Monday, June 11, 2012



  1. Anyone interested, check out the conservative website

  2. I'll get the ball rolling! This is Adam's older, conservative brother, Jeremy. Yes, I watch Fox News and listen to talk radio… While I also check out the local news channels, I'm not ashamed to say that I prefer listening to conservative sources since they are more in line with my own values, ideals, and viewpoints.

    Coincidentally, on last night's O'Reilly Factor, there was a segment on media bias. Here is the link (please note I don't know anything about the website I found it on – it was just the first site that popped up in my search). I really like what Bernie Goldberg says: "The only way we’ll make progress with the media bias problem is with liberals admitting liberal bias and conservatives admitting conservative bias."

    I have a similar viewpoint. Sometimes, there is obvious liberal bias in the media and sometimes, there is obvious conservative bias. The only way liberals and conservatives will make any headway is to admit that BOTH sides can be biased. Otherwise, what will continue will only be never-ending, finger-pointing accusations and neither side will ever concede.

    And there's my 2 cents… Peace out!

    Great job on the website, bro. Talk with you soon – God bless!


  3. Ha! Jeremy!

    We're in the same boat! My little bro is also very very liberal, to the point where he sees CNN as being VERY Conservative and right slanted. What is up with little brothers anyway!!! :-)

    That said, you should be proud of your brother. Very few people have the guts not only to put themselves out there, as Adam says, but also to honestly reflect on the occasional aftermath when things get out of hand. I've been blogging for over seven years, and I've stepped in it from time to time. I kind of stepped in it a little when I first saw your brothers emo-vid. I wasn't mean per-se, but i was overly snarky, for which I retracted both on his YouTube site and on Althouse.

    Since I'm more Libertarian than anything, I really don't have a "guy" or "party" to root for or get emotionally charged up about. Adam was going where his heart was leading him, but after the downfall, he was able to pull back and get his cards rearranged for the next card game of politics, whatever it may be.

    Have a good one. I'll be visiting here from time to time.

    Mike aka

  4. PS. Also a musician... Bass / Guitar / VOX... and a bit of mandolin thrown in for the heck of it!

  5. Mike,

    Thanks for your comments and viewpoint! I really appreciate where you're coming from. I hope I didn't come across as not being proud of Adam because that wasn't my intention at all. I know it takes time to come up with an idea, create a script or outline, film the video, edit it, upload it, and reply/moderate any comments. I know a lot of work and passion goes into it.

    I'll say this about Adam - I've never heard him get very upset at anyone posting opposite viewpoints or slamming his belief system. I've heard him say, “I'm the one that put myself out there, so I have to be able to take any criticisms”. As you can probably guess, we have a number of political viewpoints that are polar opposites, but most of the time, we're able to have civil discussions when we disagree on something…most of the time…

    Actually, Adam's videos have inspired me to strongly consider creating my own blog! I could call it “Facts Without Slacks". What do you think? :–)

    Take care and have a great day!


    P.S. Very cool about your music background. I grew up playing guitar and bass, too! They're great instruments, aren't they? What's really awesome is that my oldest daughter just started taking guitar lessons and I'm hoping that she likes it as much as I did at her age. God bless!

  6. Looks like the liberal media disagrees with you, Adam. The editing these guys do of video to completely fabricate stories is just plain irresponsible. On top of that, Rachel Maddow has to frequently choose between apologizing for her made up stories, or continuing in her lies. Check out this article...

    Is Fox News biased? Sure it is. Is it one single network in a sea of networks that are biased the other direction. It sure is!


  7. Nate - That is ridiculous. The New York Times was the paper that helped President Bush start up the Iraq War. Study after study proves that not to be true. Of course, someone Rachel Maddow is on same line of bias like O'Reilly. No difference. I would suggest her program is a bit more entertaining, sophisticated and tries to be more fair. She doesn't hack up interviews like O'Reilly does to make himself look good. What Fox News has done is taken a small bias there may be here or there in the media, and fabricated it and made it an excuse to completely meslead and lie to their audience. That's the truth my friend.

  8. What's ridiculous? Are you disagreeing with something in the article which plainly debunks the point of your video or something else? Are you saying that the creative editing people like Andrea Mitchell do to make conservatives look bad and use to create their own versions of stories (like the Zimmerman/Martin fiasco that the media has been creating/changing to fit their agenda) is OK with you? How about the media's coverage of it being too hot outside while the President and his cronies cover up one of the biggest scandals since Watergate (Fast and Furious)? You have major blinders when it comes to the media my friend. You see what you want to, which unfortunately rarely squares with reality.

  9. Adam,

    I did more research into the topic of liberal versus conservative bias in the media and found that even though there are obviously examples of conservative media bias, easily 75% of the websites/studies/polls showed a more liberal media bias. I’m surprised that you won’t even admit that this could be the truth. Here are some of my findings:


    This UCLA-led study is believed to be the first successful attempt at objectively quantifying bias in a range of media outlets and ranking them accordingly. The researchers took numerous steps to safeguard against bias — or the appearance of same — in the work, which took close to three years to complete. They went to great lengths to ensure that as many research assistants supported Democratic candidate Al Gore in the 2000 election as supported President George Bush. They also sought no outside funding, a rarity in scholarly research.

    Notice the mention of The New York Times in the 10th paragraph…


    Gallop poll from 2011


    This is an opinion video, but I really like and mostly agree with what he’s saying (including Fox News)


    Yes, this is from a conservative group, but it has ALOT of information listed – just so you know, I don't agree with everything in this report, but there's more than enough to show liberal media bias.

    Again, I'm not saying there isn't conservative media bias, only that there is much more liberal media bias out there.

    Take care and peace out,


  10. As for Rachel Maddow and Bill O’Reilly, I’ll take Bill every time. Since I had little knowledge of who Rachel Maddow was, I watched a number of her videos and she was like nails on a chalkboard for me… Both of them, however, have their own obvious ideological viewpoint, but I truly feel that O’Reilly is way above Maddow in terms of investigative journaling and reporting. Sorry!

  11. What Fox News and Talk Radio has done is exaggerate the little bit of liberal bias that may be in the media here or there (as you know, my video shows other polls that say the opposite) and has used it as an excuse to omit facts and lie to the viewers. Fox News absolutely does that, not just on their opinion shows, but on their "news" shows as well. They are simply an extension of the Republican Party. I'm sorry, but you can't say the same about The New Times or Newsweek or NBC news (not MSNBC) or anywhere else republicans say it is in the regular national media. What they've done is, say that you can't believe anything else anyone says because they are the "liberal media". Like I stated in the video, Republican strategists, including Fox News Consultant Bill Kristol, actually admitted to this.

    I'm sorry, but Rachel Maddow is road scholar and puts on a much more fun, interesting and much, much more credible show. She most definitely has an agenda, but I don’t see her cutting up interviews like O’Reilly. He is notorious for that. When Jon Stewart was on, I watched the regular interview and I was underwhelmed. I was like “That’s all Stewart had to say…he had a chance and totally bombed it”. Then I saw the unedited version, O’Reilly completely chopped up the pre-taped interview to serve his purpose.

    You can watch that and listen to it, but just know that they are lying to you and leaving out crucial facts.

  12. I don't know if you looked at any of the websites above, but there is more than a little bit of liberal bias in the media and to say otherwise is waaaay off base. Like most of our positions, I'm guessing that neither one of us will change each other's opinion on this topic.

    Regarding Rachel Maddow, feel free to look at this website which shows her numerous false statements and half truths, as well as misleading video editing:

    I'm not saying that O'Reilley doesn't have his moments, but Rach' ain't no saint either! Again, I know neither one of us will budge on this issue.

    I need to pick up kids soon, so I'll talk to you later!

  13. Well said, Anonymous (is this still Jeremy?). Adam, I think you assume that conservatives automatically back O'Reilly and Fox News, which is not always the case. My issue is that you criticize Fox News for their bias while ignoring the bias on the other networks, which happen to lean in your direction. Not only are there issues with editing of video, but flat out untruths (see Maddow, again). On top of that, it's not only what IS reported, but what's NOT reported. Things that tend to make President Obama and his socialist agenda look bad are under-reported or not reported at all. We don't get news from the news outlets, we get propaganda. And the number of propaganda outlets for the left far outnumber those for the right. All I'm hoping is that you can see/admit that you're holding one side much more accountable than the other...

  14. I don't ignore the bias of MSNBC...but still, they do have a conservative morning talk show. Can you imagine Fox News having a liberal show on? But the New York Times actually helped the Bush Administration's case for Iraq. You of course, know that story...hopefully. Of course, Maddow has an agenda and will lie, but I personally feel she is willing to give more information than O'Reilly. Jeremy - I could send you numerous clips of Jon Stewart ripping O'Reilly apart for his inaccuracies and trickery. Nate - You need to really stop with the "Socialist" agenda thing. Obama has actually been a very tame president. There may be some propoganda out there, but no one is bigger, stronger or decieves people more than Fox News.

  15. When I watch Bill O'Reilly, even though he has a conservative viewpoint, he often has guests from both sides of the aisle. There's also a show called “The Five” which is a roundtable discussion show with two liberals and two conservatives (the fifth spot rotates between the two). I don't typically watch any “true" news show, but tend to get my daily information from Yahoo, Google, etc.

    As for the New York Times, they may have helped with the Iraq situation (and yes, I know what happened), but that is only a drop in the bucket compared to other numerous examples of liberal bias.

    1. There was an article in which the Public Editor devoted his entire final column to showing how left-leaning the paper was on social issues. "We write about evolution as a fact, we don’t give equal time to creationism.”

    2. Polls have also shown that 40% saw the paper as having a liberal slant, 20% no political slant and 11% believe it has a conservative slant.

    3. Last year, Former New York Times editor Bill Keller discussed the Times' editorial stance when covering hotly contested social issues. In a forthright admission, Keller openly described the paper as "socially liberal."

    Make no mistake, Adam, I take news from any source (liberal/conservative/middle-of-the-road) with a huge grain of salt.

    Take care!


    PS Nate, I keep forgetting to sign my name, so yes, the “anonymous” comments about are from me. :–)

  16. Of course, The Time editorial staff leans left. Also The Public Editor? The blog? Those are your arguments?

    I'm talking about the news itself. Fox News and how they portray their "news" is really my main concern. O'Reilly and Maddow they are opinion shows that have an agenda and will ommit facts...but Fox News and their news programs omit facts and stir up controversy with a clear agenda. I just don't understand why someone wouldn't want to know the whole truth?

    These polls you describe, are they polling people or are they experts examining the data? What polls exactly are you talking about?

    Also, O'Reilly has two pundunts on. If I had a news program, I would concentrate on having experts on instead of pundunts. Pundits just spin from the right and from the left and it accomplishes nothing.

  17. I'll stop with the '"Socialist" agenda thing' when we have a President who isn't pushing one. Although, these days it's more of a dictatorial position since he's picking and choosing what he wants his administration to enforce and not enforce (i.e. The Defense of Marriage Act, immigration, etc.). Who is he to decide what should be enforced? That's not the job of The President of the United States.

  18. Nate - Were you not around during the Bush Administration? He constantly overstepped the line. Obama doesn't even come close compared to Bush and Cheney. They didn't even listen to their own Attorney General John Ashcroft and circumvented the law.

  19. Adam,

    I've been reading everyone's comments on these videos. Those who oppose your point of view are presenting ”FACTS” instead of “feelings”. The other thing I've noticed is that every time you're cornered by FACTS, you change your opinion slightly or try to explain “what you really meant” or you say “of course that's true, BUT…” You're playing the game, but losing big time, dude! That's The Truth! You're a slave to your ideology and that's just sad.


  20. Carlos,

    Uhhhmmm, did you actually watch my video? It doesn’t sound like you did. If so, you would have learned that in the early 90’s, Republican Party Chair Rich Bond stated “Conservatives frequent denunciation of liberal bias in the media were part of a strategy” He then goes on to talking about how any great coach knows how to “work the refs” so they get better call next time. THAT’S A FACT!

    You also would have learned. Bill Kristol from Fox News also stated, “I admit it, the whole idea of the liberal media was often used as an excuse by conservatives by conservative failures.” YUP…HE SAID THAT…THAT’S A FACT!!

    How about this – This wasn’t in the video, but it was awfully compelling: “In a careful 1999 study published in the academic journal Communications Research, four scholars examined the use of the "liberal media" argument and discovered a fourfold increase in the number of Americans telling pollsters that they discerned a liberal bias in their news. But a review of the media's actual ideological content, collected and coded over a twelve-year period, offered no corroboration whatever for this view. The obvious conclusion: News consumers were responding to "increasing news coverage of liberal bias media claims, which have been increasingly emanating from Republican Party candidates and officials." THAT’S A FACT

    Then there is the PEW study that just came out showing that Mitt Romney has way more positive coverage than Obama. THAT’S A FACT

    How about the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel that has endorsed Scott Walker twice along with Paul Ryan and many other prominent conservatives. Hmmmm…a liberal bias?

    I laugh that you think I’m a slave to my ideology, when I’m the one who is not reading the very popular leftwing website because I am not sheep…because I’m not a baby and I don’t need to be coddled.

    Being a slave to ideology is by definition watching a channel that is part of the Republican strategy. Fox News is not news. It’s propaganda. It’s bullet points. It’s a place for Nate to be spoon fed the idea calling Obama a socialist and a dictator. That’s what Fox News…and they’re proud of it.

  21. Why are you blaming Bush, Adam? I asked you to defend Obama. The way you do that is by saying he's not as bad as the last guy? That's a pretty weak argument. In fact, it's not an argument at all. As Carlos said, you like to change subjects and focus away from the questions at hand and tweak things to offer your own two cents about things that aren't even part of these discussions. And by the way, I resent the fact that you claim I'm spoon fed bullet points by Fox News. I've repeatedly said I'm not defending Fox News here and in other places. I educate myself on what our government is doing to us (not for us!) and when you put it all together, it's quite clear that this administration is leading us in a very anti-American direction. You need to stop making assumptions and ask people where they get their information before you assume things. It makes you look foolish when people call you on it...

  22. Why aren't any of you addressing what Rich Bond said, what Bill Krisol said, what the communications research study says, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinal endorsing republican candidates. You say I'm changing the subject. I brought all this up, but all I hear are crickets.

    I'm sorry Nate, I didn't mean to offend you, but when I start hearing the phrase "Obama is a socialist" or "Obama is a dictator", I think it automatically hurts your argument. He is neither. That is just hyperbole.

    I brought up Bush because his administration set the precendent for overstepping boundaries. It was relevant to the discussion. The Republicans have admitted that it is a strategy to literally not work with the Obama administration. A complete selfish move on their part. He had to start doing stuff on his own or else nothing would get done, again still within the law.

  23. Is it better if I say that Obama's policies are socialist/Marxist? Because you can't refute that (logically anyway). I'm not sure why anyone with policies like the ones that he's implementing wouldn't be categorized according to his policies. I can change my wording if it will make you feel better.

    As far as your other questions go - JS endorsing Walker doesn't mean it's not a liberal rag. It just proves that they couldn't deny that what Walker's doing for WI is working! More positive coverage for Romney? Again - there's not much positive news coming from the Obama camp. What is the media supposed to cover - the loss of more jobs, more unconstitutional workings around the Constitution? Of course there's going to be more positive coverage of Romney. Kristol's quote - the whole idea WAS used - it may have started out that way, but now it's in full force.

    What you're failing to recognize is that it's not just what is reported, but what's not reported that is also contained in the bias. Obama's getting a pass on so much of his agenda by the media.

    I've never stated that Fox News isn't biased. I've also never said that's where I get all my information (and it's not!). What I'm wishing you'd see is that it's one of many biased news sources. The only reason you point it out and carry on about it is because it's opposite your view. If you took your liberal blinders off, you'd see it everywhere around you...

  24. Adam,

    Uhhhmmm, did you actually read my comment and any of the previous replies from others? No one ever said that there wasn't conservative media bias in certain circumstances. What you fail to even slightly admit is that it happens the other way too (and to a larger degree). That's why you're a slave to your ideology: you refuse to even think that liberal media bias has ever or will ever exist! And that's just sad...