CTH Public Relations

• Torture by CO2HOG [May 02, 2012, 10:19:42 PM]
• China by CO2HOG [March 31, 2012, 02:24:13 PM]
• Global Warming Watch by TonyBlair [October 09, 2011, 06:41:37 PM]
• Solar Panel Doubts by TonyBlair [September 02, 2011, 08:25:23 AM]
• Barack Hussein Obama, Emp... by TonyBlair [August 10, 2011, 08:57:54 PM]
• National Debt Clocks and ... by Counter [August 08, 2011, 10:30:42 AM]
• Scanner or Pat Down? by Vocal Observer [June 28, 2011, 01:09:51 PM]
• Rise of the Police State by Vocal Observer [June 28, 2011, 01:01:03 PM]
• Who can we trust? by Vocal Observer [June 08, 2011, 01:07:59 PM]
• Anthony Wiener's wiener i... by CarolinaBuckeye [June 01, 2011, 11:29:22 PM]
• Democrat's Culture of Cor... by TonyBlair [May 18, 2011, 06:55:46 AM]
• Hey Obama..You want Taxes... by Vince the Fox [April 21, 2011, 03:12:25 AM]
• Obama Policy Watch by TonyBlair [April 20, 2011, 06:56:14 AM]
• George W. Obama by TonyBlair [April 19, 2011, 06:11:57 AM]
• The Religion of Peace Upd... by TonyBlair [April 12, 2011, 06:43:20 AM]

[Guest]

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever

Login with username, password and session length

Members

• Total Members: 329
• Latest: boborians

Stats

• Total Posts: 40602
• Total Topics: 5158
• Online Today: 16
• Online Ever: 252
• (April 10, 2011, 07:49:21 AM)

Users Online

Users: 0
Guests: 17
Total: 17

EducateWorthington.org

The 912 Project - Glenn Beck

912 Group of Central Ohio

Please let me know if you'd like your link added

Somebody please enlighten The Shadow;

After viewing over, and over, and over, and.... the Petro and Blackwell "hypocrite" commercials it is difficult to tell which one is the biggest.

The Shadow wants to know  :ph34r:  

Petro claims that Blackwell is a hypocrite because Blackwell has owned stock in immoral companies that violate the family values Blackwell says he upholds.

The truth is that Blackwell has a lot of financial holdings, and like many other people, it is managed as a blind trust. Around March, Blackwell in an annual review (and at the same time papers were filed making his information publicly available) found he had stock in objectionable companies, including a pharmaceutical that makes the morning-after pill, and the company that made the voting machines the state was getting everyone in the state to use. Blackwell immediately sold all the stocks which he felt were objectionable or a conflict-of-interest, some at a loss, and has given new instructions to his financial managers on these matters. I'm sure he's a little embarrassed and has learned from the experience, but it's really no different from any of us who might learn that a blind trust or a mutual fund has invested our money in something we would not like to be invested in.

Another Petro claim is about Blackwell owning radio stations that are promoting all kinds of filth. I don't know as much about this, but apparently he was invested in a radio station network which is aimed at the urban/black market. However, at a recent stop in Lorain County speaking with a group of black pastors, the pastors were raising objections to Petro's campaign characterizing the radio network as filth, because apparently it actually promotes a lot of family values type of things toward the black community.

Anyway, Blackwell was the only statewide office holder in 2004 to support the Ohio marriage amendment. Petro was strongly against it, and apparently still is, though he probably doesn't want to talk about it. Petro is claiming now to be pro-life, but several years ago was receiving endorsements from the pro-abortion crowd.

I guess that's enough and tells a lot of the story. Yes, I support Blackwell. He's the real conservative, and Petro is another Ohio Republican of the type we need fewer of. No, I'm not working for the Blackwell campaign. Yes, I have heard several of the radio ads recently on WTVN and WRFD from both Petro and Blackwell. It's getting pretty heated, obviously.

Tom

SkyHawk:

   I share your view of RINO Republicans and Petro affects me the same way DeWine and Voinovich do. Its time to take these political "traitors" to the "woodshed".......you can start this process with a vote for Bill Pierce for US Senate on Tuesday.

 Puger Gee Calabalini

Reutersgate strikes other news outlets
By SHEERA CLAIRE FRENKEL
   
Talkbacks for this article: 44

At first everyone thought they were just blowing smoke, but the debunking of a Reuters photograph by a group of Web sites has launched a fiery online war in which bloggers have taken on the mainstream media.

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?c=J...icle%2FShowFull

BBC accused of institutional 'trendy left-wing bias'
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article...#39;/article.do

Funny how when Lieberman leaves the Democrat Party to become an Independent, he is vilified and the talk is that democracy itself is threatened.

But when Bloomberg leaves the Republican Party, he is independent-minded and enlightened.


 

Funny how when Lieberman leaves the Democrat Party to become an Independent, he is vilified and the talk is that democracy itself is threatened.

But when Bloomberg leaves the Republican Party, he is independent-minded and enlightened.

A more interesting question is how the media will see a Bloomberg candidacy. Personally, I think it might hand the election to Clinton..

 

Politics in both cases.

Bloomberg was never a Republican, he simply used the Republican Party as a path to the mayoralty. The Republicans allowed this because the alternative was to go back to the days of Dinkins or Mark Green, and Bloomberg is better than that. A "real" republican is not going to win in New York City and I'd rather have the RINO than the Democrat. I think the makeup of the New York City Council is something like 48-3. Since Bloomberg can no longer benefit from the Republican Party label, best to ditch it now, so in that sense, he is enlightened.

Lieberman, on the other hand, got booted from the Democratic party in the primary. He won the general election with Republican votes and the Republicans allowed this to happen because Ned Lemont, the only viable alternative, was far worse than Lieberman. I think Ohio has it right in that if you lose in the primary, you should not be able to run in the general under a different party label, so that was the 'threat' to democracy.

 

Journalists dole out cash to politicians (quietly)
News organizations diverge on handling of political activism by staff

Most of the newsroom checkbooks leaned to the left: 125 journalists gave to Democrats and liberal causes. Only 17 gave to Republicans. Two gave to both parties.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19113485

Lieberman, on the other hand, got booted from the Democratic party in the primary.

I understand that Lieberman lost in the primary.

You'll have to explain to me how Lieberman was "booted from the Democratic party".

(This is just a rhetorical comment -- no need to reply.)

Your distinction between Lieberman and Bloomberg is correct.

If the Democrats pick up more Senate seats in the 08 elections I would expect Lieberman will lose his committee assignments -- if he wants any influence he'll be encouraged to formally become a Republican.

Last night on CNN Headline News, host Glenn Beck and former GOP consultant and radio host Michael Graham discussed a new video of President Bill Clinton and Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) spoofing the final episode of the Sopranos.

During the conversation, Graham asked Beck if he wanted to see the Clintons murdered in the video. “eriously, Glenn, didn’t you at one point want to see, like, Paulie Walnuts or someone come in and just whack them both right there. Wouldn’t that have been great?” Beck responded with a smile, “No, I did not want to see that.” Graham said, “C’mon. … I wanted that.”

Though Beck said he didn’t want to see the Clintons murdered on video, he smiled at the comments and failed to reprimand his guest or end the interview. Moreover, Michael Graham has a history of offensive remarks. In 2005, he was fired from Washington radio station WMAL-AM after he labeled Islam “a terrorist organization” on the air.

Previously, Beck has called Hillary Clinton “the stereotypical bitch” and said her “stereotypical, nagging” voice is “like an icepick” in my ear.

For the video:
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/06/21/beck-clinton/
 

The list: Journalists who wrote political checks
And their explanations, from ‘Yikes!’ to ‘They’re all in somebody’s pocket’
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19113455

REPORT: The Right Wing Domination Of Talk Radio And How To End It
The Center for American Progress and Free Press today released the first-of-its-kind statistical analysis of the political make-up of talk radio in the United States. It confirms that talk radio, one of the most widely used media formats in America, is dominated almost exclusively by conservatives.
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/06/20/radio-report

[No Free Market in Talk Radio]

No Free Market in Talk Radio

When stations drop liberal or progressive programming their ratings plummet. But they don’t care about ratings they just don’t want to carry liberal talk.

From ThinkProgress.org

Ed Schultz: ‘How Many Markets Do I Have To Beat Hannity In Before I Get 200 Or 300 Stations?’

Progressive radio host Ed Schultz appeared on MSNBC last night to discuss the new report by the Center for American Progress and Free Press, which revealed the conservative monopoly that currently exists over talk radio.

Schultz — the host of the most popular progressive radio show in the country — debunked the right-wing myth that conservatives dominate simply because they are winning in a “free market.” Schultz explained that the market is being controlled by a few ownership groups that are forcing conservative talk shows into local markets:

    I beat Sean Hannity in Denver. I beat him in Seattle. I beat him in Portland. I beat in San Diego. How many markets do I have to beat Hannity in before I get 200 or 300 stations? It’s an ownership issue. … The fact is, it’s market opportunities and liberal talkers, progressive talkers are being held to a totally different standard than conservatives.

Watch it: http://thinkprogress.org/

John Halpin — one of the principal authors of the radio report — noted that there is no “free market” under the current system. “There is little free speech or free choice in a market system that pushes out one-sided information 90 percent of the time on the radio,” he said. “Radio stations are licensed to operate in the public interest. Promoting one point of view over all others does not meet any reasonable public-interest standard.”

Transcript:  
    SCHULTZ: When you are talking about the spoken word, it influences a lot of people and it influences election in this country. There is no question. We are talking about market opportunities. Right now the liberal progressive format in this country — we are all fighting over the same 100 stations. Michael, I offer to you that ownership is an issue.

    There are conservative broadcast companies in this country that do not broadcast one single second of liberal talk radio.

    SMERCONISH: But Ed, I have to tell you something –

    (CROSS TALK)

    SMERCONISH: CBS would fire me in the morning and replace me with a communist if that communist would get them more revenue. It’s all about the scratch.

    SCHULTZ: That’s not true. Michael, that is not true. I have got one of the top talk shows in Seattle, and I am only on one station in the country with Infinity. That’s not true. We are not being given the fair market opportunity.

    SMERCONISH: I just don’t see it that way. I think it’s totally demand driven. And if were there a demand for whatever the program happened to be, believe me, they would put it on the air, because all they want to do is sell advertising and there is nothing wrong with that.

    SCHULTZ: You know, Michael that’s almost insulting me. I beat Sean Hannity in Denver. I beat him in Seattle. I beat him in Portland. I beat in San Diego. How many markets do I have to beat Hannity in before I get 200 or 300 stations? It’s an ownership issue. Salem Radio, Infinity does one, ABC owns Hannity. It comes down to ownership. Actually, Clear Channel has been better than any of them.

    The fact is, it’s market opportunities and liberal talkers, progressive talkers are being held to a totally different standard than conservatives.  
 

Just LOVE watching/listening to LIBERALS on their Orwelliann fantasy trips. Think Progress....Center for American Progress .....PROGRESS THIS....PROGRESS THAT !!! LOL...LOL Lets see .........George Soros hiding out DEJA VU. Barbara Streisand is what it is. Clear Channel is in business to make money ..not bleed green. Get a life !!!


 Puger G.

I have my own theories about why liberal talk shows don't make it on radio.

If you think about the "liberal" base they are often the poor/under educated who rely on "tv" to get their information... they like visuals and the drama and the pictures

The wealthy liberals are too busy making money to listen to talk radio... what do they care after all,  as long as it doesn't affect their money.

The "talk radio" listening audiences are your middle income/hardworking on the road (truckers come to mind) on the go workforce of america that tune in and listen as we are busy about our day rather than turning on and sitting down in front of the tv...

Where liberal talk shows make it are generally in the blue states capitals.
Like minds you know!!

my rambling thought... now off to work through my day with my talk radio tuned in.

IN Freedom