# According to Most Libs, Fox News Lies.........



## slukasiewski (May 17, 2011)

So please, if you can cite one (and you should be able to if you've made this assertion), then post one of those lies in this thread that Fox News has broadcast. 

Not affiliates.... 

Fox News, national. 

Post away !!  

This should be as entertaining as watching Dan Rather lie.... or Katie Couric getting fired, or MSNBC's ratings.


----------



## Cuyo (May 17, 2011)

slukasiewski said:


> So please, if you can cite one (and you should be able to if you've made this assertion), then post one of those lies in this thread that Fox News has broadcast.
> 
> Not affiliates....
> 
> ...



Slookie, it's more that they market themselves as a legitimate news source, where in fact they're an extremely biased opinion source that can scarcely be described as "News."  But if you want to search for actual 'Lies,' they are readily accessible via any search engine.

Here's a few to get you started.
10 Most Ridiculous Fox News Lies, Creative Edits, and Half-Truths - Spiteful Critic


----------



## slukasiewski (May 17, 2011)

Cuyo said:


> slukasiewski said:
> 
> 
> > So please, if you can cite one (and you should be able to if you've made this assertion), then post one of those lies in this thread that Fox News has broadcast.
> ...



You're fucking kidding with this, right? 

Still waiting...

Anyone else?


----------



## Cal (May 17, 2011)

slukasiewski said:


> So please, if you can cite one (and you should be able to if you've made this assertion), then post one of those lies in this thread that Fox News has broadcast.
> 
> Not affiliates....
> 
> ...



For one, the whole death panel bullshit. Steve Dooshbag and friends.. along with the ever so hawt Megyn Kelly.. and all the other FNC anchors, ran that line during the whole health care debate. And never once did they mention that the individual mandate was a _Heritage Foundation_ idea.. and was the conservative response to a single-payer system.

I guess it's more selectively reporting and editing more than lying.. but they've certainly done their share of that too.


----------



## slukasiewski (May 17, 2011)

Cal said:


> slukasiewski said:
> 
> 
> > So please, if you can cite one (and you should be able to if you've made this assertion), then post one of those lies in this thread that Fox News has broadcast.
> ...



The whole death panel thing? 
Are you fucking serious too? 

When was this "LIE" broadcast on Fox News? Who was the anchor or reporter? And Megyn Kelly is NOT an anchor - dumb ass. 

And you mention "they've done their share" of lying? 

Going to cite some examples, or are you going to blather along with your opinions...


----------



## Truthmatters (May 17, 2011)

They repetedly labeled republicans as democrats when there was a rash of republicans trying to fuck aides or suck someone off in an airport bathroom.

They did it over and over.

BTW what the hell do you think affiliate means?


----------



## Truthmatters (May 17, 2011)

affiliate: Definition, Synonyms from Answers.com






American Heritage Dictionary: 
af·fil·i·ate 


(&#601;-f&#301;l'&#275;-&#257;t') 

v., -at·ed, -at·ing, -ates. 

v.tr. 
1.To adopt or accept as a member, subordinate associate, or branch: The HMO affiliated the clinics last year.
2.To associate (oneself) as a subordinate, subsidiary, employee, or member: affiliated herself with a new law firm.
3.To assign the origin of.
v.intr.
To become closely connected or associated: The two unions voted to affiliate.



Read more: http://www.answers.com/topic/affiliate#ixzz1McV7vR4A


----------



## xsited1 (May 17, 2011)

Cuyo said:


> slukasiewski said:
> 
> 
> > So please, if you can cite one (and you should be able to if you've made this assertion), then post one of those lies in this thread that Fox News has broadcast.
> ...



Those aren't outright lies.  That's just standard operating procedure for news outlets, regardless of political bias.


----------



## PoliticalChic (May 17, 2011)

Cuyo said:


> slukasiewski said:
> 
> 
> > So please, if you can cite one (and you should be able to if you've made this assertion), then post one of those lies in this thread that Fox News has broadcast.
> ...



Shreddy, this from your link...
"When the false "death panel" rumors started in August of 2009, Fox News reported on a supposed, "death book" by the Veterans Health Administration. In liu of actual reporting, they fanned the death panel flames by promoting a number of falsehoods that would have been cleared up had they actually read the thing."



Exhibit A. Last year, bureaucrats at the VA's National Center for Ethics in Health Care advocated a 52-page end-of-life planning document, "Your Life, Your Choices." It was first published in 1997 and later promoted as the VA's preferred living will throughout its vast network of hospitals and nursing homes. After the Bush White House took a look at how this document was treating complex health and moral issues, the VA suspended its use. Unfortunately, *under President Obama, the VA has now resuscitated "Your Life, Your Choices."*

Who is the primary author of this workbook? Dr. Robert Pearlman, chief of ethics evaluation for the center, *a man who in 1996 advocated for physician-assisted suicide* in Vacco v. Quill before the U.S. Supreme Court and is known for *his support of health-care rationing. *

"Your Life, Your Choices" presents end-of-life choices in a way aimed at steering users *toward predetermined conclusions, much like a political "push poll." *For example, a worksheet on page 21 lists various scenarios and asks users to then decide whether their own *life would be "not worth living." *

There also are* guilt-inducing scenarios *such as "I can no longer contribute to my family's well being," "I am a severe financial burden on my family" and that the vet's situation "causes severe emotional burden for my family." 

When *the government can steer vulnerable individuals to conclude for themselves that life is not worth living, who needs a death panel? *

This *hurry-up-and-die message *is clear and unconscionable. Worse, *a July 2009 VA directive instructs its primary care physicians to raise advance care planning with all VA patients and to refer them to "Your Life, Your Choices."* Not just those of advanced age and debilitated conditionall patients. America's 24 million veterans deserve better.
Jim Towey: The Death Book for Veterans - WSJ.com

Exhibit B. Interviewed on Fox News Sunday, August 23, 2009 Jim Towey by Chris Wallace. The following were from my notes on the interview:

1.	The *Department of Veterans Affairs has promoted as the VA's preferred living will *throughout its vast network of hospitals and nursing homes to direct veterans, *all 24 million, *with whom it comes in contact- elderly or not- to a booklet called Your Life, Your Choice.  *A July 2009 VA directive instructs *its primary care physicians to raise advance care planning with all VA patients and to refer them to "Your Life, Your Choices."   

2. The booklet presents end-of-life choices in a way aimed at steering users toward predetermined conclusions, much like a political "push poll." For example, a worksheet on page 21 lists various scenarios and asks users to then decide whether their own life would be "not worth living."  

3.	Are you unable to shake *the blues? Are you disabled? Are you in a nursing home? Are you confined to a wheelchair? Are you an emotional burden for your family? Can you control your bladder? Bowels? Do you need kidney dialysis to keep you alive?*

4.	One can only imagine a soldier surviving the war in Iraq and returning without all of his limbs only to encounter a veteran's health-care system that seems intent on his demise. The government, with a financial stake in reducing the cost of veterans care, tries to steer vulnerable individuals into believing that their lives are not worth living.

5. When the government can steer vulnerable individuals to conclude for themselves that life is not worth living, who needs a death panel? When revised 2007-2008, only one organization was listed in the new version as a resource on advance directives: the Hemlock Society (now euphemistically known as "Compassion and Choices").

6. *The Bush Administration suspended the use of this booklet, and the Obama Administration reinstated it July 2, 2009 and tells providers to refer to it.*

7. The main author of the booklet, was. Dr. Robert Pearlman, chief of ethics evaluation for the center, a man who in 1996 advocated for *physician-assisted suicide* in Vacco v. Quill before the U.S. Supreme Court and is known for his support of health-care rationing. His research has explored *euthanasia,* the role of quality of life in decision-making, the validity of life-sustaining treatment preferences, medical futility, advance care planning, physician-assisted suicide, and relief of patient suffering.

8.The booklet can be found at Page Not Found

How about we assume that *your link is just as flawed on the other nine examples*?


----------



## PoliticalChic (May 17, 2011)

Cal said:


> slukasiewski said:
> 
> 
> > So please, if you can cite one (and you should be able to if you've made this assertion), then post one of those lies in this thread that Fox News has broadcast.
> ...



I'm about to destroy the essence of your post, the same with your understanding of the 'death panel' question...

...the only question is how many millenia it will take for you to accept same.


"[Liberal] Economist and New York Times columnist* Paul Krugman says the only way the U.S. will get its debt crisis under control is by the use of "death panels"* and a national sales tax.

The national sales tax, referred to as value-added tax (VAT), which governments across Europe use widely, will help cut the U.S deficit, Krugman argues.

Krugman made his comments *on ABC's This Week with Christiane Amanpour *during a roundtable discussion about the economy and the recent findings of the U.S. Debt Reduction Commission.

Here's the key excerpt:

"Some years down the pike, we're going to get the real solution, which is going to be *a combination of death panels *and sales taxes. It's going to be that we're actually going to take Medicare under control, and we're going to have to get some additional revenue, probably from a VAT. But it's not going to happen now."        Krugman: Death Panels, VAT Will Fix Debt Crisis


----------



## peach174 (May 17, 2011)

Oh yeah?
What about the main stream media who conveniently left out the fact that Paul Ryan's budget plan did not take effect for Medicare recipients until age 54 and under.
And that seniors who are on Medicare now would not be effected.
It scared all the Seniors, how about that kind of biased reporting Huh?


----------



## slukasiewski (May 17, 2011)

Truthmatters said:


> They repetedly labeled republicans as democrats when there was a rash of republicans trying to fuck aides or suck someone off in an airport bathroom.
> 
> They did it over and over.
> 
> BTW what the hell do you think affiliate means?



They repeatedly did this? When? Who did? Cite a source. 

An affillate - i.e. WTTG, Channel 5 - is not FOX NEWS.  It's an affilitate of the network - dumb fuck.


----------



## PoliticalChic (May 17, 2011)

Truthmatters said:


> They repetedly labeled republicans as democrats when there was a rash of republicans trying to fuck aides or suck someone off in an airport bathroom.
> 
> They did it over and over.
> 
> BTW what the hell do you think affiliate means?



August 26, 2001 - FraudFactor - Democrats in the news media and entertainment industry have misrepresented disgraced Democrat Congressman Gary Condit (D-CA, 18th CD) as a conservative and a Republican in an attempt to shift blame and disgrace away from the Democratic Party and onto the Republican Party. However, the American Conservative Union (ACU) and the Americans for Democratic Action (ADA) voting record scores show that Gary Condit is anything but a conservative. At best, Condit is a liberal "moderate" who supports dangerous gun control laws that target and punish ordinary nonviolent citizens. At worst, Condit is an extreme liberal masquerading as a moderate or conservative. 
Fraud Factor - Disgraced Democrat Congressman Gary Condit misrepresented as conservative, Republican


     On July 9, ABCs George Stephanopoulos confidently predicted on Good Morning America that "I dont think the rest of the Democratic Party is going to get tarred by Gary Condit" as a result of the California Congressmans adulterous affair with a young woman, Chandra Levy, who has been the subject of intense police activity since she ominously disappeared on May 1. 
     Probably not, and one reason may be that ABC and its broadcasting brethren have downplayed Condits partisan affiliation through-out their coverage of the Levy story. Normally, a "Republican" or "Democrat" label is presented nearly every time a member of Congress is cited, as in "Rep. Gary Condit (D-CA)." But since May, the three broadcast networks have practically erased the "D" from Condits political identity, detaching the scandal-plagued politician from the rest of his party. 
Media Reality Check -- 07/12/2001 -- Avoiding Gary Condits Democratic ID


----------



## PoliticalChic (May 17, 2011)

Truthmatters said:


> They repetedly labeled republicans as democrats when there was a rash of republicans trying to fuck aides or suck someone off in an airport bathroom.
> 
> They did it over and over.
> 
> BTW what the hell do you think affiliate means?




For Second Night, ABC and NBC Refuse to Utter Spitzer's Party ID
By Brent Baker | March 11, 2008 | 21:44

0Share 
Change font size:  A |  A 

Just as occurred Monday night, viewers of Tuesday's ABC and NBC evening newscasts never heard the word Democrat applied to New York Governor Eliot Spitzer, nor did they even put a (D) on screen by his name as ABC did briefly Monday. CBS didn't announce his party either on Tuesday night, but Katie Couric had done so Monday night. The ABC and NBC newscasts, however, did put (R) on screen over soundbites from Republicans and NBC's Mike Taibbi twice referred to the reaction from Republican politicians.

Fill-in ABC anchor Elizabeth Vargas avoided any party tag: New York's Governor, Eliot Spitzer, spent most of the day today huddled behind closed doors debating whether to resign after being linked to a prostitution ring. On NBC, substitute anchor Ann Curry led: Tonight, the investigation of New York Governor Eliot Spitzer's fall from grace is broadening... 

Viewers could only figure out Spitzer's party by implication as both shows aired a soundbite from Republican Congressman Peter King with an (R) on screen. ABC's Brian Ross led into it by referring to how Spitzer will soon end what even his political enemies called a once-brilliant career. NBC's Taibbi cited King's party as he described Republicans threatening impeachment if he doesn't resign. Before video of State Rep. James Tedisco with an (R-NY) on screen, Taibbi also noted how some Republicans in Albany would welcome the move up by Lieutenant Governor David Paterson.



Read more: For Second Night, ABC and NBC Refuse to Utter Spitzer&#039;s Party ID | NewsBusters.org


----------



## Nic_Driver (May 17, 2011)




----------



## rightwinger (May 17, 2011)

Fox News Wins Lawsuit To Misinform Public

_ In February 2003, Fox appealed the decision and an appellate court and had it overturned. *Fox lawyers argued it was their first amendment right to report false information*. In a six-page written decision, the Court of Appeals decided the FCC&#8217;s position against news distortion is only a &#8220;policy,&#8221; not a &#8220;law, rule, or regulation.&#8221;

So, Fox and the other gladiatorical cable news channels were given the okay to legally lie right around the time of the Iraq War&#8217;s birth &#8211; when media lies coincidentally hit a peak in both frequency and severity.

In February 2003, a Florida Court of Appeals unanimously agreed with an
assertion by FOX News that there is no rule against distorting or
falsifying the news in the United States.

"Fox" argued that, under the First Amendment, broadcasters have the right
to lie or deliberately distort news reports on public airwaves. Fox
attorneys did not dispute Akre's claim that they pressured her to
broadcast a false story, they simply maintained that it was their right to
do so."


_


----------



## Nic_Driver (May 17, 2011)




----------



## rightwinger (May 17, 2011)




----------



## PoliticalChic (May 17, 2011)

rightwinger said:


> Fox News Wins Lawsuit To Misinform Public
> 
> _ In February 2003, Fox appealed the decision and an appellate court and had it overturned. *Fox lawyers argued it was their first amendment right to report false information*. In a six-page written decision, the Court of Appeals decided the FCCs position against news distortion is only a policy, not a law, rule, or regulation.
> 
> ...



I'm tempted to state that only a dolt fully invested with Left-wing mind-altering and emptying atavistic tendencies would belive this...

...on second thought, there is no other explanation.

"To begin with, the popular portrayal almost always omits the rather crucial fact that Akre and Wilson lost almost every one of their claims at the trial court. As the Florida Second District Court of Appeal noted in their ruling:

Akre and Wilson sued WTVT alleging... that their terminations had been in retaliation for their resisting WTVT's attempts to distort or suppress the BGH story and for threatening to report the alleged news distortion to the FCC. Akre also brought claims for declaratory relief and for breach of contract. After a four-week trial, a jury found against Wilson on all of his claims. The trial court directed a verdict against Akre on her breach of contract claim, Akre abandoned her claim for declaratory relief, and the trial court let her whistle-blower claims go to the jury. The jury rejected all of Akre's claims except her claim that WTVT retaliated against her in response to her threat to disclose the alleged news distortion to the FCC.


It is also not correct to claim, as the Gaddy story quoted above states, that the jury ruled that the FOX affiliate had, in fact, found that the station had attempted to force Akre and Wilson to air "a false, distorted or slanted story..."

But the FCC does not share Akre's interpretation of the jury verdict. In a 2007 decision by the FCC denying a petition by Akre and Wilson demanding that WTVT's broadcast license not be renewed, the FCC includes the following footnote:

Although there has been much back-and-forth among the parties about whether the jury in the employment lawsuit found that Station WTVT(TV) violated the news distortion policy, the verdict form did not ask the jury to determine whether WTVT(TV) violated the news distortion policy, but rather to determine whether Station WTVT(TV) fired either employee for threatening to disclose what the Petitioners reasonably believed would be a violation of the news distortion policy. 

So the trial jury never reached a conclusion on whether the FOX affiliate had violated the news distortion policy, nor did they have to in order to determine she had been fired in response to the threat by Akre and Wilson to file a complaint with the FCC.

*More importantly, and more relevant to the examination of whether WTVT actually asserted a"right to lie"in its newscasts, is that there is nothing on record to show that this argument was ever advanced in court.*

*Whatever the truth of the dispute between the two reporters and WTVT, it seems clear that the station did not at the trial court level admit that it had attempted to distort the news story or assert the"right to lie"in its broadcasts. *

It is also worth noting that of all the web sites, blog postings, and online commentary on the subject of the FOX  "right to lie" argument, not a single one that I've seen links to anything that would substantiate the claim. Very few even bother to link to the actual 2nd District opinion overturning Akre's whistleblower verdict, or anything else related to the case itself.

*Yet in all the claims and charges leveled directly by Akre and Wilson against the FOX affiliate across multiple venues and platforms, there is not a single mention of any "right to lie" argument allegedly offered by WTVT. They seemingly accuse the station of nearly every other sin imaginable in the world of journalism, but are completely silent on this charge. *

FOX, Lies & Videotape: debunking an internet myth*»*Blog*»* Center for Competitive Politics



Poor baby...need a tissue to get that egg off your face?


----------



## slukasiewski (May 17, 2011)

Not seeing any examples of on-air lies folks - but, keep spinning. Eventually you'll wear yourselves out.


----------



## rightwinger (May 17, 2011)




----------



## Nic_Driver (May 17, 2011)

rightwinger said:


> Fox News Wins Lawsuit To Misinform Public
> 
> _ In February 2003, Fox appealed the decision and an appellate court and had it overturned. *Fox lawyers argued it was their first amendment right to report false information*. In a six-page written decision, the Court of Appeals decided the FCCs position against news distortion is only a policy, not a law, rule, or regulation.
> 
> ...



Wow, I knew the GOP was corrupt, I just didn't realize HOW corrupt they are.

Thanks for the link!


----------



## Wry Catcher (May 17, 2011)

slukasiewski said:


> Cuyo said:
> 
> 
> > slukasiewski said:
> ...



OUTFOXED: Clips & Trailer

In their own words.


----------



## slukasiewski (May 17, 2011)

Oh brother --- this stale old farse. 

The dems voted against King's bill. Yeah - so what? 

And Sean Hannity doesn't work for Fox News. He works for the Fox Network.... 

Try again.



rightwinger said:


>


----------



## PoliticalChic (May 17, 2011)

rightwinger said:


>



1.* President Obama is working systematically to marginalize the most powerful forces behind the Republican Party, setting loose top White House officials to undermine conservatives in the media, business and lobbying worlds.                  * 

              Obama aides are using their *powerful White House platform, *combined with techniques honed in the 2008 campaign, to cast some of the most powerful adversaries as out of the mainstream and their criticism as unworthy of serious discussion.                               Everyone from White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel to White House Communications Director Anita Dunn has piled on Fox News by contending its not a legitimate news operation. 	     	Obama strategy: Marginalize most powerful critics - Jim VandeHei and Mike Allen - POLITICO.com

a. Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it. Alinsky, Rules for Radicals, p. 130.

b. So *a new White House strategy has emerged:* rather than just giving reporters ammunition to "fact-check" Obama's many critics, the White House decided it would become a player, issuing biting attacks on those pundits, politicians and outlets"It's opinion journalism masquerading as news," [Anita] Dunn says. Calling 'Em Out: The White House Takes on the Press - TIME

2. Is there a *reason for attacks on Fox News by this administration*, other than the thin-skinned nature of this Chicago thug administration? Anita Dunn was asked exactly that by Howard Kurtz, on CNN, and she said *we had told Chris Wallace that having fact-checked an administration guest on his show, something I've never seen a Sunday show do, *and Howie, you can show me examples of where Sunday shows have fact-checked previous weeks' guests.   http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0910/11/rs.01.html

3. Background? The White House sent Tammy Duckworth, assistant secretary of the Department of Veterans Affairs, in August, and she denied the fact that the VA suggests that vets might wish to end their lives if in a wheelchair

	WALLACE: I want to ask you about the worksheet, page 21 in the V.A. booklet. You're a hero who, despite severe injuries, lives a full life, but you have to get around some of the time in a wheelchair yourself.
Do you have any problem with the V.A. asking elderly veterans whether life is worth living if they have a disability, if they live in a nursing home, if they're unable to shake the blues?... why would a question  I can understand questions about if you're in an irreversible coma, do you want us to pull the plug. But why  as I asked Mr. Towey, why would you even have a question in a  in an end-of-life counseling book about if 
you're in a wheelchair, if you're living in a nursing home, does that make life worth living?

           DUCKWORTH:   And let me make a correction. We've not used it since 2007 when, under the Bush administration, we decided to go ahead and revise it.

WALLACE: ... *that's just not true.* The VHA put out a directive on July 2nd, 2009, and I want to put up two pages from that directive. The first one, page 8, "Primary care practitioners are responsible for giving patients pertinent educational materials, e.g. refer patients to the 'Your Life, Your Choices' module."
And on page 9 it says, "If they request more information, patients may be directed to the exercises in 'Your Life, Your Choices.'"
So as of July 2nd, 2009, last month, more than a month ago, V.A. health practitioners were told to refer all veterans, not just end-of-life veterans but all 24 million veterans, to this document, "Your Life, Your Choices."
The transcript is here: Transcript: 'Death Book' Debate on 'FOX News Sunday' - FOX News Sunday | Chris Wallace - FOXNews.com

4. So, the administration feels it is not only free to lie to the American public, but that it is the obligation of the news media to roll over and play dead in response. And when an outlet tells the truth, and calls attention to lies, then its minions go out and slander it, and convince the easily led to pile on the contumely.
a. Lets fact-check Anita Dunn, because last Sunday she said that Fox ignores Republican scandals, and she specifically mentioned the scandal involving Nevada senator John Ensign, Wallace added. A number of Fox News shows have run stories about Senator Ensign. Anita Dunns facts were just plain wrong. Tammy Duckworth : Kevin Trudeau Show

4. Lets recall another President who behaved this way:

What was different about Colson and Deans effort, though, was the open declaration of war upon anyone who seemed to disagree with administration policies. Colson later expanded his list to include hundreds of people, including Joe Namath, John Lennon, Carol Channing, Gregory Peck, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Congressional Black Caucus, Alabama Governor George Wallace. All this came out during the Watergate hearings. You could see an administration spiraling downwards, and, of course, we all know where that led.

The only reason I mention this is because I have an uneasy feeling only 10 months into this new administration that we are beginning to see the symptoms of this same kind of animus developing in the Obama administration.

According to Politico, the White House plans to neuter the United States Chamber of Commerce, an organization with members in almost every major community in America. The chamber had supported the Presidents stimulus package and defended some of his early appointments, but has problems with his health care and climate change proposals.
The White House communications director recently announced that the administration would treat a major television network, FOX News, as part of the opposition. On Sunday, White House officials were all over talk shows urging other news organizations to boycott Fox and not pick up any of its stories. Those stories, for example, would include the video that two amateur filmmakers made of ACORN representatives explaining how to open a brothel. That is a story other media managed to ignore until almost a week after Congress decided to cut ACORNs funding."
Dont create an enemies list. | Flopping Aces

So, let's review....

the thug administration expects that it has the right to lie on it's jaunts into TV land, and heaven help any outlets that call them on the fabrications...

...and they expect that there are *minions out there dumb enough *to both believe the lies, an then to put up posters claiming the media outlet that calls the lies, is the liar!

Are there folks that dumb?


----------



## slukasiewski (May 17, 2011)

Wry Catcher said:


> slukasiewski said:
> 
> 
> > Cuyo said:
> ...



Using the term "flip flop" and cutting the mic's off of loudmouth Liberal blowhards is lying? Keep searching those Liberal websites Cleatus.


----------



## rightwinger (May 17, 2011)

PoliticalChic said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> >
> ...



tl;dr


----------



## kiwiman127 (May 17, 2011)

Fox News lies when they claim to be "fair & balanced".  They "report, you decide", well they report with their spin on the story,,just like MSNBC.
Then there's MSNBC's "Forward" tag,,,why not be honest and say "Leftwards"?
The righties constantly cry and whine about MSNBC being biased, yet they turn their blind eye to Fox News and the same goes for the ever loyal MSNBC viewer.
Fox News is as "fair & balanced" as MSNBC.
I chose CNN because Fox and MSNBC are both blandly biased in their news presentation, where as CNN plays the middle.  Of course being the middle is being liberal to most far right folks, thus the popular name for CNN, Clinton News Network,,unbelievable. 
All Fox News and MSNBC are good for is polarizing this country with their ultra divisive "reporting" and that isn't good at all.


----------



## PoliticalChic (May 17, 2011)

rightwinger said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



Now, be honest wingy....we both know why you didn't read


"tl;dr"   is little wingy's version of covering his little ears and shouting 'la la la I can't hear you so you're not talking.'

An answer on your level:

"Fraidy cat..faaidy cat..."


----------



## Wry Catcher (May 17, 2011)

slukasiewski said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> > slukasiewski said:
> ...



In there own words:  [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EqzKKFJSPvc]YouTube - Outfoxed: Fox Attacks Richard Clarke[/ame]


----------



## MaggieMae (May 17, 2011)

slukasiewski said:


> So please, if you can cite one (and you should be able to if you've made this assertion), then post one of those lies in this thread that Fox News has broadcast.
> 
> Not affiliates....
> 
> ...



They embellish or spin "news" to fit their agenda. Perfect example:

Paul Ryan Fires Back at Gingrich Over 'Right-Wing Social Engineering' Criticism - FoxNews.com


> Rep. Paul Ryan fired back at Newt Gingrich on Monday after the ex-House speaker *panned* Ryan's Medicare plan as "right-wing social engineering."
> That's the lead in, but it is NOT what Gingrich said, to wit:
> [also quoted in the link]
> 
> ...



He was absolutely RIGHT-ON by saying that a "national conversation" needed to take place, and how the hell is that supposed to happen when people like Paul Ryan (and FoxNews) don't want to hear anything from the Democrats, because apparently when the country's national issues are concerned, Dems are not allies, but enemies.


----------



## rightwinger (May 17, 2011)

PoliticalChic said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...



No, actually its an attempt to get you to stop your cut and pastes of voluminous material and then dare your readers to find a point in there somewhere

You have been to college....I would hope they don't let you get away with that shit, I sure as hell wouldn't

If you have a point to make.....Make it

Save the rest for backup


----------



## slukasiewski (May 17, 2011)

Wry Catcher said:


> slukasiewski said:
> 
> 
> > Wry Catcher said:
> ...



More left-winged propoganda? 
Dear God...

I love the suspicious music they include - making it appear as one massive conspiracy theory. 

You're probably one of those kook-fringe idiots that believes 9/11 was an inside job, right?


----------



## MaggieMae (May 17, 2011)

And of course Jon Stewart catches them with their pants down reguarly. Here's just the latest.

Tone Def Poetry Jam - Lyrics Controversy - The Daily Show with Jon Stewart - 05/11/11 - Video Clip | Comedy Central

I haven't yet watched the back and forth yesterday between Stewart and O'Reilly on that subject, but from the teasers, it looks as though once again those two, at least, agreed to disagree.


----------



## slukasiewski (May 17, 2011)

MaggieMae said:


> slukasiewski said:
> 
> 
> > So please, if you can cite one (and you should be able to if you've made this assertion), then post one of those lies in this thread that Fox News has broadcast.
> ...



Quit being an idiot. The story was reported accurately. 
Gingrich fucked-up and he's TOAST. 
He violated Ron Reagan's 11th Commandment.


----------



## PoliticalChic (May 17, 2011)

rightwinger said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



Oh, poor baby...you seem angry that I totally destoyed your biased fabricated post...

..stick to the truth and you won't be exposed the way you were.

Fox didn't sue to be able to misinform, did they?
Obama set out a White House strategy consistent with a thug administration, didn't he?

And you bought it like it was on sale...didn't you?


----------



## MaggieMae (May 17, 2011)

slukasiewski said:


> Cal said:
> 
> 
> > slukasiewski said:
> ...



You're either playing dumb, or your just a young-un who has only been watching Fox News for a month or so.


----------



## slukasiewski (May 17, 2011)

MaggieMae said:


> And of course Jon Stewart catches them with their pants down reguarly. Here's just the latest.
> 
> Tone Def Poetry Jam - Lyrics Controversy - The Daily Show with Jon Stewart - 05/11/11 - Video Clip | Comedy Central
> 
> I haven't yet watched the back and forth yesterday between Stewart and O'Reilly on that subject, but from the teasers, it looks as though once again those two, at least, agreed to disagree.



Who is Jon Stewart?


----------



## slukasiewski (May 17, 2011)

MaggieMae said:


> slukasiewski said:
> 
> 
> > Cal said:
> ...



No one yet has cited an on-air lie, but according to people like you - it happens all the time. Do you have your head inserted so far into your ass you don't get it, or what??


----------



## MaggieMae (May 17, 2011)

PoliticalChic said:


> Cuyo said:
> 
> 
> > slukasiewski said:
> ...



Except they weren't referring to the VA; they were referring to the one clause in Obamacare related to ADVICE to elderly people regarding living wills, end of life choices, etc., IF THE PATIENT ASKED. 

*It was thereafter dubbed the DEATH PANEL CLAUSE. *

No amount of unrelated spin you've collected will change that basic fact. None.


----------



## rightwinger (May 17, 2011)

PoliticalChic said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...



I couldn't tell if you were trying to make a point

tl;dr


----------



## PoliticalChic (May 17, 2011)

MaggieMae said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Cuyo said:
> ...



I can see why you would try to change the subject, but, surely you can do better that this post, no?

Shreddy's link states:
"When the false "death panel" rumors started in August of 2009, Fox News reported on a supposed, "death book" by the Veterans Health Administration. In liu of actual reporting, they fanned the death panel flames by promoting a number of falsehoods that would have been cleared up had they actually read the thing."

The link clearly says "..."death book" by the Veterans Health Administration..."

The date, as well, suggests the August interview.


----------



## slukasiewski (May 17, 2011)

MaggieMae said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Cuyo said:
> ...



Sarah Palin coined the term "Death Panel," numbnuts. 
Fox News reported it. 
You decide. 

Get it? 

They report.
You decide.

Now, run along Little Johnny.......


----------



## Spoonman (May 17, 2011)

Truthmatters said:


> They repetedly labeled republicans as democrats when there was a rash of republicans trying to fuck aides or suck someone off in an airport bathroom.
> 
> They did it over and over.
> 
> BTW what the hell do you think affiliate means?



So how do you feel msnbc reports the news?  are they fair? are they biased one way or the other?


----------



## PoliticalChic (May 17, 2011)

rightwinger said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



Yeah, you could....

...but nice try.


----------



## MaggieMae (May 17, 2011)

peach174 said:


> Oh yeah?
> What about the main stream media who conveniently left out the fact that Paul Ryan's budget plan did not take effect for Medicare recipients until age 54 and under.
> And that seniors who are on Medicare now would not be effected.
> It scared all the Seniors, how about that kind of biased reporting Huh?



Paul Ryan's House Republican Budget to Cut $4 Trillion Over 10 Years - Yahoo! News


> Those 55 and older would remain under the present Medicare system.



Even the Huffington Post didn't leave out the age reference.

Paul Ryan Budget Proposal Passes House Vote


> People 55 and over would remain in the current system, but younger workers would receive subsidies that would steadily lose value over time.



Just because you don't read anything but Fox.com doesn't mean all other mainstream news outlets didn't throughly cover the points. It was also clearly mentioned on all other cable channels and network news. I don't watch Fox, so how would I have known?


----------



## MaggieMae (May 17, 2011)

PoliticalChic said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> > They repetedly labeled republicans as democrats when there was a rash of republicans trying to fuck aides or suck someone off in an airport bathroom.
> ...



Grasping.


----------



## MaggieMae (May 17, 2011)

PoliticalChic said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> > They repetedly labeled republicans as democrats when there was a rash of republicans trying to fuck aides or suck someone off in an airport bathroom.
> ...



*Really* grasping. NewsBusters?


----------



## Spoonman (May 17, 2011)

rightwinger said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



actually she made a very valid point.  see, you should have read it.


----------



## slukasiewski (May 17, 2011)

Remember the Dan Rather thing where he whipped up and forged documents? 
Show us something as devestating - LIE - like that that's been done on Fox News. 
All you Libs have posted thusfar is non-sense/Liberal propoganda/BS.


----------



## MaggieMae (May 17, 2011)

slukasiewski said:


> Not seeing any examples of on-air lies folks - but, keep spinning. Eventually you'll wear yourselves out.



Apparently there's a lot of folks who think Fox sux.

POLL: Fox News Is The Most Distrusted Name In News


----------



## MaggieMae (May 17, 2011)

slukasiewski said:


> Oh brother --- this stale old farse.
> 
> The dems voted against King's bill. Yeah - so what?
> 
> ...



And FoxNews (Roger Ailes) doesn't take its marching orders from Rupert? Got it.


----------



## rdean (May 17, 2011)

slukasiewski said:


> So please, if you can cite one (and you should be able to if you've made this assertion), then post one of those lies in this thread that Fox News has broadcast.
> 
> Not affiliates....
> 
> ...



Fox doesn't "lie".  They "invent" or "alter".











fox sues for right to lie

I'm sure Fox is just doing what the owners want, Rupert Murdoch and Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal.  Together, their stock stops any "hostile takeover" from happening.  That means the station will do whatever it's told.


----------



## MaggieMae (May 17, 2011)

PoliticalChic said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> >
> ...



Getting desperate now...


----------



## rightwinger (May 17, 2011)

peach174 said:


> Oh yeah?
> What about the main stream media who conveniently left out the fact that Paul Ryan's budget plan did not take effect for Medicare recipients until age 54 and under.
> And that seniors who are on Medicare now would not be effected.
> It scared all the Seniors, how about that kind of biased reporting Huh?



Are you actually proud of that?

Do you think that by offering todays seniors a free pass that they would not be offended that future seniors would have no effective Medicare? Do you really think todays seniors do not care about their childrens ability to eventually get Medicare?

What a sleazy way to write a bill


----------



## slukasiewski (May 17, 2011)

MaggieMae said:


> slukasiewski said:
> 
> 
> > Not seeing any examples of on-air lies folks - but, keep spinning. Eventually you'll wear yourselves out.
> ...



You're an idiot... 

Stick this in your mouth and suck it:

Total Day      
FNC  979 234 463  
CNN  464 167 223  
MSNBC  432 140 231  
CNBC  226 77 125  
FBN  58 13 31  
HLN  228 85 130  

Primetime P2+ (000s) 25-54 (000s) 35-64 (000s)  
FNC  1,479 293 642  
CNN  622 228 271  
MSNBC  719 206 350  
CNBC  356 182 198  
FBN  27 6 15  
HLN  335 84 178  

Net Morning programs (6-9 AM) P2+ (000s) 25-54 (000s) 35-64 (000s)  
FNC FOX & Friends 962 320 605  
CNN American Morning 311 119 197  
MSNBC Morning Joe 474 133 241  
CNBC Squawk Box 221 68 147  
HLN Morning Express w/ Meade 333 175 225  

Net 5PM P2+ (000s) 25-54 (000s) 35-64 (000s)  
FNC GLENN BECK 1,729 445 818  
CNN SITUATION ROOM 624 202 278  
MSNBC HARDBALL WITH C. MATTHEWS 657 130 259  
CNBC MONEY IN MOTION 179 42 82  
HLN HLN SPECIAL REPORT 223 50 92


----------



## PoliticalChic (May 17, 2011)

MaggieMae said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Truthmatters said:
> ...



But...you don't seem to be denying that the MSM do exactly what the minions are claiming that Fox does...."grasping" doesn't really cut it.

It seems that I have shown several examples of exactly that....

So that leaves the question of why you Lefties seem so hot about Fox.
But, of course, everyone knows why: before Drudge and Fox, you guys had the field all to yourselves...you could say anything and there could be no counter, or rebuttal.

Not anymore.

Tough when you lose your monopoly on information, eh?
Even tougher when you can see that Americans are tuning in to the truth more than your outlets.


Condolences.


----------



## Spoonman (May 17, 2011)

MaggieMae said:


> slukasiewski said:
> 
> 
> > Not seeing any examples of on-air lies folks - but, keep spinning. Eventually you'll wear yourselves out.
> ...



apparently there are more who like it. being number 1 in ratings and all.


----------



## slukasiewski (May 17, 2011)

rdean said:


> slukasiewski said:
> 
> 
> > So please, if you can cite one (and you should be able to if you've made this assertion), then post one of those lies in this thread that Fox News has broadcast.
> ...



<BONG> <BONG> <BONG> <BONG>

Dumb fuck......

Arriving.......

<BONG>


----------



## PoliticalChic (May 17, 2011)

MaggieMae said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



No rebuttal??

No counter??

Can't find one single error? Even spelling or grammar????

What is wrong with you today, Mags? Just bumper stickers, like "Getting desperate now..."

You're reduced to deanie-weanie territory here. How far behind can "6%" be?


----------



## MaggieMae (May 17, 2011)

rightwinger said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



When Political Chic arrives on the scene, I always wonder where all the critics of Midcan are when he posts even less voluminous material as background.


----------



## slukasiewski (May 17, 2011)

PoliticalChic said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...



What's puzzling is their allegiance to the dinosaurs - ABC, CBS, NBC - no one sits down after dinner and watches the news any longer and those has been news organizations. 

The ratings further prove this.  When people do watch - they watch Fox. 

Why are Liberals so fucking dense?


----------



## PoliticalChic (May 17, 2011)

rdean said:


> slukasiewski said:
> 
> 
> > So please, if you can cite one (and you should be able to if you've made this assertion), then post one of those lies in this thread that Fox News has broadcast.
> ...



But...but....they only do it 6% of the time!


----------



## Spoonman (May 17, 2011)

rightwinger said:


> peach174 said:
> 
> 
> > Oh yeah?
> ...



they are too busy worrying about the massive debt obama is racking up for their kids.  that's the real problem


----------



## Wry Catcher (May 17, 2011)

What the bigot and the willfully ignorant refuse to acknowledge is a lie may come in different shapes, sizes and colors.  Fox uses all rhetorical means to weave a web of deception, which in the final analysis is the antithesis of journalism.  Using liberal amounts of half-truths, inuenndos, rumors and repitition, Fox commentators toe the company line, or to use kinder terms, provide a constant editorial 'page' to entertain and influence; unabashed are they in their daily duty to demagogue every issue they eschew even a pretense that what they do is fair and balanced.


----------



## WillowTree (May 17, 2011)

Cuyo said:


> slukasiewski said:
> 
> 
> > So please, if you can cite one (and you should be able to if you've made this assertion), then post one of those lies in this thread that Fox News has broadcast.
> ...



So should MSNBC remove the word "news" from it's headlines? doyathink? they don't come any more bigoted and biased and left leaning than MSNBC bews,


----------



## WillowTree (May 17, 2011)

Cal said:


> slukasiewski said:
> 
> 
> > So please, if you can cite one (and you should be able to if you've made this assertion), then post one of those lies in this thread that Fox News has broadcast.
> ...



I think obie doodle was the one who lied. he took 960 billion dollars from medicare to fund obie doodle care and at the same time enrolls thirty million uninsured. Tell me now how someone of the senior citizen population won't die. Splain that.


----------



## rightwinger (May 17, 2011)

Seriously 

Is there anyone who really thinks FoxNews is a legitimate news network?

They are in the News Entertainment business.....much like Pro Wrestling is in the Sports Entertainment Business

Only uneducated rightwing zealots think either one is real


----------



## Spoonman (May 17, 2011)

WillowTree said:


> Cuyo said:
> 
> 
> > slukasiewski said:
> ...



what's interesting is the guy running fox now came from msnbc


----------



## Spoonman (May 17, 2011)

rightwinger said:


> Seriously
> 
> Is there anyone who really thinks FoxNews is a legitimate news network?
> 
> ...



yea, like double the amount of there closest competitor.  ratings speak volumes


----------



## kiwiman127 (May 17, 2011)

Spoonman said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> > They repetedly labeled republicans as democrats when there was a rash of republicans trying to fuck aides or suck someone off in an airport bathroom.
> ...



No, I think MSBNC is as bad as Fox News.
That's why I refuse to watch either network.  I feel I'm smart enough and open-minded enough to NOT need either Fox News or MSNBC and my IQ is only 76.


----------



## rightwinger (May 17, 2011)

slukasiewski said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > MaggieMae said:
> ...



ABC, CBS and NBC all beat FoxNews ratings by a wide margin

It is not even close


----------



## MaggieMae (May 17, 2011)

slukasiewski said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> > slukasiewski said:
> ...



If Newt is toast, then probably Mitt will follow and you'll wind up with a Sarah Palin or Michelle Bachmann. Good luck with that. Do you follow the polls at all? Then you would know that thinking conservatives, the adults, want leadership willing to compromise.

Congress: Job Ratings (1)

Budget/Taxes


----------



## MaggieMae (May 17, 2011)

slukasiewski said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> > slukasiewski said:
> ...



We've been posting inyourface videos of on-air lies, but you refuse to look. You're too busy insulting people who have simply responded to your request for proof.


----------



## slukasiewski (May 17, 2011)

Wry Catcher said:


> What the bigot and the willfully ignorant refuse to acknowledge is a lie may come in different shapes, sizes and colors.  Fox uses all rhetorical means to weave a web of deception, which in the final analysis is the antithesis of journalism.  Using liberal amounts of half-truths, inuenndos, rumors and repitition, Fox commentators toe the company line, or to use kinder terms, provide a constant editorial 'page' to entertain and influence; unabashed are they in their daily duty to demagogue every issue they eschew even a pretense that what they do is fair and balanced.



Did Michael Moore ask you to post this? 
You seem to have captured all the usual Liberal bullshit buzzwords. You didn't use racist, however, which is shocking! Surely you have to find Fox News and all conservatives racist, don't you?

Get back to your smegma collection.


----------



## kiwiman127 (May 17, 2011)

rightwinger said:


> slukasiewski said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...



That is true, most people watch their favorite nightly news and that's it!  I think Fox and MSNBC get mostly the political hacks as their audience.


----------



## slukasiewski (May 17, 2011)

MaggieMae said:


> slukasiewski said:
> 
> 
> > MaggieMae said:
> ...



It's WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY too freaking early to worry about the polls. WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY too early for Pawlenty to accept the nomination.
Take a chill pill Festus.


----------



## MaggieMae (May 17, 2011)

PoliticalChic said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...



So where's the "reporting" *after* August 2009? I repeat:

*It was thereafter dubbed the DEATH PANEL CLAUSE. *


----------



## slukasiewski (May 17, 2011)

kiwiman127 said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > slukasiewski said:
> ...



Fox - 9,000,000 viewers every night and their all political hacks? No one is there to watch the news?


----------



## WillowTree (May 17, 2011)

rightwinger said:


> Seriously
> 
> Is there anyone who really thinks FoxNews is a legitimate news network?
> 
> ...



I think Fox is a legitimate News source. Just because media matters says they are not don't make it so.. put that where the moon don't shine.


----------



## MaggieMae (May 17, 2011)

slukasiewski said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...



And Fox News reported everything Sarah Palin did or said, and she ultimately wound up working for them. 

Next?


----------



## MaggieMae (May 17, 2011)

Spoonman said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> > They repetedly labeled republicans as democrats when there was a rash of republicans trying to fuck aides or suck someone off in an airport bathroom.
> ...



They lean to the left, but at least they've never denied it.


----------



## Spoonman (May 17, 2011)

rightwinger said:


> slukasiewski said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


yea with shows like american idol and dancing with the stars


----------



## Spoonman (May 17, 2011)

MaggieMae said:


> Spoonman said:
> 
> 
> > Truthmatters said:
> ...



don't you find it intersting that the guy running fox came from msnbc


----------



## kiwiman127 (May 17, 2011)

9,000,000 weak-minded people, that's all I can say.
WWE wrestling has the biggest cable audience of all cable shows (including Fox News shows), now what does THAT say?


----------



## slukasiewski (May 17, 2011)

MaggieMae said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > MaggieMae said:
> ...



Now you're just blathering nonsensical statements. Are you drunk?


----------



## spectrumc01 (May 17, 2011)

It works like this.

I watch FOX when we have a Democrat in office, because the shine a light on the shit the Democrats won't tell you.  I watch CNN when we have a Republican in office, because they will tell you what the Republicans don't want us to know.  Both outlets employ such extreme pundits it makes you sick watching them lick the B*lls of their respective presidents.


----------



## kiwiman127 (May 17, 2011)

slukasiewski said:


> kiwiman127 said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



And the National Inquirer has a larger readership than the Washington Post which is probably the top real newspaper in the country.  In other words, quanity certainly doesn't mean quality.


----------



## rightwinger (May 17, 2011)

Spoonman said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > slukasiewski said:
> ...



No.....

These are the ratings of Network News shows
FoxNews is not even in the ballpark


----------



## MaggieMae (May 17, 2011)

slukasiewski said:


> Remember the Dan Rather thing where he whipped up and forged documents?
> Show us something as devestating - LIE - like that that's been done on Fox News.
> All you Libs have posted thusfar is non-sense/Liberal propoganda/BS.



Strawman. Ironically, however, Bush skipping an entire week of TANG training was fact. His DoD 201 was posted online in 2003 but has since been taken down. Surprise surprise. So all that means is that Dan Rather had some UNprovable piece of paper that was actually based on truth. He's guilty of a  half-truth, something Fox Folks should have recognized as their own strategy.


----------



## rightwinger (May 17, 2011)

slukasiewski said:


> kiwiman127 said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



If 1 million viewers watch FoxNews for nine hours, that does not mean you have 9 million viewers


----------



## Spoonman (May 17, 2011)

kiwiman127 said:


> 9,000,000 weak-minded people, that's all I can say.
> WWE wrestling has the biggest cable audience of all cable shows (including Fox News shows), now what does THAT say?



american idol and dancing with the stars have the biggest ratings of network shows.  now your point is?


----------



## MaggieMae (May 17, 2011)

slukasiewski said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> > slukasiewski said:
> ...



Why would I stick it in my mouth, pig?

If you take all the numbers of people *NOT* WATCHING FOX, what do you come up with?


----------



## slukasiewski (May 17, 2011)

rightwinger said:


> slukasiewski said:
> 
> 
> > kiwiman127 said:
> ...



Per newscast. 
Here's the numbers from May 13 Cable News Ratings for Friday, May 13, 2011 - Ratings | TVbytheNumbers


----------



## MaggieMae (May 17, 2011)

PoliticalChic said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...



So I take that as a confession that Fox does in fact center their reporting and commentary around right-wing angles. Of course _they_ don't admit to that, do they...


----------



## slukasiewski (May 17, 2011)

MaggieMae said:


> slukasiewski said:
> 
> 
> > MaggieMae said:
> ...



I don't know - why don't you whip out a calculator, McFly, and figure it out
Here's the chart- http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2011/05/16/cable-news-ratings-for-friday-may-13-2011/92859/


----------



## Spoonman (May 17, 2011)

rightwinger said:


> Spoonman said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



pssssst - why do you think the top rated shows follow the news? becasue people watch the top rated shows and they know the viewers will typically set their channel to that of the show they want to watch. shows prior and after always get a bump.


----------



## Wry Catcher (May 17, 2011)

Why do you people continue to copy and past Red Herrings?


----------



## MaggieMae (May 17, 2011)

PoliticalChic said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...



When you stick to the issue at hand, I'll respond to you. Your usual MO of posting a bunch of "justification" from your voluminous "files" intended to DETRACT from the issue at hand never cuts it with me. You know that.


----------



## HUGGY (May 17, 2011)

slukasiewski said:


> So please, if you can cite one (and you should be able to if you've made this assertion), then post one of those lies in this thread that Fox News has broadcast.
> 
> Not affiliates....
> 
> ...



I believe that affirmation was by court order.


----------



## MaggieMae (May 17, 2011)

slukasiewski said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > MaggieMae said:
> ...



Once again, the number of people NOT watching Fox are the key. But you're too dumb to get that. And the network news only has 20 minutes to cram in real news, not garbage that Drudge/Fox _attempt_ to make the issue du jour.


----------



## rightwinger (May 17, 2011)

kiwiman127 said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > slukasiewski said:
> ...



Each of the Network News shows gets 4-6 million viewers each

The top rated Fox News broadcast gets around 1.5 million viewers


----------



## HUGGY (May 17, 2011)

slukasiewski said:


> So please, if you can cite one (and you should be able to if you've made this assertion), then post one of those lies in this thread that Fox News has broadcast.
> 
> Not affiliates....
> 
> ...



*According to Most Libs, Fox News Lies......*

I believe that affirmation was by court order.


----------



## MaggieMae (May 17, 2011)

Wry Catcher said:


> What the bigot and the willfully ignorant refuse to acknowledge is a lie may come in different shapes, sizes and colors.  Fox uses all rhetorical means to weave a web of deception, which in the final analysis is the antithesis of journalism.  Using liberal amounts of half-truths, inuenndos, rumors and repitition, Fox commentators toe the company line, or to use kinder terms, provide a constant editorial 'page' to entertain and influence; unabashed are they in their daily duty to demagogue every issue they eschew even a pretense that what they do is fair and balanced.



Their ratings are high because it's the only place the lunatic fringe from the right can get their fix.


----------



## kiwiman127 (May 17, 2011)

Spoonman said:


> kiwiman127 said:
> 
> 
> > 9,000,000 weak-minded people, that's all I can say.
> ...



I'll repeat this and by the way, thanks for affirming my point.  My point is,,,,quanity doesn't translate into quality.


----------



## MaggieMae (May 17, 2011)

WillowTree said:


> Cal said:
> 
> 
> > slukasiewski said:
> ...



Oh, now it's up to $960 billion? Which hasn't even happened yet? And from the SUBSIDIZED money given to insurance companies for coverage under Medicare ADVANTAGE? Now be truthful, Willow, where did you get your MISinformation from?


----------



## PoliticalChic (May 17, 2011)

MaggieMae said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > MaggieMae said:
> ...



So, Grasshopper...we move peripateticlly into the area of philosophy?

Certainly.

As everything is relative, a network that is 'Fair and Balanced,' certainly appears right-wing when viewed against the array of Left-wing networks.

Do you now understand?


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J5kBqrHphjo]YouTube - The Tao of Kung Fu #1 - "Fear is the only darkness."[/ame]


----------



## rightwinger (May 17, 2011)

slukasiewski said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > slukasiewski said:
> ...



If you read your link

Those numbers are in Thousands (000) not Millions

Fox gets 900,000 to 1.5 Million viewers


----------



## PoliticalChic (May 17, 2011)

MaggieMae said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > MaggieMae said:
> ...




White flag?

I didn't know you were French!?


----------



## MaggieMae (May 17, 2011)

slukasiewski said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> > slukasiewski said:
> ...



It ain't me who needs a chill pill. I'm having fun. Ironically, I think Tim Pawlenty will back off you losers, too. If he wants to win, he won't want support from your camp because it will guarantee his loss.


----------



## slukasiewski (May 17, 2011)

MaggieMae said:


> slukasiewski said:
> 
> 
> > MaggieMae said:
> ...



I don't know - why don't you whip out a calculator, McFly, and figure it out
Here's the chart- Cable News Ratings for Friday, May 13, 2011 - Ratings | TVbytheNumbers


----------



## MaggieMae (May 17, 2011)

Spoonman said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > slukasiewski said:
> ...



I thought we were talking about "news" programs.


----------



## MaggieMae (May 17, 2011)

Spoonman said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> > Spoonman said:
> ...



Not really. Beck came from HLN, where he actually acted human. It just goes to show what Rupert Murdoch is willing let pass as "news" within his network.


----------



## Spoonman (May 17, 2011)

rightwinger said:


> kiwiman127 said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



Uhm,  network news is also local news, which fox, msnbc and cnn aren't. you're comparing an apple and a potato here.  people watch network for local news. why do you libs always have to find some frigging slant gimmick to try to make a point.


----------



## Cuyo (May 17, 2011)

MaggieMae said:


> Spoonman said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



When you're clearly losing, the best you can do is muddy the issue to make it look like a draw.

Ironically, indicating that larger numbers of people are concerned with Idol and Dancing is quite counter-intuitive to the point they're trying to make.


----------



## Spoonman (May 17, 2011)

MaggieMae said:


> Spoonman said:
> 
> 
> > MaggieMae said:
> ...



ok, but beck isn't running Fox. why do you even bring him up


----------



## MaggieMae (May 17, 2011)

slukasiewski said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...



Excuse me?

death panels in obamacare - Google Search


----------



## rightwinger (May 17, 2011)

slukasiewski said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> > slukasiewski said:
> ...



McFly....You are not too good at math

Fox draws an average of 900,000 during the day and 1.4 million at night

Far from a ratings juggernaught, especially when compared to the networks


----------



## slukasiewski (May 17, 2011)

MaggieMae said:


> slukasiewski said:
> 
> 
> > MaggieMae said:
> ...



Can't find any lies that Fox has aired, so now your opineing about what our nominee thinks of fellow Conservatives? Glad he has you shitscared.


----------



## slukasiewski (May 17, 2011)

rightwinger said:


> slukasiewski said:
> 
> 
> > MaggieMae said:
> ...



Sorry. My bad - however, it's a ratings juggernaut when compared to the competition.


----------



## rightwinger (May 17, 2011)

Spoonman said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > kiwiman127 said:
> ...



No its not

The ratings are for the Katy Couric, Brian Williams network broadcasts. Local broadcasts are not nearly as high

Fox is not even close


----------



## Spoonman (May 17, 2011)

rightwinger said:


> slukasiewski said:
> 
> 
> > MaggieMae said:
> ...



again, stop comparing and apple and a potato


----------



## MaggieMae (May 17, 2011)

Spoonman said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > kiwiman127 said:
> ...



Local news is immediately before the national news. Hello?


----------



## rightwinger (May 17, 2011)

slukasiewski said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > slukasiewski said:
> ...



You have to be careful when listning to Fox

When they claim they are the "Number one cable news source" the key word is cable

They are not the number one news source in America and most Americans do not get their news from Fox


----------



## MaggieMae (May 17, 2011)

slukasiewski said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> > slukasiewski said:
> ...



Nah, you posted it and you're so smart. You do it for me. K? But I can already tell just by a quick glance that:

These:
CNN American Morning 311 119 197  
MSNBC Morning Joe 474 133 241  
CNBC Squawk Box 221 68 147  
HLN Morning Express w/ Meade 333 175 225 

Added up is more than this:
FNC FOX & Friends 962 320 605


----------



## Spoonman (May 17, 2011)

rightwinger said:


> Spoonman said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



now let me ask you another question oh mr slight of hand.  how many households does cable news reach vs network?  you do the math   stop comparing an apple and a potato.   frigging spin doctor libs.


----------



## slukasiewski (May 17, 2011)

rightwinger said:


> slukasiewski said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



Where do most Americans get their news? Personally, I like a variety of sources on the Internet - who have a variety of points of view. I seriously doubt if anyone relies on one source any more - like in the 60s when everyone watched Cronkite or Huntley/Brinkley


----------



## Spoonman (May 17, 2011)

MaggieMae said:


> Spoonman said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



mmmm no kidding -followed by what?  ooooooh top rated network primetime


----------



## slukasiewski (May 17, 2011)

Spoonman said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Spoonman said:
> ...



I don't have cable - I have Fios. Before that I had Direct TV. On both of these sources, Fox News remains #1.


----------



## MaggieMae (May 17, 2011)

Spoonman said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> > Spoonman said:
> ...



Why did you bring up American Idol and Dancing With the Stars? At least I kept my comment in the "news" genre.


----------



## slukasiewski (May 17, 2011)

MaggieMae said:


> slukasiewski said:
> 
> 
> > MaggieMae said:
> ...



So it takes the viewership of four network programs, added up, to equal one program viewship on Fox.

Thanks for pointing that out.


----------



## MaggieMae (May 17, 2011)

slukasiewski said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> > slukasiewski said:
> ...



I gave you this one, which catches Hannity in a blatant lie with material pulled from video archives. But Hannity was apparently too lazy or stupid to ask his staff to do the same just to make sure he wouldn't be showing what a hypocrite he is.

Tone Def Poetry Jam - Lyrics Controversy - The Daily Show with Jon Stewart - 05/11/11 - Video Clip | Comedy Central

I know you hate it, but that ^ is really REALLY funny, Suzie.


----------



## MaggieMae (May 17, 2011)

Spoonman said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> > Spoonman said:
> ...



 So "Glee" is followed by my local FOX news affiliate. Your point is moot. And actually, what follows NBC Nightly News and CBS evening news every night is Entertainment Tonight or Jeopardy (can't remember which is which).  Idol and DWTS don't begin until 8PM eastern. So that makes your point REALLY moot.


----------



## MaggieMae (May 17, 2011)

slukasiewski said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> > slukasiewski said:
> ...



Ahem, now there's a perfect example of perfect spin, boys and girls.


----------



## MaggieMae (May 17, 2011)

Well this has been fun. But now I have to take a break and go laugh my ass off.


----------



## Spoonman (May 17, 2011)

MaggieMae said:


> Spoonman said:
> 
> 
> > MaggieMae said:
> ...



becasue they have a significant impact on viewership of programs that preceed them and follow them.


----------



## slukasiewski (May 17, 2011)

MaggieMae said:


> slukasiewski said:
> 
> 
> > MaggieMae said:
> ...



Hannity doesn't work at Fox News, Brainiac... 

He works at the Fox Network

That's like saying Obrah Winfrey works for CBS News, or whatever failed network her pathetic Obama-worshipping talk show was on.

Grow a brain.


----------



## slukasiewski (May 17, 2011)

MaggieMae said:


> Well this has been fun. But now I have to take a break and go laugh my ass off.



Yeah right. You probably have a bowel to move. Does your doublewide have a wide enough toilet for you to sit on?


----------



## Spoonman (May 17, 2011)

MaggieMae said:


> Spoonman said:
> 
> 
> > MaggieMae said:
> ...



Ahem, now there's a perfect example of perfect spin, boys and girls.

Well this has been fun. But now I have to take a break and go laugh my ass off. 


uhm the fox glee is on is not the same fox cable news shows are on.


----------



## newpolitics (May 18, 2011)

slukasiewski said:


> So please, if you can cite one (and you should be able to if you've made this assertion), then post one of those lies in this thread that Fox News has broadcast.
> 
> Not affiliates....
> 
> ...



Haha...here's one, you fucking asshole, now erase this thread, because I just wasted you...
although, I bet you'll have some logically unsettling way to dismiss this... go figure... 
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eZkDikRLQrw]YouTube - THE CORPORATION [17/23] Unsettling Accounts[/ame]


----------



## bodecea (May 18, 2011)

slukasiewski said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> > slukasiewski said:
> ...



Everyone likes a train wreck.


----------



## MaggieMae (May 18, 2011)

Spoonman said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > slukasiewski said:
> ...



I just realized American Idol is on the FOX channel (non-news). Oopsy.


----------



## MaggieMae (May 18, 2011)

Spoonman said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> > Spoonman said:
> ...



Read his Wiki entry. Roger Ailes is an uber-conservative nut, always has been. 



> In 1993, Ailes became president of the cable channel *CNBC* and began planning another NBC cable channel, America's Talking. The new channel debuted on July 4, 1994. Ailes also hosted his own nightly show, Straight Forward, an hour-long talk show.[19]
> [edit]Fox News
> 
> *After the announcement of Microsoft and NBC's partnership to create an online and cable news outlet, MSNBC, taking the place of America's Talking, Ailes left the network in February 1996 in a fit of pique and was hired by Rupert Murdoch to create Fox News Channel for News Corporation.* In addition, eighty-nine additional employees of the NBC networks left with Ailes to help with the new channel's creation for launch, on October 7, 1996.


----------



## MaggieMae (May 18, 2011)

Spoonman said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> > Spoonman said:
> ...



It's called an analogy. Look it up.


----------



## PoliticalChic (May 18, 2011)

newpolitics said:


> slukasiewski said:
> 
> 
> > So please, if you can cite one (and you should be able to if you've made this assertion), then post one of those lies in this thread that Fox News has broadcast.
> ...





I'm tempted to state that only a dolt fully invested with Left-wing mind-altering and emptying atavistic tendencies would belive this...

...on second thought, there is no other explanation.

"To begin with, the popular portrayal almost always omits the rather crucial fact that Akre and Wilson *lost almost every one of their claims at the trial court. *As the Florida Second District Court of Appeal noted in their ruling:

Akre and Wilson sued WTVT alleging... that their terminations had been in retaliation for their resisting WTVT's attempts to distort or suppress the BGH story and for threatening to report the alleged news distortion to the FCC. Akre also brought claims for declaratory relief and for breach of contract. After a four-week trial, a jury found against Wilson on all of his claims. The trial court directed a verdict against Akre on her breach of contract claim, Akre abandoned her claim for declaratory relief, and the trial court let her whistle-blower claims go to the jury. The jury rejected all of Akre's claims except her claim that WTVT retaliated against her in response to her threat to disclose the alleged news distortion to the FCC.


It is also* not correct *to claim, as the Gaddy story quoted above states, that the jury ruled that the FOX affiliate had, in fact, found that the station had attempted to force Akre and Wilson to air "a false, distorted or slanted story..."

But the FCC does not share Akre's interpretation of the jury verdict. In a 2007 decision by the FCC denying a petition by Akre and Wilson demanding that WTVT's broadcast license not be renewed, the FCC includes the following footnote:

Although there has been much back-and-forth among the parties about whether the jury in the employment lawsuit found that Station WTVT(TV) violated the news distortion policy, the verdict form did not ask the jury to determine whether WTVT(TV) violated the news distortion policy, but rather to determine whether Station WTVT(TV) fired either employee for threatening to disclose what the Petitioners reasonably believed would be a violation of the news distortion policy. 

*So the trial jury never reached a conclusion on whether the FOX affiliate had violated the news distortion policy, nor did they have to in order to determine she had been fired in response to the threat by Akre and Wilson to file a complaint with the FCC.*

More importantly, and more relevant to the examination of *whether WTVT actually asserted a"right to lie"in its newscasts, is that there is nothing on record to show that this argument was ever advanced in court.*

Whatever the truth of the dispute between the two reporters and WTVT, it seems clear that the station did not at the trial court level admit that it had attempted to distort the news story or assert the"right to lie"in its broadcasts. 

It is also worth noting that of all the web sites, blog postings, and online commentary on *the subject of the FOX "right to lie" argument, not a single one that I've seen links to anything that would substantiate the claim.* Very few even bother to link to the actual 2nd District opinion overturning Akre's whistleblower verdict, or anything else related to the case itself.

Yet in all the claims and charges leveled directly by Akre and Wilson against the FOX affiliate across multiple venues and platforms, there is not a single mention of any "right to lie" argument allegedly offered by WTVT. They seemingly accuse the station of nearly every other sin imaginable in the world of journalism, but are completely silent on this charge. 

FOX, Lies & Videotape: debunking an internet myth » Blog »  Center for Competitive Politics


Poor baby...need a tissue to get that egg off your face?

And...try to use better language.


----------



## peach174 (May 18, 2011)

peach174 said:


> Oh yeah?
> What about the main stream media who conveniently left out the fact that Paul Ryan's budget plan did not take effect for Medicare recipients until age 54 and under.
> And that seniors who are on Medicare now would not be effected.
> It scared all the Seniors, how about that kind of biased reporting Huh?



You on the left have totally ignored this.
Main Stream Media is biased. At least Fox has a variety of employees who at left, right and center. Main Stream Media employ just the liberals.


----------



## MaggieMae (May 18, 2011)

Spoonman said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> > Spoonman said:
> ...



That's already been made clear to you, and entertainment programs that follow *network* national news is NOT the issue. Are you really that clueless? Just lonely and needed some company would be my guess.


----------



## MaggieMae (May 18, 2011)

peach174 said:


> peach174 said:
> 
> 
> > Oh yeah?
> ...



The right has accused MSM of being liberally biased for decades. It's quite possible that it's merely a matter of getting things right (er, correct, in this regard). The mainstream television, print and Internet outlets are relied upon as more factually accurate. They HAVE TO BE if they want to stay in business. Also, if you look at corporate media ownership, you'd know that MSM can't _possibly_ be slanted solely toward liberalism because of the sheer number of people, including executives, it takes to maintain those outlets. They can't all be liberals.


----------



## MaggieMae (May 18, 2011)

peach174 said:


> peach174 said:
> 
> 
> > Oh yeah?
> ...



I addressed that part early on yesterday, posting three different MSM news outlets where the age thing was right there in plain sight. Also posted the fact that even HuffPo included the information. I'm not going back to try to find it, since I couldn't find it in a search of my name (together with a couple of others). It may have been removed about the time SuzieQ or whatever its mishmashed user name is got banned.

So if you want proof that every single news outlet posted *ALL* the information on Ryan's proposal, including the age part and the fact that seniors over that age and already eligible won't be affected, then you can do your own Google search, which is where I found a shitload of them.


----------



## Truthmatters (May 18, 2011)

peach174 said:


> peach174 said:
> 
> 
> > Oh yeah?
> ...



So ONLY Fox tells the truth?

Do you see how far you have limited your information stream?


You believe only Fox or other just as right wing leaning media provide you.


You have put yourself at the mercy of people who have a very one minded agenda.


its you who are guilty of what you claim others are doing.


----------



## peach174 (May 18, 2011)

Truthmatters said:


> peach174 said:
> 
> 
> > peach174 said:
> ...




Tell me where I said anything at all about fox only telling the truth. I said Fox employees are more diverse than main stream media employees
Where did I say I watch only fox. I watch MSNBC, CNN, and regular local news.
It is the left who watch MSNBC and will not watch Fox.
And it is all of the main stream media who left out facts about Ryan's Medicare budget.
You are the one who has twisted on to another thing that was not said or even implied.
The left are very good at this.


----------

