Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR) reminds us that antigay activists like Alan Chambers aren’t the only victims of ABC commentator John Stossel.
This time, the victim is no less than trial lawyer and vice presidential candidate John Edwards.
L
Poor John Edwards, “victim” of John Stossel. I’m sure he can console himself with all of the millions he has made as an attorney. Interestingly, this “man of the people” never bothered doing any free legal work for the poor EVER.
FAIR is a ridiculous organization. Any criticism of a Democrat is interpreted as “partisan.” Never mind that Stossel has done many pieces criticizing Republicans. The guy is a libertarian—he’s pro-choice, pro-gay, anti-war on drugs, anti-victimless crime laws.
FAIR’s idea that the media has to present a “fair and balanced” point of view is total rubbish, especially coming from the far left. Does “The Nation” have conservative writers? If FAIR doesn’t like ABC, they should shut it off or start their own “fair and balanced” network.
Mark, don’t be silly. Some of us recognize that “libertarian” is little more than another term for “Republican.” Ron Paul, who ran for president on the Libertarian Party a few years ago, is now a representative in the House from Texas. And several years ago, we received a fund-raising letter from him on behalf of Jesse Helms, of all people.
“Libertarian”? Give me a break.
Most Republicans are way too liberal on economic issues for me.
FAIR seeks to disprove the notion that the media are “liberal.” It acts as a counterpoint to such conservative media watchdogs as Brent Bozell. I believe FAIR’s call for fairness and balance is about as sincere as that of Fox News. (In other words, the partisans on both sides may actually believe they are seeking fairness and balance, but observers simply chuckle.)
John Stossel’s productions are effective but, like Michael Moore’s, one-sided. Viewers know ahead of time that the arguments and evidence will be weighted toward libertarian outcomes.
Raj, are you suggesting that libertarians are Republicans, or that Libertarians are Republicans? I see a big difference between libertarians and Libertarians.
Good points, Mike!
Raj, Ron Paul is a Republican and a Libertarian. He has maintained his membership in the LP as a “lifetime member.” And although he is officially a GOP member in the House, the party establishment hates him and has been trying to get rid of him ever since he was elected to Congress. I don’t know about any fund raising letter he may have sent on behalf of Jesse Helms, but his voting record has few things most Libertarians would complain about. Count on him to vote against almost all government sopending, against war, against infringements on civil liberties and for very limited government.
Mike A. | August 5, 2004 12:25 PM
Sorry about the delay in responding, I was in Munich for a few weeks and had to get ready to return. My husband and I have an apartment over there, and I’d been posting from over there for the past few weeks.
>Raj, are you suggesting that libertarians are Republicans, or that Libertarians are Republicans? I see a big difference between libertarians and Libertarians.
To expand on what I was saying, I have spent time on internet message boards with people who claim to be libertarian, and most of them indicate that they tend to vote Republican. There are a few die-hard Lertarians who vote for the Libertarian party candidates. On the other hand, there are a few of us protest voters who have voted for Libertarian party candidates, to register a protest vote. I voted for Ron Paul in 1988, and so did my husband. But we live in Massachusetts (obviously) and it frankly doesn’t matter who we vote for–although the state did go for Reagan in 1980 and 1984 (I’m sure about 1980, and not so sure about 1984).
We also voted for the Libertarian party candidate in 1992 and 1996, because we knew that Clinton was nothing more than a snake-oil salesman, but that’s another issue.
On the other hand, I do have to say that the candidate that the Libertarian party has been running here in MA for several offices, Carla Howell, usually turns into something of an embarrassment during the campaign. A few years ago, she ran for US Senator–I believe it was against Kennedy, but it might have been Kerry–and recently for governor. She usually starts out with a “small government is beautiful” theme, but, unfortunately, as time goes on, she ends up sounding like Annie “get your guns” Oakley.
>I believe FAIR’s call for fairness and balance is about as sincere as that of Fox News
I don’t know that FAIR calls for “fairness and balance.” I believe that–regardless of its acronym–it views its mission as being a liberal watchdog group for conservative media. Much like Brent Bozo’s (my name for him) Media Research Center is a conservative watchdog group for what it believes to be liberal media. Bozo’s MRC has an affiliate, the Christian, no, Conservative, no, Cyber News Service (“CNS”), that is out on the looney conservative side of things. Not quite as bad as WorldNutDaily, but almost. As far as I know, FAIR does not have a similar affiliate that purports to provide news.
Mark D. Fulwiler | August 6, 2004 12:58 AM
>Ron Paul is a Republican and a Libertarian. He has maintained his membership in the LP as a “lifetime member.” And although he is officially a GOP member in the House, the party establishment hates him and has been trying to get rid of him ever since he was elected to Congress.
That may be, but as long as he is there he will be voting to maintain the Republican leadership, currently bug-killer DeLay, in office.
>I don’t know about any fund raising letter he may have sent on behalf of Jesse Helms
I remember it full well. Frankly, I was shocked when I received it, given our vote for him in 1988. That is another element of my determination that so-called Libertarians are little more that Republicans.
I just ran across this site and thought I would mention that I just got through hearing John Stossel on a Fox news talk show. He said: “I’m Libertarian, I am for legalizing drugs and prostitition, and I think homosexuality is natural.” (He may have a few things in there I couldn’t remember…) However, He associated pro-gay with Libertarianism.
Personally, I don’t appreciate that, since I am not “pro-gay” anymore than I am “pro-shacking up” it is against my personal beliefs. HOWEVER-I have no business cramming my personal beliefs down anyone’s life. I do not want others running my life and I do not feel I should run thiers, unless it interferes with my freedom. So, if two adults want to have a civil contract-that is thier business. If a church wants to marry a gay couple, I will choose not to associate with that church because it is unscriptural. It is wrong for me to impose my beliefs on others. THAT is Libertarianism. Not being “pro gay.” It is being Pro freedom to mind your own business. I feel it is equally wrong for gays to sue churches over discrimination. That is against Libertarian principle that churches should be free to keep thier belief systems as long and hire only who represents thier beliefs system.
At any rate, John Stossel appears to be very pro-gay from his statement I just heard. I just don’t appreciate him choosing to categorize my beliefs as a Libertarian.
Also, there is a huge difference between Libertarians and Republicans. And Democrats and Libertarians. However, there isn’t much difference between Republicans and Democrats. They both want your money and your freedom.
[Deleted by the moderators — this comment was off-topic and contained unsubstantiated medical claims.]