Robertson to Horowitz: There's "sort of a shadowy group called Media Matters. Tell me about that one"
Appearing on the August 24 edition of the Christian Broadcasting Network's The 700 Club, right-wing activist David Horowitz joined host Pat Robertson in smearing Media Matters for America and billionaire philanthropist George Soros. In discussing Horowitz's new book, The Shadow Party: How George Soros, Hillary Clinton, and Sixties Radicals Have Seized Control of the Democratic Party (Nelson Current, 2006), Robertson asked Horowitz to discuss the "sort of a shadowy group called Media Matters." Horowitz responded, claiming: "I've been attacked for many years. I have never encountered a group with lower ethical standards than Media Matters." Horowitz and Robertson also attacked Soros, repeating the baseless slur that Soros, a Hungarian-born Jew, collaborated with the Nazis as a 14-year-old boy. Horowitz also claimed that the newly launched Colorado Media Matters was part of a Soros plan "to take over the political structure of the United States."
Media Matters for America's August 2 critique of The Shadow Party exposed the book's "doctored quotes, shoddy scholarship, factual errors, and baseless insinuations on matters both small and large." Both Horowitz and Poe promised three weeks ago that they would provide "exhaustive" and "full-blown" rebuttals to Media Matters. As of this date, neither Horowitz nor Poe has posted such a rebuttal.
From the August 24 edition of The 700 Club:
ROBERTSON: Well now, you've got -- I just want to read some of them. MoveOn.org, Center for American Progress, America Votes, America Coming Together, The Media Fund, Joint Victory Campaign, the Thunder Road Group, and then there's another group that's sort of a shadowy group called Media Matters. Tell me about that one.
HOROWITZ: Media Matters is run by David Brock, who made a career, by his own account, out of lying and smearing people. It's a site that anybody in media, I'm sure that you're up there --
ROBERTSON: Oh yes.
HOROWITZ: -- knows is the lowest -- you know, I've been attacked, like you I've been attacked for many years. I have never encountered a group with lower ethical standards than Media Matters. Soros and John Podesta, who was [former President Bill] Clinton's chief of staff and runs the Center for American Progress, set this group up and funded it. It is now -- they've opened a new office in Colorado. This is part of a Soros plan to take over the political structure of the United States, to end the war on terror as we know it, and to, as he puts it, burst the bubble of American supremacy. These are people -- this is really the left-wing agenda, that America is the problem, that America has to be defeated. But now, it has behind it -- it's not just the [filmmaker] Michael Moores and [anti-war activist] Cindy Sheehans. It has behind it a billionaire who has put together the most powerful juggernaut in the history of American politics.
ROBERTSON: You know, you sound like somebody on the conservative side who was writing about the Council on Foreign Relations or the Trilateralists. I mean, but this may be worse.
HOROWITZ: Exactly, because, you know, the Council on Foreign Relations people who -- that was always behind-the-scenes power. This you can trace the actual power. They have the money. You can't run as a [Connecticut Democratic Senate candidate] Ned Lamont, a nobody, and defeat a sitting U.S. senator, unless you have the money and the ground troops to get out the vote. And that's what happened in Connecticut. They brought in 30,000 new voters. They have a whole -- it's in effect a party apparatus which they can deploy so that they can control the Democratic Party.
[...]
ROBERTSON: Last question. Soros, who I understand he's a Hungarian Jew, who should be against communism and socialism, wants to create a socialist world under the United Nations? Is that what you're saying?
HOROWITZ: That's exactly right. And there's really no mystery. He's also said that the capitalist system is the number one problem. Soros, when he was young, the family name was Schwartz. It was changed to Soros in 1936. And when he was a young man in fascist Hungary, he came under the protection of one of the fascist leaders of Hungary, and they went around -- he was a young man, to be said in his defense, there -- but he went around confiscating Jewish property prior to sending the Jews who owned it to the gas chambers. Now, he was asked on 60 Minutes by [co-host] Steve Kroft if he felt any guilt over that, and he said none whatsoever.
This is a man who is used to power and is a megalomaniac. I mean he said his ambition is to be the conscience of the world. How mania -- megano -- megalomaniacal is that? He wants to be the conscience of the world, that means he wants -- that is the socialist idea, that they are going to reorder all of us, and make us, you know, create God's kingdom on earth by political means. That's why they're dangerous.
[...]
ROBERTSON: Terry.
TERRY MEEUWSEN (co-host): Shocking.
ROBERTSON: Are you shocked?
MEEUWSEN: I am shocked.
ROBERTSON: Imagine a Jewish man going around confiscating the property of fellow Jews in Nazi-dominated Hungary. It's horrible.
MEEUWSEN: David said that it's pretty easy to follow this power trail. You hope that people are smart enough to see that.
ROBERTSON: Well, they're not, unfortunately.
Horowitz is a piece of work. Talk about whining and complaining. If this website is so sleazy, shadowy, unethical and the lowest of the lows - then what is his worry anyway? Just brush them aside then.
I have said this website is very partisan, their right. I have said they only highlight conservative media information, their right. I have said there is more to the story in the media and misinformation exists from all sides. But to level these types of accusations against this website is desperate, fear mongering, ridiculous, childish, whiny, slimy, disgusting and petty.
Horowitz needs to sell a book, try being forthright and honest - maybe you'll sell a few more instead of peddling them on hysteria.
I can't believe that a "christian" would actually insinuate that Soros helped the Nazis, its bad enough to attack him for being wealthy and opinioned, but to attack someone over religion, is simply disgusting. I also can't believe that a group that says they want to unify the country are as divisive as they are. I tried to watch the 700 club once, but was so disgusted by the way that robertson gave the news that I now refuse to watch the channel that I saw it on. I also like at the end robertson basically calling people stupid.
rather than Christianity. The good "Christians" I know do not wear $1000 suits and go around bragging about their "good works", they just go about life treating everyone fairly and equally, to the best of their ability, despite the "handicap" of being human with the associated foibles.
...there's your mistake -- believing that Pat Robertson is a Christian. All you have to do is listen to what he says and watch what he does, and you know right off the bat that this man in no Christian, no man of G_d at all by any stretch of the imagination.
If he were a just God and not the vengeful God of Pat Robertson and Ned Flanders, he would smite Pat today. Too bad it couldn't have been during the interview with Horowitz, He could have been the collateral damage.
God will not be waiting for them at the pearly gates for them, nor will 72 virgins.
MMFA must be doing something right to be attacked by these leading lights of the American Taliban.
Call me brainwashed, but I think MMFA is a real asset, a true beacon in these dark times, and while I don't know anything about Mr. Soros, I do know a little bit about Mr. Robertson; my faith isn't with Robertson. Keep shining the light on these freaks of nature, MMFA, keep telling the truth -- victory cannot, surely cannot be so far away.
was just as quick to point out Liberal missinformation as Conservative. That would make for a better site. EQUALITY FOR ALL..
Good luck with it.
lolololol... Granted, I do not see many liberals on the media casting hate speach. However, libs like Barbara Boxer have plenty of skeletons.
You were asked for an example or two. Instead you respond like a retarded 12-year old. Nice try.
that in the US military has no combat ready troops?
[link to newsbusters.org]
Follow that link to her saying it on Letterman.
the US barely has any combat ready troops
I don't see where Newsbusters showed any links to legitimate (or any for that matter) sources to rebut what Pelosi said. They only provide a video of what she said. That is just the first step with MMFA.
Now much of what Pelosi said could be regarded as opinion as well. And as many conservatives here often point out, that isn't really misinformation.
Thank you for providing further evidence of MMFA's inarguable superiority.
If you guys were as open-minded as I am (I say that jokingly) who checks this site daily you should feel inclined to do the same on www.newsbusters.org. I check both so I get conservative "misinformation" and liberal "misinformation" the best of both worlds.
They are not very convincing. For example, yesterday they railed on Hannah Storm for talking about global warming as if were real. OMG! BIAS! Then they back that up with a six year old link and a few links to the six or so minority climate scientists--you know, the ones NOT publishing in peer reviewed literature--who are deniers. Mostly they whine because the media dares to say anything other than Bush is a great president. Occasionally they come up with a good point. But they are few and far between.
same thing about this place.
crimson gave an example. all you have to do is show where things are wrong on here.
one example with links to objective sources (i.e. direct quotes, data, stats, and other fun FACTs).
And your first two guesses don't count.
That's right, it's the poster who said that Nancy Pelosi said that the US didn't have any combat-ready troops.
What she said was there are almost no combat-ready units IN the United States.
They are almost all in Iraq.
If something else happens around the world, we up the creek without a paddle.
So, challenged with coming up with an example, you have to lie to do so.
What a group the rightwingers are in general, and what a loser you are in particular. Falsely smearing Nancy Pelosi in an attempt to deflect attention from gross, undeniable errors on the part of those whom you support.
So what are you claiming that there is no liberal disinformation? Seriously? You don't believe both sides skew the facts to some degree to support their agendas?
Man stop sipping the koolaid please.
It would be nice if there was a site out there that did fairly address both sides (at least as fair as I believe MMFA typically addresses the conservative misinformation.) The ones touted as conservative counterparts by a few righty posters here don't seem to hold a candle to MMFA, but that doesn't mean I don't think liberal disinformation doesn't exist.
disinformation indicates intent, misinformation indicates ignorance; should have proof read.
So to clarify, I believe that both sides have those who will intentionally distort facts or distort by omission .
PLEASE GIVE SOME EXAMPLES.
You can't. Liberals don't control the media, even though the right wing would have you believe otherwise.
It amazed me that the media would report some sort of wrong doing by a Republic and Limbaugh would scream bloody Liberal media for 3 hours a day, but when Bill Clinton was bastardized daily by the media, that was A-OK.
Know the truth--Republic lawmakers tend to be crooked more often than Democratic lawmakers. The media reports it all, but there is so much more to report with the GOP.
Bryant Gumbel: "Before he cleans out his office," Gumbel said, "have Paul Tagliabue show you where he keeps Gene Upshaw's leash. By making the docile head of the players union his personal pet, your predecessor has kept the peace without giving players the kind of guarantees other pros take for granted. Try to make sure no one competent ever replaces Upshaw on your watch."
One can only assume that this never made it on MMFA because of Gumbels left leanings. He has said other controversial things as well, as I'm sure you are aware.
Anyway, this is just one that comes to mind.
Man I hope you have a better example than that. Since it is neither political nor even liberal nor conservative. Maybe there should be a Media Matters for sports quotes that covers that one.
I am certainly sure there is a example of a liberal saying something inappropriate but Bryant Gumbel's quote is a reach on the scale of saying George Bush is intelligent!
Portraying a black man as a dog on a leash doesn't bother you then so-be-it. Had Limbaugh or O Reilly said it you may have a different take.
Gumbel also said the Winter Olympics don't showcase the best athletes because there aren't enough blacks participating, that was probably a better example.
If the context were different, we would feel different.
Context is everything. You do realize that talking about Laura Bush putting George Bush on a leash is entirely different than say putting hooded naked prisoners on leashes by guards. Or Gumbels remarks for that matter.
I thought Gumbel's remarks demonstrated how docile the NFL Players Union seems in comparisson to other sports' player's unions. The context wan't racial at all.
Ignoring the context as we often see the right (and left at times do) is just promoting a false equivalency.
It is why Jeff Foxworthy can call us white guys "rednecks" and most of us find it funny. Although many white people may be offended if called the same by a person of a different ethnicity.
Yes, before I became enlightened by everyone here I thought that context was the key in evaluating remarks made by people.
But I've since learned that I was wrong about that from all the geniuses around here that are not only expert mind-readers but also have masters degrees in race-relations.
"Yes, before I became enlightened by everyone here I thought that context was the key in evaluating remarks made by people." --Bruce
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I don't know who told you context wasn't important, but it wasn't me. Context is everything when it comes to these kinds of remarks. Anyone around here who says different is feeding you a line.
I agree with you that people on the left do that sometimes, but in my opinion they aren't being liberal in doing so. They are just being blind partisans who warp what they are looking at in order to fit their argument.
I wasn't commenting on Bryant's quote at all since it wasn't political. I don't know enough or care enough about Gene Upshaw's time as the head of the player's union to comment. It's football, not even remotely political. Oh yea who said Bryant Gumble is a liberal commentator? It's call Real Sports and has no connection whatever so ever to politcs. Now that is different from a politcal commentator such as Druggy Limbaugh going on ESPN and making racist comments. Since he is a political commentator. Now if Bryant goes on Limbaugh show and makes a racist comment then it could appear here, but again not sure whether Bryant is consider a liberal.
Oh yea who said Bryant Gumble is a liberal commentator?
Response: Get serious.
I have never known Bryant Gumble to make any politcal statement. Is disliking Gene Upshaw a liberal position now? What about not liking the Cowboys? Maybe I am a conserative depending on how that falls down the line
Oh wait 10 years ago he worked on today and there fore is part of the "Liberal Media" ok i get you inane logic now.
His views on a variety of social issues are well known. It's not difficult to determine his ideology. Just google it.
factcheck.org
It covers both Dem an Rep misinfo
You are naive if you think Karl Rove doesn't have a similar cell, monitoring all media, to cherry pick what he would consider "liberal" bias. To you, and Tommy, I suggest signing up with the Rove Information Agency and starting a similar site on the other side of the coin. I'll wait patiently.
you're chasing your tail with those comments. if you feel you need such information, feel free to go to those sites that claim to do it.
are allegedly liberal. MMA frequently posts statements by members of the mainstream media, including NBC's cast of Matt Lauer, Katie Couric, Brian Williams, Nora O'Donnell, as well as others. So, I would say MMA does point out misinformation and lack of critical questioning by liberals. Nevertheless, if you want aless partisan critique of both the liberal and conservative points of view, try FAIR (www.fair.org).
Plato
Can anyone at Media Matters leg press 2,000 pounds?
"Where does Pat find the time and energy to host a daily, national TV show, head a world-wide ministry, develop visionary scholars, while traveling the globe as a statesman?
One of Pat's secrets to keeping his energy high and his vitality soaring is his age-defying protein shake. Pat developed a delicious, refreshing shake, filled with energy-producing nutrients.
Discover what kinds of natural ingredients make up Pat's protein shake by registering for your FREE booklet today! "
[link to www.cbn.com]
Developing visionary scholars? Traveling the globe as a statesman? Now he's selling Snake Oil?.
I think the mice have chewed through the wiring in Pat's head.
...and colludes with dictators in Africa to mine diamonds. He isn't just a smug and self-righteous pseudo-Christian. He is evil. Evil. Evil. Evil.
The diamonds that come from the regions Robertson mines are called blood diamonds because hands are amputated to keep members of this tribe or that from mining them. Hearts are stilled. Children orphaned. All so that Pat can have his tv station and his jet and his smug, stinking smile. If you cut Pat Robertson, black goo would ooze out.
Check out this: [link to www.thenation.com] Robertson. Is. Evil.
Sometimes I wish there is a Hell...for Hitler and Himmler and Robertson.
And those of you familiar with my posts know that I've never been this harsh before, but Robertson is deserving.
Robertson is a thug with a crucifix. He is an evil, twisted, little man. He's another fear peddler, nothing more. He understood what Marx meant about religion and has been selling his special opiate his entire life. He has made millions by exploiting the weaknesses of his followers and the suffering of the poor. He should be ashamed of himself.
I can attest to Holly's meekness in her prior posts. I wish I had your self control, Holly. I'm trying though.
He just can't, given the life he's led. Look at a fellow like Nobel. He reached the end of his life and panicked. Perhaps Carnegie did too. But Robertson won't repent. Rather, he smiles and smiles and smiles. Like the Joker in the first Batman movie, if you pushed him off a skyscraper, he'd die, but he'd still be smug. He'd still be smiling.
...I lurk in chat rooms and occasionally encounter people praising Brother Pat.
"With all the good he does for people around the world, he's entitled to some wealth as a reward from God!"
"That is a Liberal Media Lie!"
they still defend his wanting to murder Chavez...THAT is scary...
if there is no G-d, because then Robertson will end up not going to h--l anyway.
A respondent above referred to Robertson as a Christian. True Christians are people who follow the Gospel message of Jesus and try their human best to live that out in their daily lives. To do that they have to know the Gospels. Robertson is a fraud. The book of Revelation and the Hebrew Scriptures are not, and never will be the Gospel. Like so many other fundamentalists, Robertson ignores the message of the Gospels in his quest to scare the hell out of people with his last days paranoia. No matter how many times on the tube he screws up his face as he "prays," he will never be a Christian. God being God can do anything, even to talk to Robertson. But I have a hard time believing anything this angry, hateful person says, knowing full well that there are large numbers of people who believe his every word. God help them.
Where is your big response to MMFA as promised? We're all waiting to see you take down this "shadowy" group with almost no ethical standards. C'mon Dave. We're waiting.
In the meantime, Pat Robertson & flunky doubting the intelligence of the MMFA reader?
Too rich.
does George Soros fund media matters?
just curious . Not that it would matter to me.
Horowitz has a point here. In all the years that he has spent faithfully lying, slandering, & spreading disinformation in the cause of fascism, he has never, within the MSM, had to face the sort of vile, sleazy tactics that Media Matters has employed against him. David Brock & his ilk have stooped to using VERBATIM, IN CONTEXT SCRIPTS OF HIS COMMENTS, backed up by VIDEO & AUDIO! This is a BLATANTLY UNFAIR TACTIC! How is Horowitz to be expected to deny MMFA's claims & accuse them of distorting or fabricating his words if they're going to do this? NO ONE ELSE in th MSM does this? Why MMFA?
Horowitz & his collaborators (Coulter, Malkin, Hannity, Limpaugh, O'Reilly, et al) have the right to earn a living, so what right does MMFA have in interfering with their seeking their piece of the American Dream. Since smearing those that disagree with the neocon cause is their only shot at an opulant lifestyle, this is an unfair assault upon their very dreams... upon America itself!
Further, there can be no jusification for attacking Horowitz', as it is plainly obvious that the man suffers from a severe brain malady. His poor, stammering, disjointed, incoherent ramblings clearly demonstrate this. If he is not allowed to openly lie, then what course of action IS left to him?
It was time that someone finally challenged MMFA for their cruel & unfair tactics.
Thank God there are still men of integrity such as Pat Robertson around to do it.
Not only that, but Horowitz is really 6'2", has long blonde hair and the physique of a Greek god, but the dissemblers (that means people who lie) at Media Matters put up a photo of him that makes him look like a demented dwarf.
Now that's funny!
Robertson makes me ashamed to call myself a Christian.
Vast left wing conspiracy! Hear all about it! Right christian moralists smear evil leftist conspiracists!
The best way to discuss Horowitz's book is to have someone from both sides of the discussion, but that would be...open dialogue. GASP... What media outlet wants that? The dirty trick the low life Media Matters for America plays is to include the video and thus the evidence of the interview. Forget violence and sex, this should be rated X for immorality.
And, oh by the way, you christians out there... Welcome to the real world. There is no more morality inherent in christianity than there is in atheism. It's the people...
As for being inclusive in the misstatements, mistakes, propaganda of the left, we have the entire FOX network for that, Rush Limbaugh, Karl Rove, Dick Chaney, Anne "I have a best seller so what does truth matter anyway" Coulter, and Congress to tell us lefties all the things we do wrong. Media Matters is a voice in the darkness. If you want a site that distills information from the media without an agenda see: Columbia Journalism Review Daily. They focus on all sides of the media.
Check out frontpage magazine.com if you want to see insults, smears and attacks. MM quite admirably stops short of insulting the people it tracks. It simply lays out what they said wiith the facts....
Getting mad and trying to insult MM is like arguing with a robot.
The people at Frontpage could track Democrats or leftists or whatever but it doesn't...hell those writers never even feel the need to reference sources.. I posted on Frontpage concerning Horowitz's book and mentioned MM critiique. I was told iit was a Soros outfit...and therefore not worth looking at. After all David Brock is a "liar" and Soros is a "Nazi"...This cultic mind control sh*t sure works good.
Horowitz trots out the old talking point about how David Brock made a living "telling lies". What he fails to mention is that the REPUBLICANS paid him to tell those lies. He has since had an attack of conscience and is trying to help the good guys.
Who are the Republicans paying to tell their lies now?
is hard to disseminate when the fascists own the obsequious media establishment. The whole argument simply misdirects the discussion away from the point of this article. Horowitz destroys his own argument when he attacks Soros for being a Jew who wants to take over the political control of this country. Soros would have to wrest it away from the Israel lobby.
So what is the beef with this little leprechaun Horowitz anyway? I mean does this guy seriously suffer from a Napoleonic complex or what?
Conservatives hate George Soros with a passion... going so far as to call him a Nazi collaborator and moan and groan because he funds those eeeeevil "libruul" causes! Yet they have no problem with the DOZENS of conservative sugar daddy's and half *ssed outfits that have pumped BILLIONS into these boiler room "think tanks" and "advocacy" groups etc... check out the list at: [link to www.mediatransparency.org]
I say to these conservatives who have a problem with Soros... TOUGH! Deal with it because he is not going anywhere and is not intimidated by trolls like Horowitz and clowns like Robertson (who make a mockery of Christianity every time he opens his mouth)... these two are amusing and only hinder their "cause" (read: take money from the easily fooled readers and viewers)...
these Idiot Boys on the wacko-Right accuse those of us who actually want what's best for America and Americans (and the rest of the world as well) of doing the very heinous things that they are doing.
Reread the transcript. With the exception of their vile Soros smears, it reads like a roadmap (their word) of THEIR plans for world domination.
Typical. Always try to divert attention from your own disgusting activities by setting up strawman arguments.
I'm also heartily sick of Liberals actually giving ANY credence whatsoever to the Repugs' sick rhetoric. The fault lies not with us. Get a spine, for god's sake! Do you think these neo-con monsters for one minute stop to examine their own motives and activities?
Read "Conservatives Without Conscience" by John Dean. Very incisive.
Scullygrrrl.
I'm so heartily sick of navel-gazing by Liberals who actually, for even one second, give any time or attention to these nasty, untrue accusations by conservatives who give NO thought to their own vile motives.
Attack, attack and attack some more. All we need to do is hold up a mirror to them to expose them to all the world for the liars and charlatans that they are! That's what "The Daily Show" does, and does brilliantly!
you do put the grrr in grrrl and that's grrreat.
Yeah, Jon Stewart, our nation's court jester, is the only one allowed to tell the truth.
It's interesting that he's also so civil to his guests. Decency and humor and frankness. How many millions of American women would love to bear his love child?
that the only outlets we have for real, truthful news in this country are comedy shows? Jon Stewart and Bill Maher ROCK!
I'm in the middle of reading it now. It's very informative. I'm travelling next week, so I'll be able to finish it on the plane. So far, I would recommend it to anyone, whether liberal or conservative.
CSL
a Rockefeller Republican (at least, he WAS a Republican) who has integrity. How few of them there are, alas...
don't wander off.
Stay.
Stay.
Please.
We need more grrrls at MM. It's Boys Town, which isn't bad, except for the cooties.
I've noticed there are quite a few trolls posting here. They piss me off and I have a hard time being civil. Their talking points seldom seldom contain even a kernel of truth, so it's like talking to a rock. You burn up the keyboard citing governments studies and news services and they just keep typing what Rush and Sean and Karl Rove tell them to. Sort of like Bushie-Boy at a news conference.
Talk about your non sequiturs...
David Horowitz has shot up the ladder of righty extremists who I hate the most. He accuses MMFA of being the worst smear merchant he has ever seen, even though they do not call names, etc. They analyze SUBSTANCE of what people say, and provide the audio and/or video, and leave the smearing to us in the comments. But what gets me the most is that Horowitz's entire existence is to try to ruin lives of teachers. He wrote a book calling out specific teachers BY NAME, and accusing them of indoctrinating students, etc. to the "librul" way of thinking, as if no right wing teachers exist. My wife is a teacher. We live in GA, a state that voted nearly 70% for Bush in 2000. The teacher parking lot used to have "W" stickers on every car (the number has diminished recently :) ). My wife dared to mention before the '04 election that she was going to vote for Kerry, to three coworkers. They teamed up on her IN FRONT OF HER 4TH GRADE CLASS, and told her she was crazy to not vote for Bush, and that Kerry was a vote for terrorists. DO NOT TELL ME, MR. HOROWITZ, THAT ALL TEACHERS ARE LIBERAL. NOT IN THE STATE OF GEORGIA!! OR ALABAMA, OR MISSISSIPPI, ETC. Thanks for letting me get that out.
Let's see, the government is controlled and backed by the K St group and corporations. The left gets the backing of a few wealthy individuals and somehow this is a threat to the American population. Right. Horriblewitz and Robuttson are upset that there are actually organizations that espouse a different point of view, but don't have any problems with the right wing support groups that only now being exposed. They sound like a bunch of winers because someone actually came to the ballfield to play!
Way to go MMA. You are my shining, shadowy hero!
...there's "sort of a shadowy group called Media Matters."
"a...group called Media Matters" is the sort of phrasing one would use when has a loose familiarity with the group.
It's disingenuous.
I suspect that Robertson and Horowitz are quite familiar with MM. They probably obsess about it. They probably read every thread that cites their lies and hatred. They probably have loosed many diatribes about MM. But they're playing it cool, even though MM probably makes them hot under the collar.
Is it not the height of irony for conservatives to be shocked by the influence of money in politics?
...MMFA isn't shadowy. That's just your senility making them seem that way.
Pat Robertson and Horowitz are part of a cabal that can be aptly described as an organization of stupid clowns. May be this stupid ass didnt know that the MEDIA MATTERS was started by someone (David Brock) who used work the right wingers.
I am surprised that anyone takes these liars and stupid people seriously.
Media Matters for America is a Web-based, not-for-profit, 501(c)(3) progressive research and information center dedicated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media.
Just which part of that is giving you wingnuts trouble? It's the first damned paragraph and you're whining about what a raw deal scum like bor and the rest of al bushira gets. I'm sure Brent Bozell will tell you what you want to hear. It'll be pure horsebrit but it'll be what you want to hear.
The facts have a liberal bias. Deal with it.
It takes a wise man to write, "The facts have a liberal bias."
Hemingway urged wanna-be writers to write one good sentence. You just did it, wise man.
is right- I've tried (mostly unsuccessfully) to explain to rightys i know that if the news seems to be full of stuff that makes one side or the other look bad, it's not necessarily bias- there could just be more negeative news about them.
I think I got through to one dittohead I worked with using a sports(caster) analogy. I asked him if our local sportscaster, over the course of a season, reported more wins for the Lakers than the Clippers, would that prove an anti-Clippers bias?
No. although it could be possible that he was very pro-Lakers, it's possible he was completely objective, and the Clippers just suck.
MMFA ... "the most powerful juggernaut in the history of American politics." David Horowitz - 08/24/2006
Read about it here:
[link to holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com]
Also, Horowitz posts articles written by a suspected Holocaust denier on his site - so why does he pontificate about the Holocaust?
[link to holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com]
Neither Robertson or Horowitz said anything about what Media Matters does. They talked about Soros, and how horrible he was and how Jewish he was... and said he was associated with a shadowy organization with media in its name.
The econversation actually has a big Jews-control-the-media vibe. It seems intended to lead the typical 700 Club viewer to assume that those billions go toward buying up media outlets.