Conservapedia.com. Maybe you have heard of it. Maybe you already smell it. The half truths, extreme bias and the hate. The conservatives, complaining about the liberal slant in the media, started Fox news, among other conservative outlets. Fine. It is a free country, go right ahead. So they did. And Bill O'Reilly quit his paper route and found a real job.
But now they have really gone too far. Obviously unnerved with the reader supported definitions in Wikipedia (which offer tame definitions on a variety of subjects), the conservatives have started Conservapedia.com, the most biased piece of trash I have read in a long time.
And, I do not have a problem with its existence. What I do have a problem is with their self described definition: "The Trustworthy Encyclopedia." Folks, the true definition of encyclopedia is that of a fact filled unbiased reference manual. Conservapedia is so right wing, well....take a look at two definitions, from Wikipedia and Conservapedia and make up your own mind.
Conservapedia: Homosexuality is an immoral sexual lifestyle between members of the same sex. It is more than simply a sexual act, it is going beyond the boundaries that God has setup for marriage; one man and one woman.
Wikipedia: Homosexuality can refer to both sexual behavior and sexual attraction between people of the same gender or to a sexual orientation. When describing a sexual orientation, it refers to enduring sexual and romantic attraction toward others of the same sex, but does not necessarily involve sexual behavior.
Conservapedia: Social Security is an involuntary social insurance program enforced by the United States federal government. The socialistic program was one of the "hottest" topics under consideration in the 2004 U.S. presidential election and in early 2005, when President George W. Bush began an unsuccessful campaign to give Americans the right to voluntarily opt out of the system and seek personal retirement accounts by depositing their payroll taxes into personally owned and invested accounts similar to 401(k) plans or IRAs.
Wikipedia: Social security primarily refers to social welfare service concerned with social protection, or protection against socially recognized conditions, including poverty, old age, disability, unemployment and others.
Now you tell me, which is the more serious, fact based, hate free, relevant reference manual?
This is yet another example of a group of people unraveling by the minute.
Another Murdock- like piece of tripe, to be sure.
Think this is bad? What until Murdock buys Dow Jones, and its Wall Street Journal?
You will be able to add the journal to the list of newspapers unworthy of wrapping fish in, like the New York Post, which was absolutely ruined by...you guessed it, Rupert Murdock.
Really want a laugh? Check out Qubetv, the rightwing answer to Youtube.
Another wonderful entry into the conservative parties legacy of the early 2000's.
5 comments:
Do you believe there is a liberal lean in most media outlets Kimba?
I think there are outlets for the right, and the left. Do I believe that most media outlets lean left? No more than the readership leans left.
And that is OK. What is not Ok is the very few that take their reporting issue by issue without bias, or political leanings. Everything is politicized these days. True journalists, true journalism is dead, for the most part.
Can you point to any journalist these days and not immediately know his or her political leanings? That was the true test of a journalist in the days gone by. The same goes for bloggers.
We are on opposite sides of the see saw.
That is why I enjoyed being a two newpaper town long ago. You got both sides of any argument.
A recent study found that most (9-to-1) journalist give to the Dems. BBC just finished an in-depth study that showed they are leaned way left. NPR's own ombudsman said they lean to the left. The NYT has admitted a left leaning bias. Others who have worked inside CBS and the likes have mentioned their own companies left leaning bias. Major Journalism schools lean to the left, thus, influencing the students.
What paper is conservative besides the Washington Times Kimba? Chicago Tribune, NYT, L.A. Times, Washington Post, Detroit Free Press... on and on. Not that I am complaining, these papers are loosing subscribers hand-over-fist. But really, only talk-radio and the internet are places for conservatives to find news that has a more "sane" view.
I do not find the Washington Times in Starbucks, only the L.A. and New York Times.
Newspapers are losing readership because the world is going paperless. How about the NY Post, and any other outlet Murdock (including the Wall St Journal, soon) can get his hands on.
Academia is wholly left wing, teachers, students, everybody. It isn't until they change their majors to greed do they head to the right.
I am sorry Kimba, the richest people are on the left for the most part.
This is old info, but it is pertinent.
Greedy Religious Conservatives!
(A debate from 2004 I had)
I wanted to isolate a previous discussion and get some of your input on us greedy conservatives. The only reason I bring this up is that while playing golf in Vegas I got into a discussion with one of the caddies about politics and faith. The conversation started out very interestingly though. Democrats/Liberals place a lot of emphasis on feelings in their anti-Bush diatribe. This elderly caddy maybe in his mid-fifties said he wouldn’t vote for bush because his wife worked for the phone company making good money for fifteen-years. She lost her job and is now a receptionist for a Veterinarian. He said, I won’t vote for that assho#@!& because my wife isn’t making any money!! I pointed out, politely, so as to not make him explode, that it is not Bush’s fault that his wife does not have a degree or a specialty that can get them by in these lean times. He realized that his wife’s life choices put them in the spot their in, not Bush (with a little coaxing from me of course). So I explained some of the following during our conversation, passerby’s stopping and patting me on the back for such a great example of conservatisms values at work.
If you can remember back to the 2000 election here in the U. S. and the blue state, red state scenario of which voted for Gore and which voted for Bush, Im sure you do, even if another country. Once in awhile stats are done to see which part of the country (which states in fact) give more to charity per-capita than other states. Do you know which of the top twenty states gives the most to charity? You got it, Bush country! Every single one of the red states in that top-twenty are the middle-income fly-over states. Guess how many red-states got the lower twenty of giving? Two. Eighteen States that were in the lowest giving ratio to charity were Gore states. This is even more interesting with a few recent poles. Just under 66-percent republicans go to church one-to-two times a week. Just fewer than 66-percent democrats do not even go to church once a week. DRAT those nasty religious / conservatives!
New Stat that I am adding to my arguments by the way:
Only one of the top 25 donors to political 527 groups has given to a conservative organization, shedding further light on the huge disparity between Democrats and Republicans in this new fund-raising area. The top three 527 donors so far in the 2004 election cycle - Hollywood producer Steven Bing, Progressive Corp. chairman Peter Lewis and financier George Soros - have combined to give nearly $24 million to prominent liberal groups. They include Joint Victory Campaign 2004, America Coming Together, and MoveOn.org.
Dems the richest five senators?
Financial statements revealed the five richest members of the United States Senate are Democrats. The annual disclosure allows senators to represent their net worth inside a broad range.
Presidential candidate Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) is far ahead of his colleagues with $163 million, most of it coming from his wife's inheritance of the Heinz fortune. The actual estimate is over $400 million.
Lagging behind is Sen. Herb Kohl (D-WI) at $111 million. The Wisconsin senator's family owns a department store chain. Sen. John "Jay" Rockefeller (D-WV) comes in third with a personal fortune reported to be $81 million.
Former Goldman Sachs chairman Sen. John Corzine (D-NJ) weighs in at $71 million, with Sen. Diane Feinstein (D-CA) rounding out the top five at $26.3 million. Sen. Peter Fitzgerald (R-IL) breaks the string of Democrat multimillionaires in sixth place at $26.1 million. Sens. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ), Bill Frist (R-TN), John Edwards (D-NC), and Edward Kennedy (D-MA) complete the top ten.
Democrats are 10 of the top 15 richest senators. Nine richest of the top 12.
Post a Comment