While your stats listed the liberals, it only helps the case that there isn't really a bias. 3 guests per topic 5 days of the week, and that is all they came up with? Again if you have seen the show you would know that the worst person in the world is a humerous bit, and that people who aren't conservative have been worst person in the world more than Liberals or Conservatives. As for why Conservatives come in second, that is a question that Conservatives should ask themselves . It is a silly argument to maintain that the gag bit must find an equal number of people from each side of the political spectrum to be the worst person in the world. Also if I remember the source for that, they didn't even know what they were talking about. They included Farrakhan as a liberal. The man is far from a liberal, and is conservative on most issues.
Does he believe in affirmative action? No Does he believe in welfare? No Does he believe in a family structure with a father as head of the household? Yes Is he against homosexuality? Yes Does he believe in religion playing a bigger part in people's lives? Yes Is he against drugs, and taking personal responsibility to stop their use? Yes That sounds pretty conservative to me.
Here are Keith's guests from last week. Yep, a real diversity of opinion. Richard Wolffe, Newsweek Erwin Chemerinski, plantiff attorney for Joe Wilson and Valerie Plame Doug Neumann, Cedar Rapids Gazette Michael Musto, Village Voice Richard Wolffe, Newsweek White House correspondent and MSNBC political analyst John Dean Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) David Shuster, "Hardball" correspondent Howard Fineman, Newsweek Evan Kohlmann, terrorism analyst Col. Jack Jacobs, U.S. Army (ret.) and MSNBC military analyst Dana Milbank, The Washington Post national political reporter Jonathan Dienst, WNBC reporter John Dean, former White House council Mike Allen, TIME Magazine Only 2 of those guests (Kohlman and Jacobs) are outside of Krazy Keith's echo chamber.
As I stated most of those are journalists and professionally neither conservative nor liberal. Out of that whole list the only two who have a political angle to push are Boxer, and John Dean.
Certainly not. The others are reporters for major news magazines, and don't have political affiliations. Musto writes for the village voice and was on to talk about entertainment news, so to claim he had a political agenda to push is so far wrong that it doesn't even make sense.
I'll conditionally grant you Musto, but Wolffie, and Milquetoast are Bush haters, especially Milkie. Let me ask it this way - where are the Bush defenders? He tends not to have them on his show.
Jouralists for major news magazines aren't Bush attackers. His show format isn't to defend and attack positions. He merely seeks to explore what is happening in relation to issues. There doesn't need to be Bush defenders since there aren't really Bush attackers.
Why won't Olbywon have Laura Ingraham on? He trashes her but doesn't have the balls to let her come on and defend herself. At least O'Reilly invites on people who disagree with him.
That isn't the format of his show. He doesn't do that kind of show. It isn't about point, counterpoint, like Bill does.
Point being contray opinions are heard on O'Reilly both from his guests and the viewer emails. This doesn't really happen on Olbermann.
