Les Jones

Does anyone think that he is such a great journalist that he would have been hired if he supported Bush?

If Chelsea was even marginally articulate and interesting, and spoke at the Republican convention denouncing some sacred cow of the Democrats, and in generally publically went around spouting conservative ideas, would the Liberal Media think for a second about hiring her as a political commentator? No, of course not. They don't care one whit about stirring up controversy to improve ratings. And they certainly aren't motivated by what they think will make them money.

I don't even think it was stirring up ratings. I think they just hired someone whose politics they were comfortable with. Sort of like when ABC hired former senior Clinton advisor George Stephanopoulos as the permanent anchor for "This Week."

But maybe I'm wrong in ascribing it liberal bias. Maybe it's just that most Republican officals are too ugly for TV.

You really think that none of the [non-Fox] networks would be interested in an outspoken Republican Chelsea?

Probably, as a short-lived gimmick. But would the non-Fox networks hire a conservative Chelsea Clinton as a permanent anchor?

The conversation so far:

LLJ: Ron Jr was hired because the networks hate W.
SEK: I think Ron Jr. was hired just as a gimmick.
LLJ: Stephanopoulos was hired because the networks hate W.
SEK: Huh?

I didn't say they hired Stephanopoulos to trash Bush. But his Democractic views are more compatible with theirs than a Republican's would be.

It happens on both sides. Joe Scarborough, FoxNews, and Bill Schneider are a few examples. We're (liberals) told to get over it, so maybe it's time for your side, too.

Gerald: Scarborough is a good counter-example, since he was a Republican Senator. Did Schneider serve office?

would the non-Fox networks hire a conservative Chelsea Clinton as a permanent anchor?

Probably not, I guess, but I have no idea. And RRjr isn't a permanent anchor, he's a "special correspondant" or something like that, for Hardball.

Ok, here's an amended summary of the converstation.

ORIGINAL POST: Ron Jr.'s hiring is great evidence of Liberal Media Bias.
SEK: I think it's better explained as just a gimmick. They'd probably hire Chelsea, too, if she spoke at the Republican convention.
LLJ: Ok, they probably would hire Chelsea. But Stephanopolous' hiring is great evidence of Liberal Media Bias.
SEK: Jeez Louise. We were talking about Ron Reagan, not George Stephanopolous. Why the change of subject?
SEK: Anyway. If commentary by Chelsea wouldn't be evidence of right-wing bias, but rather would more easily be explained as merely a gimmick, then why is commentary by Ron Reagan evidence of left-wing bias?

Steve: the permanent anchor I was refering to was Stephanopolous, not Reagan. Sorry for not being clear.