Birthers are mostly Republicans and Southerners, to put it redundantly
July 31st, 2009 at 11:48am Pat Cunningham
 Here’s MORE EVIDENCE that much of the GOP is outside the American mainstream — as if we needed further proof.
 The chart below, from WashingtonMonthly.com, breaks down poll responses by region:
 UPDATE: It says HERE that ratings for Lou Dobbs’ program on CNN have fallen sharply since he started pushing birtherism.
 UPDATE II: McClatchy has a PRETTY GOOD RUNDOWN on the leaders of the birther movement and audio of a phone conversation between a birther and Obama’s grandmother in Kenya (who speaks through an interpreter).
 UPDATE III: Eric Cantor, the No. 2 Republican in the U.S. House, is BLAMING the liberal media for the birther phenomenon. It figures.
 UPDATE IV: How about a couple more charts? And they’re pies! Mmmmm, good!:
Entry Filed under: Uncategorized
12 Comments Add your own
1. David Johnson | July 31st, 2009 at 1:36 pm
You really believe your mainstream Pat? And the proprietors of the printed press wonder why they’re losing readership expotentially…go figure.
2. Pat Cunningham | July 31st, 2009 at 2:10 pm
David: At least I’m mainstream on the question of Obama’s birthplace. That’s more than many Republicans can say. I suppose you’re a birther, too. Please don’t disappoint me by saying you’re not.
By the way, the penultimate word in my previous sentence is spelled correctly, unlike the antepenultimate word in your first sentence.
(That ought to keep the dude busy for a while trying to figure out what I meant. Snarky libs like me consider wingnuts like David low-hanging fruit, if you get my drift.)
3. Pat Cunningham | July 31st, 2009 at 2:50 pm
David: One more point: You don’t know a damn thing about newspaper economics, so quit pretending that you do. Conservative and liberal newspapers alike are facing tough times, as are most advertiser-supported media. Some very conservative radio chains, for example, are laying off people like crazy. Two of the biggest right-wing radio chains, Clear Channel and Sinclair, are both teetering on the brink of bankruptcy.
I know this stuff is way over your head, but you only make yourself look foolish when you come up with nonsense like your crack about “the proprietors of the printed press.” Besides, I don’t work in the print media. I’m a free-lance blogger. Blogs don’t use printing presses.
4. mike | July 31st, 2009 at 3:06 pm
No that’s not true Pat. I posted the chart a while back on what newspapers were in the toilet. I even congratulated you on your pal at the Washington Post. They actually increased readership by becoming more FAIR and BALANCED, like FOX NEWS. That means showing the conservative view and hiring conservative columnists. They must have a pretty sharp editor there now, she doesn’t want to lose money. Imagine that.
5. Pat Cunningham | July 31st, 2009 at 3:28 pm
mike: Circulation at the Washington Post is down this year, not up. Advertising revenues at the Washington Post are down, not up.
Yes, the company posted a profit in the second quarter, but as we see in this story released just today, the profit was due to various factors among the firm’s many holdings:
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gncOap2D6M7AG8VB2wuJ3kbpY_aQD99PJ4600
There isn’t a shred of evidence that the Post’s bottom line has been affected by its addition of conservative columnists. Besides, the New York Times has several prominent conservative columnists, but the Times company has big money problems.
By the same token, Rupert Murdoch’s New York Post, which is about as right-wing as newspapers get, is a big money loser.
By the way, here’s another story on the Washington’s Post’s latest dollar figures. Note that is says the profits came from the company’s education and cable TV holdings, while revenues at the newspaper were down: http://paidcontent.org/article/419-earnings-wapo-swings-to-profit-revs-gain-just-2-percent/
6. Pat Cunningham | July 31st, 2009 at 3:31 pm
mike: One other thing: Are you serious when you refer to Fox as “fair and balanced”? You’re not really that gullible, are you? On second thought, don’t answer that question.
Meanwhile, if you have any other mistaken theories about media economics, be sure to share them with us, hear?
7. Pat Cunningham | July 31st, 2009 at 3:46 pm
mike: Still one more thing: After that thrashing I gave you yesterday regarding the Fox News poll, and now this smackdown regarding the Washington Post, are you not embarrassed?
Perhaps not, considering that you submit your stuff anonymously, while I put my name on mine.
I guess I just have more courage than you.
Mike Carroll is one of the few conservatives among Applesauce regulars who puts his real name out there. I admire him for that among other reasons.
8. Andrew Kellogg | July 31st, 2009 at 4:18 pm
Fox news is an odd entity. It doesn’t believe what it says but rather spouts what it wishes was the truth. Then all the tooth fairy republicans digest every ‘fair-and-balanced’ fabrication like it was gospel. Really sad and really pathetic.
9. shawnnews | July 31st, 2009 at 4:31 pm
There’s a market for wishful thinking news as Fox has shown. It’s like vanity news.
10. shawnnews | July 31st, 2009 at 4:59 pm
Chris Matthews just did this piece on Hardball. Maybe he reads Applesauce.
11. Orlando Clay | July 31st, 2009 at 5:46 pm
mike hallucinates: “They actually increased readership by becoming more FAIR and BALANCED, like FOX NEWS.”
To paraphrase the GOP’s most famous queen of quitting, “Stop makin’ stuff up!”
12. mike | August 1st, 2009 at 10:34 am
Last name so I can get anonymous hate mail from you compassionate peace loving libs. LOL LOL Stop I’m gonna throw up I’m laughing so hard. Am I a coward? No way, I will meet anybody face to face, AND say what I write. Will you Pat?
Leave a Comment
Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed