I have to hand it to anybody who will go on with Brad, except for John Fund who thinks he is so smart that he can lie his way through any conversation and get away with it. I wrote him off years ago after an interview with Amy Goodman where he called five hundred thousand people protesting the 2004 Republican convention, "a bunch of people", who didn't deserve to be covered.

There is an unwritten law in this country that no corporation will attack another corporation. It's sort of like a scull and bones pact, and you had better follow it if you know what's good for your future financial well being. That's why PBS was created, but the radical right even got their fingers into that during the wasted Bush years.

Take as much time off as you need Brad. You've done more then anybody could have expected you to and our country has one more chance because of your efforts.

As for the "just because you read it on the internet doesn't mean it's true" mantra: there isn't any left wing blog I've been to in the last 8 years that hasn't been proven right on nearly everything they printed, or who didn't post a correction afterwords. That cannot be said about any corporate television news program. The coverage of the voting machines is a sin of omission at best; usually blatant lies about their reliability. It has caused untold damage to our society. There is no other way to put it.

Great appearance, Brad. You had some good things to say.

If that show had been watched by a few million people, progress would ensue....

I love your suit bro! Awesome! BEST DRESSED! The only thing I probably would have done is ask Lou how many investigative reports they have done in the past eight years on electronic vote tabulation devices. Bless Gregory Mantell, for keeping it real!

There is bias. There always be bias. Even I (a Music TV show producer) have bias. I can't play every band, well... I could chop it all up and run 20 seconds of each band, (you wouldn't like that show) but really I choose. Nobody tells me what to play. The same thing goes for big media. They choose. Maybe it's what pisses people off the least, or what advertises the most, still they choose.

Lou isn't going to cover scanner problems in depth. Lou isn't going to investigate DRE's. He chooses not to.

Anyway that's my opinion.

And yeah, Brad even beat Patty for best dressed! (A thing I been kinda bitching about here lately)

"Censorship by omission" within the stories to achieve "balance" is the proper term...Right?

Very good job B.

6 or 7 of us remember when Brad couldn't get on TV...
We're making progress bit by bit.
Nice work, Brad, and I'm glad you manage to fit in an election reform angle...

shw

can't help but notice that the lefties here are identical to most of the liberal sites I have choked down in my quest to see both sides of issues. Lots of accusations, platitudes, bumper stickers and no support for your positions. Polls show that even the sheep who voted in th elast election without any idea who they were voting for (read that lefty sycophants) saw an overwhelming bias in the media. Liberal pundits are (convieniently after the election) saying shame on the media for it's lack of objectivity and that conservative bastion of academia, UCLA, has researched and found that the main 3 nets ARE as slanted as the are accused of being and Fox and CNN are fair and balanced.

Yes Virginia, the mainstream media is and was in the tank for Obama and anything that fits their agenda regardless of the truth omitted or reported.

Yeah that UCLA study sub-authored by right wing nut Jeff Milyo, who Brad mentions in the video above that will write anything for a buck???

LOL, what do you think we are...Morans???

A Bradblog piece on Jeffrey "sell soul to the devil for a buck" Milyo

and another link where Jeffrey made a fool of himself

I could go on but you aint worth it buddy

Well done FLO, thanks.

The reich wingers continue to demonstrate their very casual relationship with reality.

There is a hell of a lot more on Groseclose and Milyo (the two authors of the UCLA junk) if interested.
Don't let yer head splode there Ducky #8.

Link

Weird , that link will not go hyper.

Lemme try this:

http://mediamatters.org/items/200512220003

Seems to work only if you copy and paste to the header for some reason.

If you say the same thing enough times, with conviction and without acknowledging contrary evidence, people will simply accept it.

Faux news sources like FOX have used this tactic with enormous success.

When I was working in Nevada this summer, a GOP state (until the Obama campaign succeeded at registering more Dems than Repubs for this election), we had many Repubs come to our candidate/issues discussions. Repubs would almost exclusively try to carry their conclusions on the backs of talking points I've heard over and over and over again out of mouths like O'Reilly, Coulter, Limbaugh, and Hannity. They seem completely unable to process that the premises of their opinions are false.

Maybe it's a congenital thing, a damaged or lack of a particular neural pathway in the brain that can sort truth from bunk in an argument.

It's absolutely frustrating to try to carry on a productive dialogue with someone when you have to constantly point out the lack of any substantive basis for their conclusions. It's not only not interesting, it rarely results in any meeting of the minds on a factual basis.

For example, people still think that Hussein and bin Laden were co-conspirators in 9/11. People still believe that there was actual evidence of WMDs in Iraq pre-US invasion. And the two that confound me the most are that people actually think that WMDs were actually discovered in Iraq post-US invasion, but that "the liberal media" didn't report on it, and that there was consensus among our allies around the world for our invasion of Iraq.

This is not a "conservative" phenomenon. I have met many lefties with opinions based on false perceptions. It's just that they're not being hounded with these right-wing TV and radio shows that now dominate the airwaves all day long with owners who support corporate-control of our government telling them that something's true, when in fact it is not.