To be frank, I thought fbair1 was refering in his post to just the big three network organizations and not the cable news stations - that is why I felt he won the argument.

CNN was founded by Ted Turner - I think he is out now - but it was historically a left of center organization in my humble opinion.

“Speaking of Big Fat Idiots

Those would be the citizens and voters of Minnesota.They elected a fool and laughing stock. In my opinion”

Granted, but in her defense, you gotta admit Michele Bachmann is working to disenfranchise those idiots by persuading them to illegally boycott the census.

Excuse me, if it's expanded to include cable, I know that would no longer be considered "network." But we are still at 2 networks Democrat-owned, versus 1 Republican-owned, versus 1 unaffiliated.

See the correction post regarding excising the cable networks. But Fox is certainly one of four networks, there aren't only three. He said "all," not "half," which your data shows.

i'm in a bit of a rush and have only picked out a few lines of this article to read so far. calling rush a "big fat idiot" is way too kind. as far as Fox goes, they should be experts at stolen elections. 2000 ring a bell, folks? at this moment, sarah palin is making a statement on her decision not to seek re-election or finish her first term. as usual, she's making NO SENSE. dear God, please make her go away.

You have a point that not all are liberal.

My opinion in general is Democrats hold greater sway in TV land and Republicans hold greater sway in radio land.

Which is the best medium?

Don't know?

O'Reilly, Hannity and company are just upset that a REAL comedian is now in the Senate. They are unintentionally funny (when they're not being stupid and dangerous). Big difference.

from fbair1's claim of a complete stranglehold. Plenty of GOP views are aired on TV, I can hardly turn on my TV without hearing it blared out -- which wouldn't bother me, except that it's all this illogical yelling. If you're going to work for the dark side, don't insult my intelligence. Give me someone who argues logically. But political operatives don't do that. And there is very little right-wing press, radio or TV media people that are not simple, political operatives. It's degrading to the public discourse.

Limbaugh's ilk call Franken "evil." But even if I thought a right-winger were evil, I'd prefer him to be an intelligent, logical thinker, than a bellowing clod.

Love Obama or not, this sunk you guys. Obama's sweet spot was saying to the world, "we're capable of more elevated discourse," befitting a man with an advanced, Ivy League education. These political operatives for the GOP have painted themselves into a corner with their illogical ad hominem attacks. Since Obama answered saying, "we're better than this" (cannily enough, since it's really saying "we're better than the GOP"), the GOP has no answer. They just look like name-calling children, and stupid ones at that. How will you fix that?

Rock on, Limbaugh. Keep on painting.

If Palin is going to run in 2012 it will be interesting.

She could follow the Obama pattern:

2 years in the Senate

4 years in the White House

Another historic presidency

While ownership certainly plays a role in programming, it is not a monolithic role. ABC's ownership, according to posters here, qualifies as "liberal." But take a look at the lineup for Sunday's episode of "This Week:" George Will, Liz Cheney, former Bush-Cheney strategist Matthew Dowd, and Cynthia Tucker. I can't argue with Steve Benen's assessment of this roundtable:

"It's the kind of ideological balance we've come to expect on the Sunday morning shows. Consider the breakdown of the four roundtable guests: one conservative pundit (Will), one liberal pundit (Tucker), and two former employees of the Bush/Cheney team, including yet another appearance for the former vice president's daughter."

Thanks for your reply, Uncle G. And I have to be honest: over the last eight years, at least when it came to terrorism, I have been inclined to place the fear-mongering on one side of the aisle, while placing the craven acquiescence on the other side of the aisle. But when it comes to economic stimuli and healthcare reform, both sides seem to be equally fond of the bogeyman.

Salon is vocabulary challenged. Rather than substantive editorial opinion, Salonites call names.....rather juvenile.

Lefty, Lefty, Lefty.......na na na na na!!!!!

Listen,

The party out of power always rails against the White House - for 8 years Bush could do nothing right and the news generally agreed unless you watched Fox (fair and balanced - maybe not - but consistant - yes)

Now POTUS is working his programs - blaming W for the mess - but eventually (I believe after year 1) Obama will have to take responsibility for his actions.

The news media is hedging - starting to question Obama and very happy to let Rush and Sean lead them. If it goes bad for Obama - the network orgs will turn on him like they turned on John McCain (he never really had anything to offer anyway).

Franken will do the same - if he sees Obama succeeding he will jump on the band wagon - if he sees or is able to see trouble ahead he will have to show his courage and buck the Democratic tide or get swallowed alive by the news and recycled Republicans who will never stop attacking (they are out of power so what else is there to do?)

The idiots at the WSJ conveniently forgot that Bush effectively became President of the US by STEALING an election in a move that made the US be the laughter of the world, gave those who hate us great ammunition to hate us more and those who envy us great ammunition to say how idiots we are. The same WSJ idiots supported and validated that so called "election" and we must thank them for the loss of respect we have gained around the world.