BuffettNews.com

Jon Stewart.

But I do watch O'Reilly to get the other side.

I feel I can't have an honest opinion if I only listen to what one guy says. I try to watch as many different ones as possible (except that lady with a scratchy voice and Greta Van something - they seem like they only focus on the same crap for months at a time). I also like Scarborough, he comes from my hometown and plays a hell of a guitar.

PIA wrote:i feel like every news station, newspaper, magazine, and radio talk show...is corrupt or takes a side...news is propoganda...ive seen documentaries on tv and the media and what it does to stories and how it skews the story...

so jon stewart! love him...hes funny...

for world news...i just have to deal with the fact that i have no idea what the government is really doing...

The part that gets me is, that know matter what evening news you watch thay all start with the same story and end with the same story even the indy stations

OystersandBeer wrote:Jon Stewart.

Greta Van something - they seem like they only focus on the same crap for months at a time).

You nailed that one. Seems like Greta can only keep one news story straight at a time. She's been on Natalee Holloway for the last year or so, straight.

I hate that Natalee is missing, too, but I just feel sure that over the last 12 months, SOMETHING else newsworthy must have happened.

Truth is, I watch O'Reilly occasionally, and Brit Hume whenever it's convenient, but most of my news comes from web-based media. TV news broadcasts are SO last century.

El mojito wrote:The only person i watch is
Is Stephen Colbert

Where else could we have learned the NUMBER ONE threat to society is bears

And remember, facts ruin great opinions every time

El mojito wrote:

PIA wrote:i feel like every news station, newspaper, magazine, and radio talk show...is corrupt or takes a side...news is propoganda...ive seen documentaries on tv and the media and what it does to stories and how it skews the story...

so jon stewart! love him...hes funny...

for world news...i just have to deal with the fact that i have no idea what the government is really doing...

The part that gets me is, that know matter what evening news you watch thay all start with the same story and end with the same story even the indy stations

i used to listen to hannity...i like him alot hes a really nice guy...ive met him a few times...but the older i get the more i realize that you haev to put yourself in the position and try to make your own opinions...because that is what is important...

I would probably have to say Peter Jennings, though I do trust Dan Rather as well. I love to watch Colbert & Jon Stewart for thie takes on things, but I rarely learn anything new from them.

Honestly, I can't understand how anyone can get their news from people like Jon Gibson, O'Reilly, Hannity, or Rush. I can only assume that people who trust them aren't paying attention, won't listen to anyone else, and/or won't research the issue deeper themselves. It seems that they think they can disguise their clear bias by constantly perpetuating the major liberal media myth. Of course these people either still believe Hussein was instrumental in the attacks on 9/11 or are willing to continue to outright lie or use innuendo to defend the GOP.

Fins in Low Places wrote:though I do trust Dan Rather .

Scary. That guy put the "lib" in liberal media bias. Even back in the 1980s he was trying to set up Reagan to look stupid. Fortunately, he was really bad at it.

Here's the story... the movie "Rambo" had just come out, and while walking off Air Force One, Reagan made some quip that he "had just seen Rambo and would know what to do next time..." All the news guys laughed...

Except Dan-O...

Dan dropped into breaking news tone and started a monologue about the theme of Rambo, and when/where/how Reagan might authorize such a mission. Fortunately for Dan, a fellow correspondent broke in and said, "Dan, the president is well known for kidding around."

(And yes, I saw this in person. This is NOT a second-hand account.)

Scary dude. Glad he's off the air.

Fins in Low Places wrote:Honestly, I can't understand how anyone can get their news from people like Jon Gibson, O'Reilly, Hannity, or Rush.

Those guys are all commentators, not newsmen. Their job is to give their opinion, not the news.

Cameron from NakedNews.com

CaptainP wrote:Cameron from NakedNews.com

AMEN!!!!

ummmm hello....


BuffettNEWS.com


I dont watch the national news... I read cnn.com I will pickup the local newscast occasionally.... but if its really important.... it will be on BN!

Brit Hume
Rush Limbaugh
Sean Hannity
G. Gordon Liddy
Mike Gallagher
Mike Reagan

AND,
the master of all-
PRINCE WILLIAM O'RIELLY

of course, I really enjoy having people here tell me what's going on

LIPH wrote:

Fins in Low Places wrote:Honestly, I can't understand how anyone can get their news from people like Jon Gibson, O'Reilly, Hannity, or Rush.

Those guys are all commentators, not newsmen. Their job is to give their opinion, not the news.

While that may be the case, too many American's get the bulk of their news and information from them and don't bother to check anything they say. If they did, then even their opinions wouldn't mean much.

krusin1 wrote:

Fins in Low Places wrote:though I do trust Dan Rather .

Scary. That guy put the "lib" in liberal media bias. Even back in the 1980s he was trying to set up Reagan to look stupid. Fortunately, he was really bad at it.

Here's the story... the movie "Rambo" had just come out, and while walking off Air Force One, Reagan made some quip that he "had just seen Rambo and would know what to do next time..." All the news guys laughed...

Except Dan-O...

Dan dropped into breaking news tone and started a monologue about the theme of Rambo, and when/where/how Reagan might authorize such a mission. Fortunately for Dan, a fellow correspondent broke in and said, "Dan, the president is well known for kidding around."

(And yes, I saw this in person. This is NOT a second-hand account.)

Scary dude. Glad he's off the air.

Honestly, if that's one of your basis to try to prove the myth, then we are one step closer to finally declaring it dead. BTW who would you say put the "con" in conservative?

krusin1 wrote:

Fins in Low Places wrote:though I do trust Dan Rather .

Scary. That guy put the "lib" in liberal media bias. Even back in the 1980s he was trying to set up Reagan to look stupid.

Not much of a set up required there!

Which anchor do I trust? Depends on the bottom, but Danforth has always worked well for me. I have a CQR for backup.

Two of the best aren't on the list...

Bob Schiefer on CBS
Brian Williams on NBC

sorry... but saying national news has an agenda is a COP OUT and an excuse to not pay attention to anything current.
This excuse to tune out is the same as the saying...
"Are you ignorant and apathetic?... I don't know and I don't care!"

Nothing has changed over the many years of television news.
It is, and has been, driven by corporate sponsor money. No huge mystery solved there!

What is important... is to UNDERSTAND THIS going in, and realize WHO wants to tell you WHAT
(example: Fox News = Bush apologists/neo-con hawks propaganda)
They just hired one of Fox's commentators to act as press secretary! The balls they got!

Stories on TV are not just flat-out lies... yes, that even includes Dan Rather's Bush National Guard story on CBS.

You just have to take in a couple of points of view, and weigh for yourself
Kind of like everything else you have to do in real life, right?....

I get my news the old-fashioned way.

I ignore the facts and make up my own version of what happens.

flyboy55 wrote:

krusin1 wrote:

Fins in Low Places wrote:though I do trust Dan Rather .

Scary. That guy put the "lib" in liberal media bias. Even back in the 1980s he was trying to set up Reagan to look stupid.

Not much of a set up required there!

Reagan was an actor who could not conjure up an answer that wasn't already written on a cue card.
But... he was a good actor

Fins in Low Places wrote:

krusin1 wrote:

Fins in Low Places wrote:though I do trust Dan Rather .

Scary. That guy put the "lib" in liberal media bias. Even back in the 1980s he was trying to set up Reagan to look stupid. Fortunately, he was really bad at it.

Here's the story... the movie "Rambo" had just come out, and while walking off Air Force One, Reagan made some quip that he "had just seen Rambo and would know what to do next time..." All the news guys laughed...

Except Dan-O...

Dan dropped into breaking news tone and started a monologue about the theme of Rambo, and when/where/how Reagan might authorize such a mission. Fortunately for Dan, a fellow correspondent broke in and said, "Dan, the president is well known for kidding around."

(And yes, I saw this in person. This is NOT a second-hand account.)

Scary dude. Glad he's off the air.

Honestly, if that's one of your basis to try to prove the myth, then we are one step closer to finally declaring it dead. BTW who would you say put the "con" in conservative?

Actually, that was just one example of Dans's liberal bent. I was about 12 yrs. old or so at the time, and just starting to pay attention to world events, so it really hit me.

There are many other examples of Dan getting stupid. If you really want, I suppose I could dig 'em up and quote chapter and verse.

If you seriously don't think Dan had a liberal bias and took numerous potshots at conservatives, (IMHO) you've got the blinders on tight.