Ward Churchill to be fired for research misconduct

You named two leftist networks (and there are more: MSNBC, the three major networks news, etc.) and you can only come up with one (Fox) that you consider right-leaning?

Further, an individual's reality is created by their perception. In the journalists mind, their perception might be that they walk the center. Of course, all the people that they deal with on a daily basis are, for example, pro-abortion, so aren't all resonable people pro-abortion? Therefore, you must be an extremist if you are not pro-abortion.

It's really easy to classify yourself as a centrist when you classify everyone who disagrees with you as an extremist.

 

Good observation ... from someone who seriously needs to look in the mirror.

 

I don't make claims to be a centrist nor a moderate. I'm 100% conservative and freely admit as much.

I'm not uber-ultra-right-wing-wierdo, either...there are plenty out there more conservative than myself. While I admit that I am squarely on the right side of center, I make no claims to be a "centrist." Nor do I classify those to the left of myself, except the fringe, as "extremists."

Therefore, no need to look in the mirror.

ETA: Quite frankly, those in the media would find themselves meeting with much less criticism if they would be just as honest with themselves and others regarding their political and social leanings.

 

You seem to think that journalists are incapable of comparing their political persuasions to the population at large. I believe that assessment is wrong, and I don't think you have any proof - other than a gut feeling - that supports your position

Look at it like this: Clinton's sexual scandals, political problems, perjury, impeachment proceedings, etc. were the constant focus of media attention - On ALL media outlets. The Bush Administration, on the other hand, has misused intelligence to lead us into war, publicly expressed disregard for constitutional principles, spied on the American public, and has began a process where our civil liberties are becoming less and less meaningless.

Why isn't the mainstream media (which you assert to be biased against conservatives) covering Bush's shortcomings as a president? You have to dig very deep to find any significant reporting on these matters on mainstream media outlets, and in many cases, you have to venture into non-conventional media sources in order to find any significant commentary at all.

 

Are you joking? You can't turn on the news without seeing news regarding Bush's approval ratings. You can't watch for long without seeing news about the "spy" programs. The list goes on...immigration, job numbers, etc.

The media has their political leanings, however they will sell out anybody, including their own, to make a story.

 

Tell you what. If I really wanted to be arguing politics, I'd be on a politics boards.

This is a distance-learning board. I'll be sticking to education discussion from here on out.

 

Who's joking? A few quips about approval ratings and "spying" don't cut it, given what Bush has done and what is subsquently at stake. You can't compare the coverage Bush is getting (and the implications of those activities) to the coverage Clinton received.

Moreover, you still haven't offered proof that journalists are incapable of comparing their political beliefs to the entire population.

 

That might be a good idea, considering you were one of the first people to bring this discussion into the political realm.

EDIT...

I just wanted to add I have nothing against you personally, and I would welcome your further political input, here or elsewhere.