[marden]

Couric: Conservative "freeSpeech" Segment Might Be Found "Repugnant"
NewsBusters.org ^ | 4 October 2006 | Dave Pierre

Posted on 10/04/2006 7:24:54 PM PDT by infoguy

According to CBS Evening News host Katie Couric, a Monday installment of its "freeSpeech" segment, which espoused a strong conservative viewpoint, could be viewed as "repugnant." The issue was discussed on tonight's episode of The O'Reilly Factor (Wednesday, October 4, 2006).

In light of Monday's shooting at a Pennsylvania Amish school, CBS invited Brian Rohrbough, the father of a victim of the 1999 Columbine school massacre, to speak on "freeSpeech."

Quite simply, Mr. Rohrbough delivered a powerful and thoughtful editorial. His commentary is a must-read/must-see (link (with video)). Among other things, Mr. Rohrbough said:

Couric: Conservative "freeSpeech" Segment Might Be Found "Repugnant"

I am so fed up with liberal elitism. How could someone call his comments repugnant???

They might not AGREE with him, but there is nothing repugnant about them!

[lpkmckenna]

Originally Posted by marden 

How could someone call his comments repugnant???

Let's see:

1. Completely misrepresenting evolution as "without moral consequences";
2. Advocating teaching religious ethics in school in violation of religious freedom;
3. Describing abortion as murder implies millions of American women are murderers;
4. Equating "death with dignity" with suicide attackers.

Repugnant? Abso-f'n-lutely.

[ShortcutToMoncton]

Originally Posted by lpkmckenna 

Let's see:

1. Completely misrepresenting evolution as "without moral consequences";
2. Advocating teaching religious ethics in school in violation of religious freedom;
3. Describing abortion as murder implies millions of American women are murderers;
4. Equating "death with dignity" with suicide attackers.

Repugnant? Abso-f'n-lutely.

Oooooo, I bet he's totally gonna have some articles against that viewpoint!!!

greg

[Millennium]

Originally Posted by lpkmckenna 

1. Completely misrepresenting evolution as "without moral consequences";

But evolution doesn't have moral consequences. It has nothing to do with morality, one way or another.

2. Advocating teaching religious ethics in school in violation of religious freedom;

...as opposed to teaching a system where any moral code governed by something other than the whim of the individual who practices it is invalid? The current system manages to teach a form of morality which takes its inclusivity to an exclusive degree.

3. Describing abortion as murder implies millions of American women are murderers;

Well, yes. Do the unpleasant implications make it wrong by itself?

Repugnant? Abso-f'n-lutely.

Then the two sides are even, because the opposites of these things are no less repugnant.

[Spliffdaddy]

Katie Couric is repugnant.

Yes, I'm being serious.

[marden]

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton 

Oooooo, I bet he's totally gonna have some articles against that viewpoint!!!

greg

Oh, so this is what you consider an improvement?

Originally Posted by lpkmckenna

Let's see:

1. Completely misrepresenting evolution as "without moral consequences";
2. Advocating teaching religious ethics in school in violation of religious freedom;
3. Describing abortion as murder implies millions of American women are murderers;
4. Equating "death with dignity" with suicide attackers.

Repugnant? Abso-f'n-lutely.

Originally Posted by marden

You are wrong, just wrong!

1. Is wrong.
2. Wrong.
3. Wrong.
4. Wrong.

There.

Ya know, greg, this IS a lot easier than finding good reasons which are already well stated to support my position but also help bring illumination to the subject.

You guys will WISH me to return to posting articles.

Watch and see.

[marden]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy 

Katie Couric is repugnant.

Yes, I'm being serious.

Once I saw that she was turning the Evening News into a liberal feel good coffee klatch exchange of ideas I have stopped watching the Big 3 evening newscasts. Bob Schieffer was my last hope.

Charlie Gibson was good on GMA.

Brian Williams is a dyed in the wool liberal.

Katie is yechhy!

They've forced me to watch O'Reilly exclusively.

Not that I am complaining, but I did always want to include the liberal perspective and so Bob Schieffer was as neutral yet liberal as could be but always enjoyable and admirably professional.

Now there's nothing that doesn't insult my intelligence or sensitivities and has me screaming at the set except FNC.

I miss Bob.

[Railroader]

If you look hard enough you'll find someone somewhere is going to find just about anything repugnant.

Couric is simply showing her lack of ability to remain impartial. She's now an entertainer like Al Franken, Michael Moore, and Rush Limbaugh.

[lpkmckenna]

Originally Posted by Millennium 

But evolution doesn't have moral consequences. It has nothing to do with morality, one way or another.

Actually, that was my point.

Originally Posted by Millennium 

...as opposed to teaching a system where any moral code governed by something other than the whim of the individual who practices it is invalid? The current system manages to teach a form of morality which takes its inclusivity to an exclusive degree.

False alternatives. Public schools may not be teaching ethics very well, but it isn't religious ethics that will improve it.

Originally Posted by Millennium 

Well, yes. Do the unpleasant implications make it wrong by itself?

No, but describing woman as murderers is as repugnant as calling our soldiers murderers. If you saw a bunch of peaceniks parading signs that read "War is Murder," would you find that repugnant? I would.

Originally Posted by Millennium 

Then the two sides are even, because the opposites of these things are no less repugnant.

Huh?

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by marden 

Ya know, greg, this IS a lot easier than finding good reasons which are already well stated to support my position but also help bring illumination to the subject.

I strongly suggest you learn about how argumentation actually works. Perhaps take an introductory logic course.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by Railroader 

Couric is simply showing her lack of ability to remain impartial. She's now an entertainer like Al Franken, Michael Moore, and Rush Limbaugh.

Now? Couric has never had any kind of credibility.

[Railroader]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

Now? Couric has never had any kind of credibility.

Oh yeah. That's right.

[marden]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

I strongly suggest you learn about how argumentation actually works. Perhaps take an introductory logic course.

You're wrong.

[BRussell]

Haha, I love it. Big-time media like this see conservatives as AM-radio ranters, so they give AM-radio ranters 5 minutes on the frickin' evening news every night! That should make them happy, right? Of course not!

[analogika]

Originally Posted by Millennium 

But evolution doesn't have moral consequences. It has nothing to do with morality, one way or another.

Neither does creation, as such.

[marden]

Originally Posted by BRussell 

Haha, I love it. Big-time media like this see conservatives as AM-radio ranters, so they give AM-radio ranters 5 minutes on the frickin' evening news every night! That should make them happy, right? Of course not!

From what I've read the free speech minute is not only for conservative voices or expressions.

Since its debut, the Couric version of the CBS Evening News has been repeatedly criticized by liberals and the American left for its inclusion of highly conservative voices such as Rush Limbaugh without counterbalance, and its failure to include commentary from prominent liberals.[10][11] However, Katrina vanden Heuvel, the editor of the liberal magazine The Nation, has done several commentaries for the program. Not to mention, Arianna Huffington has also contributed commentary for the program. Most recently, a dust-up with Bill Maher, who claims he was denied the opportunity to speak about religion during his appearance on the show's "Free Speech" segment, intensified these criticisms. [12]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CBS_Evening_News

[Atomic Rooster]

Couric gets blasted on MediaMatters.org all the time for her soft touch approach to people on the right.

[marden]

Originally Posted by Atomic Rooster 

Couric gets blasted on MediaMatters.org all the time for her soft touch approach to people on the right.

Did media matters criticize her for being condescending to people on the right?

[BRussell]

Hey marden, Couric gives a bunch of conservative nonsense (e.g., that teaching science caused Columbine) a platform for weeks and weeks, and then, in response to criticism, says that she knows some people wouldn't like it. And that acknowledgment is proof of her bias!

Apparently conservatives not only want to spout crap like this, but they don't even want anyone to acknowledge that some people might find it to be crap. Quite a low standard for "liberal bias," huh.

[marden]

Originally Posted by BRussell 

Hey marden, Couric gives a bunch of conservative nonsense (e.g., that teaching science caused Columbine) a platform for weeks and weeks, and then, in response to criticism, says that she knows some people wouldn't like it. And that acknowledgment is proof of her bias!

Apparently conservatives not only want to spout crap like this, but they don't even want anyone to acknowledge that some people might find it to be crap. Quite a low standard for "liberal bias," huh.

She said people might call his comments repugnant.

Definitions of repugnant on the Web:

abhorrent: offensive to the mind; "an abhorrent deed"; "the obscene massacre at Wounded Knee"; "morally repugnant customs"; "repulsive behavior"; "the most repulsive character in recent novels"
wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

Well, I guess she has her finger on the pulse of liberal lunacy. So maybe I will just rest my case.

[BRussell]

Yes marden. She said...

We knew when we decided to put on this segment that a lot of people would disagree with it. We also knew some might even find it repugnant. (Some of you made that point loud and clear!)

But that is the very essence of what we try to do with the “freeSpeech” segment. This is a platform for our viewers to hear from a wide range of people – those who may share your views, and those who don’t.

So, a bunch of people emailed and criticized her for airing one particular piece of nonsense, blaming school shootings on science and abortion. Couric says that yes, she knew some people wouldn't like it - they might hate it, find it repugnant, find it yucky, whatever bad adjective you want to use. She said some people might not like it. She was right, judging by her emails.

Again - conservatives can't possibly be pleased when it comes to the media. They air conservative ratings and ravings for night after night, and then when they simply acknowledge that some people might not like it, they're accused of "liberal bias." It's truly astounding.

[marden]

Originally Posted by BRussell 

Yes marden. She said...

So, a bunch of people emailed and criticized her for airing one particular piece of nonsense, blaming school shootings on science and abortion. Couric says that yes, she knew some people wouldn't like it - they might hate it, find it repugnant, find it yucky, whatever bad adjective you want to use. She said some people might not like it. She was right, judging by her emails.

Again - conservatives can't possibly be pleased when it comes to the media. They air conservative ratings and ravings for night after night, and then when they simply acknowledge that some people might not like it, they're accused of "liberal bias." It's truly astounding.

And the coloreds had their own rest rooms and drinking fountains, what could be more fair than that???

Just throw us a bone and think you are really doing something and we should be grateful!

Typical liberal attitudes.

[lpkmckenna]

Originally Posted by marden 

And the coloreds had their own rest rooms and drinking fountains, what could be more fair than that???

Oh jeez. Would you like some wood and nails so you could crucify yourself too?

[marden]

Originally Posted by lpkmckenna 

Oh jeez. Would you like some wood and nails so you could crucify yourself too?

Do you realize how REPUGNANT that is?

[ink]

Originally Posted by Railroader 

She's now an entertainer like Al Franken, Michael Moore, and Rush Limbaugh.

Are you implying that she used to be something else?

[black bear theory]

Originally Posted by BRussell 

So, a bunch of people emailed and criticized her for airing one particular piece of nonsense, blaming school shootings on science and abortion. Couric says that yes, she knew some people wouldn't like it - they might hate it, find it repugnant, find it yucky, whatever bad adjective you want to use. She said some people might not like it. She was right, judging by her emails.

Again - conservatives can't possibly be pleased when it comes to the media. They air conservative ratings and ravings for night after night, and then when they simply acknowledge that some people might not like it, they're accused of "liberal bias." It's truly astounding.

from how the article was written, it almost seemed that she preceeded his piece with the 'repugnant' remark. but in fact, it happened after the segment aired and some feedback came in, both positive and negative (with examples of both extreme ends included).

so is the use of repugnant the only real sticking point in this quintessential glaring example of liberal elitism? ("we shall give our opponents a platform from which they may voice their opinions uncensored!") if they had used "controversial" instead would there be such a huge stink? what other criticism is there?

why is this article so much more relevant now than when it occured over a month and a half ago?

[Railroader]

Originally Posted by ink 

Are you implying that she used to be something else?

Wellll...

BTW, aren't you a little late to the party:

Originally Posted by Railroader

Originally Posted by Chuckit

Now? Couric has never had any kind of credibility.

Oh yeah. That's right.

[ink]

Originally Posted by Railroader 

Wellll...

BTW, aren't you a little late to the party:

Yeah, I saw that after I posted...

[Railroader]

Originally Posted by ink 

Yeah, I saw that after I posted...

I hate it when that happens to me.