Bachmann, at 53, is a darling of the so-called Tea Party movement, which has campaigned vociferously against healthcare reform, the economic stimulus package and legislation to combat climate change. Her followers have been behind mass rallies in Washington and smaller ones all over the country. She has emerged as one of the most visible politicians in America, frequently appearing on the conservative Fox News channel, whose hosts often champion her causes.
The Guardian has a long and proud tradition of being the Pravda of the UK, and this propaganda piece is no exception. The Tea Party movement campaigned against healthcare reform? That's subjective. If the Guardian's reporters and columnists were up on their journalistic standards, they would avoid editorializing the facts. Proponents of the "public option" or "single-payer" would characterize the Tea Partiers as being against "reform", but the Partiers would describe it instead as taking a stand against partial or total nationalization of an industry contributing to about one-sixth of the nation's economy. And economic stimulus package? That's what the Bush and Obama administrations have called it, but there are a great many people who see it as reckless spending and attempts to prop up businesses that are "too big to fail." And this columnist, Paul Harris, shows his bias again by seeing the Tea Partiers as opposing "legislation to combat climate change" without acknowledging that:
- The science on anthroprogenic climate change (previously called "Global Warming" until surface temperatures just wouldn't cooperate) is not settled.
- Cap and trade legislation seeks to impose heavy fines on industries the government deems to be "polluting" the planet with carbon dioxide.
- The Kyoto treaty has been an utter failure, seeking to regulate the emissions of western industrialized nations while giving the rapidly-growing industries of the Chinese and Indian governments a pass. Never mind that all of the nations that signed Kyoto have failed to meet their reduction targets.
"Conservative Fox News channel"? Talk about painting with a broad brush! Once again, lefties see the bias in FNC, but not in ABC, CBS, NBC, BBC, CNN, PBS, MSNBC, etc. And is it the channel that's conservative, or is it hosts, specifically the hosts anchoring the news desk? Because opinion programming is by it's very nature biased, and I will allow that FNC has Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, and Bill O'reilly, to name a few conservative/populist news analysts. But they also have Greta Van Sustern, Shepard Smith, and Geraldo Rivera. They have a diversity of opinions. With the departure of Lou Dobbs, CNN has lost its last host with conservative leanings. Anderson Cooper? Wolf Blitzer? Jack Cafferty? MSNBC's line-up is even more skewed, with news anchors such as Contessa Brewer. News analysts? MSNBC's stars are Keith "I went to the agricultural school at Cornell, so technically I'm an Ivy League graduate" Olbermann and Rachel "The Constitution doesn't have a Preamble" Maddow. Conservative opinion? Occasionally from Joe Scarborough.
The reality is that FNC does much better in the cable TV ratings, not just because of the star power of O'reilly, Hannity, and Beck, but because of the diversity of viewpoints. Hannity's "Great American Panels" have a diverse, balanced ideological make-up. O'reilly continually has Al Sharpton and Juan Williams as guests on his show. Here are the results from a recent poll:
- 40% conservative
- 35% moderate
- 21% liberal
- 36% Democratic
- 28% Republican
- 37% Independent
The generalizations collapse in the face of simple arithmetic.
No comments:
Post a Comment