Why Is MSNBC Allowing A Rightwing BITCH To Host A GOP Lovefest?

[ruggerson]

WHat is wrong with the people who run these networks? Why can't we do something about this? Laura Ingraham has Joe Scarborough on the phone and Frank Luntz next to her and the three righwingers "analyze" an electoral map.

Then she has Ralph Reed on and some secular guy and proceeds to interrupt the secular guy and not let him get a word in edgewise and allows Ralph Reed to ramble on unchecked for minutes.

Isn't there someone at MSNBC we can complain to? Where is the liberal balance? Why isn't there a cable show chock full of liberals bashing Bush and looking at an electoral map full of blue states? What the hell is this crap?

[Gato Moteado]

1. the media is owned by the same garbage.....

...that put bush in the white house.

[Cats Against Frist]

2. I already wrote them a letter at 9:04 CDT.

When you're begging for Joe Scarborough and Pat Buchanan to come back, you know the host is pretty outrageous.

[FrankenforMN]

3. For the same reason the let Joe Scarborough, and Pat Buchanan...

It is meant to be a right-wing show. Do not watch it, and it will be canceled faster than you can say "Phil Donahue".

[Child_Of_Isis]

4. Well, I turned it on a moment ago,

just to see what the hoopla was about, as I haven't ever seen this Laura person. Man oh man, oh man..shudder...shudder...what a horrid voice she has.

[diplomats]

13. I watched a few minutes of it, too and it made me so mad!

How dare they have all those right-wing ideologues on with her and no-one to rebut them?

Then, for contrast, I watched Aaron Brown on CNN and he had Mr. Kay on, the weapons inspector, who validated the fact that the weapons were there when our troops reached the site. In fact, there are pictures taken by our troops of the weapons cache! Let the Repugs try to talk themselves out of that one.

And the election is close, can someone tell me why?

I wonder who actually put the NYT on to the the story? It would be interesting to know. And such perfect timing, too. And then the Repugs try to say that Kerry uses the headlines to criticize the president. Well, Yeah! Duh!
:kick:

[w4rma]

5. For the same reason GE terminated Donahue's show just before the invasion.

Meanwhile, the Web site www.allyourtv.com posted a commentary on Wednesday by Rick Ellis saying that he had been leaked an internal NBC study that described Donahue as “a tired, left-wing liberal out of touch with the current marketplace.”

The report allegedly said Donahue presented a difficult face for NBC at a time of war, saying a nightmare scenario would be one in which his show becomes “a home for the liberal anti-war agenda at the same time our competitors are waving the flag at every opportunity.”
http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/entertainment/5263274.htm

While “Donahue” does badly trail both O'Reilly and CNN's Connie Chung in the ratings, those numbers have improved in recent weeks. So much so that the program is the top-rated show on MSNBC, beating even the highly promoted “Hardball With Chris Matthews.”

Although Donahue didn't know it at the time, his fate was sealed a number of weeks ago after NBC News executives received the results of a study commissioned to provide guidance on the future of the news channel.

That report--shared with me by an NBC news insider--gives an excruciatingly painful assessment of the channel and its programming. Some of recommendations, such as dropping the “America's News Channel,” have already been implemented. But the harshest criticism was leveled at Donahue, whom the authors of the study described as “a tired, left-wing liberal out of touch with the current marketplace.”
http://www.allyourtv.com/0203season/news/02252003donahue.html

[lanparty]

20. Suppressed text ...

But the harshest criticism was leveled at Donahue, whom the authors of the study described as “a tired, left-wing liberal out of touch with the current marketplace.” <suppressed> who has the highest ratings on our network.

A convenience store would be more profitable than MSNBC's operations. It goes without saying that a WAR would be a HELL of a lot more profitable to GE both in military hardware and increased television viewership across CNBC, MSNBC and the mother-whore NBC!!!

Donahue is anti-war. And it's very plain that a LOT more people watch him than the other 23 hours of pro-war programming on the air. Therefore, we need to cancel Donahue ASAP. The loss in ratings revenue is a token compared to the boon of unsubstantiated warfare!!!

</suppressed>

[wishlist]

6. I don't get it either- Dems/liberals never get a whole show to themselves

The show several months ago was at least tolerable because Joe usually gave Dems a chance to give opposing viewpoints but lately it is just RWingers with Frank Luntz spinning the polls obviously trying to demoralize Kerry supporters and boost up Bush supporters.

[Demfromct]

12. I'd still do a 3 some

with Laura Ingraham and Ann Coultor. Ann woudl be the dominant one.

[shrub chipper]

21. There are not enough condoms in the World

to protect you from THAT concentration of evil

[sandnsea]

7. I watched the Santiago part

And lost another big blotch of hair!! "I'm going to turn your mic down"???? Gawd she's a vile little *@#^!#%^@. I flipped through for a second after watching Aaron Brown, I just couldn't believe she said that. MSNBC doesn't usually do that crap.

[Fluffdaddy]

8. I did not last *8 minutes tonight. I saw it was going to be a Right wing

group hug an I left.

[Confident]

9. Dan Rather Handicaps the Race

I think we can all agree that Rather hasn't sold out to the White House. He's got a lot of experience, and posted this on the CBS website today.

(CBS) The state rankings in the piece below are not the same as in the latest CBS News public opinion poll analysis. These are Dan Rather's own, based on the readings of many polls, including CBS's, plus his contacts among political professionals in both parties, his 54 years of experience covering politics, and his own instincts. The analyses and guesses are his own, not those of CBS News

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Here's one way to look at the presidential race right now: There are at least nine states — possibly as many as 16 — that are key, because they appear to be so close they could still go either way. The core nine that your reporter classifies as hanging in the balance, too close to even guess about are: Florida, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Wisconsin, Iowa, Colorado, New Mexico, Arkansas and — surprise — Hawaii.

Hawaii has almost always gone Democratic in recent presidential races and until just lately was widely considered to be a sure-thing for Kerry. The race in the islands has suddenly tightened. Nobody knows exactly why. One possible explanation is that Hawaii is particularly security conscious -- Peal Harbor memories plus 9/11 -- and has many past and present military families among its voters.

Anyway, count Hawaii in as one of the core nine. Among those nine, Wisconsin and Iowa may very well turn out to be decisive. These next-door neighbors usually vote alike in presidential campaigns; this year Wisconsin holds ten electoral votes, Iowa seven. With that in mind, do the math and consider this: If — mark the word, if — Bush carries every state he did 2000, he would have 278 electoral votes, above the necessary 270. Reapportionment of electoral votes based on population shifts have added to Bush's total from the 27l he got in 2000.

Should Bush lose this time in Ohio and New Hampshire, states he won last time, he would be at 254 — providing he wins every other state he won in 2000. That would push him down to 254. But if he then carried Wisconsin and Iowa (both of which went for Gore in 2000), he would pick up 17 electoral votes, pushing the president back up to a winning 271.

It is, of course, only one of many possible scenarios in which Bush could win. But if one puts one's nose to the wind and sniffs, it may be as good a guess as any. And better than most.

So, think of election night this way: First, concentrate on the Big Three: Florida, Pennsylvania and Ohio. Then watch the Middle Three: Wisconsin, Iowa and Colorado. After that, the Little Three: Arkansas, New Mexico and Hawaii.

By the way, in the "possibly as many as 16" states that could still go either way mentioned the first paragraph of this, the additional seven besides the core nine are: Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Hampshire, Oregon West Virginia and Missouri.

Oh yes, there is also this: keep eyes peeled for surprises. There'll probably be one or more. Like what? Well, maybe New Jersey. Most lists have it reasonably safe for Kerry, but there are some poll numbers and gut instincts among veteran pols hinting at a possible upset.

We’ll see soon enough.

[Maat]

10. This may sound witchy...and I'm a feminist and all...but..

didn't somebody have a little plastic surgery? She looks Scarecrow-eey.

Excuse spelling/word-creation.

[Maraya1969]

11. Send your complaints here

[e-mail]

[bettyellen]

16. THANK YOU, I WILL. REPULSIVE!!

[leftofthedial]

14. that's their purpose

we need a purge in this country

a media purge

a corporate purge

deprogramming and reeducation camps

much of this country has become incapable of constructively participating in a representative democracy

[Ksec]

15. Its awful. We should ruin their sponsorships.

Its the only way you get their attention and get some baalance.

Lets ruin them financially. There are thousands of us . We control millions of dollars between us all.

Boycotting is OK but if you really wanna hurt them drive down their worth. Make the stock tumble.

[Ksec]

17. no action? all mouth?

[coreystone]

18. I wrote letter also!.....

To the editor

"To Whom it May Concern!

I just viewed "Scarborough Country" from 10 - 11 PM (EST) this evening. I must tell you that I find the interviewing technique of "Laura Ingram" to be most repulsive. I find her to be extremely rude and condescending.

I was insulted just view her behavior.

She is one of the "personalities" that gives the "Fourth Estate" a VERY BAD name.

Sincerely,

{my name}"

:argh:

[AndyTiedye]

19. WHO OWNS THE NEWS?

[RevolutionStartsNow]

22. You know, I've sworn off cable news until the election

and I feel liberated! I used to watch a lot of CNN and MSNBC, not because I felt they were fair or truthful, but just to keep myself informed about what the pundits were saying (even if it was all BS).

But not watching them anymore, and getting my news from various web, radio and print sources instead, is very refreshing. Cable news is a lot of inflammatory NOISE and many things they put on the air are just to piss people off to get better ratings. (We get mad, we say "MSNBC is making me so mad!!" but all they care about is that we are using their name in our forum.)

So I'm done with them until after the election. Or maybe forever. I will go back to watch them squirm after Kerry wins probably, but that's it.