Quote:
Originally Posted by BFT3K
Maddow's investigative research team is actually quite amazing. I know the righties hate her, but her reports are often quite eye-opening.
|
I like her actually. She's bright and remains civil. She's definitely slanted left of course. I'm sure her research is competent, but like anyone else on those channels they spin it to conform to their ideology. I've seen people push back in interviews with her and she tries to bend them to her POV even though theirs is completely valid. I distinctly remember this happening with Chris Matthews who disagreed with her on something and wouldn't cave to her "but don't you think" tacks.
I think the media, in my lifetime anyway, has historically had a liberal slant to it. Fox News I think is a result of business rather than politics. Murdoch saw an opportunity to provide a product to a segment of the population that was being under served. There were several liberal networks already. Launching another was just going to slice the same pie up into smaller pieces. But a conservative network, well, there weren't any. He had that entire population to himself. Glenn Beck and Bill O'Reilly are paid entertainers. They get on the air and play a part, period (I think Olbermann does too). Beck makes what, $33 million a year? For that kind of cheddar I'd act slightly to the right of Atilla the Hun too. That's what it is, an act. He's the Howard Stern of political pundits.
Perot was leading by a sizeable margin the summer before the '92 election. He dropped out and jumped back in which is what cost him. There was a lot of speculation about why he did that. I do recall there being a lot of animosity between him and the Bush family. Some thought he ran just to prevent a Bush reelection.