Hannity To Glenn Beck: ‘You’re A Perfect Fit’ For Fox News
Hannity To Glenn Beck: ‘You’re A Perfect Fit’ For Fox News
On Thursday, Fox News announced that CNN’s Glenn Beck would join the network next spring, hosting the 5 p.m. daily news program. Yesterday on his radio program, Beck read a congratulatory e-mail from Fox’s Sean Hannity, welcoming him to “the Fox family”:
Glenn,
Welcome to the Fox family. I can honestly tell you working with Roger [Ailes] has been one of the BEST things to ever happen to me in my life. You’re a perfect fit, a great addition to family. I look forward to seeing you.
Sean.
Listen here:
It’s true that Beck will be a “perfect fit” at Fox News — and with Sean Hannity especially. With Beck on the network, Hannity’s radical right-wing views will get a whole extra hour of exposure, as the two share nearly identical perspectives:
ON STARTING WAR WITH IRAN
– BECK: War with Iran is no longer a question of “if.” I believe it’s a question of when. … Now we have no longer any other options but to go into Iran. [10/9/07]
– HANNITY: Mission: Iran Showdown. The objective: destroy and disable Iran’s top nuclear facilities, impact its ability to process and enrich uranium, delay its ability to manufacture and deploy nuclear weapons, all while crippling the ruling regime. [9/25/07]
ON APOLOGIZING FOR TORTURE
– BECK: You need to torture, I mean, within reason. … You do what you have to do to get the information if it’s pressing. [12/21/07]
– HANNITY: If we have enemy combatants and they have information that can save the lives of innocent Americans or troops, I’m not saying — we have to use very tough techniques. … I want to torture them to the limit. [11/10/06]
– BECK: Waterboarding is torture now? You’re dead wrong! [1/15/08]
– HANNITY: KSM spilled the beans as a result of waterboarding gave up not only his role of 9/11 attacks but several ongoing terror plots hence saving lives. … So if that’s the price we pay for our security is it really that bad? [11/11/07]
ON OBAMA
– BECK: With his rock star persona, celebrity fan club, a socialist point of view, Obama feels a lot like he’s running for king over president. … I think this man is actually dangerous. [8/13/08]
– HANNITY: Joe the Plumber actually went out there on “Good Morning America” this morning and he said Obama holds the socialist view. For the next 19 days of this campaign, I think America has got a choice. And that is European socialism. [10/16/08]
ON DISMISSING ABU GHRAIB
– BECK: I was against Abu Ghraib and I said, because it didn’t look like it was done by professionals, what was that, stacking people in a pyramid. [11/1/07]
– HANNITY: There was underwear on the head of one of them. We’re not raping and killing anybody. [6/8/05]
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Putting the incurably insane in one place is a great idea. This is the best thing to happen to CNN in years.
October 18th, 2008 at 9:56 amI guess Rupert Murdoch wants to gin up support for attacking Iran. Oh, and insulting the intelligence of every man, woman, and child in the US.
October 18th, 2008 at 9:56 amMight as well have all of the hate-spewing dopes on one poisonous channel rather than take up thew airwaves on real news outlets like CNN.
Hannity and Beck: Talk about a man crush…
http://www.sunstateactivist.org/ssablog/
October 18th, 2008 at 9:57 amBECK: You need to torture, I mean, within reason.
Glenn “Peckerhead” Beck is torture. Abolish the SOB!
====
October 18th, 2008 at 10:04 amToday’s TP Coin Toss Question of the Day™, sports fans… you make the call:
Who wears more makeup on television… Sean “Heil” Hannity… or Glen “The Pillsbury Blowboy” Beck?
Vote now and feel free to vote as often as you like.
October 18th, 2008 at 10:05 amhttp://www.censurebachmann.com/
October 18th, 2008 at 10:06 amWho wears more makeup on television… Sean “Heil” Hannity… or Glen “The Pillsbury Blowboy” Beck?
Better question — which one has a bigger annual KY Jelly budget?
October 18th, 2008 at 10:07 amWell — birds of a fascist feather do flock together . . .
Just saying . . .
October 18th, 2008 at 10:10 amI didn’t think the day would come when I’d agree with Hannity, but here it is! Beck is a PERFECT fit for Fox Noise, I’d even go as far as to say a perfect POSTER CHILD for it.
Now, when the wingnuts at Fox start realizing that Beck is a Mormon, we’ll see how long the honeymoon lasts…
October 18th, 2008 at 10:12 amFor the first time ever, I actually agree with Hannity. Beck is, indeed, a “perfect fit” for Fascist News Network.
October 18th, 2008 at 10:12 amBeck’s show is at 5pm weekdays, a slot once held by such esteemed journalists as John Gibson and Laura Ingraham.
And Fox is STILL the most watched cable news network, just as the NY Post is the most read paper in NYC.
We’re failing as a society, here.
October 18th, 2008 at 10:16 amtom Says:
Better question — which one has a bigger annual KY Jelly budget?
___________
And that, of course, begs this follow-up question:
Which flavor of jelly does the winner of the first question prefer…
… Grape… or strawberry???
October 18th, 2008 at 10:22 amdrobert_bfm Says:
Now, when the wingnuts at Fox start realizing that Beck is a Mormon, we’ll see how long the honeymoon lasts…
_____________
I think you misspelled one word there… it’s “MORON”, as in “Beck is a MORON”…
October 18th, 2008 at 10:23 amIck. Those pictures. I just threw up in my mouth a little bit.
October 18th, 2008 at 10:36 amAh! the morons get to room together sort of like a Porky’s movie and what’s really nice I don’t have to accidentally stumble on it cause that channel is blocked on my TV
October 18th, 2008 at 10:38 amRightwing mental cases with microphones. Both graduates from the Dr. Joseph Goebbels School of Broadcasting…
====
October 18th, 2008 at 10:40 amNext question for our audience at home:
When our two “celebrities du jour” and new “bestest best friends” get together for some well-deserved “intamint* time”… who gets to pretend they’re the man?
*h/t to H Simpson…
October 18th, 2008 at 10:41 amCan imagine what a staff meeting is like at Fox News? WOW! Between Bill O’s dillusions of granduer, Hannity’s hate filled rage, Beck the bi-polar loon, the three stooges in the morning @ Fox and Friends. And those are the headliners, co-starring Coulter, Rove and Kristol.
October 18th, 2008 at 10:51 amSomeone please let me know when this is no longer the top story on the page. If I have to look at those two smug creeps whenever I check on TP, I’m going to lose my breakfast.
October 18th, 2008 at 10:51 amFits like a hand in a mitten.
October 18th, 2008 at 10:55 amWe need the fairness doctrine back. This is the end result of corporations deciding who will be heard.
With the fairness doctrine these two gasbags would be ridiculed off of the air. Anyone, if they just have the opportunity can show them to be liars and nothing more than propaganda spreaders.
This is clearly evident if you examine recent history. The advent of the right wing gasbag coincides with the destruction of the fairness doctrine……
October 18th, 2008 at 11:06 amTwo dooshbags in a pod.
October 18th, 2008 at 11:07 amGreat news for CNN!
October 18th, 2008 at 11:15 amYou’re a perfect fit –
Yes, a lieing, brownshirt, jackboot, scum sucking, neanderturd, fascist, low-life, propaganda spreading, brain-dead, a$$wipe….a perfect mirror image of Sean.
October 18th, 2008 at 11:18 amWith his usual blend of naivete and credulity, “Fred” sez: We need the fairness doctrine back. This is the end result of corporations deciding who will be heard.
little realizing that, once dead and dispatched, regulations never “come back.” They might be replaced, but the replacements are ALWAYS pale imitations, shells, of their former embodiments…
We’ll NEVER again see anything resembling a “Fairness Doctrine.” First, you’d have to repeal all the media concentration that’s occurred in the 20 or so years since the Raygunauts killed it off…
NAGAHAPUN…
October 18th, 2008 at 11:34 amTweedle Dumb and Tweedle Dumber (not quite sure which is which) belong together at US Pravda
October 18th, 2008 at 11:35 amIt’s going to be very interesting to see how all these hate mongers fare when Obama is President and he starts healing this nation. I fervently hope that they will become irrelevant.
October 18th, 2008 at 11:35 amIt’s going to be very interesting to see how all these hate mongers fare when Obama is President and he starts healing this nation. I fervently hope that they will become irrelevant.
October 18th, 2008 at 11:35 am
Just out of curiosity, how can you look at the streams of racist bullshit pouring out of “White” Murka and imagine that Obama can possibly “heal” the nation? You think it’s gonna end on Nov 4 or 5?
The re-Risen jesus H. fuuking CHRIST couldn’t heal the racial fissures that afflict this poor, ruined bastard of a country…
October 18th, 2008 at 11:39 amDoc Rock Says:
Fits like a hand in a mitten.
________
Or, perhaps, a fist up an …
October 18th, 2008 at 11:41 amOh man, I foresee a giant circle jerk happenin’ at Phaux. Maybe we should all donate some loofahs & lube.
October 18th, 2008 at 11:42 amEew.
October 18th, 2008 at 11:42 amOh please teach me oh wise one. I’m so humbled by your amazing hoplessness that I think I will just commit suicide since there is absolutly no hope…..tokin has said it is so.
October 18th, 2008 at 11:47 amYeah right, like the laws that made it illegal for women to vote…..those never came back, right.
like the laws that made black people property….those never got changed did they…
You’re not helping tokin. Quit whining and crying and do something constructive.
October 18th, 2008 at 11:50 amHannity To Glenn Beck: We’ve got a loose screw just waiting for your wingnuttiness.
And her name is Greta…
October 18th, 2008 at 11:53 amHard to achieve, but FOX dumbs down even further.
October 18th, 2008 at 11:55 amWith a smart, sane, thinking man in the WH like Obama, they’ve got to get the double team propogando going. Their audience needs that message repeated over and over, least they think for themselves accidently somehow. They’ll have a new Democrat to blame.
October 18th, 2008 at 11:56 amClusterTim:
October 18th, 2008 at 12:21 pmHave I not asked nicely? Joked pointedly? Do we really have to move toward a more aggressive stance?
I would like to start a new pool….How many days before Hannity and Beck are caught in the Fox Bathroom sucking each other off. I’m sure Hannity got a hard on the moment he heard Beck was cumming…lol.
I put my bet $10..at 45 days. Enough time for Beck to figure out the bathroom patterns of the other employees.
Hannity and Beck Suck off Pool. Anyone???
October 18th, 2008 at 12:28 pmHANNITY to GLENN:
October 18th, 2008 at 12:32 pmAnd we both agree that the coming war will be fought against Bill Ayers.
We also both agree that Obama is going to take Joe the plumber’s money!
It is great to have all the garbage in one place. It it is easier to take it out to the dump and burn the hell out of it.
October 18th, 2008 at 12:45 pmMurdoch is to be congratulated for this fine collection of first-rate crap that he has assembled. They will be so pissed on Nov. 5th. if the Rethuglican attempt to steal another election fails miserably, and Barack is bound for the White House, that we can only hope they will all self-implode and take the whole dumbassed network that is Faux Noise with them and sink Murdoch in the deepest part of the ocean, or send him packing to Australia where he will be welcomed as the sellout he is.
Hannity is right about this. Beck is just as disgusting as all the morons on FAUX. Take it from the junior college dropout, Hannity, he knows a lying slug when he sees one.
October 18th, 2008 at 12:50 pmThat puffed up slug will fit in well with the rest of the slugs.
October 18th, 2008 at 12:54 pmSean,
October 18th, 2008 at 12:56 pmHere’s a question for you, or one of your brainwashed sycophantic worker bee’s at Fox to answer! When will you produce a canceled check made out to Freedom Alliance for your donation of $10,000,000
According to: premierspeakers.com/sean_hannity/bio
you are quoted as saying that you donatated $10,000,000 dollars to Freedom Alliance, raised from your 5 Freedom Concerts held last year(2007)! That would mean every single of concert goers, all 60,000 of them would to have shoved out a bare minmum of $166.66!
In reading and rereading the Freedom Alliances 2007 Tax Form 990(a 501c3 Charity) to the IRS, there is no mention of you,your concerts or anyone else donating $10,000,000 to Freedom Alliance!
So Sean,did Ollie run off with your Freedom Concerts money, or did you just keep the money for yourself,cause Freedom Alliance doesn’t have it! If you donated the $10,000,000,it would have to show up in their report, wouldn’t it?
In otherwords Hannity, “SHOW ME THE MONEY!”
Now all Fox needs to do is give Lou Dobbs a job and get him of CNN and maybe I’ll start watching. The only reason to turn it on now is Jack Cafferty when he’s there.
October 18th, 2008 at 12:56 pmI just sent a note to CNN congratulating them on their loss:
http://www.cnn.com/feedback/forms/form5.html?65
October 18th, 2008 at 1:12 pmConfused by complex rhetorical constructions as usual, “Fred” retorts: You’re not helping tokin. Quit whining and crying and do something constructive.
October 18th, 2008 at 11:50 am
while citing “laws” (against slavery, e.g.) which have been changed, to rebut my assertion that, once deceased, ‘regulations’ never revivify.
To which I would reply: check the fate of the regulatory effort to repeal the EPA and the Endangered Species Acts, where ‘regulatory’ changes are being used to eviscerate the Acts…
October 18th, 2008 at 1:16 pmI’m sure they’ll be very happy together.
October 18th, 2008 at 1:17 pmWhen bad Americans die they go to FOX…
====
October 18th, 2008 at 1:22 pmWhat an astonishingly offensive group of men and women they have managed to coagulate at Fox.
October 18th, 2008 at 1:29 pmGood idea, simplify (consolidate) the problem. Neutralize with a single shot (Fairness Doctrine).
October 18th, 2008 at 1:31 pmDon’t spend the money before you get it. Beck and other Fox News wacko’s might get a surprise if Murduct who is losing billions in the drop of the Stock Market. Now he just might smile and clean house and Hannity/Beck/O’Reilly would be in line to get their unemployment check.
October 18th, 2008 at 1:36 pmI thought the Fairness Doctrine applied to “Broadcast” TV and Radio…where Spectrum is limited.
I don’t think Cable Stations ever were required to be Fair. Does the FCC even have control over Cable Stations??
October 18th, 2008 at 1:39 pmThis is a response? Another attack. please, vote for nader if you want but please keep the personal attacks out of the discussion. It makes you look like a gop stooge.
revivify….is that an example of your complex rhetorical constructions?
sounds like something bush might have said.
In response to your last paragraph I would say……when democrats have the power these regulations always stem back towards safety for citizens, when republicans are in power they go the other way…..they do change back and forth though and just because it hasn’t happened in the last 8 years does not an argument make.
And please don’t say the dems have been in power the last 2 years as an argument, it don’t hold water. Soon though.
In all of your ranting you offer no alternative. Just a chicken little response.
October 18th, 2008 at 1:41 pmCareful mcwars, tokin liberal has declared the fairness doctrine to be dead and cannot be revived.
tokin knows all.
October 18th, 2008 at 1:49 pmIt’s beginning to feel like Thanksgiving dinner with the family in here…
October 18th, 2008 at 1:52 pmI can get fox, etc. with rabbit ears…..
October 18th, 2008 at 1:56 pmgood – get all the turds in one bowl, so they can all be flushed at one time without wasting any water.
October 18th, 2008 at 1:58 pmI’m sorry Zooey, but I refuse to believe that we are doomed or that we can’t reverse some of the damage the republicans have caused when we have a solid majority and a president who will sign those bills.
I resent being called naive for thinking such things are possible.
October 18th, 2008 at 1:59 pmFred says’
I can get fox, etc. with rabbit ears…..
I can Proudly Display my Ignorance of Fox Network Programming,…isn’t Fox News a cable Show?? Is HANNITY and colmes on Fox News Channel??
I won’t waste my time watching people who would deliberately LIE to me. My point was that Cable, Satellite, and Internet sources of Information have pretty much made the FAirness Doctrine Concept Obsolete.
October 18th, 2008 at 2:11 pmI’m with you Fred.
I would be thrilled if there were a viable third option but, there is none. Plus, if we want to regain a place among civilized nations, we need to send the entire world a message that we repudiate the Bushco foreign policy. I’m not terribly happy with the idea of a Dem super-duper majority but, it’s the only realistic way to send that message.
If we don’t? We could see the end of the great American experiment.
October 18th, 2008 at 2:13 pmI’m with you Fred. If we say all is lost we do nothing. We have to start getting this country back to the days before Reagan started destroying everything.
October 18th, 2008 at 2:25 pmWell, I am ignorant of fox network programming and I am proud of that. I guess you might have a point but I don’t see why cable should be exempt, it is still public media.
Do you know anything to verify they are exempt for sure or are you just guessing too. I don’t see why the fcc wouldn’t be the appropriate regulatory agency for cable and satellite. I don’t recall it being restricted to airwave broadcasts but I definatly could be wrong.
I would be interested if anyone knows for sure.
October 18th, 2008 at 2:37 pmBadger, from the fcc website:
the link
October 18th, 2008 at 2:40 pm
Beck is going to Faux? Great!
Now Headline News just needs to get rid of Nancy Grace and put real news in the place of both of them. I mean really, if I want to rabid conservatives lying and hounding people who disagree with them, I’d gnaw my arm off then as a last resort I’d look at Cheney’s favorite channel.
October 18th, 2008 at 3:21 pmSean Hannity and Glenn Beck are why some people think Americans are a form of sewage.
October 18th, 2008 at 3:37 pmThis is the one time when I will say that Sean Hannity is correct.
Jeebus, I think I just threw up in my mouth a little bit.
October 18th, 2008 at 3:46 pmFred,
Thanks for clearing that up. As Bush might say….I was apparently Misconceptioned.
October 18th, 2008 at 3:54 pmHannity To Glenn Beck: ‘You’re A Perfect Fit’ For Fox News
I concur
A lying dipshit working with other lying dipshits…
October 18th, 2008 at 4:26 pmBeck and Hannity
Sitting in a tree
K-i-s-s-i-n-g
They say, I’ll do you. Then, you’ll do me..
And, we’ll sit on Fox for everyone to see!
Perfect.
October 18th, 2008 at 4:28 pmYou people are just jealous. The so-called “news” organizations of CBS, ABC, CNN, & PMSNBC could only HOPE for the kind of success Fox News had had. They know how to REPORT news, not spew biased commentary and pass it off AS NEWS.
Further, the more informed of you here will recall that Fox News has been cited as the most balanced by some of your favorite DEMOCRATS. Hahahahahaha!
Anyway, it’s really quite funny to read all the rants here because they are breathtakingly hate-filled, spittle laced, and ill-informed! Way to go, “progressives” (and I use that term loosely)
Now on to more serious topics, ie. the so-called “Fairness Doctrine.” I thought a wooden stake had been driven through it’s heart and the crypt lined with silver bullets, BUT NO! It looks like the chosen one might be elected and then he can put on a black cape, insert his teeth and RE_OPEN the casket!
ANYONE who argues for the fairness doctrine to make a return is Un-American. Period. There is absolutely no justification for any type of law or rulemaking that suppresses freedom of speech in such a blatant fashion.
I’d like to hear any of you who’d like to take me on and argue for it. I’ll hand you your head…
October 18th, 2008 at 4:36 pmTim Vaculik Says:
——————————————————————————–
October 18th, 2008 at 4:36 pm
Dipshit
FAUX spews possesses nowhere near the size viewership that any major nightly news network has ; that is statistical FACT.
2nd
Please post the names of the Dems you claimed have cited FAUX Noise as the most balanced and their exact quote(s)…….
3rd
The only thing you’ll be doing with my “head” , is licking it…..
October 18th, 2008 at 4:41 pmHand me my head? Are you totally gone?
October 18th, 2008 at 4:41 pmMcMetal,
Lazy…do your own research. It’s out there.
October 18th, 2008 at 4:51 pmTim Vaculik Says:
——————————————————————————–
McMetal,
Lazy…do your own research. It’s out there.
October 18th, 2008 at 4:51 pm
Slim Dicklick
Stupid……….Don’t try to brag/talk tough when you have nothing to back up your lies.
October 18th, 2008 at 4:53 pmFred,
One of your posts above reveal that you don’t understand what the fairness doctrine was put in place to do. Further, you seem to be clueless as to the effect it had on free speech.
If I own a broadcast company and decide to put on a radio or TV commentary program, I have every right to decide which host I want. They have the right of free speech under the U.S. Constitution.
If someone else wants to do the same, say Air America, they can go right ahead! It’s of no consequence that hardly anyone wants to listen to them! In the free market of ideas, they can put forth theirs and I can put forth mine.
Attempts to revive the so-called “fairness doctrine” are nothing more than raw power grabs just like the tactics employed by Communists the world over! Hugo Chavez would be proud!
October 18th, 2008 at 4:57 pmMcIgnorant,
I can’t help it you aren’t up to speed on what’s happening in the world. Try opening you eyes, maybe your mind will follow (although I’m guessing that’s a stretch.)
I’ll give you a hint. It was during the primaries and there was a lot of talk going around about news coverage of the Democrats. Fox News was being treated like it was radioactive, when it was well known that Fox wanted to give Democrats fair and balanced treatment on its news and commentary shows. One of the Democrat state chairmen defended Fox News by saying that Fox WAS fair in its coverage and that Democrats could get a fair shake.
October 18th, 2008 at 5:03 pmdbadass,
It’s a figure of speech, ever heard of one?
October 18th, 2008 at 5:04 pmSure have. Have you ever heard of humility? Pompous and boorish are not endearing traits
October 18th, 2008 at 5:05 pmMcMetal,
Here ya go!
“FOX News Channel (FNC) continued its ratings dominance among its cable news competition in all categories during the third quarter of 2008 according to Nielsen Media Research. During an unprecedented period for political and financial news and events, FNC was once again the highest rated cable news network for the 27th consecutive Quarter (see below). Among all basic cable channels, FNC ranked 4th for the Quarter in prime time viewership, with CNN and MSNBC lagging behind at 9th and 23rd, respectively.*
In prime time, FNC commanded an overwhelming lead with an average of 2,198,000 viewers for Q3 2008, compared with CNN’s 1,342,000 and MSNBC’s 867,000. In total day, FNC led the cable news competition again with 1,123,000 total viewers compared to CNN’s 713,000 and MSNBC’s 472,000.** “
October 18th, 2008 at 5:05 pmdbadass,
Well, I didn’t come here looking for friends. The reception I’ve received was about what I expected, but no matter.
So, what do you think of the so-called “fairness doctrine”?
October 18th, 2008 at 5:08 pmMcMetal,
Uh Oh… Seems like there’s a bit of trouble in network news land:
“Big Three Network Evening News Viewership Has Dropped Like a Rock This Year. By Tom Blumer July 11, 2006 – 22:10 ET
A year ago tomorrow, I did a post on the continued decline in evening news viewership at Big Three Networks NBC, ABC, and CBS, and made these observations and predictions about why that decline was taking place, and would continue (some of last year’s text was slightly revised):
All three nightly broadcasts most likely lose money, when isolated from their morning counterparts (Today, Good Morning America, CBS Morning Show) and their documentary shows (Dateline, 60 Minutes, 20/20, etc.). At a minimum, none makes an acceptable level of profit.
BUT, the news operations of each of the Big 3 networks are very small parts of very large organizations (CBS-Viacom, NBC-GE, and ABC-Disney), so small that apparently no one at any of the three parent companies cares enough to do anything about the continued hemorrhaging in their evening new shows, as long as the news operations themselves are profitable.
So because those other parts of the news operations make money, the nightly news programs can chug right along, oblivous to normal profitability expectations.
The journalists who put together the nightly news programs could care less if the broadcasts are profitable. It’s obvious that their agenda is more important.
Because of all of the above, the ever-shrinking audience for these broadcasts will be spoon-fed biased reporting, Bush bashing, and conservative-bashing for the foreseeable future.”
October 18th, 2008 at 5:12 pmTim Vaculik Says:
——————————————————————————–
McIgnorant,
I can’t help it you aren’t up to speed on what’s happening in the world. Try opening you eyes, maybe your mind will follow (although I’m guessing that’s a stretch.)
I’ll give you a hint. It was during the primaries and there was a lot of talk going around about news coverage of the Democrats. Fox News was being treated like it was radioactive, when it was well known that Fox wanted to give Democrats fair and balanced treatment on its news and commentary shows. One of the Democrat state chairmen defended Fox News by saying that Fox WAS fair in its coverage and that Democrats could get a fair shake.
October 18th, 2008 at 5:03 pm
Tim VacuousHead
In your original idiotic post , you lyingly claimed “Further, the more informed of you here will recall that Fox News has been cited as the most balanced by some of your favorite DEMOCRATS” ; “DEMOCRATS” is PLURAL , jackass.
Now , in your latest insipid post , you mention a single individual , who also happens to be a state chairman ; since when is a state chairman ever a “favorite” of anyone ?
In the future , instead of stupidly and erroneously insinuating that I’m somehow current events ignorant , you should have all facts(if you can ever find any ; not likely)correct , instead of making up nonsensical garbage , and thus end up looking like an abolute moronic dipshit………..
October 18th, 2008 at 5:16 pmTim Vaselineuser
I mentioned viewership , not profits ; you have reading and comprehension problems in addition to your GOP nut hugging disease ?
October 18th, 2008 at 5:19 pmI choose not to have television so Fox is irrelevant to me but I do vaguely remember reading sometime back that their viewership tends to be less educated relative to several other media sources and didn’t those same viewers barely break forty percent on that little political literacy quiz recently?
October 18th, 2008 at 5:22 pmMcMetal,
So you mis-read my original post… Fox New IS more successful than the one s I cited. What part of “ratings” don’t you understand?
No matter, you do seem ill-informed to me. You are entitled to your opinion as well.
October 18th, 2008 at 5:34 pmSure gets quiet around here when a real challenge is thrown out.
I guess it’s no fun when someone steps into your echo chamber and tacks up a few egg crates to tone down that God awful screeching!
October 18th, 2008 at 5:37 pmTim Vaculik Says:
——————————————————————————–
McMetal,
So you mis-read my original post… Fox New IS more successful than the one s I cited. What part of “ratings” don’t you understand?
No matter, you do seem ill-informed to me. You are entitled to your opinion as well.
October 18th, 2008 at 5:34 pm
Making a bigger profit isn’t the same as viewership number , you incredibly ignorant dope.
Nightly network news programs are far more costly to produce , thus a smaller profit margin ; that has nothing to do with viewership.
BTW
I am hardly concerned with your view(s) of me ; you are so laughably unintelligent and ignorant , I’m wondering who ties your shoes daily for you.
Your (lack of) intellect is a big part of your adoration of FAUX and of the garbage GOP……..
October 18th, 2008 at 5:38 pmTim Vaculik Says:
——————————————————————————–
Sure gets quiet around here when a real challenge is thrown out.
I guess it’s no fun when someone steps into your echo chamber and tacks up a few egg crates to tone down that God awful screeching!
October 18th, 2008 at 5:37 pm
Contrary to your useless opinion , you’ve already been slapped down and around ; what would be the point of others piling on ?
October 18th, 2008 at 5:40 pmThey’re going to have to have wall to wall bobbleheads when the bushco criminals all come looking for a place to hang their dunce caps.
October 18th, 2008 at 5:42 pmChallenge? Did I miss something? Is it public radio pledge time again?
October 18th, 2008 at 5:44 pmGuess all the defenders of the so-called fairness doctrine have left the building…
Too bad.
October 18th, 2008 at 5:48 pmSort of like that directors and films thing?
October 18th, 2008 at 5:52 pmI fully understand it’s purpose and for you to tell me that a corporation or station manager should have free reign is what has cause all of the problems we are in right now.
regulation of what goes across the air waves is just as legitmate as regulation of how much polution a company is allowed to expose the rest of us to.
You are just a right wing dufuss who thinks you have a point. Problem is, we’ve heard it all before and you explaining it doesn’t make it any more legitmate than the last fool who tried.
Hugo is much more of a patriot to his country than bush has been to America……same goes for mccain.
October 18th, 2008 at 5:55 pmI smell pee….with a hint of sanctimony…
Ah, the troll du jour.
Carry on.
October 18th, 2008 at 6:41 pmHmmm. If the talking heads at FAUX are so “fair and balanced”, why do they pitch a fit when another entity (Media Matters for instance?) reports what they say? If they are so “fair and balanced” why are they ashamed of their words?
Seriously. How can they complain when their lies are repeated and exposed? Personally, I welcome corrections when I make an errors but, I never claimed to be “fair and balanced”.
In fact, I find it to be insane to “balance” the truth with lies. And it’s not “fair” to give shyte an equal footing with shinola.
October 18th, 2008 at 7:04 pmFox doubles down on the idiocy factor.
October 18th, 2008 at 9:21 pmFred, Fred, Fred!
“…regulation of what goes across the air waves is just as legitmate as regulation of how much polution a company is allowed to expose the rest of us to.”
Are you talking about CONTENT? Are you telling me that free speech should be CENSORED???
Wow. You want to talk about dangers to the republic – they are not coming from conservatives, my friend. It’s people like you who are the real menace.
Explain yourself.
October 19th, 2008 at 12:14 amPete,
Surely you are not defending Media Matter, are you? They are the worst liars on the left that breath air…
Media Matters has about the same credibility as Hitler did.
October 19th, 2008 at 12:17 amGood. They are squeezing all the repug on a single channel.
October 19th, 2008 at 12:36 amTim Vaculik Says:
You are an ignorant piece of garbage. You spew nonsense and stupidly expect it to become true just because you spew it. Your capacity for self delusion is a sight to behold
October 19th, 2008 at 4:39 amTim Vaculik Says:
Again with the vintage stupid. You dont know ANYTHING about the fairness doctrine. There IS no free speech issue involved whatsoever in the fairness doctrine the Supreme Court said this DIRECTLY reference the Red Lion decision. It doesnt matter WHO owns a network since the AIRWAVES that is the resource being used BY them belong to US. The deal we made with broadcasters is THEY get to make obscene buttloads of money off of our resource and in return they are required to perform a public service. THAT IS A REQUIREMENT that broadcasters KNOW they have an obligation to perform. WE democratically get to decide how that obligation is performe YOU INSUFFERABLE MORON. IF the broadcaster doesnt LIKE the obligations WE decide they must perform they can get OUT of the broadcasting bussiness and become drycleaners. Of course you just parrot the idiocy that Rush Limbaugh and the other propagandists of the Limborg hivemind have TOLD you to parrot because you are irretrievably STUPID. Try at least ONCE in your pathetic life having some dim idea what you are talking about instead of regurgitating your ignorance over and over hoping and WISHING that it will become true from repitition
October 19th, 2008 at 4:46 amIdiocy likes company.
October 19th, 2008 at 10:15 amTim Vaculik Says:
Pete,
Surely you are not defending Media Matter, are you? They are the worst liars on the left that breath air…
Media Matters has about the same credibility as Hitler did.<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Wow how did I miss this posting of GALACTIC level ignorance. Media Matters just makes you hiveminders blood boil becaue they DO have credibility. They back up everything they post with facts and the LYING around here as usual is done by YOU. You are a liar and a fool and ignorant beyond all belief. Thanks for the free clown show other than that function you are completely worthless. Then again anyone as stupid as you couldnt be anything else.
October 19th, 2008 at 10:38 amEugene,
OK, Here’s your head handed to you line for ignorant line you posted above:
“It doesnt matter WHO owns a network since the AIRWAVES that is the resource being used BY them belong to US.”
The airwaves do not belong to you or to “us” whatever that means. While it’s true that rights to frequency spectrums are auctioned by the government, that is just to regulate the physical aspects of broadcasting to keep “order” as it were so all frequency bands can be used effectively.
“The deal we made with broadcasters is THEY get to make obscene buttloads of money off of our resource and in return they are required to perform a public service.”
Broadcasting is not a “public service”, unless of course you’re speaking of PBS. Hahahahahaha.
“THAT IS A REQUIREMENT that broadcasters KNOW they have an obligation to perform.”
Again, not so much.
“WE democratically get to decide how that obligation is performed…”
Uh, no. You wish! Once again you have it all wrong. You no more get to dictate what’s on the airwaves than I do, dipshit.
“IF the broadcaster doesnt LIKE the obligations WE decide they must perform they can get OUT of the broadcasting bussiness and become drycleaners.”
The problem as always is who the hell is “WE”? You obviously think that just because broadcasters have to follow certain regulations, then they must also have the CONTENT of what they broadcast regulated as well. This just is not true no matter how badly you and the rest of the left want it to be!
Now, go take those meds you so desperately need…
Wow. That wasn’t too hard since most of your so-called argument against free speech was just invective aimed at me.
October 19th, 2008 at 11:10 pmTim Vaculik Says:
Sorry Timmeh. I didnt even know YOU were THAT stupid. Yes the airwaves ABSOLUTLY belong to the people and ARE a public trust this is NOT in dispute nor that there is supposed to be a public service obligation. Obviously, being the moron you are you didnt even look into this you just posted whatever idiocy conformed to your delusional fantasies.
Here is what the FCC itself says about the public service obligation
http://www.fcc.gov/mb/audio/decdoc/public_and_broadcasting.html
This Manual is published by the Federal Communications Commission (the “FCC” or the “Commission”), the federal agency directed by Congress to regulate broadcasting. It provides a brief overview of the FCC’s regulation of broadcast radio and television licensees, describing how the FCC authorizes broadcast stations, the various rules relating to broadcast programming and operations with which stations must comply, and the essential obligation of licensees that their stations serve their local communities. The Manual also outlines how you can become involved in assessing whether your local stations are complying with the FCC’s rules and meeting these service obligations, and what you can do if you believe that they are not.
In exchange for obtaining a valuable license to operate a broadcast station using the public airwaves, each radio and television licensee is required by law to operate its station in the “public interest, convenience and necessity.” This means that it must air programming that is responsive to the needs and problems of its local community of license.
In exchange for obtaining a valuable license to operate a broadcast station using the public airwaves, each radio and television licensee is required by law to operate its station in the “public interest, convenience and necessity.” This means that it must air programming that is responsive to the needs and problems of its local community of license.
As for the public owning the airwaves I appologize for not realizing you are so stupid I would have to take your hand and lead you through a point any reasonably bright ten year old already knows. I will try to stop underestimating the incredible depths of your ignorance. The Supreme Court said this in language so straight forward even an imbecile like you ought to understand it. Read it and weep moron
http://mib.nic.in/informationb/POLICY/supreme.htm
Operative part of the Supreme Court judgement delivered by Justice P.B. Sawant and Justice S. Mohan on 9.2.1995 in the case between the Union of India & Cricket Association of Bengal.
We, therefore, hold as follows:
(i) The airwaves or frequencies are a public property. Their use has to be controlled and regulated by a public authority in the interests of the public and to prevent the invasion of their rights. Since, the electronic media involves the use of the airwaves, this factor creates an in-built restriction on its use as in the case of any other public property.
That ought to be plain enough for someone as ignorant as YOU. As for your WHINING about the invective aimed at you let me translate from wingnut WWWAAAHHHHHHHH stop treating me the way I treat you guys WWWAWAHHHHHHH only us moron conservatives get to use invective WWWWAAAHHHHHHH, so pathetic a six year old girl would be embarassed to snivel as much as you. YOU toss out the mud expect it back you pathetic loaf.
October 20th, 2008 at 1:28 amEugeneDebs,
I have gone back and read the better part of the Supreme Court case you cited as well as other material and I still think you are conflating the true meaning of “ownership of the public airwaves.”
There really isn’t an “ownership” per se, but rather a government mandate to REGULATE the use of the broadcast spectrum to safeguard the public’s interest in the use of the medium.
If you read the original fairness doctrine and look at how it was applied over the years, you can see why it was eventually rescinded by the FCC. It simply became unworkable AND the abuse of it crossed the boundary into unconstitutional abridgement of free speech.
This excerpt from the Supreme Court case is very revealing, “…This is not to say that the First Amendment is irrelevant to public broadcasting. On the contrary, it has a major role to play as the Congress itself recognized in 326, which forbids FCC interference with “the right [390] of free speech by means of radio communication.” Because of the scarcity of radio frequencies, the Government is permitted to put restraints on licensees in favor of others whose views should be expressed on this unique medium. But the people as a whole retain their interest in free speech by radio and their collective right to have the medium function consistently with the ends and purposes of the First Amendment. It is the right of the viewers and listeners, not the right of the broadcasters, which is paramount.”
What I’m arguing is that it is unconstitutional for proponents of a “new” fairness doctrine to limit my rights by insisting that the fairness doctrine demand “equal time” simply on the basis of the content expressed on various shows.
It is clear that the original fairness doctrine does not require this as can be understood just by reading it and looking at the various FCC rules and court cases.
In today’s world of radio, TV, Satellite communications, and the internet, the conditions present when the fairness doctrine was enacted are no longer operative.
Now, once you let the government have some power, it never relinquishes it voluntarily. In this case, I understand and concur that there has to be regulation of the various frequency spectrums as well as limitations on clearly obscene or other types of speech, but there is absolutely NO NEED to regulate “equal time” except in limited cases where political candidates are given airtime.
If you could ever get over your need to run down people who disagree with you, you might make a halfway decent debater.
October 20th, 2008 at 8:24 pmEugene,
OK, Here’s your head handed to you line for ignorant line you posted above:
Timmeh since you STARTED your previous post with this line spare me the snivelling about ME denigrating YOU. If you dont LIKE mud thrown at you stop throwing mud at least quit whinings so piteously that I treat YOU the way you treat me.
Whatever you THINK I am doing the SC decision I cited says DIRECTLY that the public owns the airwaves so I cant understand why you would bother to keep arguing the point. YOU can think what you want the LAW is what the SC says it is and what they said is PLAIN
You state DELUSIONS about the fairness doctrine and it was NEVER attacked as unworkable it was scrapped for partisan free market reasons and no other. IT NEVER said anything about equal time only that anyone attacked had a right to respond and that if a public issue was discussed the other side had a right to be heard. There is no POSSIBLE free speech issue involved since Rush Limbaugh can still lie his butt off as much as he wants he would just have to allow the other side to be heard. NO ONE IS SILENCED just both sides heard. Again why even BOTHER arguing this it was long ago decided the Supreme Court said DIRECTLY that there was no free speech issue involved in the Fairness Doctrine and why in the Red Lion decision
http://supreme.justia.com/us/395/367/
The First Amendment does not protect private censorship by broadcasters who are licensed by the Government to use a scarce resource which is denied to others. Pp. 395 U. S. 390-392.
Red Lion was a UNANIMOUS DECISION by the way. The issue is clear since it is a public resource that is given to some and denied others it is in NO WAY a first amendment issue that those USING that resource be compelled to allow both sides of a public issue to be heard. Also there IS a public service obligation there is NO DISPUTE about this. So if broadcasters dont LIKE those obligations they are free to go into the dry cleaning bussiness and leave the broadcasting to those who are willing to abide BY those obligations.
October 23rd, 2008 at 1:05 amBedava Porno izle
Liseli Bakire
April 1st, 2009 at 5:20 am