican, but changed parties about 14 years ago.I find that neither party has a party platform where I can fully support all issues.

I think the rabid labeling by both parties of the other is ridiculous and negatively reflects on the intelligence of the people who do it. People are individuals and have a wide range of opinions on topics which may or many not match a predetermined party line.

The MSM considers itself a watchdog and looks for things in our leaders to bring to light. They will do this no matter who is president. They rubber stamped most of Bush's actions and policies in his early years as president. Polls indicate that many are not pleased with many of these policies today, have concerns about our economy and other issues. The MSM maybe is leading this or perhaps is just mirroring it.

It is important for people to look at all sides of issues and feel free to question policies that affect us all.

Posted by: Shonane at December 29, 2005 11:42 PM

We apparently disagree on many things, particularly on the issue regarding the media.

And if you're a Christian and do not see Christian values consistently reflected in many Republican leaders, yet do so in many of the Democratic leaders and platforms, when the Democratic leaders and policies conflict with virtually every single life and faith issue associated with Christianity, I'm mystified as to how you arrived at your conclusions.

However, even with all of this in mind, you are obviously far too reasonable a person to be a moonbat, albeit in my opinion you may be a little confused since you can characterize the policies of the Democratic party and it's leaders as being consistant with Christian values. I am not questioning your faith, merely your understanding of what values are trully consistant with Christianity, or your understanding of what the policies are of the Democratic party and it's leadership.

In short, rest easy, you are not a moonbat. And yes, there are many Democrats that are indeed Christians, and do indeed understand what values are truly embraced by Christianity. And by the way, I wouldn't hesitate to vote for a Democrat, and sometimes do. But there are none presently in the leadership of the Democratic party, or anything in the Democratic party's platform, that could entice me to do so at this time.

Posted by: Richard at December 30, 2005 12:13 AM

I am not confused about Christianity or the Dem party platform. Some things attributed to the party are not party issues, but belong to special interests and individuals who promote their issues - there is a difference. Given the two, and the way that it is expressed and intended for implementation, I still chose the Dems. Again, I don't agree with the party platforms down the line with either party.

My thinking is very similar to that of Jimmy Carter re Christianity, policies, and government. His latest book lays out this logic well.

Also, some Republican leaders who are Christian seem to me to be like the Pharisees in the Bible, which Jesus did not seem to value vs a more humble and active expression of service. And, there are Dem leaders who could be their twins.

Posted by: Shonane at December 30, 2005 11:05 PM

Articles Related to Follies of the Mainstream Media: