60 Minutes- could they be any more biased?

[lyeag]

It just happens to be on right now. The Plame covert thing. With so many leading questions.... I just can't stand it. People say FOX is biased, but see nothing wrong with CBS running the Dem attack strategy.


I don't say perjury is ok, far from it. However, this "news" story is so emotionally biased and charged, it is obvious it is meant to stir up emotions, not fact finding. All it is trying to do is get people upset. So far, the charges don't support the "outing" claim. Couldn't tell from this bit of news.

 

[bsnyder]

It's really quite amazing that liberals get so upset at FNC and their "conservative bias". They've had a grossly uneven playing field for decades, and they begrudge us one measly little network.

Here's the latest outrage from the New York Times, courtesy of Michelle Malkin:

On Wednesday, the NYTimes published a 4,625-word opus on the "2,000 dead" milestone--a "grim mark," read the headline--on page A2. Among those profiled were Marines from the First Battalion of the Fifth Marine Regiment, including Cpl. Jeffrey B. Starr. Here's an excerpt from the Times' passage about Cpl. Starr:

Another member of the 1/5, Cpl. Jeffrey B. Starr, rejected a $24,000 bonus to re-enlist. Corporal Starr believed strongly in the war, his father said, but was tired of the harsh life and nearness of death in Iraq. So he enrolled at Everett Community College near his parents' home in Snohomish, Wash., planning to study psychology after his enlistment ended in August.
But he died in a firefight in Ramadi on April 30 during his third tour in Iraq. He was 22.

Sifting through Corporal Starr's laptop computer after his death, his father found a letter to be delivered to the marine's girlfriend. ''I kind of predicted this,'' Corporal Starr wrote of his own death. ''A third time just seemed like I'm pushing my chances.''

Pretty cut and dried, huh? Well, let's see what the Times so conveniently edited out of that letter (because it didn't fit their anti-war narrative).

Last night, I received a letter from Corporal Starr's uncle, Timothy Lickness. He wanted you to know the rest of the story--and the parts of Corporal Starr's letter that the Times failed to include:

Yesterday's New York Times on-line edition carried the story of the 2000 Iraq US military death. It grabbed my attention as the picture they used with the headline was that of my nephew, Cpl Jeffrey B. Starr, USMC.
Unfortunately they did not tell Jeffrey's story. Jeffrey believed in what he was doing. He [was] willing put his life on the line for this cause. Just before he left for his third tour of duty in Iraq I asked him what he thought about going back the third time. He said: "If we (Americans) don't do this (free the Iraqi people from tyranny) who will? No one else can."

Several months after Jeffrey was killed his laptop computer was returned to his parents who found a letter in it that was addressed to his girlfriend and was intended to be found only if he did not return alive. It is a most poignant letter and filled with personal feelings he had for his girlfriend. But of importance to the rest of us was his expression of how he felt about putting his life at risk for this cause. He said it with grace and maturity.

He wrote: "Obviously if you are reading this then I have died in Iraq. I kind of predicted this, that is why I'm writing this in November. A third time just seemed like I'm pushing my chances. I don't regret going, everybody dies but few get to do it for something as important as freedom. It may seem confusing why we are in Iraq, it's not to me. I'm here helping these people, so that they can live the way we live. Not have to worry about tyrants or vicious dictators. To do what they want with their lives. To me that is why I died. Others have died for my freedom, now this is my mark."

What Jeffrey said is important. Americans need to understand that most of those who are or have been there understand what's going on. It would honor Jeffrey's memory if you would publish the rest of his story.

You won't see this outrage covered by the MSM, but at least now we have the internet, to get the word out, when they pull this crap.

 

[DawnCt1]

I think Joe Wilson did more to out his wife than anyone else could have. The spread on Vanity Fair gave him one out of many moments to capitalize on it. I am sorry that I missed 60 minutes tonight but nothing they air would surprise me. Our Congressman from Ct. Rob Simmons was a covert CIA agent. He spoke at DS's graduation a few year ago and joked about "its a great job but he couldn't tell anybody". Given the world according to Plame and Wilson, no one could ever reveal their work for the CIA. She had a desk job for Pete's sake.

 

[lyeag]

It's really quite amazing that liberals get so upset at FNC and their "conservative bias". They've had a grossly uneven playing field for decades, and they begrudge us one measly little network.

Here's the latest outrage from the New York Times, courtesy of Michelle Malkin:

On Wednesday, the NYTimes published a 4,625-word opus on the "2,000 dead" milestone--a "grim mark," read the headline--on page A2. Among those profiled were Marines from the First Battalion of the Fifth Marine Regiment, including Cpl. Jeffrey B. Starr. Here's an excerpt from the Times' passage about Cpl. Starr:



Pretty cut and dried, huh? Well, let's see what the Times so conveniently edited out of that letter (because it didn't fit their anti-war narrative).




You won't see this outrage covered by the MSM, but at least now we have the internet, to get the word out, when they pull this crap.

I saw that one too. Sickening. But we're the ones who have an agenda of lies and propoganda.

 

[AMcaptured]

The amazing part is that the "crime" here was the lying to a grand jury and its basically a he said/he said thing. Tim Russert testifiied one thing and Libby testified another. Plame was never "covert" and she wasn't very smart to send her husband off on an official trip considering he didn't work at the CIA.

I watched Meet The Press this morning and I thought Russert was lying, jmo, he had a very hard time following copy and reading off the teleprompter. I don't know what it was, I just thought that he realized that he was in the middle of this whirlwind and was wondering if he was honestly in the clear.

I also saw Al Haig on I believe CNN today and he said during the Nixon administration, he was brought in to testify before a grand jury and was basically told, you either incriminate the President or we will charge you with perjury. Scary stuff IMO. Does anyone think there are many people who wouldn't be guilty of something if they investigated you enough. Imagine trying to remember what you said to someone word for word two years ago, I would be charged with who knows what too.

The mainstream media is incredibly liberal and resents that the "average" person is able to find their news elsewhere now and that they no longer have a stronghold on what we hear about after all these years.

I think they are trying harder than ever to slant the truth to fit their agenda and we all know what their agenda is, to destroy Bush. They actually hate George Bush more than they love America, actually, do they even love America? I have to question that.

 

[bsnyder]

The amazing part is that the "crime" here was the lying to a grand jury and its basically a he said/he said thing. Tim Russert testifiied one thing and Libby testified another. Plame was never "covert" and she wasn't very smart to send her husband off on an official trip considering he didn't work at the CIA.

I watched Meet The Press this morning and I thought Russert was lying, jmo, he had a very hard time following copy and reading off the teleprompter. I don't know what it was, I just thought that he realized that he was in the middle of this whirlwind and was wondering if he was honestly in the clear.

I also saw Al Haig on I believe CNN today and he said during the Nixon administration, he was brought in to testify before a grand jury and was basically told, you either incriminate the President or we will charge you with perjury. Scary stuff IMO. Does anyone think there are many people who wouldn't be guilty of something if they investigated you enough. Imagine trying to remember what you said to someone word for word two years ago, I would be charged with who knows what too.

The mainstream media is incredibly liberal and resents that the "average" person is able to find their news elsewhere now and that they no longer have a stronghold on what we hear about after all these years.

I think they are trying harder than ever to slant the truth to fit their agenda and we all know what their agenda is, to destroy Bush. They actually hate George Bush more than they love America, actually, do they even love America? I have to question that.

I have to disagree with your assertion of a "he said/he said thing". I think the prosecutor has evidence on Libby that goes beyond that, and it comes from contradictory testimony from other Bush Administration officials.

I do agree that the Dems (and the MSM) are trying harder than ever. It's become increasingly clear to me that they will grow ever more desparate. And it's not even about President Bush so much any more. He can't run for office again in 2008. But the Dems are caught in a bind. They can't criticize the war effort directly, because then they get accused of not supporting the troops. And they're deathly afraid that at the end of the day (or before the 2008 election) that Iraq will be largely on the road to becoming a functioning democracy. And that the Bush Administration and the GOP will get credit for it. Every time something positive happens in Iraq that leads down that road (ratifying the constitution, continued increased turnout in the elections there, Iraqi forces increasingly taking over the security role) the more desparate the Dems will become. Their only hope is to sell the "Bush Lied us into War" theme. That way, even when the outcome in Iraq turns around, they can taint the amount of credit Bush gets.

 

[eclectics]

The amazing part is that the "crime" here was the lying to a grand jury and its basically a he said/he said thing. Tim Russert testifiied one thing and Libby testified another. Plame was never "covert" and she wasn't very smart to send her husband off on an official trip considering he didn't work at the CIA.

I watched Meet The Press this morning and I thought Russert was lying, jmo, he had a very hard time following copy and reading off the teleprompter. I don't know what it was, I just thought that he realized that he was in the middle of this whirlwind and was wondering if he was honestly in the clear.

I also saw Al Haig on I believe CNN today and he said during the Nixon administration, he was brought in to testify before a grand jury and was basically told, you either incriminate the President or we will charge you with perjury. Scary stuff IMO. Does anyone think there are many people who wouldn't be guilty of something if they investigated you enough. Imagine trying to remember what you said to someone word for word two years ago, I would be charged with who knows what too.

The mainstream media is incredibly liberal and resents that the "average" person is able to find their news elsewhere now and that they no longer have a stronghold on what we hear about after all these years.

I think they are trying harder than ever to slant the truth to fit their agenda and we all know what their agenda is, to destroy Bush. They actually hate George Bush more than they love America, actually, do they even love America? I have to question that.

Criticize George Bush = America Hater

Interesting that Bush himself distanced himself from people that think like that and called them "misguided". Kinda takes the wind out of your sails doesn't it.

 

[jimmiej]

Dan Rather

 

[LauraR]

Huh, what was it Bill Clinton got impeached for again?

 

[Pugdog007]

I had to turn it off.

 

[disykat]

Huh, what was it Bill Clinton got impeached for again?

Did I miss something?

 

[marybet]

Could this thread be more biased? Some people must believe everthing they read or hear on Fox. But why let the truth get in the way. Believe what ever gets you through the day. I believe I'll have a .

 

[bsnyder]

Could this thread be more biased? Some people must believe everthing they read or hear on Fox. But why let the truth get in the way. Believe what ever gets you through the day. I believe I'll have a .

So, what's your version of "the truth"? Care to comment on the selective editing of the NY Times piece?

 

[lyeag]

Could this thread be more biased? Some people must believe everthing they read or hear on Fox. But why let the truth get in the way. Believe what ever gets you through the day. I believe I'll have a .

Did you even see 60Minutes tonight? Pure emotion and drama. Nothing about the actual investigation, the charges, just more high drama about possible damage to the CIA.


At least FOX does try playing the devil's advocate once in while. By the way, I try to watch a little of everything to get a broad spectrum of the news. I watch FOX, CNN, MSnbc, the major news networks. That's why I caught 60 Minutes in the first place. I wasn't watching FOX

 

[daddydisneyworld]

So, what's your version of "the truth"? Care to comment on the selective editing of the NY Times piece?

Obviously, It's the DNC talking points, CBS, ABC, NBC, NYT, CNN...oops...didn't mean to be redundant. I shoulda stopped with DNC talking points, the others are just mouthpieces for the DNC talking points. It's sad that there are so many suckers out there who think those sources are unbiased, but FOX is tilted to the right. The reality is that things have been soooo slanted to the left for soooo long, that when a news organizatiuon ACTUALLY IS "Fair & Ballanced", it seems (to those who have been slaves to the alter of the left) that it is right leaning. The truth is, they (those on the left) have no perception of reality in which to ojectively judge.

 

[eclectics]

Obviously, It's the DNC talking points, CBS, ABC, NBC, NYT, CNN...oops...didn't mean to be redundant. I shoulda stopped with DNC talking points, the others are just mouthpieces for the DNC talking points. It's sad that there are so many suckers out there who think those sources are unbiased, but FOX is tilted to the right. The reality is that things have been soooo slanted to the left for soooo long, that when a news organizatiuon ACTUALLY IS "Fair & Ballanced", it seems (to those who have been slaves to the alter of the left) that it is right leaning. The truth is, they (those on the left) have no perception of reality in which to ojectively judge.

So every left of center Democrat including Senators, Supreme Court Judges, Harvard Graduates, Champions Of Industry, and Clergy who watches CNN etc. on a regular basis has absolutely no grip on reality? Interesting theory......

 

[bsnyder]

So every left of center Democrat including Senators, Supreme Court Judges, Harvard Graduates, Champions Of Industry, and Clergy who watches CNN etc. on a regular basis has absolutely no grip on reality? Interesting theory......

Not the poster you quoted, but I wouldn't say they have no grip on reality. Rather, they've griown accustomed to a media echo chamber for decades, that has selectively reported and distored the news to conform with the liberal agenda.

Why else would there be so much outrage over Fox? It's only ONE news outlet out of thousands.

 

[daddydisneyworld]

So every left of center Democrat including Senators, Supreme Court Judges, Harvard Graduates, Champions Of Industry, and Clergy who watches CNN etc. on a regular basis has absolutely no grip on reality? Interesting theory......

Yes, and thank you.

 

[eclectics]

Not the poster you quoted, but I wouldn't say they have no grip on reality. Rather, they've griown accustomed to a media echo chamber for decades, that has selectively reported and distored the news to conform with the liberal agenda.

Why else would there be so much outrage over Fox? It's only ONE news outlet out of thousands.

The poster insinuated that anyone on the left (not even just liberals, it's everyone on the left now) does not possess the intellegence to see a blatantly biased media report for what it is. I beg to differ. Anyone that doesn't believe FOX and CBS doesn't slant the news with bias is missing a few brain cells, imho. There are some, however that believe FOX and CBS tell the gospel truth and refuse to consider that they do not. All I am asking is please do not assume that we are all sheep following Dan Rather, just as I believe all those on the other side of the aisle do not worship Bill O'Reilly and Anne Coulter (I just got a keyboard shock typing her name!) Hmmm .

 

[eclectics]

Yes, and thank you.

That's about the response I expected