Barack Obama Elected President!

[Wales2004]

IA about the grouping.

I don't think the title is a big deal because I've seen titles that refer to Americans when the story is not about all Americans. I don't think people generally think any reference to a group in a title is all encompassing. The main issue, for me, is that this seems to happen quite a bit at Fox News. It may be that not everyone is guilty of it but from different references that I've seen to specific individuals employed by that station, it's no longer shocking for them.

[Roman]

http://www.newsweek.com/id/161218

That's the problem.

They do it so much over there that it actually makes news when someone on that network either calls a conservative out or stays on the truth and doesn't lie.

[Greg's GL]

I so wish that I could take some time to post everything I'm thinking right now. But alas, I am off to a shell-lined beach in SW FL for a week with my honey tomorrow morning.

Y'all take it easy and have fun!

[David_Vickers]

(1) CNN and MSNBC are truly fair and balanced not liberal or just Democratic, not like a lot of the GOP lie and say anything but conservative news sources are Liberal!

(2) neo-conservative------is a far,far right conservative, in other words very,very conservative, and almost fanatically religious.

Yes that's why Faux News has has higher ratings, because its the GOP mouthpiece where the GOP can tune in without much Democratic slant in the reporting.

CNN polls are scientific. Moreso than Faux News, who are NOT honest whatsoever----they should know most of their viewers are neo-cons just like themselves and that's who's gonna respond to their damned polls. Why would they want polls to make their candidates McCain/Palin look bad? I told you what a neo-conservative above, but I am pretty certain you already knew that and were just being snide.

[Roman]

http://www.johnmccainrecord.com/index.html

[Max]

First of all, I agree that FOX News is biased in favor of the Republicans.

However, you are completely delusional, Mulder, if you believe that MSNBC is a non-biased network: that entire network is centered around Keith Olberman and his far left opinions.

And, while I know that all liberals hate Bill O'Reilly with a passion, he's got one huge plus that Olberman does not have: O'Reilly frequently features guests on his show who disagree with him. By contrast, Olberman never invites guests on his show who disagree with him.

And, I'll give FOX News another plus over MSNBC as well: that network has never had biased folks like O'Reilly and Sean Hannity anchor election night coverage. On the other hand, MSNBC used to frequently have Olberman and Chris Matthews (who is another die-hard Obama supporter) anchor their network's official election night coverage. In fact, because the entire credibility of NBC News has taken such a huge hit, executives recently made the decision to ban Olberman and Matthews from anchoring on future election nights.

[Jess]

I have to agree that MSNBC is as biased as Fox. CNN generally is pretty unbiased. I don't like the partisan hacks arguing all the time, but at least I can generally tell who the news person is. You know, on a tangent, Lou Dobbs annoys me to no end. He just blusters. He's equal opportunity when he blusters, but he does bluster. He's just become a joke with his daily righteous (or self-righteous) outrage.

As far as Faux having one thing on MSNBC in that it doesn't have its columnist anchoring the news, I disagree. Last night Greta, who should be handing out bumper stickers for McCain/Palin, was anchoring the post debate coverage. Frank Luntz was interviewing uncommitted voters. Also, what is that network doing giving the Obama interview to Bill O'Reilly? I don't know that he welcomes people with an opposite opinion. He just yells at them and doesn't let them have a word in edgewise. No, in my opinion, MSNBC and Fox are equally as bad.

[Roman]

CM a Obama supporter.

Is this the same CM who said Obama was an elitist because he wore sunglasses? Yeah, that sounds like support.

Oh, and Fox News, is this the same network where Neil Cavuto recently said that selling mortgages to minorities was crazy, and thereason why we were in this financial mess?

Mulder maybe a bit passionate, but his point is taken. When I no longer hear the conservative ass-kissing on FN that I hear, and the outright lies and racist, sexist, homophobic BS that many on that network spew, then I'll start watching it.

[SnCCorinthos4ever]

As an outsider I watched the debate and I do belive that Obama won the debate.

McCain at one stage pretty much said that the republicans were alousy Govt. He said that Iran had a lousy economy, because they had a lousy Govt and considing the Economy in the US at the moment I really wonder what he was saying.

While he was speaking I kept on thinking OMG that is Bush speaking.

There a lot of biased people that work in the media and in all honesty I think that they should leave the bias at the front door when they are at work. If they are a political reporter or such they should give equal time to all parties.

[David_Vickers]

Max I'll agree with you on Olberman and MSNBC's mistake of having him and Chris Mathews doing jobs as news anchors. That would be like CNN giving anchor chairs to Paul Begala and Donna Shalala.

[David_Vickers]

I agree with you on all points yet again. I don't watch MSNBC much and I stand corrected on them. Bill O'Reilly is a pompous prick. I used to admire Dobbs and thought he was a pretty damned good reporter but in the last few months he's really becoming too self-righteous imho.

[Max]

Mulder, you deserve a lot of praise for the comments you just made.

[UCLAN]

I don't consider a lot of what goes on on Fox, MSNBC, CNN as news reporting. Usually when I watch, I know that the show is biased or slanted to the hosts opinion. I have issues with news reporters who let their biases show. That was the issue with Matthews and Olberman during the convention. I also don't agree with the "liberal media" stuff. I don't see it. Sometimes things get reported that we don't like or don't agree with. I don't think it means it is necessarily untrue. I believe reporters take pride in their work and give us their best efforts. But since we are human, mistakes can be made.

Remember these shows on MSNBC, Fox etc, are commentaries. I see them as entertainment value. These people express opinions that have no greater value than our own. We just don't make our living by expressing ours. Everyone of us who come to this board express our opinions and research the facts just like they do.

Ultimately, we make up our own minds and vote our own choice. That's what it's all about. Think back to the days before"cable news" and all the pundits. Since this is their job, don't you think the have a vested interest in maaintaining a close exciting election season?

[Kay]

I know you guys are discussing which news program is the least biased when covering the election stuff. I'll tell you all: I watch KERA, public television.

They covered both conventions, and you got to hear every speaker without the commentators cutting up the program. I watched the debate on that station as well and it was great. After it's over, they do have their analysts ( or whatever) weigh in on the whole thing, but there is no clear right-winger or liberal-- they just give it to you straight. If there were no KERA, I'd just find clips of the stuff online. I just need the facts (I don't need opinion masquerading as fact).

I can't take the MSM-- they make me sick to my stomach.

[Wales2004]

Since I don't watch Fox News I do not know how unbiased their actual news coverage is and how much of their programming includes shows with hosts. Some of the things with which people took issue seems to have happened during their news broadcasts.

MSNBC's news broadcasts are basically the same as the major networks' broadcasts. They have three shows with biased anchors and I don't know about Chris Matthews but neither Keith Olbermann or Rachel Maddox pretend to be unbiased. Chris Matthews seems to blow in the wind and his fascination with Obama as a candidate doesn't necessarily translate into any support of Obama. He's in love with thinking up things that Obama should do and fantasy campaign managing.

David Gregory anchors their fourth show and if he shows any bias at all then it's a conservative one. So basically MSNBC devotes six hours to shows with a liberal bias since each of the biased hosts' shows are aired for one hour each and then rebroadcast. David Gregory's show is only on once and MSNBC airs three hours of the conservative biased show hosted by Joe Scarborough.

Keith Olbermann doesn't necessarily have all liberals on his show because some of his guests are reporters who have not professed any political party allegiance. His show is structured in such a way that he basically has all of his guests on to support whatever point he is making.

Prior to adding Rachel Maddow's show a few weeks ago it was really just Matthews and Olbermann and the liberal label comes from Olbermann and his one hour show that is repeated. Considering that there were 20 hours and now 18 of non liberal biased shows, I don't consider MSNBC liberal at all.....just the actual 2-3 people that fall into that category.

I don't know that I care whether or not the person hosting a pre or post debate show is biased or not....the same for the convention coverage. I don't expect that when these people are giving their opinions on the debates that they are being unbiased since it is their opinion. Now when people are reporting actual news or something passing as news, then they need to present it in an unbiased manner since I do not need to know whether or not they think a person that's been arrested is guilty or not.