# Fox: Deliberate Misinformation



## rightwinger (Feb 1, 2010)

FOX: 'Deliberate misinformation'? - THE WEEK

New York Times columnist Paul Krugman accused Fox News of spreading "deliberate misinformation" about the health-care reform bill and other important issues -- and he made the complaint directly to Fox News CEO Roger Ailes. Krugman, appearing with Ailes and others on a ABC's "This Week" on Sunday, said that the bill was actually a Republican plan, first championed by Mitt Romney, but many people don't realize that because Fox News has tried to convince people it was socialism. Ailes said "the American people are not stupid," and if they're confused about the health plan it's because the bill's supporters tried to "hide" elements the public wouldn't like in a 2,000 page bill. Does Fox News try to get at the truth -- or does it intentionally mislead its viewers?


----------



## Tom Clancy (Feb 1, 2010)

Every News station is biased. 

CBS, CNN, FOX, MSNBC, ABC. you know name it.


----------



## uscitizen (Feb 1, 2010)

The all do it so it is ok if we do it?


----------



## Tom Clancy (Feb 1, 2010)

uscitizen said:


> The all do it so it is ok if we do it?



Do what? 

Some Liberals especially act like their left leaning media isn't biased, it's kind of funny to see. 

But then again, it's the same with some Republicans..


----------



## The Rabbi (Feb 1, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> FOX: 'Deliberate misinformation'? - THE WEEK
> 
> New York Times columnist Paul Krugman accused Fox News of spreading "deliberate misinformation" about the health-care reform bill and other important issues -- and he made the complaint directly to Fox News CEO Roger Ailes. Krugman, appearing with Ailes and others on a ABC's "This Week" on Sunday, said that the bill was actually a Republican plan, first championed by Mitt Romney, but many people don't realize that because Fox News has tried to convince people it was socialism. Ailes said "the American people are not stupid," and if they're confused about the health plan it's because the bill's supporters tried to "hide" elements the public wouldn't like in a 2,000 page bill. Does Fox News try to get at the truth -- or does it intentionally mislead its viewers?



Actually the thread title ought to be:
Rightwinger: Deliberate Misinformation.

We can start with your screen name.  You are a rightwinger only in comparison to say Jane Fonda.
Then there is the putting of a period in the title instead of the question mark in the original.
Then there is the knowledge that the "deliberate misinformation" was actually just an attack by a partisan hack on a TV show rather than anything substantive.

But it is a measure of the left's desperation they have to sink to low's like this.  Pinning the failed health care bill ont he GOP is really scraping.


----------



## masquerade (Feb 1, 2010)

The fight against FOX News will never end as long as there are liberals in this country.  So I guess that means the fight will last forever!!!

It's getting old.  REAL OLD!
Take a look at the number of viewers on any given night.
There's your answer.


----------



## TheSuaveOne (Feb 1, 2010)

Did Krugman provide any proof to back up his claim?

-TSO


----------



## uscitizen (Feb 1, 2010)

The Rabbi said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > FOX: 'Deliberate misinformation'? - THE WEEK
> ...



We all KNOW that the poor misunderstood Republicans had nothing at all to do with the health care bills difficulties....


----------



## uscitizen (Feb 1, 2010)

masquerade said:


> The fight against FOX News will never end as long as there are liberals in this country.  So I guess that means the fight will last forever!!!
> 
> It's getting old.  REAL OLD!
> Take a look at the number of viewers on any given night.
> There's your answer.



Many people love to be told how to act and what to think.
One reason why the Republicans and religious go so well together.


----------



## The Rabbi (Feb 1, 2010)

TheSuaveOne said:


> Did Krugman provide any proof to back up his claim?
> 
> -TSO



Proof?  You're asking for proof from a liberal?  WTF is the matter with you??  Obama is the One We've Been Waiting For.  If you dont like him you're obviously a racist.  No proof is needed.  Fox is against Obama.  They are obviously not a news organization.  So you can say anything about them.  There is no proof needed for any of this.


----------



## Stephanie (Feb 1, 2010)

Fox news must be getting the truth out if it has the PROGRESSIVES and the commie Krugman panties in a bunch, again.


----------



## The Rabbi (Feb 1, 2010)

uscitizen said:


> The Rabbi said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



You are right.  Because the Dems could have passed whatever bill they wanted on a straight party line vote.  No fillibuster allowed.
Or are you now trying to rewrite history. Again?


----------



## masquerade (Feb 1, 2010)

uscitizen said:


> masquerade said:
> 
> 
> > The fight against FOX News will never end as long as there are liberals in this country.  So I guess that means the fight will last forever!!!
> ...



Laughable.  Truly laughable condescending bullshit.  Thanks.  LOLOLOL


----------



## Oldandtired (Feb 1, 2010)

TheSuaveOne said:


> Did Krugman provide any proof to back up his claim?
> 
> -TSO



Nope...he did not....nor did he claim any proof existed.
He simply made a statement as "fact" and asked Ailes to respond to this "fact".
Ailes simply responded with the truth and moved on.
He does not get into that partisan attack crap.


----------



## Oldandtired (Feb 1, 2010)

The Rabbi said:


> uscitizen said:
> 
> 
> > The Rabbi said:
> ...



Interesting how this ONE LITTLE fact that should speak VOLUMES to the American people is simply brushed under the rug and ignored as the Dems and their sheep blame republicans for the bill nopt passing.

It is one thing to misinform the American People...it is another to view them as SO STIUPID thast you can say:

* "we did not need a single republicans vote, but it is their fault we could not get enough   votes"*


----------



## Murf76 (Feb 1, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> FOX: 'Deliberate misinformation'? - THE WEEK
> 
> New York Times columnist Paul Krugman accused Fox News of spreading "deliberate misinformation" about the health-care reform bill and other important issues -- and he made the complaint directly to Fox News CEO Roger Ailes. Krugman, appearing with Ailes and others on a ABC's "This Week" on Sunday, said that the bill was actually a Republican plan, first championed by Mitt Romney, but many people don't realize that because Fox News has tried to convince people it was socialism. Ailes said "the American people are not stupid," and if they're confused about the health plan it's because the bill's supporters tried to "hide" elements the public wouldn't like in a 2,000 page bill. Does Fox News try to get at the truth -- or does it intentionally mislead its viewers?



Again... for the umpteenth time... the States can do whatever they want regarding healthcare just so long as they aren't trampling the Bill of Rights.  And the failures of MassCare are obvious in the fact that the expense of it is running away with their budget.


What a surprise that a liberal New York Times columnist, a Keynesian economist, should point his grubby finger at someone else and squeal "partisan". 

And Ailes is exactly right.  The American people are NOT stupid.  We don't need Fox News telling us what to think.  We can READ.  The problem Barack Obama and his Merry Band of Looters is having isn't about Fox News.  Their problem is... Literacy.  We read their giant 2,000 page pile of crap and understood it PERFECTLY as the government power-grab it is.


----------



## Stephanie (Feb 1, 2010)

Progressives see no problem with Lying if it justifies getting their AGENDA in place.

the sooner the people wake up and see this, the better.


----------



## rightwinger (Feb 1, 2010)

Tom Clancy said:


> Every News station is biased.
> 
> CBS, CNN, FOX, MSNBC, ABC. you know name it.



Please feel free to chime in with misinformation from CBS, CNN, MSNBC ans NBC


----------



## Oldandtired (Feb 1, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> Tom Clancy said:
> 
> 
> > Every News station is biased.
> ...



Youy mean an "open accusation" with no proof or even a claim of proof is enough to comment on Fox...

But to comment on any other would require proof?

LMAO.....


----------



## rightwinger (Feb 1, 2010)

FOX is lucky that we don't live in the kind of country it's trying to create, because it would be the first to go.


----------



## Nosmo King (Feb 1, 2010)

masquerade said:


> The fight against FOX News will never end as long as there are liberals in this country.  So I guess that means the fight will last forever!!!
> 
> It's getting old.  REAL OLD!
> Take a look at the number of viewers on any given night.
> There's your answer.



Do you think viewership equals credibility?  Is popularity the same as quality?


----------



## masquerade (Feb 1, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> FOX is lucky that we don't live in the kind of country it's trying to create, because it would be the first to go.



What kind of craziness is this comment?


----------



## Stephanie (Feb 1, 2010)

So now Fox is trying to Create a country. One news channel out of all the lefty leaning ones and all this hysteria about it..must be because it has the MOST viewers out of all of them and the left can't control ALL THE propaganda they dish out.


----------



## masquerade (Feb 1, 2010)

Nosmo King said:


> masquerade said:
> 
> 
> > The fight against FOX News will never end as long as there are liberals in this country.  So I guess that means the fight will last forever!!!
> ...



Does the lame stream media's lack of viewership mean anything?  Hmmmm?  I think so.

And yes, I do think viewership equals credibility.
Ask Keith Olbermann is he'll trade his ratings for Bill O'Reilly's.


----------



## Nosmo King (Feb 1, 2010)

Stephanie said:


> So now Fox is trying to Create a country. One news channel out of all the lefty leaning ones and all this hysteria about it..must be because it has the MOST viewers out of all of them and the left can't control ALL THE propaganda they dish out.


Again, is popularity the same as quality?  Does having a large audience grant credibility?


----------



## Tom Clancy (Feb 1, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> Tom Clancy said:
> 
> 
> > Every News station is biased.
> ...



Are you seriously asking that? 

Are you implying that CBS, CNN or MSNBC aren't biased?


----------



## Nosmo King (Feb 1, 2010)

masquerade said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > masquerade said:
> ...


Why?  What basis do you find to make this claim true?


----------



## Tom Clancy (Feb 1, 2010)

Hell i'd be pissed too if Fox News had twice as many ratings as I do.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Feb 1, 2010)

Fox did get a court to rule that it was allowed to lie. Why would they seek such a ruling?

The health plan is a corporate welfare bill similar to, but much worse than, Bush's corporate welfare prescription plan D.


----------



## Oldandtired (Feb 1, 2010)

Nosmo King said:


> Stephanie said:
> 
> 
> > So now Fox is trying to Create a country. One news channel out of all the lefty leaning ones and all this hysteria about it..must be because it has the MOST viewers out of all of them and the left can't control ALL THE propaganda they dish out.
> ...



As it pertains to the news...I would say yes.


----------



## masquerade (Feb 1, 2010)

Nosmo King said:


> masquerade said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



Mathematics.

*COMMON SENSE!!!*


----------



## Nosmo King (Feb 1, 2010)

Oldandtired said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > Stephanie said:
> ...


Why?  Why would popularity automatically grant credibility?  How does a large audience equate to quality?


----------



## Oldandtired (Feb 1, 2010)

P F Tinmore said:


> Fox did get a court to rule that it was allowed to lie. Why would they seek such a ruling?
> 
> The health plan is a corporate welfare bill similar to, but much worse than, Bush's corporate welfare prescription plan D.



I sugggest you read the ruling and what it referred to.
They did not get a ruling that it was allowed to lie.
Likewise...they did not seek that ruling.
They were sued and won the law suit.

Jeez...>STOP FUCKING WATCHING MSNBC...they makle people look silly.


----------



## uscitizen (Feb 1, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> Tom Clancy said:
> 
> 
> > Every News station is biased.
> ...



Lets also see some misinformation proof from PBS.  My favorite news source.


----------



## uscitizen (Feb 1, 2010)

Nosmo King said:


> Oldandtired said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



but American Idle had a large audience.


----------



## Oldandtired (Feb 1, 2010)

Nosmo King said:


> Oldandtired said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



I suugest you review the poll. The poll asks WHY.....
The reason they were favored was they are found to have the mpost accurate and fair news reporting.


----------



## traveler52 (Feb 1, 2010)

Faux Snooze, Seldom Fair and VERY Un-Balanced.


----------



## Oldandtired (Feb 1, 2010)

uscitizen said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > Oldandtired said:
> ...



Jeez....you are graspng for straws.

READ THE POLL...dont just respond like an idiot...it makes youy look like an idiot.


----------



## Nosmo King (Feb 1, 2010)

masquerade said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > masquerade said:
> ...


Okay.  Using you 'common sense' the claims of the Nazi regime were accurate and credible because of the popularity of those claims.  Using your common sense, The Beverley Hillbillies was a high quality show simply because it had large audiences.  Using your common sense, the National Inquirer is a more credible newspaper than the Fresno Bee due to its large circulation.

Do you care to rethink your argument, or should I continue to give you examples?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Feb 1, 2010)

Oldandtired said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Fox did get a court to rule that it was allowed to lie. Why would they seek such a ruling?
> ...



So, they did not getting a ruling allowing them to lie?


----------



## uscitizen (Feb 1, 2010)

Oldandtired said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > Oldandtired said:
> ...



Of course the people watching Fox would say that.  



Do you actually think they would say they watch a deceptive news source?


----------



## rightwinger (Feb 1, 2010)

_Huffington cornered Ailes early, asking if he was concerned with the hateful and inciteful rhetoric of Glenn Beck. Isn&#8217;t Ailes worried when his Fox firebrand uses inflammatory words like &#8220;slaughter&#8221; and &#8220;killing spree&#8221; in relation to Obama and the Democrats? Huffington asked. Ailes said, &#8220;He was talking about Hitler and Stalin.&#8221; When she pressed further, insisting Beck was in fact, talking about the Obama administration, Ailes, remaining as calm as he is corpulent, said, &#8221; we can&#8217;t be the word police.&#8221;

Or apparently the fact police. HUFFINGTON POST has fact checked Ailes contention and&#8211;surprise&#8211;he&#8217;s wrong. Beck specifically took aim at the Obama administration in October 2009, warning of a killing spree: &#8220;Spread the wealth&#8211;hello, Mao&#8211; this is what this is all about&#8211; and anybody not on board, look out, because you could be the next victim of the killing spree.&#8221; And in November 2009, the Beckster warned of the impending slaughter: &#8220;These people ( Obama administration/Democrats) are taking you to a place to be slaughtered.&#8221;_

Battle of Titans: Huffington vs. Ailes Shakes Up Walters on ABC | NEWS JUNKIE POST


----------



## rayboyusmc (Feb 1, 2010)

Fox is not a news media.  It is a political commentary media.  It is the only major cable news that is owned by one person like Rupert whose sole purpose is to make money spreading his conservative view.s

I don't give a shit if he is consevative or liberal, but I detest the fact that they simply won't state the truth that they are there to push the current Republican agenda.

To keep pushing the lie that it is fair and balanced is a indication of how weak that argument is.


----------



## Oldandtired (Feb 1, 2010)

uscitizen said:


> Oldandtired said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



You truly must be an idiot....

THAT IS WHY 49% OF THE PEOPLE WATCH FOX

You supported my point you moron.


----------



## uscitizen (Feb 1, 2010)

Oldandtired said:


> uscitizen said:
> 
> 
> > Oldandtired said:
> ...



But earlier I said most people seem to like to be told what to think and how to act.
That explains the viewership.
Why they defend their viewership is my last post on this.


----------



## masquerade (Feb 1, 2010)

Nosmo King said:


> masquerade said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



Oh no, don't bother giving me more examples.  You and I will never agree on this issue.  Period.  And I grow tired of going around and around with you about this.    The American people want to hear the stories they would never hear on the lame stream media.  The want discussion from BOTH sides.  Just a couple of reasons why the ratings are soaring for FOX.  But you will never see that.  

Funny y'know ... we never see an attack on any of the other news organizations like we do with FOX.  Why?  Because the liberals and the current administration are afraid of FOX News.


----------



## Murf76 (Feb 1, 2010)

_"Fah-fa-fa-fa-fa-F-OX!!! ... Fah-fa-fa-fa-fa-F-OX!!!"_

[youtube]gbzY3Gmebr4[/youtube]


Seriously, with all the ruffled feathers and hysterical squawking... one would think the fox truly had broken into the henhouse.





Masquerade is right... the free market says... _'That there is QUALITY'_.  People vote with their dollars.  And when it comes to television, they vote with their viewership.  Consumers don't typically select poor quality merchandise.


----------



## Dante (Feb 1, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> FOX: 'Deliberate misinformation'? - THE WEEK
> 
> New York Times columnist Paul Krugman accused Fox News of spreading "deliberate misinformation" about the health-care reform bill and other important issues -- and he made the complaint directly to Fox News CEO Roger Ailes. Krugman, appearing with Ailes and others on a ABC's "This Week" on Sunday, said that the bill was actually a Republican plan, first championed by Mitt Romney, but many people don't realize that because Fox News has tried to convince people it was socialism. Ailes said "the American people are not stupid," and if they're confused about the health plan it's because the bill's supporters tried to "hide" elements the public wouldn't like in a 2,000 page bill. Does Fox News try to get at the truth -- or does it intentionally mislead its viewers?





Considering Roger Ailes is a master manipulator and image distiller, of legendary proportions (I along with others am in awe of his accomplishments and skills), it should be no surprise to those with half a brain and an ounce of critical thinking skills to see the obvious.

I understand tha many folks who watch FOX NEWS are ignorantly unaware of it's mission and agenda. I also understand that many who are can become intellectually lazy and complascent when swallowing a regular diet of FOX News....but to excuse all these folks would be a disservice to intellectual honesty and truth, justice and the American way. FOX NEWS is a propaganda arm of the right, that also happens to cover real news stories...many times in an unbiased way. Their commentators are pure right wing tools.


----------



## rightwinger (Feb 1, 2010)

> Funny y'know ... we never see an attack on any of the other news organizations like we do with FOX. Why? Because the liberals and the current administration are afraid of FOX News.



Attack at will...

Provide specific examples where other networks mislead the public and we can talk about it. The reason Fox is constantly attacked is because they do not maintain the journalistic standards of legitimate news networks.


----------



## Oldandtired (Feb 1, 2010)

masquerade said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > masquerade said:
> ...



They are afraid of the truth.


----------



## uscitizen (Feb 1, 2010)

LMAO

funny thread.


----------



## masquerade (Feb 1, 2010)

Oldandtired said:


> masquerade said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



Amen!


----------



## Nosmo King (Feb 1, 2010)

masquerade said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > masquerade said:
> ...


No.  I don't know anyone who "fears" Fox News.  I don't know anyone who "fears" Sarah Palin or Glenn Beck or the addict Limbaugh.  "Fear" is a construct of Right Wingers who rationalize that way.  Criticism=Fear.

And, if your 'common sense' was actually common sense, you would realize the essential flaw in your logic.  By the way you rationalize Fox's credibility being due to its popularity would be as if you argued Beyonce makes better music than Mozart due to iTunes receipts.


----------



## masquerade (Feb 1, 2010)

Nosmo King said:


> masquerade said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



If the folks didn't like what they were hearing, or the reporters / commentators bringing them what they are listening to, then they would tune out.  Change the channel and watch something more to thier taste.   It's pretty common sense to me.  The numbers = the folks interested in what is being said.  The truth.  Period.

Nice talking with you today.
You and a few others in this thread have kept me thoroughly entertained and made my morning fly by!  One minute closer to the evening news on FOX!


----------



## Oldandtired (Feb 1, 2010)

Nosmo King said:


> masquerade said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



Another moron who refuses to read the actual questions IN THE POLL that specifically ask WHY they watch the news they watch.


----------



## Nosmo King (Feb 1, 2010)

masquerade said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > masquerade said:
> ...


Liking what you hear and the truth are not the same thing!  I think you are a brilliant logician.  You like to hear that, don't you?

The check's in the mail.

I'll still respect you in the morning.

Fox News...Fair and Balanced.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Feb 1, 2010)

I love the latest Librul Talking Point: ObamaCare is really a Republican Plan.

Libs are the biggest fucking liars on the planet, because first of all, they are Marxists


----------



## bobbcat (Feb 1, 2010)

> We all KNOW that the poor misunderstood Republicans had nothing at all to do with the health care bills difficulties....


In case you have not noticed, the Dems have had the majority sizable enough to forge ahead with the bill without any participation by the Pubs whatsoever. The bill's difficulty is rooted in conflicts within the Dems' own party, as they have allowed virtually no input from the Pubs during the more intensive (and significant) sessions of debate and discussion about the bill.


----------



## Nosmo King (Feb 1, 2010)

Oldandtired said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > masquerade said:
> ...


The question is: does popularity equate to truth and credibility.  Nothing at all to do with any poll.  I never cited a poll, never.

And I'm a moron!


----------



## Oldandtired (Feb 1, 2010)

Nosmo King said:


> Oldandtired said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



The poll fist asked what news you preferring asking and then asked WHY they preferr watching that particular news channel.

The answer was overwhelimingly "credibility and accuracy"


----------



## rightwinger (Feb 1, 2010)

_Huffington got in another punch. She asked Ailes, who had just boasted about his sky high &#8220;fair and balanced&#8221; ratings, *why Fox News opted to cut off the coverage of Obama&#8217;s historic and triumphant appearance at the House Republican retreat last Friday.*
Ailes feeble response? &#8220;Because we&#8217;re the most trusted name in news.&#8221; Huh? Forget the malicious audacity of such a statement. It doesn&#8217;t even make sense. *If an outlet&#8211;any outlet&#8211;is truly to be trusted to provide fair and balanced news coverage&#8211;it certainly would carry the entire event. Unfiltered.* That&#8217;s how trust is garnered. Or rather should be. Wake up, people. Regardless of political affiliation, everyone deserves to have the facts. And when a rare live, unedited event like Friday&#8217;s is available, the public has a right to see it. No matter who comes out the perceived victor. Apparently, even twenty more minutes was too long for the paranoid rabble rousers on Fox News to wait to start spinning the reality out of the event._

Battle of Titans: Huffington vs. Ailes Shakes Up Walters on ABC | NEWS JUNKIE POST


----------



## Nosmo King (Feb 1, 2010)

Oldandtired said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > Oldandtired said:
> ...


The question is: does popularity equate to truth and credibility?


----------



## uscitizen (Feb 1, 2010)

The republican spent any money fighting healthcare reform?
No republicans spoke out against healthcare reform?


----------



## Oddball (Feb 1, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> _Huffington got in another punch. She asked Ailes, who had just boasted about his sky high &#8220;fair and balanced&#8221; ratings, *why Fox News opted to cut off the coverage of Obama&#8217;s historic and triumphant appearance at the House Republican retreat last Friday.*
> Ailes feeble response? &#8220;Because we&#8217;re the most trusted name in news.&#8221; Huh? Forget the malicious audacity of such a statement. It doesn&#8217;t even make sense. *If an outlet&#8211;any outlet&#8211;is truly to be trusted to provide fair and balanced news coverage&#8211;it certainly would carry the entire event. Unfiltered.* That&#8217;s how trust is garnered. Or rather should be. Wake up, people. Regardless of political affiliation, everyone deserves to have the facts. And when a rare live, unedited event like Friday&#8217;s is available, the public has a right to see it. No matter who comes out the perceived victor. Apparently, even twenty more minutes was too long for the paranoid rabble rousers on Fox News to wait to start spinning the reality out of the event._
> 
> Battle of Titans: Huffington vs. Ailes Shakes Up Walters on ABC | NEWS JUNKIE POST


My answer:

Unlike the socialized medical care debate, that dog and pony show _*was*_ shown on C-SPAN.


----------



## Oldandtired (Feb 1, 2010)

Nosmo King said:


> Oldandtired said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



Is it that you have trouble comprehending, I hjave trouble articulating, or you simply dont want to know the truth?

They asked why people watch the news they watch and the answer was credibility and accuracy.

So  I am curious....you, TOO, feel the American people are too stupid to make smart decisions on their own?


----------



## Yukon (Feb 1, 2010)

FOX "News" is the voice of the GOP. The network does not report the news but twists it to ensure the GOP looks good and the Dems look bad. 

I have noticed on several occassions very subtle encouragement for some right-wing wack job to do harm to Mr Obama. Im sure the authorities are aware of these threats and take them serious. 

FOX is a propaganda arm of the GOP - no more, no less. No intelligent, thinking, ratuional person could watch the network and take it seriously.


----------



## Oldandtired (Feb 1, 2010)

Yukon said:


> FOX "News" is the voice of the GOP. The network does not report the news but twists it to ensure the GOP looks good and the Dems look bad.
> 
> I have noticed on several occassions very subtle encouragement for some right-wing wack job to do harm to Mr Obama. Im sure the authorities are aware of these threats and take them serious.
> 
> FOX is a propaganda arm of the GOP - no more, no less. No intelligent, thinking, ratuional person could watch the network and take it seriously.



So then I guess 49% of the people are just too stupid to know this.

And you are too smart to be fooled by it.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Feb 1, 2010)

Huffington is a Titan?


----------



## Yukon (Feb 1, 2010)

Oldand Tired and obviosuly stupid,

Listen to the FowNews reports. It isnt news its an editoral. They twist the news, they lie, they defame, the urge criminal activity, the network is a disgrace.Only an uneduated fool could believe what they say and that's abot 70% of the US population - thank goodness 20 % of them cant afford a TV.


----------



## Oldandtired (Feb 1, 2010)

uscitizen...

To thank Yukon for his post seriously diminished any credibhility you may have.

The man obviously hates America......I suggest you not thank him for squat.


----------



## Oldandtired (Feb 1, 2010)

Yukon said:


> Oldand Tired and obviosuly stupid,
> 
> Listen to the FowNews reports. It isnt news its an editoral. They twist the news, they lie, they defame, the urge criminal activity, the network is a disgrace.Only an uneduated fool could believe what they say and that's abot 70% of the US population - thank goodness 20 % of them cant afford a TV.



Go away Yukon.
I will not debate someone who hates the country I love and will die for.


----------



## uscitizen (Feb 1, 2010)

Oldandtired said:


> uscitizen...
> 
> To thank Yukon for his post seriously diminished any credibhility you may have.
> 
> The man obviously hates America......I suggest you not thank him for squat.



Yes he is a wacko, however i agreed with him on that post.

Thanks for your suggestion, however I go my own way.  Always have, always will.


----------



## VaYank5150 (Feb 1, 2010)

Oldandtired said:


> Yukon said:
> 
> 
> > FOX "News" is the voice of the GOP. The network does not report the news but twists it to ensure the GOP looks good and the Dems look bad.
> ...



That is the only thing we are left to deduce...


----------



## Yukon (Feb 1, 2010)

Oldandtired said:


> Go away Yukon.
> I will not debate someone who hates the country I love and will die for.



You're too old to debate. You confuse criticism with hatred as do all Conservatives.


----------



## Dante (Feb 1, 2010)

Dude said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > _Huffington got in another punch. She asked Ailes, who had just boasted about his sky high fair and balanced ratings, *why Fox News opted to cut off the coverage of Obamas historic and triumphant appearance at the House Republican retreat last Friday.*
> ...




Much of the health care debate was shown on c-span. The House and Senate are covered.

and Obama hasn't kept true to all his campaign promises? OMFG!!! The Republic is in danger! Call the promises police!

Asswipe, get a life.


----------



## Dante (Feb 1, 2010)

Oldandtired said:


> Yukon said:
> 
> 
> > FOX "News" is the voice of the GOP. The network does not report the news but twists it to ensure the GOP looks good and the Dems look bad.
> ...



49% of what people? Where do you get this idea that 49% of 'the people' watch FOX?


----------



## Dante (Feb 1, 2010)

Tom Clancy said:


> Every News station is biased.
> 
> CBS, CNN, FOX, MSNBC, ABC. you know name it.



Like life, not all biases are born equal...or fair and balanced.


----------



## Dante (Feb 1, 2010)

uscitizen said:


> LMAO
> 
> funny thread.



yes indeed.


----------



## Oldandtired (Feb 1, 2010)

Dante said:


> Oldandtired said:
> 
> 
> > Yukon said:
> ...



Guess your news refused to present the latest poll....and no...not a fox poll and not a Rasmussen poll.

Wow....so exactly how is that media doing for ya there?


----------



## Yukon (Feb 1, 2010)

"49% of the people watch Fox". Who told him that? *GLENN BECK of course !*


----------



## Dante (Feb 1, 2010)

CrusaderFrank said:


> I love the latest Librul Talking Point: ObamaCare is really a Republican Plan.
> 
> Libs are the biggest fucking liars on the planet, because first of all, they are Marxists



Frank, here's a pity post/reply for you.

next time try stepping up to the plate with some  interesting thoughts as well as some balls, and maybe people will start paying attention to you.


----------



## Dante (Feb 1, 2010)

Oldandtired said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> > Oldandtired said:
> ...



49% of what exactly?


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Feb 1, 2010)

Dante said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> > I love the latest Librul Talking Point: ObamaCare is really a Republican Plan.
> ...



Aren't you overdue for another name change?


----------



## Dante (Feb 1, 2010)

Yukon said:


> "49% of the people watch Fox". Who told him that? *GLENN BECK of course !*


----------



## Oddball (Feb 1, 2010)

Dante said:


> Much of the health care debate was shown on c-span. The House and Senate are covered.
> 
> and Obama hasn't kept true to all his campaign promises? OMFG!!! The Republic is in danger! Call the promises police!
> 
> Asswipe, get a life.


The nondescript and purposefully vague "much" is not _*ALL*_, which is what was promised, peckerhead.


----------



## VaYank5150 (Feb 1, 2010)

Dude said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> > Much of the health care debate was shown on c-span. The House and Senate are covered.
> ...



How much healthcare was debated on CSPAN under Bush?  Oh that's right....the Republicans never gave a shit about reforming healthcare until Obama took office....never mind.


----------



## LibocalypseNow (Feb 1, 2010)

Fox News is now considered to be the most balanced and trusted News in America. They are trusted much more than the corrupt Liberal Media at this point. This is according to recent polling. CNN's gonna have to give up their dishonest tag-line. They are definitely not the most trusted news anymore. WTG Fox News!


----------



## Yukon (Feb 1, 2010)

Glenn Beck, Rush Limpdick, Ann Coulter and others are the voices of right-wing, Christian zealots, young and old (Oldandtired <andprobablyuninsured> is a good example).


----------



## Oldandtired (Feb 1, 2010)

Dante said:


> Oldandtired said:
> 
> 
> > Dante said:
> ...



You really refuse to see the truth.....you actually prefer to live in your "guarded" world.
Works for you, so go for it.


----------



## LibocalypseNow (Feb 1, 2010)

"Paul Krugman??" lol! Gee another Liberal Wing Nut whining about dat Fox NOOOOOOOOZ. Did a Blame BOOOOOOOOOOOOSSH rant follow? Newsflash: Liberal Wing Nuts hate Fox News!! What boring stuff. Fox News really is the most balanced and trusted News in America today. It's true.


----------



## Oddball (Feb 1, 2010)

VaYank5150 said:


> Dude said:
> 
> 
> > Dante said:
> ...


We're not talking about republicans and/or _* BOOOOOOOOSH!*_ here, Skippy.

Thanks for playing, though....Johnny has a case of Bardahl for you, as a parting gift.


----------



## Oldandtired (Feb 1, 2010)

Yukon said:


> Glenn Beck, Rush Limpdick, Ann Coulter and others are the voices of right-wing, Christian zealots, young and old (Oldandtired <andprobablyuninsured> is a good example).



LMAO...I am right wing.
Sure.
As other posts of mine have said...Hillary had my vote if she made it into November as she was the only one I believed...whether I agreed with her policies or not.
But I guess that since I do not hate Americans as you do...nor do I have so little regard for Americans, as you dont, then I must be right wing.
Cool.


----------



## Darkwind (Feb 1, 2010)

The Rabbi said:


> uscitizen said:
> 
> 
> > The Rabbi said:
> ...


The problem is, they never stop rewriting history.  They have to do so in order to keep the gullible and mentally challenged voting for them.


----------



## Oldandtired (Feb 1, 2010)

VaYank5150 said:


> Dude said:
> 
> 
> > Dante said:
> ...



Please remind me when Bush made a promise that he would ensure the healthcare debate was televised on C-SPAN.
I must have missed that promise.


----------



## Oldandtired (Feb 1, 2010)

VaYank5150 said:


> Dude said:
> 
> 
> > Dante said:
> ...



And on that note...

Exactly what has "changed in Washington"?


----------



## LibocalypseNow (Feb 1, 2010)

All Liberal Wing Nuts hate Fox News. That alone should make ya wanna watch.


----------



## LibocalypseNow (Feb 1, 2010)

Btw,PPP is a well known Democratic polling organization. Even they found that most people in America trust Fox News much more than the Dan Blather-led corrupt Liberal Media at this point. Seriously,it's true.


----------



## VaYank5150 (Feb 1, 2010)

Dude said:


> VaYank5150 said:
> 
> 
> > Dude said:
> ...



I know...I know....Bush's failed Presidency is now off limits.  My bad.


----------



## LibocalypseNow (Feb 1, 2010)

Paul Krugman is a well known Liberal kook who deliberately spews misinformation all the time. So is anyone really taking him seriously on this one? Fox News is now considered to be the most balanced and trusted News in America today. That must really hurt for all Liberal kooks like Krugman. His Liberal Media is dying and that's a good thing. WTG Fox News!


----------



## Dante (Feb 1, 2010)

Dude said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> > Much of the health care debate was shown on c-span. The House and Senate are covered.
> ...



"Much is not All" 

I see the twelve step program is working. Give it a few more months and maybe some more cobwebs will fall off of your brain.


----------



## Dante (Feb 1, 2010)

VaYank5150 said:


> Dude said:
> 
> 
> > Dante said:
> ...


But Dude will say Obama has done what no other President has done in the history of the USA...he's went back on a campaign promise!


----------



## Dante (Feb 1, 2010)

Oldandtired said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> > Oldandtired said:
> ...



All I'm saying is a survey of _registered voters_ is NOT representative of the viewing public or America as a whole. You cannot honestly extrapolate data from the survey to support your claim..


----------



## LibocalypseNow (Feb 1, 2010)

Their President is a disastrous failure and their Liberal Media is dying. "Blame BOOOOOOOOOSSH!!" and dat "EVIL FOX NOOOOOOOOOOZ!!!" is all these kooks have left. Kind of pathetic no?


----------



## Oldandtired (Feb 1, 2010)

Dante said:


> VaYank5150 said:
> 
> 
> > Dude said:
> ...



Seeing as his slogan all along was 
"change the way we do things in Washington"..

Breaking these promises hold a heck of a lot of water:

"no lobbysists"
"no back room dealing"
"air all debates on c-span"
"all bills posted for 5 days before a vote"
"No more unecessary earmarks and poork projects"
"all bills will be read by him personally"

So other than those things, what is left as it pertains to the way thigs are done in Washington?


----------



## uscitizen (Feb 1, 2010)

Remember now folks that 30% of Republicans thought Bush was doing a good job in his final year as president.


----------



## Dante (Feb 1, 2010)

Oldandtired said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> > VaYank5150 said:
> ...


If you actually vote for campaign slogans I think your right to vote should be taken away.


Come on pal, I voted against Obama twice. Actually once. Once I voted for Hillary and then against Obama. I thought the idea of McCain being President...that a divided government would be better. I did not ever vote against or for a campaign because of a slogan.


----------



## LibocalypseNow (Feb 1, 2010)

In fact,Krugman's accusations are the ultimate forms of misinformation. Hmm?


----------



## Oddball (Feb 1, 2010)

_*NOT!*_


----------



## Oddball (Feb 1, 2010)

LibocalypseNow said:


> In fact,Krugman's accusations are the ultimate forms of misinformation. Hmm?


Krugman's life itself is the ultimate form of misinformation.


----------



## Oldandtired (Feb 1, 2010)

Dante said:


> Oldandtired said:
> 
> 
> > Dante said:
> ...



I agree...

However, Change we can believe in became more than a slogan. It became the supposed blueprint for his administration.....he ran with it and stuck with it.

Now, if you noticed...he is claiming he all along was saying he meant "changing America".....

But the well informed recall it being "changing the way we do things in Washington".

It was not until election day when he said "Join me as we fundamentally change America".

Between you and me....it sent chills up my spine when he said that.


----------



## Murf76 (Feb 1, 2010)

uscitizen said:


> LMAO
> 
> funny thread.




Yeppers.  Sure is! 

And the funniest part is how these people seem to have forgotten Keith Olbermann's unhinged attack on Scott Brown less than 2 weeks ago, where he referred to Massachusetts'  newest senator as an _""irresponsible, homophobic, racist, reactionary, ex-nude model, tea bagging, supporter of violence against women and against politicians with whom he disagrees."_ 
Short memories around here, I guess.  Because they also don't remember that CNN only carried 26% of Brown's speech and MSNBC only 37%.  Fox ran all of Coakley's and all of Brown's.

Now, I don't think it's a really big deal that Fox cut off the tail-end of Obama's Q & A with Republicans.  Unless you're REALLY into politics, it was a pretty dry event.  And, it was being broadcast in its entirety on CSPAN anyway.  What's actually a bit more surprising is that they carried it for as long as they did, or that ANY of the news stations carried the whole thing.

You know, it's lunacy for people who don't watch Fox and don't watch Glenn Beck to expect us to accept their twisted partisan view.  People who actually listen to Beck or read his books... don't have any trouble understanding what he's talking about.  Anybody who's still watching MSNBC when they failed to fire Olbermann after his attack on Scott Brown (or at  the least send him out rabies shots), doesn't exactly have the moral high-ground for  faux-outrage. 


Oh... and has anyone else noticed a recent uptick in the Fox-bashing?  I mean, liberals always cluck on about Fox News (because they don't really believe Americans can think for themselves)... but are there some new instructions from the leftwing talking-heads?  Because it's REALLY become pervasive this past couple of days.


----------



## Oldandtired (Feb 1, 2010)

uscitizen said:


> Remember now folks that 30% of Republicans thought Bush was doing a good job in his final year as president.



I am curious what percentage of the people that voted for Obama in November truly believed that they were never have to worry about their bills again.

Sadly...I bet it was in the 20% range....a pure guess.


----------



## uscitizen (Feb 1, 2010)

Oldandtired said:


> uscitizen said:
> 
> 
> > Remember now folks that 30% of Republicans thought Bush was doing a good job in his final year as president.
> ...



Yeah I figure we are about 20% pure fools and another 30% of impure fools.


----------



## rightwinger (Feb 1, 2010)

Murf76 said:


> uscitizen said:
> 
> 
> > LMAO
> ...



FoxNews gets bashed because of its poor journalistic standards. Ailes was called to task and came up with nothing.
Olbermann went over the top with Scott Brown and even admitted he had gone too far.......Still waiting for Fox to Man UP


----------



## LibocalypseNow (Feb 1, 2010)

Liberal loons like Krugman are just cranky because even they know that their President is a miserable failure and their old Liberal Media is dying. It really is that simple in the end. Most common sense thinking people trust Fox News much more than the Dan Blather-led corrupt Liberal Media at this point. It is what it is.


----------



## Dante (Feb 1, 2010)

Dude said:


> p://trendliest.files.wordpress.com/2008/11/change-we-can-believe-in.jpg[/img]
> 
> _*NOT!*_



not many of us liberals believed in the slogans...half of us voted for Hillary you stupid fuck.



your hard on for Obama is telling. Like dark meat on your turkey do you?


----------



## uscitizen (Feb 1, 2010)

The "right"....  So eager to be misled....


----------



## Coyote (Feb 1, 2010)

Wow...look at all the apologists for Fox. Like, it's ok for a news organization to "mislead" (or is it lie?).


----------



## Dante (Feb 1, 2010)

Oldandtired said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> > If you actually vote for campaign slogans I think your right to vote should be taken away.
> ...



The cahnge thing was what you called it the first time...a slogan. Nothing more, nothing less. Like I told that drug addict dude, many of us liberals voted for Hillary...experience over change. Then there are loads of people who voted for Obama who wanted change, but saw the slogan as what it was...only a slogan.

It appears only the Obama cult members (there are quite a few) and the right wing, got all hot and bothered by the slogan. 

hey run with it if you want, but it makes you look like an idiot. I thought you had more sense. MAybe you got caught up in the propaganda lately?  who knows...


----------



## uscitizen (Feb 1, 2010)

Coyote said:


> Wow...look at all the apologists for Fox. Like, it's ok for a news organization to "mislead" (or is it lie?).



Some are eager to be a tool too.


----------



## Murf76 (Feb 1, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> FoxNews gets bashed because of its poor journalistic standards. Ailes was called to task and came up with nothing.
> Olbermann went over the top with Scott Brown and even admitted he had gone too far.......Still waiting for Fox to Man UP



Still waiting for Chris Matthews to "man up".  Either that, or go ahead, put on a dress, and present Barry with his "flower".


----------



## Dante (Feb 1, 2010)

uscitizen said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Wow...look at all the apologists for Fox. Like, it's ok for a news organization to "mislead" (or is it lie?).
> ...


talk of tools?



uh oh, look for thamalcontent and CrusaderFrank to appear...


1...

2...


3......
4........


----------



## Oldandtired (Feb 1, 2010)

Dante said:


> Oldandtired said:
> 
> 
> > Dante said:
> ...



Poeple were fed up with the way Washington was doing things.

Most voted for Obama as he proimised to change the way washington did things...AND HE OFFERED THE SOLUTIONS as I listed earlier such as no lobbyists, cspan, etc.

You call that a slogan...I call it presenting solutions he planned to implement.

There is a diference between "I like IKE" and "I promise to not allow lobbysists in the white house, as they are not good for legislation for the people"


----------



## uscitizen (Feb 1, 2010)

There is also a difference between being against being the police force of the world and "bring em on".


----------



## LibocalypseNow (Feb 1, 2010)

Cranky Hopey Changeys. Gotta love it. Krugman is well known Liberal propagandist so i just don't see how anyone can take him seriously on issues like this. "Blame BOOOOOOOOOSSH!!" and "BAD FOX NOOOOOOOOOZZ!!" are just old & tired wing nut talking points. Time for some new material. The fact that all the Hopey Changeys are this cranky is a good indication of what a failure their President is at this point. It's also pretty entertaining.


----------



## masquerade (Feb 1, 2010)

Oldandtired said:


> uscitizen said:
> 
> 
> > Remember now folks that 30% of Republicans thought Bush was doing a good job in his final year as president.
> ...



Barack's gonna pay my mortgage!


----------



## Dante (Feb 1, 2010)

Oldandtired said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> > Oldandtired said:
> ...


LEt us talk some plain talk. 

2006 and 2010:
People were fed up with the way the GOP was doing things. The GOP had locked out the Dems for close to eight years. 

Obama has been in for exactly one year. Criticism is warranted. Attacks on his character and statements suggesting he will never come through on promises...given he has three more years to do so...are the kind of things that do a disservice to the public debate over the proper role of government.


----------



## Oddball (Feb 1, 2010)

Love to sit around and slap the Obammy Kool-Aid Korps around all day, but it's upsloping at Marshall Peak.


----------



## Oldandtired (Feb 1, 2010)

Murf76 said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > FoxNews gets bashed because of its poor journalistic standards. Ailes was called to task and came up with nothing.
> ...



The other day I heard about a publication (Salant, I bleieve) that blamed Foix news for the loss of healthcare support in 94.

Fox was established in 96.


----------



## masquerade (Feb 1, 2010)

Oldandtired said:


> Murf76 said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



I heard this too.  LOL


----------



## Oldandtired (Feb 1, 2010)

Dante said:


> Oldandtired said:
> 
> 
> > Dante said:
> ...



His promise was to get us out of this recession by "changing the way we do things in wahsington"

If there was EVER a time for him to keep his promise was the FIRST year seeing as that is when we were in the recession.

Why did he want to wait to keep his lobbyist promise?
Why did he want to wait to keep his cspan promise?
Why did he need to wait to keep his "back room dealing" promise?

Why was it so hard to keep those promises? They were the platform of his campaign!


----------



## LibocalypseNow (Feb 1, 2010)

Yea for the cranky Hopey Changeys it's basically..."It's all dat BOOOOOOOOOSSH and FOX NOOOOOOOOOZ's fault that our President sucks so badly!!!" Less & less common sense thinking people are buying that chit though. Make 2010 count people.


----------



## Dante (Feb 1, 2010)

Dude said:


> Love to sit around and slap the Obammy Kool-Aid Korps around all day, but it's upsloping at Marshall Peak.



Problem is, many of us didn't vote for Obama.

Are you experiencing a slip? Call your sponsor, now!


----------



## Vel (Feb 1, 2010)

VaYank5150 said:


> Dude said:
> 
> 
> > Dante said:
> ...




Show us the link where Bush promised to debate health care reform on CSPAN and your post might have some relevance. Otherwise it's just another deflection to hide the Obama failures.


----------



## Dante (Feb 1, 2010)

Oldandtired said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> > Oldandtired said:
> ...



I am underwhelmed with this. I believe most Americans are. The recession may be ending and whether it ends because of a change in the way things are done will matter little.

Give IT up.


----------



## Oldandtired (Feb 1, 2010)

Dante said:


> Dude said:
> 
> 
> > Love to sit around and slap the Obammy Kool-Aid Korps around all day, but it's upsloping at Marshall Peak.
> ...



Exactly why do you give a pass to a president who ran on change but has not implemented the change he ran on?

Why do you say "lets see how the next 3 years go" when, in fact, he is not admitting fault for breaking his proimises.
In fact, he takes credit for having the least amount of lobbyists in his WH....32 I believe is the numbner.

He outright denied the back room deals...blamed congress.....but I seem to recall the unions and Pharma met directly with him.

If he said "yeah, things were tough and I was more wrapped up in getting things done than doing it the way I promised it would be done, then you would have a good argument.

But, you see...he is claiming "it is not his fault"....and that just pisses me off....as that means he has no plans to change anything.


----------



## Oldandtired (Feb 1, 2010)

Dante said:


> Oldandtired said:
> 
> 
> > Dante said:
> ...



So you are OK with a president that says "X", does "Y" and then blames others (congress) for it.

Me? I am not. I speak my mind when pour elected officials show immatrurity.

Glad to see you are more forgiving...I guess the two of us even things out.


----------



## Dante (Feb 1, 2010)

Vel6377 said:


> VaYank5150 said:
> 
> 
> > Dude said:
> ...



A broken promise is a failure?     

Ronald Reagan broke almost every promise he ever made, and yet conservatives and the GOP went hog wild over him ...they even have an ongoing Reagan campaign that has reshaped the facts about his career. 

the point was Bush  never did what Obama has failed to do...so far. WOW!!!


----------



## Oldandtired (Feb 1, 2010)

Dante said:


> Oldandtired said:
> 
> 
> > Dante said:
> ...



And if it doesnt end because of the way things are done?


----------



## Dante (Feb 1, 2010)

Oldandtired said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> > Oldandtired said:
> ...



The recession will end. Cycles. 

Why and how it ends is irrelevant to me. Maybe it is super important to you? I say, if it is, go for IT. But don't expect a popular upsurge of indignation from the populace or a revolution.


----------



## Oldandtired (Feb 1, 2010)

Dante said:


> Oldandtired said:
> 
> 
> > Dante said:
> ...



Recessions all end...and yes...cycles.

The length of a recession can be affected by policies.

SO we can do what you do and sit around and hope it ends soon...or we can speak our minds and force washington to butt out.

Your way may work for you....I see it as selfish and lazy.


----------



## Dante (Feb 1, 2010)

Oldandtired said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> > Oldandtired said:
> ...


I heard most economists say the great depression came about because the government stopped public spending to prop up the economy. Is this true?


----------



## Oldandtired (Feb 1, 2010)

Dante said:


> Oldandtired said:
> 
> 
> > Dante said:
> ...



Revolution?
No.
Thinking that those in Washington know more about what is good for MY family, MY business, MY friends, MY community?

Sorry....no way they kn ow more than I do as it pertains to those around me.

Seems you are more apathetic...and as opposed to admitting it, you are trying to make it sound you are not interested in speaking your mind as keeping quiet is the mature thing to do.

Well, as I see it...it is not the mature thing to do. It is the irresponsible thing to do.


----------



## Oldandtired (Feb 1, 2010)

Dante said:


> Oldandtired said:
> 
> 
> > Dante said:
> ...



Oh...I did not realize what I was debating with.
We are done.
What a waste of time.


----------



## Dante (Feb 1, 2010)

Oldandtired said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> > Oldandtired said:
> ...



Here is were we differ my friend. I firmly believe we elect those who go to washington in our name (as oppossed to those 'in washington'), to do just that...do what "_is good for MY family, MY business, MY friends, MY community_."

I never said they know more...but they do represent us. We elect them We send them there. Who we DON'T send are the assistants who stay afterwards and the lobbyists who the GOP led Supreme Court just said are equal to voters.

I am not apathetic. I've worked very hard on some campaigns. I've been an elected representative of a local party (I actually voted against myself LOL).


----------



## Dante (Feb 1, 2010)

Oldandtired said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> > Oldandtired said:
> ...



so I ask you a question and you get all crazy? I guess you haven't an answer or fear the one you do have?

_go figure_


----------



## Vel (Feb 1, 2010)

Dante said:


> Vel6377 said:
> 
> 
> > VaYank5150 said:
> ...




Would you prefer that I use the more honest vernacular and say refer to those failures as the lies they were?


----------



## Dante (Feb 1, 2010)

Vel6377 said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> > Vel6377 said:
> ...


One man's lie is another's nuance.

When Bush said 'read my lips' I never got upset when he went back on a promise...because the principles involved were at odds. Be responsible and raise taxes even though you promised not too, or keep a promise and allow things to get worse.

Leaders are supposed to lead. George HW Bush was a leader who was thrown overboard by irrational and populist anger fed by propagandist rants and raves about taxes being evil.


----------



## rightwinger (Feb 1, 2010)

Dante said:


> Vel6377 said:
> 
> 
> > Dante said:
> ...



Baby Bush was the complete opposite. He stayed the course regardless of how the situation on the ground had changed


----------



## Oldandtired (Feb 1, 2010)

Dante said:


> Vel6377 said:
> 
> 
> > Dante said:
> ...



I agree...

SO tell me....do you truly believe that those lobbyists were the ONLY people in the country qualified to bring in? Or is it possible that he needed them to acheive an agenda?


----------



## Oldandtired (Feb 1, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> > Vel6377 said:
> ...



Again, you are really oput of your league here RW.
This forum is for people that think for themselves.

And the surge was "staying the course"....I guess?


----------



## Dante (Feb 1, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> > Vel6377 said:
> ...



and he always listened to the commanders on the ground, even if that meant firing them all in order to hear what he wanted to hear.


----------



## Zona (Feb 1, 2010)

Tom Clancy said:


> Every News station is biased.
> 
> CBS, CNN, FOX, MSNBC, ABC. you know name it.



That is very true, but Fox outright lies.  The fact that Fox fans swallows it is the sad part.


----------



## Dante (Feb 1, 2010)

Oldandtired said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> > Vel6377 said:
> ...



I don't think qualifications is an issue. All people had a seat at the table. Either through elected representatives or lobbyists. I don't like what came out of the back room deals. But that is teh way things work.

The US Constitution was created and debated behind locked doors...in secret.


----------



## rightwinger (Feb 1, 2010)

Zona said:


> Tom Clancy said:
> 
> 
> > Every News station is biased.
> ...



Its part of being fair and balanced.

They have to balance the truth with an equal number of lies


----------



## Zona (Feb 1, 2010)

Oldandtired said:


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



Thinks for themselves?  Do you know there are still right wingers who say the Iraq war was justified and there really were WMD's.  Can you believe this crap?


----------



## Oldandtired (Feb 1, 2010)

Zona said:


> Tom Clancy said:
> 
> 
> > Every News station is biased.
> ...



Yeah...I guess that must be true seeing as you said it as fact.

And I guess 49% of the people are too stupid to realize it.


----------



## Dante (Feb 1, 2010)

Zona said:


> Tom Clancy said:
> 
> 
> > Every News station is biased.
> ...



Isn't there a toddler's pool you can go and piss in to get that warm feeling you so crave?


----------



## Dante (Feb 1, 2010)

Oldandtired said:


> Zona said:
> 
> 
> > Tom Clancy said:
> ...


FACT CHECK:
49% of registered voters


----------



## Oldandtired (Feb 1, 2010)

Zona said:


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



This is America. People are entitled to their opinion and when they express it as their opinion, all is good.

Then there are those like RW that expresses as fact things that are nothing more than oipinoion.

Sort of EXACTLY what you do.


----------



## Oldandtired (Feb 1, 2010)

Dante said:


> Oldandtired said:
> 
> 
> > Zona said:
> ...



Yes.....49% of registered voters.

So......I guess 49% of regiustered voters are too stupid to realize.

Better?


----------



## Dante (Feb 1, 2010)

Oldandtired said:


> Zona said:
> 
> 
> > Oldandtired said:
> ...


So says teh old coot who ran away because I asked him a question about economists.


----------



## Oldandtired (Feb 1, 2010)

Dante said:


> Oldandtired said:
> 
> 
> > Zona said:
> ...



Nope. You stated as fact a theory.

Once you did that, I was done.

I have no problem discussing economics with you....Syaracuse University, 1980, BA Economics. Current Owner of my 3rd and 4th companies in 30 years.

I will always discuss theory as theory...I have learned to NEVER discuss theory as fact...and never get into a debate of theory with someone who states theory as fact...as you did.

But nice "I will take the high road" attempt on your part.


----------



## del (Feb 1, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> > Funny y'know ... we never see an attack on any of the other news organizations like we do with FOX. Why? Because the liberals and the current administration are afraid of FOX News.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



New Questions On Bush Guard Duty - 60 Minutes - CBS News


 Play CBS Video 
Video

Bush's Service Questioned

New information previously thought to be factual uncovered by CBS News sparks allegations about President Bush's National Guard service. CBS News' Bill Plante reports.

Video

Ben Barnes Talks

Ben Barnes talks in an exclusive interview with Dan Rather on 60 Minutes about helping George W. Bush get into the Texas Air National Guard.

Video

Barnes: 'Sorry'

Former Lt. Gov. Ben Barnes tells Dan Rather that he readily helped supporters and friends get into the National Guard, and that he is sorry for what he did.

George W. Bush during his days in the Texas Air National Guard.  (AP)

Dan Rather talks exclusively with former Texas House Speaker and Lt. Gov. Ben Barnes.  (CBS)
(CBS)  EDITOR'S NOTE: A report issued by an independent panel on Jan. 10, 2005 concluded that CBS News failed to follow basic journalistic principles in the preparation and reporting of this Sept. 8, 2004 broadcast.

Jayson Blair: A question of trust - Dateline NBC- msnbc.com

It's not front-page news when most people get caught in a lie. It was when Jayson Blair did. That's because his lies appeared in the pages of one of the world's most respected newspapers, The New York Times. By his own admission, reporter Jayson Blair lied or plagiarized the work of others in dozens of stories he wrote for the Times. 

Byron York on CBS & Rathergate on National Review Online

Do you remember Michael Gartner? Probably not. 

Gartner used to be president of NBC News, until the scandal at Dateline NBC blew him out of his job. That scandal began, you may remember, in November 1992, when Dateline aired a segment on General Motors trucks that allegedly had a dangerous tendency to catch fire in side collisions.

True to TV-news-magazine form, Dateline wanted some dramatic video to illustrate the problem. So producers set up a test in which a car would slam into the side of one of the trucks, leading  hopefully  to a spectacular, caught-on-tape explosion.

But what if the truck didn't blow up? Would the Dateline team have to get another one and try again? That could get expensive.

So to ensure a positive result, the Dateline producers placed small incendiary devices in the truck. And sure enough, it blew up very nicely.

enjoy


----------



## Dante (Feb 1, 2010)

Oldandtired said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> > Oldandtired said:
> ...


uhm, your partisan ass steered you wrong. You must have perused it too quickly. I asked a question. 

you're bad


----------



## Dante (Feb 1, 2010)

Oldandtired said:


> Nope. You stated as fact a theory.
> 
> Once you did that, I was done.
> 
> ...





Dante said:


> I heard most economists say the great depression came about because the government stopped public spending to prop up the economy. Is this true?



huh?


----------



## Dante (Feb 1, 2010)

del said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > > Funny y'know ... we never see an attack on any of the other news organizations like we do with FOX. Why? Because the liberals and the current administration are afraid of FOX News.
> ...


_*Purposefully *_mislead the public should've been the operative phrase.


----------



## Oldandtired (Feb 1, 2010)

Dante said:


> Oldandtired said:
> 
> 
> > Dante said:
> ...



My partisan ass?

LMAO...if only you really knew.

Like I said earlier....I would have voted Hillary as she was the only one that I beleived.

Voted a repoublicans ass right out of our local government...and had his opponenets sign on my lawn.

One can be a fiscal conservative and not be a republican hack.

Sadly, it seems one can not be a liberal without being a democrat.

As for misread...I took it as you stating that the senmitments were of all or most economists...and that is blatantly not true.


----------



## del (Feb 1, 2010)

Dante said:


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



in all three of those examples an attempt was made to purposefully mislead the public. you,of course, are free to believe otherwise, but i'll bet on the fastest horse.


----------



## rightwinger (Feb 1, 2010)

del said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > > Funny y'know ... we never see an attack on any of the other news organizations like we do with FOX. Why? Because the liberals and the current administration are afraid of FOX News.
> ...




Thanks del...those were what I expected..

Now we get to see the difference between when a legitimate news agency makes an error and FoxNews makes an error.

When each of those legitimate news sources made errors they immediately issued retractions, apologies and in Dan Rathers case he was fired.

FoxNews blames leftwingers and "out of context" for their errors. No retractions, no apologies no accountability


----------



## Dante (Feb 1, 2010)

Oldandtired said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> > Oldandtired said:
> ...



I plainly wrote..."I heard..." and "Is that true?"

maybe you are not partisan, but you have expressed partisan views. It's sort of like being against the war but supporting the troops. now pay more attention. Just because your old is no guarantee of wisdom or reason.


----------



## del (Feb 1, 2010)

rightwinger said:


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



i wouldn't know. i don't watch fox news. i watch the local news sports and weather, read 7 or 8 newspapers and periodicals, make up my own mind. then i just watch the usual suspects here go back and forth about what what lying bastards foxnewsmsnbcnnblah blah blah are. 

and laugh my ass off.

but i'm sure you're right-you being unbiased and all.


----------



## Vel (Feb 1, 2010)

Dante said:


> Vel6377 said:
> 
> 
> > Dante said:
> ...




This is simply more deflection. What relevance does George H W Bush's broken promise have to do with Obama's? Not much other than Bush Sr. paid the political price for that broken promise and Obama will pay for his as well. The lesson needs to be that if a politician engages in political hyperbole in order to garner votes, they'll pay.


----------



## Oldandtired (Feb 1, 2010)

Dante said:


> Oldandtired said:
> 
> 
> > Dante said:
> ...



Dont blame my age...I am 51.
Blame the drugs of my youth....my mother was right!

Like what I say to my wiofe when she asks me if her pants make her ass look big.
"Dont blame the pants" I tell her.

What you heard is untrue. Not most economists beleived that. Some did, yes, not most by any means.

From a business ownership standpoint, I believe otherwise. From a basic economics logic standpoint, I can not see why an economist would have believed it.....but they are all theorists...and from both sides, ideology is always inserted into hypotheses.

As for my partisan views...I am a fiscal conservative and very strong on my fiscal conservative views...so it comes across as partisan.....but I most certainly did not vote for Bush the second time around.....and as I said, I would have voted for Hillary as I saw her as the most honest of all in the race...even though I was not pleased with all of her social and fiscal views...but at least I believed her.

The day Obama said he lied about public financing as he believed he would lose if he kept his proimise was the day I lost ALL interest in him.

McCain? I liked him...but not as my p[resident. Something seemed a bit disingenuous about him. Was never able to put my finger on it, but I trust my judgement of character...something was off with him....and the Palin choice turned me off...not becuase ofr all of the "left bashing" that was out there....simply becuase I needed to see some more girth in my candidates....and she lacked girth.


----------



## Dante (Feb 1, 2010)

Vel6377 said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> > Vel6377 said:
> ...



Promises...why they are broken. 

Leadership dictates not following slogans and promises made before the facts on the ground change. 

,


----------



## Dante (Feb 1, 2010)

Oldandtired said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> > Oldandtired said:
> ...


I wonder what the dominant economist view is. Do you know?

A business owner's standpoint? Most business owners don't know their ass from their elbow. How many new businesses fail? How many old ones? 

If you needed girth in a candidate...Obama had girth as a candidate (as time went on...not in the beginning), but not as a nationally experienced politician.


----------



## WillowTree (Feb 1, 2010)

*LIBTARDS WHINING AND BITCHING ABOUT FOX NEWS AGAIN.. WHO IN THE HELL WUDDDA THUNK IT???? *


----------



## Murf76 (Feb 1, 2010)

Dante said:


> Promises...why they are broken.
> 
> Leadership dictates not following slogans and promises made before the facts on the ground change.
> 
> ,



Oh... there are _reasons_ why Barack Obama doesn't bother keeping his word?  Some "change on the ground" that requires murky backroom deals, lobbyist waivers, and in-your-face partisanship? 

Do tell.  We're all ears.


----------



## Vel (Feb 1, 2010)

Dante said:


> Vel6377 said:
> 
> 
> > Dante said:
> ...




It's pretty damn simple. As I was growing up my Daddy always told me to "Never make a promise you can't keep". And in this particular case, we're not talking about facts on the ground changing anyway. Obama said he'd negotiate the bill on CSPAN. He chose instead to meet with the unions and pharm. companies in closed door meetings. That was a promise he could have kept had he CHOSEN to keep it.


----------



## Dante (Feb 1, 2010)

Murf76 said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> > Promises...why they are broken.
> ...



Yep. Just as I said there were legitimate leadership reasons George HW Bush went back on his "read my lips"

I don't do hysterics or feigned outrage very well.


----------



## del (Feb 1, 2010)

Dante said:


> Murf76 said:
> 
> 
> > Dante said:
> ...



sure you do, just not very often.
_*wink_​


----------



## rightwinger (Feb 1, 2010)

Dante said:


> Murf76 said:
> 
> 
> > Dante said:
> ...



Don't even get me going on..

"The smoking gun will be a mushroom cloud"
"Mission accomplished"
"They will treat us as liberators"


----------



## Oldandtired (Feb 1, 2010)

Dante said:


> Oldandtired said:
> 
> 
> > Dante said:
> ...



No, I do not know what the domionant economist view is.....but as for "views" they are most certainly guided by ideology. so I do not really care aqbout their opinions.

As for many business failing......that is based on poor planning. For example, most service firms open up and spend all kinds of start up money on marketing for clients..

BIG MISTAKE.

Instead, you should spend your time and money creating a differential in the marketplace for yourself.....solidify your product (in other words, enusre your service is wortth the price)....and THEN get out there.

Most get out there and then find out one of two things...they suck at what they do or they are no better than their competitioon who is already well situated.

As for Obama...as I said...the minute he lied about public financing, he was off my list.
As for girth...what did he have? Words....charisma, speech writers and words.

Record? Highly partrisan voting record. 95% party lines...5% present...0% accross the aisle.
Experience? No executive experience at all and no business ownership experience.
Realtionships? Seemed he had no worthy relationships with anyone other than far left business people and some "out of the ordinary" public figures.

SO I am not sure what you saw as girth....can you give me some examples of what you refer to as girth?


----------



## Dante (Feb 1, 2010)

del said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> > Murf76 said:
> ...


not fair!

_but, tff_  lol
_peep_


----------



## Oldandtired (Feb 1, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> > Murf76 said:
> ...



Thus why I told you that this board was not for simple minds such as yours.
You didnt listen.
Your choice....so gooid luck!


----------



## Dante (Feb 1, 2010)

Oldandtired said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> > I wonder what the dominant economist view is. Do you know?
> ...


 If this is so, why did you storm out of a thread because of what you thought was...

_never mind._



Oldandtired said:


> As for many business failing......that is based on poor planning. For example, most service firms open up and spend all kinds of start up money on marketing for clients..
> 
> BIG MISTAKE.
> 
> ...


 you've made my point quite well. thank you



Oldandtired said:


> As for Obama...as I said...the minute he lied about public financing, he was off my list.
> As for girth...what did he have? Words....charisma, speech writers and words.
> 
> Record? Highly partrisan voting record. 95% party lines...5% present...0% accross the aisle.
> ...



Girth as a candidate...he ran an awesome campaign. I was unimpressed with his credentials from the get go.

I was on the floor during his convention speech in Boston in 2004. I was one of the few who walked out shaking their heads wondering what smoke was blown up the collective ass. I've written about it too many times.


----------



## Murf76 (Feb 1, 2010)

Dante said:


> Murf76 said:
> 
> 
> > Dante said:
> ...



No.  This isn't about George Herbert Walker Bush.  It's not even about taxes.  It's about simple, ethics-based promises, made by Barack Obama as a candidate.  It's your contention that circumstances have changed in such a way that as a matter of "leadership", he shouldn't have made good on those promises.  So... what is it that's changed in terms of "transparency", in terms of lobbyists, and in terms of backroom deals for congressmen and special interests?


----------



## Dante (Feb 1, 2010)

Murf76 said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> > Murf76 said:
> ...


It's about leadership. Ethics? YOu have lots of nerve even using that term.

goodbye.


----------



## Xenophon (Feb 1, 2010)

Paul Krugman ain't exactly the picture of mental health, you sure you want him as your standard bearer?


----------



## Oldandtired (Feb 1, 2010)

Dante said:


> Oldandtired said:
> 
> 
> > Dante said:
> ...



Yes, Axelrod ran an awsome campaign. Not Obama. Obama was the puppet just as any candiodate is a puppet of the CM......but I can see through that and something tells me so can you.

I saw through the Palin hooplah right away. Attractive, successful, yet not what we needed in the number 2. I did not need the left to go after her as they diud to lose interest in her....but I still give her credit as a governor..and a pretty succeesful one...something the left just can not seem to give her. I wonder why that is...eusa_whistle

I ran out earlier as I misread what you said...I read it that you took that "economist" thing as fact...and I do not respond to those that cite opinion or theory as fact and then ask me to comment on "why"...

I simply misread it and admitted it already.

What did you mean when you said I furtrher proved your point?


----------



## Murf76 (Feb 1, 2010)

Dante said:


> Murf76 said:
> 
> 
> > Dante said:
> ...



Yeah.  That's what I thought.  You can't back up your assertion. 

Your guy LIED.  He said whatever he thought people wanted to hear in order to get elected.  "Politics as usual"... and then some.


----------



## rightwinger (Feb 1, 2010)

Oldandtired said:


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



How many of Obama's lies started wars?


----------



## Oldandtired (Feb 1, 2010)

rightwinger said:


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



You truly are clueless...it is sad.

How many of Bush's lies started wars?


----------



## &#9773;proletarian&#9773; (Feb 1, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> FOX: 'Deliberate misinformation'? - THE WEEK
> 
> New York Times columnist Paul Krugman accused Fox News of spreading "deliberate misinformation" about the health-care reform bill and other important issues -- and he made the complaint directly to Fox News CEO Roger Ailes. Krugman, appearing with Ailes and others on a ABC's "This Week" on Sunday, said that the bill was actually a Republican plan, first championed by Mitt Romney, but many people don't realize that because Fox News has tried to convince people it was socialism. Ailes said "the American people are not stupid," and if they're confused about the health plan it's because the bill's supporters tried to "hide" elements the public wouldn't like in a 2,000 page bill. Does Fox News try to get at the truth -- or does it intentionally mislead its viewers?




They already went to court to defend their right to lie


----------



## LibocalypseNow (Feb 1, 2010)

This is nothing. A much more serious issue is this White House's close relationship with GE. How much Bailout/Stimulus $$ did this White House give to GE? GE owns NBC and other Media Outlets. NBC really has become the biggest White House Boot-Lickers in the Media. This shady relationship needs to be investigated immediately. This issue is far more serious then what is supposedly going on at Fox News. You can always just not watch if you don't like Fox News. However giving Billions in Tax Dollars to a Media Outlet to do the White House's bidding is something that shouldn't be ignored. Just don't hear Liberal wingnuts complaining about this far more serious issue. Investigate GE right now!


----------



## &#9773;proletarian&#9773; (Feb 1, 2010)

uscitizen said:


> The Rabbi said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...




Not as much as all the Dems who wanted to insert their own special interests


----------



## &#9773;proletarian&#9773; (Feb 1, 2010)

Oldandtired said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > Stephanie said:
> ...


----------



## Murf76 (Feb 1, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> How many of Obama's lies started wars?




Give him time.  Isn't that you libs always say?...  "He needs more time". 



Anyway... I've got to say... THIS is real progress, man.  Admitting it is the first step.  It's like a 12-step kool-aid withdrawal program.  You'll be clean before you know it.


----------



## LibocalypseNow (Feb 1, 2010)

INVESTIGATE GE RIGHT NOW!! No Corporation that owns Media Outlets should have ever been allowed to receive Bailout/Stimulus money. This shady White House/GE relationship needs to be investigated. GE + NBC = Biggest White House Butt-Sniffers in the Media.


----------



## Wry Catcher (Feb 1, 2010)

Seems Mr. Ailes evaded the question and lied.  He knows the American people - those who watch Fox News and believe Fox News is news - are stupid.


----------



## Yukon (Feb 1, 2010)

Bush, Junior was and is a lier, drug user, alchoholic, and a coward. The only thing that you Conservatives can say with any truth about Obama is that he's half-Negro and that drives you nuts.


----------



## Vel (Feb 1, 2010)

Dante said:


> Murf76 said:
> 
> 
> > Dante said:
> ...





So.. Ya got nothing huh?    You can't back up your statements so you're running away. Good job.


----------



## WillowTree (Feb 1, 2010)

*HEY DOGPOOPIE! DON'T YOU THINK THIS SHOULD BE IN THE FUCKING MEDIA SECTION? HUH DOGPOOPIE???*


----------



## rightwinger (Feb 1, 2010)

Oldandtired said:


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



The WMD lie
The smoking gun will be a mushroom cloud lie


Then he lied to the American people about how easy the Iraq war would be..
The "They will treat us like liberators"  lie
The "Mission accomplished" lie


----------



## CaféAuLait (Feb 1, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> Tom Clancy said:
> 
> 
> > Every News station is biased.
> ...



'RatherGate" comes to mind very quickly. I was quite surprised when I read this poll the other day:

*Poll*: Fox most trusted name in news



> A *Public Policy Polling *nationwide survey of 1,151 registered voters Jan. 18-19 found that 49 percent of Americans trusted Fox News, 10 percentage points more than any other network.



Read more: Poll: Fox most trusted name in news - Andy Barr - POLITICO.com

Poll conducted by Public Policy Polling, a Democratic Party-affiliated polling firm.


----------



## Harry Dresden (Feb 1, 2010)

uscitizen said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > Oldandtired said:
> ...



yes and we know that is quality.....im still waiting for Reuben Stoddards greatest hits....


----------



## Harry Dresden (Feb 1, 2010)

traveler52 said:


> Faux Snooze, Seldom Fair and VERY Un-Balanced.



sounds like every one of them to me.....they all suck....


----------



## kyzr (Feb 1, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> The WMD lie
> The smoking gun will be a mushroom cloud lie
> 
> Then he lied to the American people about how easy the Iraq war would be..
> ...



1. The WMD "lie" was by the Clinton appointed head of the CIA who called it a "slam dunk".

2. The Iraq War was relatively easy.  It was the nation-building instead of letting them have their civil war that cost us so much.  They may still get their civil war.

3. The "mission accomplished" sign was on an aircraft carrier headed back to the US.  Their mission was accomplished.  Only the Left has no clue what it meant.


----------



## Yukon (Feb 1, 2010)

FOX is not a news provider. FOX creates and twists the news. They lie to make the GOP seem reasonable.


----------



## The Rabbi (Feb 1, 2010)

rightwinger said:


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


Gosh are you still pounding that dead horse?  Gee, dickwad.  I see Tony Blair was giving testimony about this yesterday.  Seems he believed intelligence about WMD.  And somehow Blair doesnt seem like someone who would just fall over dead for Bush.


> LONDON, United Kingdom  Clearly feeling the strain of six hours at the witness table, former British Prime Minister Tony Blair survived his day of testimony at Britain's Iraq Inquiry here without his inquisitors landing a serious blow.
> 
> His voice failing but his spirit intact, Blair today threw himself robustly into the task of writing into history his own version of the war. He finished the gruelling day by insisting that Iraqis were better off materially now than they had been under Saddam Hussein, and that he had no regrets about removing the dictator.
> 
> ...


More at the source:
Tony Blair Testimony | Iraq War Inquiry

Why don't you lie your way past this?


----------



## Harry Dresden (Feb 1, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> _Huffington cornered Ailes early, asking if he was concerned with the hateful and inciteful rhetoric of Glenn Beck. Isnt Ailes worried when his Fox firebrand uses inflammatory words like slaughter and killing spree in relation to Obama and the Democrats? Huffington asked. Ailes said, He was talking about Hitler and Stalin. When she pressed further, insisting Beck was in fact, talking about the Obama administration, Ailes, remaining as calm as he is corpulent, said,  we cant be the word police.
> 
> Or apparently the fact police. HUFFINGTON POST has fact checked Ailes contention andsurprisehes wrong. Beck specifically took aim at the Obama administration in October 2009, warning of a killing spree: Spread the wealthhello, Mao this is what this is all about and anybody not on board, look out, because you could be the next victim of the killing spree. And in November 2009, the Beckster warned of the impending slaughter: These people ( Obama administration/Democrats) are taking you to a place to be slaughtered._
> 
> Battle of Titans: Huffington vs. Ailes Shakes Up Walters on ABC | NEWS JUNKIE POST


lol....two dirt bags debating who is the bigger dirtbag is all this show was.....its like Louie DePalma telling Frank Reynolds he is a dishonest lowlife........


----------



## Harry Dresden (Feb 1, 2010)

uscitizen said:


> Oldandtired said:
> 
> 
> > uscitizen said:
> ...



they also would rather watch a show like American Idle were you dont have to think over a show were you do.....like a good drama....


----------



## Harry Dresden (Feb 1, 2010)

Yukon said:


> FOX "News" is the voice of the GOP. The network does not report the news but twists it to ensure the GOP looks good and the Dems look bad.
> 
> I have noticed on several occassions very subtle encouragement for some right-wing wack job to do harm to Mr Obama. Im sure the authorities are aware of these threats and take them serious.
> 
> FOX is a propaganda arm of the GOP - no more, no less. No intelligent, thinking, ratuional person* could watch the network and take it seriously*.



watch the network or fox news dipshit?.....


----------



## Harry Dresden (Feb 1, 2010)

Yukon said:


> Oldand Tired and obviosuly stupid,
> 
> Listen to the FowNews reports. It isnt news its an editoral. They twist the news, they lie, they defame, the urge criminal activity, the network is a disgrace.Only an uneduated fool could believe what they say and that's abot 70% of the US population - thank goodness 20 % of them cant afford a TV.



[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gWZZ-NdZheQ&feature=PlayList&p=880C672FA33C8E9C&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=5]YouTube - Canadian Idiot[/ame]


----------



## Zona (Feb 1, 2010)

Oldandtired said:


> Zona said:
> 
> 
> > Tom Clancy said:
> ...



49% of americans watch fox?  well, I hate to tell you this but less than 5% of Americans watch fox.  That means 95% of Americans have some sense. 

Thank god.


----------



## Harry Dresden (Feb 1, 2010)

Yukon said:


> Oldandtired said:
> 
> 
> > Go away Yukon.
> ...



go fuck yourself pedophile.....how many innocent young boys have you molested lately jerk...


----------



## Zona (Feb 1, 2010)

Here is a question righty's.  If fox is so fair and balanced, why did they just stop the president 20 minutes short and why did they talk over a lot of his responses when he spoke to those genius republicans last week?  NO OTHER STATION DID THIS, NONE.  

Fox just sucks.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Feb 1, 2010)

http://play.rbn.com/?url=demnow/demnow/demand/2003/nov/256/dnB20031110a.rm&proto=rtsp&start=00:21:07


----------



## Vel (Feb 1, 2010)

Zona said:


> Here is a question righty's.  If fox is so fair and balanced, why did they just stop the president 20 minutes short and why did they talk over a lot of his responses when he spoke to those genius republicans last week?  NO OTHER STATION DID THIS, NONE.
> 
> Fox just sucks.



I guess they cut back to their regular programming because Obama is enamoured of the sound of his own voice and wouldn't shut the fuck up.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Feb 1, 2010)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rqdtZlec0s&feature=related]YouTube - FOX NEWS- LIES, LIES, LIES --See For Yourself (part 1 of 2)[/ame]
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yXJIV4f4ZQ0&feature=related]YouTube - FOX NEWS- LIES, LIES, LIES --See For Yourself (part 2 of 2)[/ame]


----------



## oreo (Feb 1, 2010)

The Rabbi said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > FOX: 'Deliberate misinformation'? - THE WEEK
> ...




Right Winger ALWAYS DOES this--spew "misinformation" of part of the story he/she is great at.--

What is laughable is that he believes that Mitt Romney wrote these two bills--that Americans are kicking to the curb.

While Romney was govenor of MASS they did in deed institute a cover all plan to Mass.  It turned out to be a mess--& as the current democrat govenor will tell you is because they made no efforts to CONTROL the ever rising cost of medical care---which is 100% similar to the Pelosi/Reid/Obama plan.  Yet these morons still wanted it passed--even though they do have experience with the disaster in MASS.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Feb 1, 2010)

oreo said:


> The Rabbi said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



Mass. health care is the corporate welfare system-the most expensive system available. Of course it is a disaster. Unfortunately the plan being debated is also a corporate welfare system.


----------



## Yurt (Feb 1, 2010)

Zona said:


> Oldandtired said:
> 
> 
> > Zona said:
> ...



you're such a moron....

now give us the percentage who watch other news channels....be honest for once


----------



## oreo (Feb 1, 2010)

Zona said:


> Here is a question righty's.  If fox is so fair and balanced, why did they just stop the president 20 minutes short and why did they talk over a lot of his responses when he spoke to those genius republicans last week?  NO OTHER STATION DID THIS, NONE.
> 
> Fox just sucks.




Let's see why--- *President Obama in is 1st year has given over 475 SPEECHES*--

Could it be that the news media--including FOX have heard the same old crap before?


----------



## txlonghorn (Feb 1, 2010)

Hmmmm....misinformation...wellll....it brings two wrods to mind.


DAN RATHER


----------



## Father Time (Feb 2, 2010)

masquerade said:


> The fight against FOX News will never end as long as there are liberals in this country.  So I guess that means the fight will last forever!!!
> 
> It's getting old.  REAL OLD!
> Take a look at the number of viewers on any given night.
> There's your answer.



So because lots of people watch it can't be biased?

Really?


----------



## Father Time (Feb 2, 2010)

Vel6377 said:


> Zona said:
> 
> 
> > Here is a question righty's.  If fox is so fair and balanced, why did they just stop the president 20 minutes short and why did they talk over a lot of his responses when he spoke to those genius republicans last week?  NO OTHER STATION DID THIS, NONE.
> ...



Has a US news program ever done that with the president before when there wasn't some breaking news they needed to cover?


----------



## uscitizen (Feb 2, 2010)

Yurt said:


> Zona said:
> 
> 
> > Oldandtired said:
> ...



You call him a moron and then ask for more information from him?
They typical Fax viewer mentality.


----------



## kyzr (Feb 2, 2010)

Wow, FXN really has the cool-aid drinkers pissed-off.  Great work.  Let them watch Olberman & Maddow, they need the viewers.  Besides, they wouldn't appreciate seeing both sides of issues discussed intelligently.  They prefer the leftist politically correct pablum they've been programmed with in college.


----------



## Zona (Feb 2, 2010)

Vel6377 said:


> Zona said:
> 
> 
> > Here is a question righty's.  If fox is so fair and balanced, why did they just stop the president 20 minutes short and why did they talk over a lot of his responses when he spoke to those genius republicans last week?  NO OTHER STATION DID THIS, NONE.
> ...



Or it could be Obama was spanking the right so bad, they had to talk over his responses, then they simply cut him off 20 minutes early.

FAIR AND BALANCED.  Don't think America, we got it for you.  We don't report, we decide.


----------



## Zona (Feb 2, 2010)

kyzr said:


> Wow, FXN really has the cool-aid drinkers pissed-off.  Great work.  Let them watch Olberman & Maddow, they need the viewers.  Besides, they wouldn't appreciate seeing both sides of issues discussed intelligently.  They prefer the leftist politically correct pablum they've been programmed with in college.




Ok, MSNBC didn't interrupt the president and they certainly didn't cut him off 20 minutes early.  

Fox showed both sides of issues?  They allowed you to see exactly what they wanted YOU to see.  That is beyond showing one side, that is pathetic.


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 2, 2010)

I have the distinct impression that people like rightwinger and his libby cohorts watch Fox more than any repudlicans do


----------



## Xenophon (Feb 2, 2010)

Skull Pilot said:


> I have the distinct impression that people like rightwinger and his libby cohorts watch Fox more than any repudlicans do



They always seem to know what Beck or Hannity said or did.


----------



## rightwinger (Feb 2, 2010)

Zona said:


> Vel6377 said:
> 
> 
> > Zona said:
> ...



49% of Americans need their news filtered by FoxNews. Total sheep who ignore all other news sources


----------



## rightwinger (Feb 2, 2010)

Skull Pilot said:


> I have the distinct impression that people like rightwinger and his libby cohorts watch Fox more than any repudlicans do



Trust me...I try

I can go about 10 minutes before I become irate at their shabby excuse for a news network. I tried to watch professional wrestling too. I figured all these people who watch must see *something* in it.
Like Fox, I came to the realization that the fans are just idiots.


----------



## Murf76 (Feb 2, 2010)

Father Time said:


> Has a US news program ever done that with the president before when there wasn't some breaking news they needed to cover?



Has a U.S. president ever tried to co-opt such a ridiculous amount of air time???  Just last page Oreo reminded us that this guy has done 475 speeches.  It's tiresome.  He demanded more prime time in a year than Bush asked for in 8.  It'd be one thing if he ever had anything interesting or truthful to say... but it's pretty much the same nonsense every time he steps to the podium.

Further, even Nixon didn't have the temerity to mount consistent attacks on a news outlet.  But that's EXACTLY shat we've seen from the Obama White House, isn't it?... his media directors, Nancy Dunn, and more recently Dan Pfeiffer, demanding that Fox be isolated and that whatever stories they generate be ignored.  Was Pfeiffer even in office 10 whole minutes before he started throwing feces?

Liberals can keep up their whining.  We KNOW where it's ultimately coming from.  We've learned the Alinsky playbook.  We see who's really pulling the strings.

Mark Twain said, _"Never pick a fight with someone who buys his ink by the barrel." ..._.  I guess we'll see if that's still wisdom today, won't we?


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 2, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > I have the distinct impression that people like rightwinger and his libby cohorts watch Fox more than any repudlicans do
> ...



Get your news the old fashioned way.  

I rarely if ever watch TV or cable news and I am far from uninformed.


----------



## Harry Dresden (Feb 2, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > I have the distinct impression that people like rightwinger and his libby cohorts watch Fox more than any repudlicans do
> ...



but you admit you watch it RW....and so do all the other left leaning crowd here.....WHY?.....christ i cant stand watching any of those news shows lib or cons......if they SUCK,why are you watching giving them the ratings they have,and then turn around and bitch about it.....if you have to watch something on Fox....try Fringe,Bones....this new one Human Target aint bad either.....the so called news shows suck,and if you watch it daily,then you must be one of the IDIOTS Rw mentions above....


----------



## Yukon (Feb 2, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > I have the distinct impression that people like rightwinger and his libby cohorts watch Fox more than any repudlicans do
> ...



.....a miracle...he finally posted something I agree with !


----------



## Vel (Feb 2, 2010)

Father Time said:


> Vel6377 said:
> 
> 
> > Zona said:
> ...




You seem to be operating under the impression that Fox News somehow owes the Obama administration something. They don't. Obama was running well over the time scheduled and I see no reason why Fox should waste time that could be used to pay the bills, to stroke this blowhard's ego.


----------



## rightwinger (Feb 2, 2010)

> You seem to be operating under the impression that Fox News somehow owes the Obama administration something. They don't. Obama was running well over the time scheduled and I see no reason why Fox should waste time that could be used to pay the bills, to stroke this blowhard's ego.



Vel6377 is right Fox could have been running stories about how the President bows too much or how often he used the word "I" in the State of the Union address.


----------



## Vel (Feb 2, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> > You seem to be operating under the impression that Fox News somehow owes the Obama administration something. They don't. Obama was running well over the time scheduled and I see no reason why Fox should waste time that could be used to pay the bills, to stroke this blowhard's ego.
> 
> 
> 
> Vel6377 is right Fox could have been running stories about how the President bows too much or how often he used the word "I" in the State of the Union address.




So? It's THEIR network. As yet, they still get to make their own programming decisions. If you don't like their choices, don't watch. They don't owe Obama air time.


----------



## rightwinger (Feb 2, 2010)

Vel6377 said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > > You seem to be operating under the impression that Fox News somehow owes the Obama administration something. They don't. Obama was running well over the time scheduled and I see no reason why Fox should waste time that could be used to pay the bills, to stroke this blowhard's ego.
> ...



No they don't owe anything..

Its THEIR network....they don't have to do anything to make themselves appear to be a credible news network.......its a free country


----------



## Vel (Feb 2, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> Vel6377 said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...


----------



## &#9773;proletarian&#9773; (Feb 2, 2010)

Fox went to court to protect their right to lie


----------



## Oldandtired (Feb 2, 2010)

&#9773;proletarian&#9773;;1967227 said:
			
		

> Fox went to court to protect their right to lie



Based on that logic, A bank robber goes to court to protect his right to rob banks.


----------



## Soggy in NOLA (Feb 2, 2010)

Paul Krugman is in no position to be acusing anyone of misinformation.


----------



## uscitizen (Feb 2, 2010)

Vel6377 said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > > You seem to be operating under the impression that Fox News somehow owes the Obama administration something. They don't. Obama was running well over the time scheduled and I see no reason why Fox should waste time that could be used to pay the bills, to stroke this blowhard's ego.
> ...



they still get to make their own programming decisions.


----------



## Soggy in NOLA (Feb 2, 2010)

Oldandtired said:


> &#9773;proletarian&#9773;;1967227 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Logic?  These are lefties.... they wouldn't know logic if it landed on their collective pinheads and pooped.


----------



## &#9773;proletarian&#9773; (Feb 2, 2010)

Oldandtired said:


> &#9773;proletarian&#9773;;1967227 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...





> On February 14, a Florida  Appeals court ruled there               is absolutely nothing illegal about lying, concealing               or distorting information by a major press               organization. The court reversed the $425,000 jury               verdict in favor of journalist Jane Akre who charged               she was pressured by Fox Television management and               lawyers to air what she knew and documented to be               false information. The ruling basically declares it               is technically not against any law, rule, or               regulation to deliberately lie or distort the news on               a television broadcast.



Fox News gets okay to misinform public, court ruling | Media Reform | CeaseSPIN.org


Fox News went to court specifically to protect their legal right to lie outright and call it 'news'.


----------



## &#9773;proletarian&#9773; (Feb 2, 2010)

> On August 18, 2000, a six-person jury was unanimous               in its conclusion that Akre was indeed fired for               threatening to report the station's pressure to               broadcast what jurors decided was "a false,               distorted, or slanted" story about the widespread use               of growth hormone in dairy cows.



See, that''s how Fox works. Refuse to go along with the lies, and you get fired


----------



## uscitizen (Feb 2, 2010)

&#9773;proletarian&#9773;;1967288 said:
			
		

> Oldandtired said:
> 
> 
> > &#9773;proletarian&#9773;;1967227 said:
> ...



Interesting, thanks for that link/info.


----------



## &#9773;proletarian&#9773; (Feb 2, 2010)

A bank robber goes to court to argue his innocence.

Fox went to court to argue that lying and calling it 'news' is just fine.


'Fair and Balanced'? They went to court to defend their right to be anything but.


----------



## LibocalypseNow (Feb 2, 2010)

The corrupt Liberal Media is dying and that's a good thing for America. They've controlled things for far too long. Fox News is whipping Liberal Media A*S on a daily basis so i can see why Krugman and the rest of his fellow Liberal Wingnuts are so cranky. If these Wingnuts stop whining about Fox News that's when you know Fox News is having some problems. Fox News really is the most balanced & trusted News in America today. WTG Fox News!


----------



## LibocalypseNow (Feb 2, 2010)

Man,Roger Ailes swatted Huffington and Krugman like annoying gnats on 'This Week.' Two against one and Ailes still managed to make them look like the simpletons they are. A mismatch fo sho. They are exactly why Fox News whips Liberal Media a*s on a daily basis. Liberal looons usually come off as whiny dummies. WTG Mr. Ailes!


----------



## Zona (Feb 2, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > I have the distinct impression that people like rightwinger and his libby cohorts watch Fox more than any repudlicans do
> ...



Fox talking heads shows, american idol, project runway....same thing.


----------



## Father Time (Feb 2, 2010)

oreo said:


> Zona said:
> 
> 
> > Here is a question righty's.  If fox is so fair and balanced, why did they just stop the president 20 minutes short and why did they talk over a lot of his responses when he spoke to those genius republicans last week?  NO OTHER STATION DID THIS, NONE.
> ...



Source?


----------



## Zona (Feb 2, 2010)

Murf76 said:


> Father Time said:
> 
> 
> > Has a US news program ever done that with the president before when there wasn't some breaking news they needed to cover?
> ...




How dare he let the American people know whats going on.  Its annoying.  I agree with you.


----------



## Father Time (Feb 2, 2010)

Vel6377 said:


> Father Time said:
> 
> 
> > Vel6377 said:
> ...



No, I'm under the impression that if they were neutral they would let the man speak because what the president says is usually important.


----------



## Zona (Feb 2, 2010)

Harry Dresden said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...




I cant speak for RW but I know I get my fox info from msnbc.  They ALWAYS point out the hypocrisy from them. I also listen to Stephanie miller on xm who does this bit daily on her show.  She points out right wing crap daily and everything ...EVERYTHING she says is factual.  

No need to watch beck or hannity or fox and friends to know how dumb those idiots are.   You can get full quotes in context from their shows easily.  That is enough for me.

This last stunt by fox proves everything.  They will let you see what they want you to see.  If you disagree, explain why they stopped the president 20 minutes early or why they were actually talking after the question was asked and he was responding?

How do you spin that?


----------



## Father Time (Feb 2, 2010)

Zona said:


> Harry Dresden said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



Pretend this was a question of whether Fox had the right to do that, not whether it makes them biased and say something like 'it's their channel'.


----------



## Zona (Feb 2, 2010)

Yurt said:


> Zona said:
> 
> 
> > Oldandtired said:
> ...




I dont care about the other stations...there are over 300 million people in the united states....over 95% of them DO NOT WATCH FOX. 

Do the math and come back and apologize.


----------



## Oldandtired (Feb 2, 2010)

Zona said:


> Yurt said:
> 
> 
> > Zona said:
> ...



Apologize for your inability to read?
The discussion had to do with the poll. The poll referred to THOSE THAT REGULARLY WATCH THE NEWS.
I did not need to continually refer to those polled as people that watch the news regularly..

Unless, of course, I come across someone who is too lazy to refer to the actual poll.

Are you too lazy to read the poll? Huh? Is that the problem? You are a lazy know nothing do nothing loser and so the rest of us need to be careful and ensure you are completely up to date with the facts becuse you are a lazy no good good for nothing loser? Huh? Is that the way it is with you? Is it? I mean...really...if it is, I understand.


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Feb 2, 2010)

Oldandtired said:


> Zona said:
> 
> 
> > Yurt said:
> ...



I think that's exactly the way it is for him. Oh and one other thing about Zona, he thinks his word should be good enough, he almost never supports his argument (if you can call them that ) with any facts or sources.  In my opinion, he's nothing but a troll.


----------



## driveby (Feb 2, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> FOX: 'Deliberate misinformation'? - THE WEEK
> 
> New York Times columnist Paul Krugman accused Fox News of spreading "deliberate misinformation" about the health-care reform bill and other important issues -- and he made the complaint directly to Fox News CEO Roger Ailes. Krugman, appearing with Ailes and others on a ABC's "This Week" on Sunday, said that the bill was actually a Republican plan, first championed by Mitt Romney, but many people don't realize that because Fox News has tried to convince people it was socialism. Ailes said "the American people are not stupid," and if they're confused about the health plan it's because the bill's supporters tried to "hide" elements the public wouldn't like in a 2,000 page bill. Does Fox News try to get at the truth -- or does it intentionally mislead its viewers?





The Left: Deliberate misinformation and demonization.

The End.....


----------



## Zona (Feb 2, 2010)

Lonestar_logic said:


> Oldandtired said:
> 
> 
> > Zona said:
> ...



over 300 million people in america....more than 95% of americans do not watch fox.  Agree?  I thought so.


----------



## Zona (Feb 2, 2010)

Father Time said:


> Zona said:
> 
> 
> > Harry Dresden said:
> ...



Of course they have the right to cut off information because it wasn't helping their agenda....they also have the right to call themselves fair and balanced....this is not in dispute.  The sad part is fox fans are rubes who actually believe they are getting information that is fair and balanced.  Fox is dumbing down a lot...A LOT of Americans.  

from what I understand, fox fans are mostly elderly and with minimal education.  This explains their ratings really.


----------



## Harry Dresden (Feb 2, 2010)

&#9773;proletarian&#9773;;1967305 said:
			
		

> A bank robber goes to court to argue his innocence.
> 
> Fox went to court to argue that lying and calling it 'news' is just fine.
> 
> ...



and apparently a jury of our peers agreed with them....


----------



## Harry Dresden (Feb 2, 2010)

Zona said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Skull Pilot said:
> ...



wholeheartedly agree....may i recomend Bones,Fringe and this new one The Human Target....but mind you....you will have to follow a story line.....


----------



## Harry Dresden (Feb 2, 2010)

Zona said:


> I cant speak for RW but I know I get my fox info from msnbc.  They ALWAYS point out the hypocrisy from them. I also listen to Stephanie miller on xm who does this bit daily on her show.  She points out right wing crap daily and everything ...EVERYTHING she says is factual.
> 
> No need to watch beck or hannity or fox and friends to know how dumb those idiots are.   You can get full quotes in context from their shows easily.  That is enough for me.
> 
> ...



so in other words.....you just let a bunch of other talking heads tell you whats going on....and of course Stephanie Miller is ALWAYS factual.....Geezus Zona and your putting the fox listeners down.....


----------



## Zona (Feb 3, 2010)

Harry Dresden said:


> Zona said:
> 
> 
> > I cant speak for RW but I know I get my fox info from msnbc.  They ALWAYS point out the hypocrisy from them. I also listen to Stephanie miller on xm who does this bit daily on her show.  She points out right wing crap daily and everything ...EVERYTHING she says is factual.
> ...



The biggest difference is, FOX LIES.  MSNBC calls them out on it.  

Geezus, you still dont get it....  Oh and Stephanie miller rules!  Funny show and I love when she calls righty's out on their hypocrisy.    Funny show.


----------



## &#9773;proletarian&#9773; (Feb 3, 2010)

Who the hell is Stephanie Miller?


----------



## Harry Dresden (Feb 3, 2010)

Zona said:


> Harry Dresden said:
> 
> 
> > Zona said:
> ...


because these particular heads say they lie?.....Zona YOU dont get it....the fox followers say that your full of shit......your doing the same thing they are....relying on a bunch of opinionated morons to tell you whats up....and about 2 years ago out here Miller got her ass handed to her by two radio guys named John And Ken for her bullshit....and these guys take on all the parties.....they are equal opportunity exposers....Stephanie Miller is just another talking head....what a joke....


----------



## Harry Dresden (Feb 3, 2010)

&#9773;proletarian&#9773;;1970772 said:
			
		

> Who the hell is Stephanie Miller?



another flunky who shoots her mouth off.....and idiots like Zona eat it up....


----------



## &#9773;proletarian&#9773; (Feb 3, 2010)

That Fox lies is a fact. It was established in a court of law. Fox fought for the right to lie.


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Feb 4, 2010)

&#9773;proletarian&#9773;;1972325 said:
			
		

> That Fox lies is a fact. It was established in a court of law. Fox fought for the right to lie.



Ignorance such as this is what the left embraces. I'm sure you're not interested in the facts of the case, but for those that are, here are the facts. Fox News didn't sue for the "right to lie" as you suggest, in careful reading of the jury instruction the jury was only answering whether they believed Akre had been fired for threatening to lodge a complaint with the FCC alleging broadcast of a false, distorted, or slanted news report, not whether the news report was in fact false, distorted, or slanted.

The FCC included this 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 if they 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. Instead, the station claimed its editorial decisions were based on an effort to air a fair and accurate story, and defended its editorial prerogatives under the First Amendment - editorial prerogatives that are indisputable, if the guarantee of a free press means anything.

Further evidence that WTVT did not assert at the trial court level any"right to lie"or distort the news is that neither Akre's response to WTVT's initial appeal brief nor the petition she and Wilson filed with the FCC make any reference at all to such a claim. Surely, had a claim for a First Amendment" right to lie" in news broadcasts been made at the trial court level, some mention of it would have found its way into either of these two documents (Akre's brief to the appellate court runs 57 pages, and the FCC petition runs over 90 pages including appendices).

A review of both the initial brief and the reply brief of WTVT for the appeal also reveals no mention whatsoever of a "right to lie" defense. Not surprisingly, the station's brief does contain multiple references to the First Amendment supporting the contention that editorial decisions and disputes are beyond the purview of the government.
FOX, Lies & Videotape: debunking an internet mythBlog Center for Competitive Politics


----------



## Harry Dresden (Feb 4, 2010)

&#9773;proletarian&#9773;;1972325 said:
			
		

> That Fox lies is a fact. It was established in a court of law. Fox fought for the right to lie.



and a jury of 12 people apparently agreed.....


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Feb 4, 2010)

Harry Dresden said:


> &#9773;proletarian&#9773;;1972325 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Were you born stupid or is it something you strive for? Fact is dumbass the trial had nothing to do with whether or not "lies" had or had not been told or demanded.  Even after I posted the facts of the case you ignorant fucks still don't get it.


----------



## &#9773;proletarian&#9773; (Feb 4, 2010)

http://www.2dca.org/opinions/Opinion_Pages/Opinion_Page_2003/February/February%2014,%202003/2D01-529.pdf

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fqVMUwdBYBM[/ame]


----------



## &#9773;proletarian&#9773; (Feb 4, 2010)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eZkDikRLQrw&feature=player_embedded]YouTube - THE CORPORATION [17/23] Unsettling Accounts[/ame]


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Feb 4, 2010)

&#9773;proletarian&#9773;;1974484 said:
			
		

> http://www.2dca.org/opinions/Opinion_Pages/Opinion_Page_2003/February/February%2014,%202003/2D01-529.pdf
> 
> YouTube - Broadcast Blues: Fox News Does Not Have to be True!



Hey stupid for one thing even if Fox did want them to lie, lying is not illegal! But that wasn't the purpose of the lawsuit. The lawsuit was filed because the two reporters felt that they were wrongfully terminated.


----------



## Harry Dresden (Feb 4, 2010)

Lonestar_logic said:


> Harry Dresden said:
> 
> 
> > &#9773;proletarian&#9773;;1972325 said:
> ...



i was born stupid?.....was this not a jury trial?.....did not the jury agree with Fox....


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Feb 4, 2010)

Harry Dresden said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> > Harry Dresden said:
> ...



There were two trials, the first one found in favor of one of the reporters, the second trial overturned that decision.


----------



## &#9773;proletarian&#9773; (Feb 4, 2010)

Lonestar_logic said:


> &#9773;proletarian&#9773;;1974484 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




That was Fox's whole case- that they are allowed to lie all they want, therefore the people fired didn't get whistleblower protection.

You just argued my case for me.


----------



## &#9773;proletarian&#9773; (Feb 4, 2010)

Lonestar_logic said:


> Harry Dresden said:
> 
> 
> > Lonestar_logic said:
> ...




The second hearing ruled with fox, saying that Fox has a right to lie all it wants.


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Feb 4, 2010)

&#9773;proletarian&#9773;;1974813 said:
			
		

> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> > &#9773;proletarian&#9773;;1974484 said:
> ...



No the difference is you and others painted the trial as being about Fox's right to lie or some such nonsense and the fact is the trial was about whether they terminated the two reporters with just cause. Fact is reporters embellish the truth and that is not illegal.


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Feb 4, 2010)

&#9773;proletarian&#9773;;1974815 said:
			
		

> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> > Harry Dresden said:
> ...



Provide the evidence then.


On August 18, 2000, journalist Jane Akre won $425,000 in a court ruling where she claimed she was wrongfully terminated for threatening to blow the whistle to the FCC.

She found out cows in Florida were being injected with RBGH, a drug designed to make cows produce milk  and, according to FDA-redacted studies, unintentionally designed to make human beings produce cancer.

Fox lawyers, under pressure by the Monsanto Corporation (who produced RBGH), rewrote her report over 80 times to make it compatible with the companys requests. She and her husband, journalist Steve Wilson, refused to air the edited segment. And both were promptly terminated.

In February 2003, ( the second trial) Fox appealed the decision and an appellate court and had it overturned. In a six-page written decision released February 14, the court essentially ruled the journalist never stated a valid whistle- blower claim because, they ruled, it is technically not against any law, rule, or regulation to deliberately lie or distort the news on a television broadcast.

The lawsuit was never about the content of any program or whether information was distorted or not, it was about whether or not the reporters were fairly terminated. But you idiots can't seem to understand that.


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Feb 4, 2010)

What you idiots don't seem to get is that any news organization can lie. It is not illegal. And the only thing you got is this ten year old lawsuit that's not even about distorting the truth.


----------



## &#9773;proletarian&#9773; (Feb 4, 2010)

Lonestar_logic said:


> &#9773;proletarian&#9773;;1974813 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



It wasn't over just cause, you twit. It was over whether they were allowed to lie, because that determined whether whistle blower protection was applicable.


----------



## &#9773;proletarian&#9773; (Feb 4, 2010)

Read the ruling for the appeal, you idiot


----------



## &#9773;proletarian&#9773; (Feb 4, 2010)

> We agree with WTVT that
> the FCC&#8217;s policy against the intentional falsification of the news &#8211; which the FCC has
> called its &#8220;news distortion policy&#8221; &#8211; does not qualify as the required &#8220;law, rule, or
> regulation&#8221; under section 448.102.
> ...


http://www.2dca.org/opinions/Opinion_Pages/Opinion_Page_2003/February/February 14, 2003/2D01-529.pdf


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Feb 5, 2010)

&#9773;proletarian&#9773;;1975238 said:
			
		

> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> > &#9773;proletarian&#9773;;1974813 said:
> ...



If you choose to stay ignorant I can't help you. I have given you the details of the trial, the lawsuit that was filed was for wrongful termination, it had nothing to do with anyone being allowed to lie. For one thing lying is not illegal unless you perjure yourself in a court of law or lie to a federal agent!!! Damn the stupidity you people exhibit is amazing.


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Feb 5, 2010)

&#9773;proletarian&#9773;;1975248 said:
			
		

> > We agree with WTVT that
> > the FCC&#8217;s policy against the intentional falsification of the news &#8211; which the FCC has
> > called its &#8220;news distortion policy&#8221; &#8211; does not qualify as the required &#8220;law, rule, or
> > regulation&#8221; under section 448.102.
> ...



Read the first paragraph you idiot!!!! By the way this is the appellate court (the second trial) that reversed the the ruling against Fox.


----------



## &#9773;proletarian&#9773; (Feb 5, 2010)

Lonestar_logic said:


> By the way this is the appellate court (the second trial) that reversed the the ruling against Fox.


On the grounds that Fox is allowed to lie, therefore it's not a crime, therefore whistle blower status wasn't applicable.


----------



## &#9773;proletarian&#9773; (Feb 5, 2010)

Lonestar_logic said:


> the lawsuit that was filed was for wrongful termination, it had nothing to do with anyone being allowed to lie..



On the grounds that he was, as both courts agreed, fired for refusing to lie.


----------



## &#9773;proletarian&#9773; (Feb 5, 2010)

Fox's entire defense was that they are allowed to lie all they want.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Feb 5, 2010)

&#9773;proletarian&#9773;;1970772 said:
			
		

> Who the hell is Stephanie Miller?



Stephanie Katherine Miller (born September 29, 1961) is an American comedienne and host of The Stephanie Miller Show, a liberal talk radio program produced in Los Angeles and syndicated nationally by Dial Global. Talkers magazine ranked her as the 36th most important radio talk show host in America for 2007.[1] She is the daughter of former U.S. Representative William E. Miller, who was Barry Goldwater's running mate in the 1964 presidential election and a Chairman of the Republican National Committee.

Stephanie Miller - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i2kNFbxPYOk&feature=related]YouTube - Ron Paul: Stephanie Miller Show (12/6/07)[/ame]
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=74g_YJ4a4-o&feature=related]YouTube - Stephanie Miller: Best of 2008[/ame]


----------



## &#9773;proletarian&#9773; (Feb 6, 2010)

Oh. I kept picturing Dennis Miller in drag.


----------

