Fox’s Williams: There’s no debate that Fox News is ‘conservative audience-oriented programming.’
Fox’s Williams: There’s no debate that Fox News is ‘conservative audience-oriented programming.’
Last Sunday on CNN, White House communications director Anita Dunn defended her past comment that Fox News is “opinion journalism masquerading as news.” “The reality of it is that Fox News often operates as either the research arm or the communications arm of the Republican Party,” she told CNN’s Howie Kurtz, adding, “it really is more of a wing of the Republican Party.” Many of Fox News’ hosts spent most of the day yesterday defending against Dunn’s remarks. But during the Special Report All-Star panel last night, Fox News contributor Juan Williams appeared to be the only one to recognize the reality:
WILLIAMS: Well, the case that the White House is making is largely that some of the personality driven shows on Fox go over the top, that they are trying to say that the president wasn’t born in the country or that the president is a racist or he’s socialist or a communist. [...] Now what they have lost in this is, first of all, a lot of those programs, people know exactly what to expect when you’re watching prime time Fox. We’re a conservative audience-oriented programming. And I don’t think anybody is going to debate that.
Watch it:
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
More precisely, it is conservative audience-oriented programming that claims to be fair and balanced. Which of the two claims is a lie?
October 13th, 2009 at 2:34 pmLater on FAUX, Glenn Beck will insert needles into a Juan Williams “Voodoo doll”. 9 in the head and 12 in the crotch.
October 13th, 2009 at 2:34 pmShorter Williams: “I don’t really care if FAUX lies about their motives as long as the checks clear”.
October 13th, 2009 at 2:36 pmi see they’ve finally given up that “fair and balanced” charade
October 13th, 2009 at 2:38 pmJuan Williams must be feeling lonely. With Alan Colmes gone, he’s the network’s only “liberal”.
And he’ll remain that way.
Huh. I’m kind of surprised Shep hasn’t commented on the issue…though if he did, Fox would probably sever his multi-million dollar contract.
October 13th, 2009 at 2:38 pmSo the takeover of NPR by Fox continues. First Bush appoints leaders of the Republic National Committee to head public broadcasting, now Mara Liason and Juan Williams continue to work for NPR while simultaneously spewing for Fox.
Call your local NPR station and demand it return to the old objectivity of public broadcasting. Frankly I’m getting tired of going to the BBC to get rational news on America.
October 13th, 2009 at 2:39 pmExcuse me, but what exactly have these right-wing clowns ever “conserved?” The environment? Naahh… GOP conserves stupidity, greed, imperialism, arrogance and they have all to themselves a corner on the market of “No.”
Heck of a job, Goopers, you’ll probably been finishing in 3rd or 4th place in the 2010 Congressional Elections, behind some new Green and Socialist Parties.
October 13th, 2009 at 2:40 pmLater, Williams clarified his remarks by saying that Faux News appealed to the ignorant element in America. “Someone has to serve the great unwashed and uneducated,” he said.
October 13th, 2009 at 2:41 pmThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
Fox: made by morons FOR morons. It’s that simple.
October 13th, 2009 at 2:44 pmThere is something that has been lost in the current kerfuffle about the White House supposedly “attacking” FoxSnooze. First of all, what the White House spokesperson did was merely acknowledge the obvious. Of course, FoxSnooze is a right-wing propaganda machine.
Their defense, however, is wrong on two counts. First, they say that they clearly separate their news from their opinion programs. Not so. Their opinion mongers “talk” news all the time as a springboard for their wacked out tirades against the Obama administration. Their supposed news-heads (with the exception of Sheperd Smith) communicate their opinions very clearly with their smirks, snide comments and the questions they choose to ask guests.
The second thing seldom talked about, though, is that there is a whole third content category that is missing from FoxSnooze and they don’t even identify it when they try to defend themselves. That category is “analysis”. FoxSnooze doesn’t need that because all editorial decisions and scripts are governed by the ideology imposed by Roger and Rupert.
October 13th, 2009 at 2:46 pmMr. Puke: at least MSNBC has Morning Joe and his band of merry misfits to temper the evening left-leaning smorgasboard. Name one program on Faux Snooze that is hosted and paneled entirely by non-conservative commentators.
Yeah, that’s what I thought. Now go back to your poopy sandbox and let us adults continue with our conversation.
October 13th, 2009 at 2:46 pm9, Fair and Balanced. We report, you decide. Wake up.
October 13th, 2009 at 2:47 pm“So what. MSNBC is a lefty agenda media outlet”…..
October 13th, 2009 at 2:48 pmso sayteh the tard to justify faux “news” being the “official opposition to the obama administration” like we’re living in some goddamn third world country.
Mr.Duke says:
——————————————————————————–
October 13th, 2009 at 2:41 pm
Yeah , because Joe Stupidborough , Andrea Mitchell , Norah O’Donnell , Chuck Todd , and Chris Matthews certainly are perfect examples of “lefties” , aren’t they , Mr D0uche ?
October 13th, 2009 at 2:49 pmOval12345678 aka James K. Sayre says:
Excuse me, but what exactly have these right-wing clowns ever “conserved?”
Intellectualism? Neutrality? Open mindedness?
October 13th, 2009 at 2:49 pm” . . opinion journalism masquerading as news.”
You betcha [wink, wink]
Hey, whadda ’bout the audience? Chickenhawks who INSULT and LIE to them every day and they lap it up . .
faux audience = sick puppies
October 13th, 2009 at 2:50 pm‘conservative audience-oriented programming.’
I think that’s called putting lipstick on a pig.
October 13th, 2009 at 2:51 pmFox News-the station that tells you what your opinion should be because you are too dumb to figure it out for yourself.
October 13th, 2009 at 2:52 pmthe majority of faux viewers can’t survive without the oxygen tubes running up their nose, let alone decide what’s “fair and balanced”
October 13th, 2009 at 2:53 pm“…people know exactly what to expect when you’re watching prime time Fox.”
Time to go slop the hogs.
October 13th, 2009 at 2:55 pmJuan Williams sold his soul to the highest bidder long ago, and really ought to shut the f uck up.
October 13th, 2009 at 2:55 pmA Rabid Rightie called into a left leaning radio show I was listening to yesterday. He adamantly claimed Fox had higher ratings than all cable & network shows. COMBINED.
He went on to claim Fox was the only channel that accurately reports the news.
When asked what they did different than others, he explained that, unlike other shows, Fox ‘digs down to the truth’ and does superb, in-depth analysis of today’s topics. He added that they’re not biased; just take a look around you & see what the Democrats have done to our great Country.
They may be less than 20% of Americans, but these fools actually believe what they hear on Fox. Disturbing, yet amazing.
October 13th, 2009 at 2:58 pm“‘conservative audience-oriented programming.”
hell, rerunning old episodes of “Hee-Haw” would do just as well.
October 13th, 2009 at 3:00 pmp.s.
October 13th, 2009 at 3:00 pmSomeone needs to fix the
Oops, (/align)
October 13th, 2009 at 3:01 pm.
FOXPRAVDA is NOT a News Network…
… FOXPRAVDA is a Political Station!
.
October 13th, 2009 at 3:02 pmA real journalist hides his or her political feelings, never gives you a clue.
Then you agree that there are no ‘real journalists’ at FOX?
Awesome…
October 13th, 2009 at 3:02 pmThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
I wonder if Pew Research Center would categorize the report of a train wreck as “negative” or not.
October 13th, 2009 at 3:07 pmI call the network Fuchs Noose. They fuch their viewers over with their lies and conspiracy theories, then slip a noose around their necks, cutting off all blood flow to the head, leaving them in a perpetual state of ignorance.
October 13th, 2009 at 3:07 pmflag@whitehouse.gov says:
“…in the last six weeks of the campaign…”
Try to keep up on current events, please.
October 13th, 2009 at 3:08 pmPoor Mr. Duke doesn’t know that Charles Krauthammer already spilled the beans, when he bragged about how Fox News had created an “alternate reality” to propagandize right-wing zombies, or that Fox went to court to win the right to lie and still leagally call it “news”.
Now, poor Mr. Duke will read this and he still wil not know anything about it, because this information cannot be processed by the right side of what passes for his brain.
October 13th, 2009 at 3:10 pmflag@whitehouse.gov says
Well you quoted them, I don’t believe it and I doubt if anyone else here does either. Maybe you could provide a link that show what you say at pew. I don’t find any such study.
October 13th, 2009 at 3:10 pmEnnuiDivine says:
Juan Williams must be feeling lonely. With Alan Colmes gone, he’s the network’s only “liberal”.
October 13th, 2009 at 3:11 pm—-
Colmes isn’t gone; he’s still a contributor. FNC also has Bob Beckle, Geraldo Rivera as well as many other liberal guests that are continually on the shows and news.
Did TP not use enough protection before our field trip to the GOP site?
Our site alignment is as distorted as their thinking.
It’s kind of fun to type down hill, though.
WWWHHHHEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!
October 13th, 2009 at 3:12 pmaksarben60 in the words of one of our newest trolls.
you funny
October 13th, 2009 at 3:13 pmThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
HA! Cluster-Fox IS Pravda..just a little re-packaging..Poof!!!
October 13th, 2009 at 3:14 pmflag@whitehouse.gov, was there something positive to report about the McCain/Palin campaign? If so, I must have blinked and missed it.
October 13th, 2009 at 3:15 pmBeckle is a center-left political commentator ; no way in hell is he a “liberal”.
As for your assertion of Geraldo , I have no idea where you pulled that utter nonsense from ; nor do I really want to know…….
October 13th, 2009 at 3:16 pmMost or all news lacks objectivity. Fox obviously leans right. Other MSM lean left.
That view is subjective based on the judgement of where the observer believes the center in politics is.
October 13th, 2009 at 3:16 pmWhy, because I don’t buy into your insane revelation that fox has liberals on it?
You ignorant
October 13th, 2009 at 3:16 pmYou intolerant.
How so?
October 13th, 2009 at 3:17 pmThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
This comment has been voted down. Click to read.
backup says:
——————————————————————————–
Most or all news lacks objectivity. Fox obviously leans right. Other MSM lean left.
That view is subjective based on the judgement of where the observer believes the center in politics is.
October 13th, 2009 at 3:16 pm
Especially when that assessment is made by someone so far to the right (like yourself) , who believes anyone BARELY left of Stalin , Hitler and Genghis Khan , is a “liberal”…..
October 13th, 2009 at 3:18 pmMCMetal, backup and aksarben60 probably think stossel is a leftie.
October 13th, 2009 at 3:18 pmshoeless says:
Poor Mr. Duke doesn’t know that Charles Krauthammer already spilled the beans, when he bragged about how Fox News had created an “alternate reality” to propagandize right-wing zombies, or that Fox went to court to win the right to lie and still leagally call it “news”.
Now, poor Mr. Duke will read this and he still wil not know anything about it, because this information cannot be processed by the right side of what passes for his brain.
and MSNBC doesn’t have a lefty agenda. LMAO.
October 13th, 2009 at 3:19 pmSorry, there is no news that leans left the way fox leans right. None. And to pretend, even pretend that there is is dishonest.
October 13th, 2009 at 3:20 pmbelaccifer lacca says:
You intolerant.
How so?
October 13th, 2009 at 3:20 pm—
I don’t know about you because I’m not familiar with your comments and this doesn’t apply to every single “progressive” out there, but it is very apparent this party of tolerance isn’t very tolerant of other views. Tolerance should not be limited to those with whom you agree.
I watched a Hannity interview with Michael Moore last week. It was very civil.
I actually thought Moore came out of the interview as more reasonable.
I think the administration or progressives miss an opportunity when they boycott Fox.
Like it or not, there are millions of Fox viewers. It seems progressives have more to gain by ensuring their voices are getting to those people, rather than letting the conservative voices monopolize the Fox message.
October 13th, 2009 at 3:21 pmThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
Mr.Duke says:
——————————————————————————–
October 13th, 2009 at 3:19 pm
A “lefty agenda” while having various centrist/right wing talking head morons on their network ?
Wow …….You are a completely dishonest imbecile.
October 13th, 2009 at 3:22 pmFred. I believe that Fox leans farther right than other MSM lean left. I imagine that is based on what I believe the center to be.
October 13th, 2009 at 3:22 pmThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
well, in the words of ms duke, I’m lmao watching the righties try to defend the absolute propaganda machine that fox is by comparing fox to any other media.
It’s laughable and cannot be taken seriously. If you want to have a conversation, you have to accept obvious facts.
October 13th, 2009 at 3:23 pmI can see on the beginning of this clip that Borg leader
October 13th, 2009 at 3:23 pmDr. Charles Krauthammer is still ochestrating the insanity at fuxnooz.
Fox News leans right? LEANS?
October 13th, 2009 at 3:23 pmbackup says:
Fred. I believe that Fox leans farther right than other MSM lean left. I imagine that is based on what I believe the center to be.
October 13th, 2009 at 3:23 pm—-
We disagree about the first part of your statement but that is due to the second part of your statement which is right on the money. Well said.
See, I gave poor Mr. Duke the information that Fox has created an alternate reality to fool him, and that they fought for, and won the right to lie to him. But, that had no effect upon him. He could not understand what I was saying.
October 13th, 2009 at 3:24 pmaksarben60 says:
You’re so full of lies and distorions that you fit perfectly into the gop mold. The truth is irrelivant to you.
You are a fool and a tool for your masters.
October 13th, 2009 at 3:25 pmbackup says:
——————————————————————————–
October 13th, 2009 at 3:21 pm
You sound apologetic , and surprised at the same time , that Michael Moore is “reasonable” ? You do understand you’re (laughably) comparing him with She-Yawn Insanity ; one of the most dishonest , unintelligent and effeminate losers ever to (unfortunately) appear on TV , don’t you ?
October 13th, 2009 at 3:25 pmI think Stossel is libertarian.
October 13th, 2009 at 3:26 pmThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
aksarben60 says:
——————————————————————————–
Nope. I don’t think Stossel is a leftie; I just think he’s a responsible journalist.
October 13th, 2009 at 3:23 pm
He’s a GOP tool (apparently like your pathetic self) ; that makes it absolutely IMPOSSIBLE for Stossel to be either responsible or a journalist……
October 13th, 2009 at 3:27 pmWho gives a flying fart what you think. You had your chance and you excuded the left from the table and you failed and now you want to give us your advice. Fu ck off.
October 13th, 2009 at 3:27 pmbackup says:
I think Stossel is libertarian.
October 13th, 2009 at 3:28 pm—
You may be right; I’m not that familiar with his political views.
backup says:
——————————————————————————–
I think Stossel is libertarian.
October 13th, 2009 at 3:26 pm
“Thinking” ; not exactly your strong suit (obviously)……
October 13th, 2009 at 3:29 pmThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
These fools can’t understand that there is a big difference between “leaning” one way or the other, and admittedly basing an entire network on lies, while calling it “news”.
October 13th, 2009 at 3:30 pmThe issue should not be where they lean or by how much. Conservatives have the right to watch something they want to watch.
The issue is truth in news and informing the public. Studies and polls consistently show that Fox News viewers are misinformed on a variety of issues.
October 13th, 2009 at 3:30 pmHere’s your responsible journalist at work. You should be so proud. If he’s your example of excellence then your bar is just too low.
stossel asking probing questions
October 13th, 2009 at 3:31 pmMCMetal. Moore had guts to go on Fox (and he is promoting the movie).
It’s more difficult to make you case in the opposition camp.
Acknowledging Moore came off as more reasonable is saying a lot when you consider Moore wasn’t simply preaching to the choir at MSNBC. He was making his case in to the Fox audience where Hannity had more control of the message.
That’s significant.
October 13th, 2009 at 3:31 pmaksarben60 says:
——————————————————————————–
backup says:
I think Stossel is libertarian.
—
You may be right; I’m not that familiar with his political views.
October 13th, 2009 at 3:28 pm
If you readily admit you know nothing about Stossel’s political beliefs (amongst a whole host of other topics , apparently) , how in the hell can you claim to know that he’s a “responsible journalist” , you dishonest GOP leg humping tool ?
October 13th, 2009 at 3:32 pmThis whole MSNBC is far-left silliness seems to stem from the network’s willingness to give airtime to two people: Olbermann and Maddow. That and the usual Right Wing belief that any news not specifically skewed to the Right is “liberal.”
The “MSM is liberal” defies simple logic, given that every single major news outlet is part of a huge corporation, and corporations have absolutely no reason to provide a platform for anti-corporate information. Most, in fact, simply want to keep a nice big audience happy and entertained, so that the audience is more open to commercial messages. Disgruntled and unhappy consumers just don’t want to consume.
October 13th, 2009 at 3:34 pmFaux gets its highest ratings from the nursing home day room TV sets. Of course, no one is watching, but the day room COULD hold up to 65 seniors.
October 13th, 2009 at 3:34 pmshoeless says:
These fools can’t understand that there is a big difference between “leaning” one way or the other, and admittedly basing an entire network on lies, while calling it “news”.
October 13th, 2009 at 3:35 pm—
Sucks that MSNBC does that, huh?
backup says:
——————————————————————————–
MCMetal. Moore had guts to go on Fox (and he is promoting the movie).
It’s more difficult to make you case in the opposition camp.
Acknowledging Moore came off as more reasonable is saying a lot when you consider Moore wasn’t simply preaching to the choir at MSNBC. He was making his case in to the Fox audience where Hannity had more control of the message.
That’s significant.
October 13th, 2009 at 3:31 pm
The above typifies your viewpoint/ideals/beliefs (which are shared by the rest of your retarded GOP backing brethren).
You and your ilk are not interested in being presented with FACTS/PROOF and/or listening to both sides of any given topic/argument ; it’s merely ALL ABOUT THE MESSAGE , and being “in control”……
Whatever happened to “right and wrong” ?
October 13th, 2009 at 3:35 pmThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
Conservative-oriented? Namby pamby bull-shit.
You’re not watching a branch of the f uckin PBS channel, you’re watching some HARDCORE CONSERVATIVE shit; a channel that’s real food for real guys (ok, armchair warriors); the kinda blood-drinking, WWIV-pimping, Bush (god)- bottin’, CEO cigar chomping, stomp-on-middle-class-cause-they’re roaches kinda f uckin channel.
If you can’t take the heat, quickly grab a bag of Cheetos, get out of the kitchen, and turn on America’s anti-pro-patriotic channel.
October 13th, 2009 at 3:37 pmaksarben60 says:
——————————————————————————–
October 13th, 2009 at 3:35 pm
Sucks even more that what you posted is completely untrue , and that FAUX Comedy Channel is the most egregious offender , tool…..
October 13th, 2009 at 3:38 pmMCMetal. From Stossel’s wikipedia:
Stossel doesn’t sound like a strict conservative.
October 13th, 2009 at 3:38 pmaksarben60, try to process this. Fox News went to court and won the right to lie to you and call it “news”. No other network did that. One of the leading “journalists” for Fox bragged about the network creating an “alternate reality” to fool you. No other network did that.
Can you understand what I am trying to tell you?
October 13th, 2009 at 3:40 pmaksarben60 says:
——————————————————————————–
MCMetal says:
If you readily admit you know nothing about Stossel’s political beliefs (amongst a whole host of other topics , apparently) , how in the hell can you claim to know that he’s a “responsible journalist” , you dishonest GOP leg humping tool ?
—-
You idiot! You really are that stupid, aren’t you? You “progressive” imbicile have absolutely no FU CKING clue what it means to be an impartial, responsible journalist.
October 13th, 2009 at 3:37 pm
And you , an uneducated , imbecilic , nut hugging GOP backing stooge , do understand ?
Slugs like yourself couldn’t even comprehend that Bible Spice Palin is nothing more than a moronic and dishonest rube , who has NO BUSINESS in ANY elected office , much less one of the highest offices in the land……
You would know an “impartial, responsible journalist” , if Walter Cronkite’s corpse were shoved up your stinky , imbecilic , redneck ass , dummy…..
October 13th, 2009 at 3:42 pmThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
You just don’t get it do you? You need to name one success story for conservatives before you go any further.
Just one. And freedom aint an answer. I mean a real program that worked and is still successful. Just one.
Then and only then will you understand why we don’t request input from you and yet you still think you know what’s what!
Astounding bravado and nothing more. You were wrong about everything and your idiology just got a thourough chance but it failed every test.
You failed and America rejected you. You get to sit on the sidelines while we make history and you just report.
October 13th, 2009 at 3:43 pmbackup says:
——————————————————————————–
October 13th, 2009 at 3:38 pm
Please direct everyone to the post where I EVER claimed Stossel is a “strict conservative” ……..
I NEVER DID ; he is , however , a GOP backing , moronic stooge…..And that’s a fact.
October 13th, 2009 at 3:44 pmThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
Ahem, ak.
I reprogrammed the floor bots NOT to reflexively yell “MSNBC!” when complaints are aired about Fox. Simple reason is, we stand in a league of our own. You can’t compare our blood and profits channel to another news channel because it isn’t a news channel. It’s a dumping ground for our beloved Bush hawks trying to gloss over their legacy and batshit media figures to consolidate onto one ground.
Not to mention, it doesn’t help that much of everything is to the left of Fox News; we don’t have to single out MSNBC as “librul.”
October 13th, 2009 at 3:45 pmMCMetal.
Is war right or wrong? Is stealing right or wrong? Is abortion right or wrong? Is failing to follow orders right or wrong? Is conspiring to overthrow the government right or wrong? Is religion right or wrong? Is capitalism right or wrong? Was the bombing of Japan at the end of WWII right or wrong?
Etc.
I don’t see how you’re confident that there is objective right and wrong.
October 13th, 2009 at 3:45 pmbackup, is it right or wrong to lie and call it “news”?
October 13th, 2009 at 3:48 pmbackup says:
——————————————————————————–
October 13th, 2009 at 3:45 pm
Please post the time(s) She-Yawn Insanity has ever been “right” about anything , and then consider the foolishness , vapidity and lack of depth throughout your entire post………
October 13th, 2009 at 3:49 pmshoeless says:
backup, is it right or wrong to lie and call it “news”?
October 13th, 2009 at 3:49 pm—
When do they lie on the news?
where do you draw the line between partisan exaggeration and lying?
October 13th, 2009 at 3:49 pm~sigh~ They went to court to win the right to lie and legally call it news.
October 13th, 2009 at 3:51 pmThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
aksarben60 says:
——————————————————————————–
October 13th, 2009 at 3:45 pm
Are you (laughably) attempting to claim the Cancervative/GOP party , is the ultimate in honesty , inclusion ,intelligence , thoughtfulness , transparency and ideas ?
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Shut up , you ignorant rube assclown………
October 13th, 2009 at 3:51 pmThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
Yes, we all understand that you cannot tell the difference between the truth and a lie. That is the secret to Fox’s success.
October 13th, 2009 at 3:53 pmbackup says:
——————————————————————————–
where do you draw the line between partisan exaggeration and lying?
October 13th, 2009 at 3:49 pm
By comparing what is stated , to the ACTUAL FACTS ; something you GOP backers deem as inconsequential/unnecessary ……..
October 13th, 2009 at 3:53 pmMCMetal says:
Are you (laughably) attempting to claim the Cancervative/GOP party , is the ultimate in honesty , inclusion ,intelligence , thoughtfulness , transparency and ideas ?
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
October 13th, 2009 at 3:53 pm—–
Negatory, good buddy. I think all politicians are pretty much lying, self-serving scum.
backup says:
where do you draw the line between partisan exaggeration and lying?
Why draw a line? Neither has any place in journalism.
October 13th, 2009 at 3:54 pmaksarben60 says:
——————————————————————————–
shoeless says:
~sigh~ They went to court to win the right to lie and legally call it news.
—-
I suppose you making things up is well tolerated in your circle.
October 13th, 2009 at 3:52 pm
They do not claim to be a News organization/channel either , dipshit ……….
October 13th, 2009 at 3:54 pmaksarben60 says:
——————————————————————————–
MCMetal says:
Are you (laughably) attempting to claim the Cancervative/GOP party , is the ultimate in honesty , inclusion ,intelligence , thoughtfulness , transparency and ideas ?
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
—–
Negatory, good buddy. I think all politicians are pretty much lying, self-serving scum.
October 13th, 2009 at 3:53 pm
And that is readily apparent , what with your support/adoration of FAUX Comedy Channel and the GOP (which are the same thing , anyway)………
Are you insane or retarded ?
Perhaps both ……..
October 13th, 2009 at 3:56 pmWhen do they lie on the news?
Fox news argued that they had a first amendment right to broadcast stories they knew to be false, askarben.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane_Akre
October 13th, 2009 at 3:57 pmThe Republicans have been complaining about the “liberal” media since Nixon. The song is getting old. Likewise, tax cuts and smaller government is another old song. They need to find a new chants.
October 13th, 2009 at 3:57 pmHe can’t understand what you are saying.
October 13th, 2009 at 4:01 pmThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
This comment has been voted down. Click to read.
Fox’s Williams: There’s no debate that Fox News is ‘ignorant, conservative bigoted audience-oriented programming”
Yeah, we already knew that.
October 13th, 2009 at 4:03 pmaksarben: “When do they lie on the news?”
Again, numerous studies and polls consistently show that Fox News viewers are not only misinformed on a variety of issues but also under-informed. The last study I saw showed that Fox viewers were twice as likely as the general public to believe Saddam Hussein was in on the planning and execution of the 9-11 attack. Now, that is simply not true and the fact that a decent percentage of Americans THINKS it’s true is entirely on FOX.
Did they lie? I don’t know. I don’t watch Fox. But I do know what Fox viewers ended up believing.
October 13th, 2009 at 4:03 pmTo the Trolls:
The neocon war profiteers of the GOP designed fox to manipulate public opinion with “1984″ inspired intentions.
I can understand how older people cannot differentiate fox from real news. “Yellow journalism” used to be quickly denounced by other existing news sources with integrity. Bush’s 9/11 policies crippled the First Amendment long enough for fox to entrench itself into the viewing habits of the fearful and previously politically uninformed.
I don’t understand how anyone that has access to the internet and blogs cannot see the discrepancies in what they hear on fox and the real world.
October 13th, 2009 at 4:03 pmResearch the talking heads on this network
(rightwing site biographies don’t count)
and you may question their honesty.
I research everyone, and examine their motives and past history.
But then, liberals make lousy cult member.
Don’t tell me you just used Wikipedia to back up your arguement. Please. WHAT stories are false???
Well, if you’d looked at the Wikipedia page you would have seen this…
The decision is New World Communs. of Tampa, Inc. v. Akre and is no longer available on-line, otherwise I would have linked directly to the decision… but Wiki does a good job of encapsulating the facts and argument.
Care to comment?
October 13th, 2009 at 4:05 pmaksarben60 says:
——————————————————————————–
shoeless says:
He can’t understand what you are saying.
—-
Just so you know for future name calling, I’m a she, not a he. I just want to be fairly condemned.
October 13th, 2009 at 4:03 pm
You’re a disgrace to women everywhere…..You should be ashamed of yourself , as I am certain your parents are of you….
October 13th, 2009 at 4:06 pmIn 1997, they were fired from the station after refusing to knowingly include false information in their report concerning the Monsanto Company’s production of RBGH, a drug designed to make cows produce more milk.
In case you still missed the point, askarben.
October 13th, 2009 at 4:07 pmaksarben?
Comment?
That’s when the ‘knowingly lie on the news.’
When the reality runs counter to Fox’s perceived interests…
October 13th, 2009 at 4:10 pmokie dokie says:
I can understand how older people cannot differentiate fox from real news. “Yellow journalism” used to be quickly denounced by other existing news sources with integrity. Bush’s 9/11 policies crippled the First Amendment long enough for fox to entrench itself into the viewing habits of the fearful and previously politically uninformed.
As an “older person”, I not only find this offensive but completely illogical. “Older people” actually have experience with “real news,” while “younger people” have been exposed to crap like Fox News long enough to think it’s real and have nothing to judge it against, especially considering that most American news programming is crap.
October 13th, 2009 at 4:12 pmbelaccifer lacca says:
Don’t tell me you just used Wikipedia to back up your arguement. Please. WHAT stories are false???
Well, if you’d looked at the Wikipedia page you would have seen this…
October 13th, 2009 at 4:13 pm—-
I did look at the page only to notice “Source Watch” as a reference. Source Watch is a project of Center for Media and Democracy. One of the major funders is the Tides foundation, a well known liberal group. One of the board members used to be our favorite self-avowed commie, Van Jones. That’s why I don’t trust it.
MCMetal says:
You’re a disgrace to women everywhere…..You should be ashamed of yourself , as I am certain your parents are of you….
October 13th, 2009 at 4:14 pm—
See…intolerance. So foolish, you are.
Juan Williams can expect his final paycheck from FAUX NEWS in . . . approximately 2 weeks.
October 13th, 2009 at 4:14 pmThat’s why I don’t trust it.
Fine… what is WTVT’s (and by extension- Fox’s, since they are a wholly owned and operated subsidiary of Fox News Corp.) argument if not that they are allowed to knowingly lie?
Please help me understand.
October 13th, 2009 at 4:15 pmaksarben60 says:
——————————————————————————–
MCMetal says:
You’re a disgrace to women everywhere…..You should be ashamed of yourself , as I am certain your parents are of you….
—
See…intolerance. So foolish, you are.
October 13th, 2009 at 4:14 pm
Ah yes , I see ; I need to be more tolerant , like this :
——————————————————-
90.aksarben60 says:
——————————————————————————–
MCMetal
You sir, are an intolerant idiot who has no thought processing neurons other than those which have been taken over by the lies and disengeniousness of your “progressive”, elitist, condescending party. You are a liberal follower who is so tied to their party by the balls that you wouldn’t know what to do if the truth smacked you on the ass.
October 13th, 2009 at 3:45 pm
——————————————————————————–
Good call , you moronic hypocrite …….
October 13th, 2009 at 4:18 pmThe Monsanto case is illuminating, but you’re not going to see any penetrating muckraking on General Electric on NBC or MSNBC either. These things are directly related to profits.
I’m more concerned with the fact that Fox viewers come away with political opinions based on distorted presumptions they’ve somehow obtained watching Fox News. If, for example, you still believe that Saddam Hussein possessed the ability to attack us with WMD’s, you obviously have a different set of criteria with which to judge the last administration.
October 13th, 2009 at 4:20 pmI am still waiting on Okie Dokie’s response on his agist views.
October 13th, 2009 at 4:21 pmbelaccifer lacca says:
That’s why I don’t trust it.
Fine… what is WTVT’s (and by extension- Fox’s, since they are a wholly owned and operated subsidiary of Fox News Corp.) argument if not that they are allowed to knowingly lie?
Please help me understand.
October 13th, 2009 at 4:21 pm—
I don’t know what WTVT has done. Sorry.
MCMetal says:
October 13th, 2009 at 4:22 pmGood call , you moronic hypocrite …….
—-
Thanks, man!!! Takes one to know one!
aksarban: “That’s why I don’t trust it.”
What’s not to trust? We’re talking about a fact, not an opinion. There was a whistleblowing suit; it was decided. What’s your beef with that information?
October 13th, 2009 at 4:23 pmI don’t know what WTVT has done. Sorry.
They pressured Jane and Steve Aker to include false information that painted Monsanto in a better light in a report on RBGH… and then argued that the FCC’s policy against ‘intentional falsification of news’ was just a policy and did not supersede their First Amendment right to broadcast known falsehoods.
Wow. That’s what you’re defending?
October 13th, 2009 at 4:24 pmgummitch. Maybe I’m older too. Or maybe I was just a news dweeb that started watching as a pre teen.
Journalists used to at least attempt to appear objective.
Fox is obviously not objective. They have a partisan bent to sell.
But, Fox isn’t the only one. Most of the MSM has given up even the pretense of objectivity and basically taken biased sides.
It looks more like a scramble for market share than any real attempt at objective accounting of events.
October 13th, 2009 at 4:25 pmhttp://www.rcfp.org/news/2003/0219newwor.html
October 13th, 2009 at 4:28 pm
aksarben60 says:
I did look at the page only to notice “Source Watch” as a reference. Source Watch is a project of Center for Media and Democracy. One of the major funders is the Tides foundation, a well known liberal group. One of the board members used to be our favorite self-avowed commie, Van Jones. That’s why I don’t trust it.
Ah patsy, you conservative extremists always have a reason for not trusting ‘facts’ you don’t want to believe! ;)
October 13th, 2009 at 4:28 pmaksarben60 says:
MCMetal says:
Good call , you moronic hypocrite …….
—-
Thanks, man!!! Takes one to know one!
So you admit you’re one? Thanks! ;)
October 13th, 2009 at 4:30 pmbelaccifer lacca says:
I don’t know what WTVT has done. Sorry.
They pressured Jane and Steve Aker to include false information that painted Monsanto in a better light in a report on RBGH… and then argued that the FCC’s policy against ‘intentional falsification of news’ was just a policy and did not supersede their First Amendment right to broadcast known falsehoods.
—-
YOu’re right. I wasn’t aware of this case. I will look into it more. I will concede that in this one case, I may be wrong. (bash me all you want)
However, I do know that Fox wouldn’t be alone in this, if in fact this case happens to be true, which I will make up my own mind about. MSNBC lies all the time and they get away with it as well and many liberals and progressives believe everything they say as well. I will concede that in this one case, I may be wrong.
I will look into this case and get back to you on what I think after I’ve formed my own opinion.
October 13th, 2009 at 4:30 pmOh, I found it aksarben, you tell me how this isn’t a ‘first amendment right’ to knowingly falsify news… thanks.
http://docs.google.com/gview?a=v&q=cache:oqjOFg7JGdIJ:www.2dca.org/opinion/February%252014,%25202003/2D01-529.pdf+New+World+Communs.+of+Tampa,+Inc.+v.+Akre&hl=en&gl=us&sig=AFQjCNHWv7IP3Ihf6YD1RrYAnfs5aZWqQQ
October 13th, 2009 at 4:30 pmHowever, I do know that Fox wouldn’t be alone in this
And yet Fox is the only company I know of that has made this argument… weird.
October 13th, 2009 at 4:31 pmjust the bleepn facts says:
Thanks, man!!! Takes one to know one!
So you admit you’re one? Thanks! ;)
October 13th, 2009 at 4:32 pm—
Yeah, actually on this one, I got called out. I was just as closed minded as he was.
aksarben: “MSNBC lies all the time and they get away with it as well and many liberals and progressives believe everything they say as well.”
You know. You may be right. I believe just about everything Joe Scarborough and Pat Buchanan says. And Chris Matthews was very believable all through ‘99 and ‘00 as he worked hard to convince as many as possible that Al Gore was a big creep and GW Bush was a “guy you’d like to have a beer with.”
October 13th, 2009 at 4:35 pmFred says:
You just don’t get it do you? You need to name one success story for conservatives before you go any further.
Just one. And freedom aint an answer. I mean a real program that worked and is still successful. Just one.
Then and only then will you understand why we don’t request input from you and yet you still think you know what’s what!
Let’s start with the first Republican President: Abraham Lincoln successfully led his country through its greatest internal crisis, the American Civil War, preserving the Union and ending slavery.
Ronald Reagan brought down Communist Russia and freed 100’s of millions of people. How about those two for starters?
October 13th, 2009 at 4:36 pmaksarben60 says:
——————————————————————————–
just the bleepn facts says:
Thanks, man!!! Takes one to know one!
So you admit you’re one? Thanks! ;)
—
Yeah, actually on this one, I got called out. I was just as closed minded as he was.
October 13th, 2009 at 4:32 pm
Unfortunately for you , you’re a helluva’ lot more gullible and way more stupid , too………
October 13th, 2009 at 4:36 pmaksarben60 says:
However, I do know that Fox wouldn’t be alone in this, if in fact this case happens to be true, which I will make up my own mind about. MSNBC lies all the time and they get away with it as well and many liberals and progressives believe everything they say as well. I will concede that in this one case, I may be wrong.
Aren’t you the one who wanted specifics about FN’s lies? How about you meet the same standard?
What are the MSNBC lies?
October 13th, 2009 at 4:36 pmbelaccifer lacca. I looked at the Jane Akre info.
It looks like to me that Fox lawyers used the argument to avoid paying the $425,000 settlement twelve years ago.
Isn’t that different than the suggestion that the network sued for the right to lie?
Additionally, because lawyers used the argument, does that mean the only information the network generates is lies?
It would be a little like me highlighting something like Al Sharpton’s misstep with the Tawana Brawley controversy and using that to dismiss anything he has said since.
Fox hasn’t sued for the right to lie. They have used the argument that their offense was not governed by a law to get out of paying a settlement.
October 13th, 2009 at 4:37 pmNinerFan says:
You know. You may be right. I believe just about everything Joe Scarborough and Pat Buchanan says. And Chris Matthews was very believable all through ‘99 and ‘00 as he worked hard to convince as many as possible that Al Gore was a big creep and GW Bush was a “guy you’d like to have a beer with.”
October 13th, 2009 at 4:37 pm—-
What about the guy (the African American) who carried that gun to a town hall and MSNBC purposely zoomed in on the gun, neglecting to show that he was black, therefore, leading people to think he was a white man. Or the black man who was attacked by SEIU members for selling “Don’t tread on me” paraphanalia and MSNBC again neglected to report that he was black.
Again, it shouldn’t be surprising when corporate-owned “news” outlets don’t report news that may hurt corporate profits.
I’m more concerned with the fact that a larger percentage of Fox viewers think Democrats want to kill their grandmother. I would ask any Fox News defender why they think that is.
October 13th, 2009 at 4:38 pmflag@whitehouse.gov says:
——————————————————————————–
October 13th, 2009 at 4:36 pm
Lincoln was a conservative ?
Yeah , keep telling yourself that , you colossal moron ; as for Ronnie Retard , he sucked ass.
Stop repeating that dishonest myth that Alzheimer’s boy brought about the destruction of the Soviet Union ; that is a (typically) bullshit , GOP concocted story…..
October 13th, 2009 at 4:39 pmflag@whitehouse.gov says:
Fred says:
You just don’t get it do you? You need to name one success story for conservatives before you go any further.
Just one. And freedom aint an answer. I mean a real program that worked and is still successful. Just one.
Then and only then will you understand why we don’t request input from you and yet you still think you know what’s what!
Let’s start with the first Republican President: Abraham Lincoln successfully led his country through its greatest internal crisis, the American Civil War, preserving the Union and ending slavery.
Ronald Reagan brought down Communist Russia and freed 100’s of millions of people. How about those two for starters?
Uh, Fred asked for conservative successes. Lincoln was not a “conservative” in any shape, manner or form. And the Republicans of the 19th Century have nothing in common with the Republicans of the 21st Century except in name.
And Reagan did no such thing, although it’s a notable GOP fantasy.
October 13th, 2009 at 4:39 pmaksarben: “What about the guy (the African American) who carried that gun to a town hall and MSNBC purposely zoomed in on the gun, neglecting to show that he was black, therefore, leading people to think he was a white man.”
I was watching either CNN or MSNBC and the fact that he was black was the first thing I noticed about him. To tell you the truth, my first thought was that an Obama supporter was bringing his own weapon as a counter protest, so I can’t account for how you got your impression.
October 13th, 2009 at 4:41 pmaksarben: “Or the black man who was attacked by SEIU members for selling “Don’t tread on me” paraphanalia and MSNBC again neglected to report that he was black.”
You probably need to check back on that one. Video evidence shows the SEIU member getting attacked first and the “Don’t Tread on Me” dude is getting sued.
October 13th, 2009 at 4:43 pmFox hasn’t sued for the right to lie. They have used the argument that their offense was not governed by a law to get out of paying a settlement.
Backup… let me help.
1) The FCC has a rule against knowingly ’slanting or distorting the news.’
2) Jane Aker sued under the whistle blower statute and argued that using this rule, her termination was unlawful as Fox’s altering of her report was a crime.
3) Jane Aker won. The courts agreed that Fox had attempted to knowingly slant her report.
4) Fox appealed arguing that the FCC’s policy was not a ‘law or regulation’ and so the court’s decision that they had violated it STILL had no bearing on the whistle blower claim (they did NOT deny the FACTS, only the application of the rule)
5) the appeals court agreed.
6) Fox has ARGUED FOR and WON a first amendment RIGHT TO KNOWINGLY BROADCAST FALSE INFORMATION.
October 13th, 2009 at 4:43 pmIt looks like to me that Fox lawyers used the argument to avoid paying the $425,000 settlement twelve years ago.
And the ruling and arguments are from 2002/2003… not twelve years ago.
October 13th, 2009 at 4:47 pmaksarben60 says:
What about the guy (the African American) who carried that gun to a town hall and MSNBC purposely zoomed in on the gun, neglecting to show that he was black, therefore, leading people to think he was a white man. Or the black man who was attacked by SEIU members for selling “Don’t tread on me” paraphanalia and MSNBC again neglected to report that he was black.
You referring to the black guy that picked a fight with another black guy and whined about racism? LOL! How many media outlets bothered to point that out? ;)
October 13th, 2009 at 4:48 pmaksarben60 says:
Yeah, actually on this one, I got called out. I was just as closed minded as he was.
Only on “this one”? LOL! You’re way to “generous” with yourself! ;)
October 13th, 2009 at 4:48 pmNinerFan says:
You probably need to check back on that one. Video evidence shows the SEIU member getting attacked first and the “Don’t Tread on Me” dude is getting sued.
October 13th, 2009 at 4:50 pm—
Olbermann never once mentioned he was black.
aksarben60 says:
YOu’re right. I wasn’t aware of this case. I will look into it more. I will concede that in this one case, I may be wrong. (bash me all you want)
You conservatives are ‘always’ right. Because you don’t believe in facts and you don’t do your homework!
aksarben60 says:
However, I do know that Fox wouldn’t be alone in this, if in fact this case happens to be true, which I will make up my own mind about. MSNBC lies all the time and they get away with it as well and many liberals and progressives believe everything they say as well. I will concede that in this one case, I may be wrong.
Fox is the only one that says they have a ‘right’ to lie. Lies all of the time? LOL! You mean says things that make you “uncomfortable”. That’s not lying, it’s called the ‘truth’ and you can’t handle it! ;)
aksarben60 says:
I will look into this case and get back to you on what I think after I’ve formed my own opinion.
How about you go look at “everything” and come back when you aren’t an uninformed partisan hack? ;)
October 13th, 2009 at 4:51 pmaksarben60 says:
Olbermann never once mentioned he was black.
How is that relevant? Did he say he was white? You “racists” are all alike!
October 13th, 2009 at 4:51 pmt the bleepn facts says:
You referring to the black guy that picked a fight with another black guy and whined about racism? LOL! How many media outlets bothered to point that out? ;)
October 13th, 2009 at 4:52 pm—-
Did you see the video? The man selling the paraphanalia had to go to the hospital because of what the SEIU members did to him. Did you EVER think that maybe your preferred news outlet got it wrong? They usually do.
So the communists just gave up?
How about Dwight Eisenhower beginning the Interstate Highway System ( I believe we still have that), launching the Space Program (still going?), Nixon ended the Vietnam War…who started that one? During the Nixon administration, the following agencies were started, among them the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Nixon authorized the Clean Air Act of 1970, which was noted as one of the most significant pieces of environmental legislation ever signed. He established the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)…dirty conservatives hate the environment and workers. Nixon felt that racism was the greatest moral failure of the United States and concentrated on the principle that the law must be color-blind: “I am convinced that while legal segregation is totally wrong, forced integration of housing or education is just as wrong.”…..hmmm allow individuals to succeed without forced government intervention.
October 13th, 2009 at 4:53 pmaksarben60 says:
Olbermann never once mentioned he was black.
And Fox News never once mentioned that the entire tea bagger movement is almost 100% white. Your point?
October 13th, 2009 at 4:53 pmjust the bleepn facts says:
aksarben60 says:
Olbermann never once mentioned he was black.
How is that relevant? Did he say he was white? You “racists” are all alike!
October 13th, 2009 at 4:54 pm—-
Actually, the MSNBC news broadcast did call him white.
aksarben60 says:
Did you see the video? The man selling the paraphanalia had to go to the hospital because of what the SEIU members did to him. Did you EVER think that maybe your preferred news outlet got it wrong? They usually do.
He got up and looked fine, then came out in a wheelchair later! LOL! Most “media” never showed that part of the video. What did he have to go to the hospital for – peeing his pants? ;)
October 13th, 2009 at 4:55 pmActually, the MSNBC news broadcast did call him white.
Where?
October 13th, 2009 at 4:55 pmjust the bleepn facts says:
And Fox News never once mentioned that the entire tea bagger movement is almost 100% white. Your point?
October 13th, 2009 at 4:56 pm—
The Tea Party movement is actually not almost 100% white. You must believe everything Madcow and Boobermann tell you. YOu are a waste of air. Just the bleepn facts, my ass. You know nothing about facts.
belaccifer lacca. Even if their intention was to fight for the right to lie, Fox still is constrained by it’s own credibility.
The more any network is wrong or untruthful, the more people will find their information suspect or dubious.
It’s kind of a self correcting mechanism.
People that disagree with what Fox is saying should continue to dispute it. If the objections are credible it will further impact Fox’s credibility.
The court decision has little bearing.
October 13th, 2009 at 4:56 pmaksarben60 says:
Actually, the MSNBC news broadcast did call him white.
Transcript?
October 13th, 2009 at 4:59 pmbackup…
October 13th, 2009 at 5:00 pmSo networks have no larger civic duty to do their best to report the truth?
The market will take care of it?
That’s your argument?
How well have these ’self correcting mechanisms’ of the market worked recently?
Are they not ‘public airwaves?’
Does the public not have an interest in the truth being presented as news? With as little intentional slanting as possible?
aksarben60 says:
The Tea Party movement is actually not almost 100% white. You must believe everything Madcow and Boobermann tell you. YOu are a waste of air. Just the bleepn facts, my ass. You know nothing about facts.
No, I believe the videos I saw of the gathering. You must believe everything Limpd**k and VicksBeck say! LOL! ;)
October 13th, 2009 at 5:00 pmbelaccifer lacca says:
Actually, the MSNBC news broadcast did call him white.
Where?
Patsy doesn’t need facts – the Limbaugh gave her his word that it’s true! LOL! ;)
October 13th, 2009 at 5:01 pmActually, the MSNBC news broadcast did call him white.
I just watched what I think you are referring to, aksarben. And she is discussing the larger ‘racial overtones’ of white people with guns showing up to protest a sitting black President… no where does she say that this guy was white.
How you can dismiss Fox’s blatant corporate toady-ing and falsification and chastise MSNBC’s unfortunate phrasing is beyond me…
October 13th, 2009 at 5:02 pmThe crowds at the tea parties are overwhelmingly white.
But, the characterization that the crowd is overwhelmingly racist breaks down when you consider the enthusiastic reception given black speakers at the events:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k9pluLWZFe8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5PHc8oDszXE
The tea party protestors are responsible, however, for not overtly confronting the racists that did show up at the protests. Their presence in the crowd lends some credibility to those that characterize the movement as racist.
October 13th, 2009 at 5:03 pmAbout six seconds into the clip, a figure in a beige t-shirt and khaki pants with his back to the camera falls on his butt and immediately gets up and moves out of frame. It’s unclear clear what caused him to fall. Nobody appears to be punching or kicking anyone.
A conservative fakes an attack and whines about racism when the only person near him is another black person. LOL! You’re really gullible or just a complete liar patsy! ;)
October 13th, 2009 at 5:04 pmbackup says:
The crowds at the tea parties are overwhelmingly white.
But, the characterization that the crowd is overwhelmingly racist breaks down when you consider the enthusiastic reception given black speakers at the events:
Racists have almost always been kind to those that sell out their own.
October 13th, 2009 at 5:04 pmbackup says:
The tea party protestors are responsible, however, for not overtly confronting the racists that did show up at the protests. Their presence in the crowd lends some credibility to those that characterize the movement as racist.
Not only responsible for, but encouraging of.
October 13th, 2009 at 5:05 pmbelaccifer lacca. The market isn’t a perfect correcting mechanism, but what’s the alternative?
Truth police? Who’s going to decide what is truth and what’s not, so we can regulate it?
October 13th, 2009 at 5:05 pmTruth police? Who’s going to decide what is truth and what’s not, so we can regulate it?
How about the courts?
They agreed with the Aker’s that FOX had meddled with the report to knowingly slant the information presented… they just didn’t agree that that was against the law… yet.
October 13th, 2009 at 5:07 pmflag@whitehouse.gov says:
So the communists just gave up?
No, your hero Ronnie just scared the whole country so badly they turned into capitalists overnight.
Good for Ike and Dick, although you will notice that none of the programs you credit them with are “conservative.” You continue to think that “Republican” is the same as “conservative” and even then you get it wrong. Now you have to go all the way back to Eisenhower and Nixon to find something positive to say, even about a Republican, much less a “conservative.”
October 13th, 2009 at 5:07 pmhttp://blahblahblog.wordpress.com/2009/08/20/arizonas-law-is-an-open-one-and-msnbcs-law-is-to-conceal/
October 13th, 2009 at 5:09 pmbackup:
The more any network is wrong or untruthful, the more people will find their information suspect or dubious.
Unless it confirms their worldview, like Fox’s viewers. Then, it’s just a balance issue: reportage one agree with, versus reportage that doesn’t conform to viewers’ outlook, and so can be discarded – but don’t ever think they value truth over nightly vindication of their outlook, because you’d be horribly mistaken.
October 13th, 2009 at 5:11 pmaksarben60 says:
Right… but does she say, ‘Here’s a white guy carrying an assault rifle?’ She doesn’t?
She says that white people are bringing guns to events?!?
Are they?
Weird.
October 13th, 2009 at 5:11 pmLet’s count the news outlets that have reported this lie.
Rush Limbaugh said, “I mean, let’s face it, we didn’t have slavery in this country for over 100 years because it was a bad thing. Quite the opposite: slavery built the South. I’m not saying we should bring it back; I’m just saying it had its merits. For one thing, the streets were safer after dark.”
This has been reported as fact on MSNBC, and CNN yet no one can seem to come up with any evidence that this was not completely made up
October 13th, 2009 at 5:12 pmTruth police? Who’s going to decide what is truth and what’s not, so we can regulate it?
That was the purpose of the Fairness Doctrine, to rein in the more aggregious propaganda pushed by news networks.
October 13th, 2009 at 5:13 pmLet’s count the news outlets that have reported this lie.
Great. Bust their shoddy fact-checking if you can… Have any of them argued in court that ‘knowingly slanting the news’ is not illegal?
Just one.
Fox.
October 13th, 2009 at 5:14 pmbelaccifer lacca says:
——————————————————————————–
aksarben60 says:
Right… but does she say, ‘Here’s a white guy carrying an assault rifle?’ She doesn’t?
She says that white people are bringing guns to events?!?
Are they?
Weird.
October 13th, 2009 at 5:14 pm—
Yes, but she could have said “people are bringing guns to events”, she specifically characterizes them as white and MSNBC purposely panned in on the gentleman (black gentleman) with the assault rifle in order to lead people to believe he was white also. It was disengenious reporting.
The more any network is wrong or untruthful, the more people will find their information suspect or dubious.
It’s kind of a self correcting mechanism.
Saddam’s Weapons of Mass Destruction didn’t see much self correction – more like hyperventilation at every administration lie.
October 13th, 2009 at 5:16 pmIt was disengenious reporting.
Were ‘White’ people bringing guns to these events?
That clip had several white people with guns… explain.
October 13th, 2009 at 5:16 pmDuring Jimmy Carter’s last year in office (1980), inflation averaged 12.5%, compared to 4.4% during Reagan’s last year in office (1988). Did he scare people into getting jobs also?
October 13th, 2009 at 5:17 pmDon’t be offended Gummble-bee-itch @4:12
I’m over fifty myself. I was refering to the generation before me that trusted their government and media because checks and balances and regulations for broadcasting functioned to protect the truth, although censorship was stricter.
My father was 91 when he died last year. A proud Democrat, progressive by today’s standards, his knowledge and passion for politics and history were an inspiration to all that knew him. He kept up with every bill introduced, knew the names and policies of most of the players, and still formed objective opinions of events, to the end. He watched the news, cspan, and read the newspaper, to keep a balanced perspective. He often cut out Maureen Dowd’s column(he had quite a crush on her) and put it in my hand, as I left his house.
You missed my point.
October 13th, 2009 at 5:18 pmI know that many retirees tuned into fox during 9/11 events. Their fear and uncertainty about our country’s future was fertile ground for fox’s political manipulation.
The teabaggers are a good example.
These people were not that politically motivated before 9/11.
Family, work and church were more central to their lives. When these things were threatened, their attention turned to world events.
Fox and churches that have political agendas are unquestionably deliberately influencing politics and votes.
belaccifer lacca says:
It was disengenious reporting.
Were ‘White’ people bringing guns to these events?
That clip had several white people with guns… explain
October 13th, 2009 at 5:18 pm—-
The clip had one white person with a gun, legally carried. The clip also had one black person with a gun, legally carried. MSNBC mislead people by making it seem like both people in the clip were white. Why would they mislead like that if they’re responsible journalists? Explain.
If a progressive avoids watching Fox, because it reports information or airs sentiment that is contrary to their worldview, aren’t they engaging in similar behavior as Fox viewers are?
October 13th, 2009 at 5:21 pmflag@whitehouse.gov says:
During Jimmy Carter’s last year in office (1980), inflation averaged 12.5%, compared to 4.4% during Reagan’s last year in office (1988).
Um, did you forget Reagan also raised the national debt higher than all previous presidents combined? With that kind of governmental deficit spending, unemployment was naturally lowered. Just as it will be, in Obama’s second term.
October 13th, 2009 at 5:22 pmIf a progressive avoids watching Fox, because it reports information or airs sentiment that is contrary to their worldview, aren’t they engaging in similar behavior as Fox viewers are?
This isn’t either or, since both Fox and other media failed to report on how shaky the intel was, before the invasion. Liberals tend to value truth over partisanship, something not true of Fox viewers.
October 13th, 2009 at 5:25 pmWhy would they mislead like that if they’re responsible journalists? Explain.
I wondered the same thing about FOX and it’s Monsanto argument…
She was discussing the racial overtones that people are seeing in the guns being brought to these events… was there only one white gentleman and one black gentleman carrying at these events?
Or were there several examples of ‘white people’ bringing guns?
I can think of several.
The Gentleman with the ‘legally carried’ assault rifle belongs to a church that has called for the death of Obama… why don’t you mention that in your post?
Is it disingenuous posting on your part?
October 13th, 2009 at 5:25 pmJuan says:
Page # please.
October 13th, 2009 at 5:26 pmBarfly said:
Um, did you forget Reagan also raised the national debt higher than all previous presidents combined? With that kind of governmental deficit spending, unemployment was naturally lowered. Just as it will be, in Obama’s second term.
Assuming he doesn’t destroy the dollar. Oh how we long for the fiscal responsibility of Bill Clinton…I am serious.
October 13th, 2009 at 5:28 pmbelaccifer lacca says:
Is it disingenuous posting on your part?
—
It has no bearing on whether or not the people carrying guns to ANY event in Arizona were doing it legally. They weren’t breaking the law. So what if the church called for the death of Obama; they can say what they want. The two are not related. That is why I didn’t mention it. That doesn’t mean other people can’t exercise their 2nd ammendment rights. people called for the death of Bush all the time and I don’t see you whinning about that.
Why didn’t the MSNBC reporter mention there was also a black man carrying a gun? Explain.
October 13th, 2009 at 5:30 pmNo this jackass is arguing that the Florida Appeals court case, Jane Akre Vs. WTVT never happened. She is backed into a corner and that’s the only thing she can think of at this point. This poor fool is seriously deluded.
October 13th, 2009 at 5:30 pmI asking because I don’t know the answer.
Would the fairness doctrine be analogous to turning over 50% of the TP thread topics or content to trolls?
October 13th, 2009 at 5:33 pmWhy didn’t the MSNBC reporter mention there was also a black man carrying a gun? Explain.
I’ll let you:
The two are not related. That is why I didn’t mention it. That doesn’t mean other people can’t exercise their 2nd ammendment rights.
It had no bearing on the statement she was making about the racial overtones that people were seeing, get it?
October 13th, 2009 at 5:34 pmWrong again, b-kup. According to this study, facts don’t really hold much weight with the Reichwhiners. FAUX could change it’s editorial policies 180 degrees and refute every piece of misleading, or downright dishonest, “reporting” and it would merely reinforce the lies among the “folks”. They simply Believe whatever they find emotionally satisfying whether it’s that the invasion of Iraq was justified or God/Jesus will Rapture them away before we turn the planet into a toxic mess incapable of supporting life.
http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2008/09/backfire-effect
October 13th, 2009 at 5:34 pmWould the fairness doctrine be analogous to turning over 50% of the TP thread topics or content to trolls?
No.
October 13th, 2009 at 5:35 pmSo, now you are defending right-wing terrorists. I’m not surprised. Are you a Republican insurgent yourself, or are you just an advocate of domestic right-wing Republican terrorism?
October 13th, 2009 at 5:35 pmbelaccifer lacca says:
——————————————————————————–
Why didn’t the MSNBC reporter mention there was also a black man carrying a gun? Explain.
I’ll let you:
The two are not related. That is why I didn’t mention it. That doesn’t mean other people can’t exercise their 2nd ammendment rights.
It had no bearing on the statement she was making about the racial overtones that people were seeing, get it?
October 13th, 2009 at 5:37 pm—-
If there are so many racial overtones, she should have mentioned the other man was black and included all information. Instead, she left it out in order to promote her MSNBC’s politics. Get it?
shoeless says:
October 13th, 2009 at 5:38 pmSo, now you are defending right-wing terrorists. I’m not surprised. Are you a Republican insurgent yourself, or are you just an advocate of domestic right-wing Republican terrorism?
—-
You “progressives” are really good at taking things out of context. Of course I’m not defending terrorism, of any kind. I am defending the Constitution. Are you a socialist “progressive” communist?
Where in the Constitution say that it is legal to threaten to murder the President?
October 13th, 2009 at 5:39 pmInstead, she left it out in order to promote her MSNBC’s politics. Get it?
Then you should have included the fact that the assault weapon carrier was a member of a church that has an avowed wish to see the president dead… instead you left that out because it had no bearing on the point you thought you were making (and because it paints right-wingers in an even WORSE light) in order to promote your politics, get it?
October 13th, 2009 at 5:40 pmbelaccifer lacca says:
——————————————————————————–
Instead, she left it out in order to promote her MSNBC’s politics. Get it?
Then you should have included the fact that the assault weapon carrier was a member of a church that has an avowed wish to see the president dead… instead you left that out because it had no bearing on the point you thought you were making (and because it paints right-wingers in an even WORSE light) in order to promote your politics, get it?
October 13th, 2009 at 5:41 pm—
Yeah, um…you need to provide a link for that, please.
Sounds like aksarben60 should be investigated by the Secret Service and the FBI. If not a right-wing terrorist herself, she is a sympathizer, and could be aiding and abetting domestic terrorists.
October 13th, 2009 at 5:41 pmshoeless says:
October 13th, 2009 at 5:42 pmWhere in the Constitution say that it is legal to threaten to murder the President?
—
It’s legal to say what you want according to the First Ammendment.
Why?
October 13th, 2009 at 5:42 pmI am defending the Constitution.
Where were you when progressives were being arrested at events for wearing T-Shirts… is a t-shirt more threatening than a gun? Is a gun more protected?
Does the 2nd Amendment mean more than the 1rst?
http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/news.aspx?id=14041
October 13th, 2009 at 5:43 pmshoeless says:
Sounds like aksarben60 should be investigated by the Secret Service and the FBI. If not a right-wing terrorist herself, she is a sympathizer, and could be aiding and abetting domestic terrorists.
October 13th, 2009 at 5:43 pm—
Bring it.
aksarben60, do you have Google? You sure are one lazy wingnut. Try doing your own homework instead of trying to make everyone else look things up for you. You are so uninformed on almost any subject, we would have to spend all of our time trying to educate you.
October 13th, 2009 at 5:45 pmbelaccifer lacca says:
October 13th, 2009 at 5:45 pmWhere were you when progressives were being arrested at events for wearing T-Shirts… is a t-shirt more threatening than a gun? Is a gun more protected?
Does the 2nd Amendment mean more than the 1rst?
—
It’s 1st, not 1rst and no, they are both of the same importance and people can say what they want, whether I or you agree with them or not. Even if it’s inappropriate, it’s still legal.
It’s legal to say what you want according to the First Ammendment.
It is not legal to threaten the President.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/usc_sec_18_00000871—-000-.html
October 13th, 2009 at 5:45 pmDid that church actually threaten POTUS or just make a dumb-ass comment like many liberals did against Bush? Explain.
October 13th, 2009 at 5:46 pmOh please just give me your name, and will be happy to call the Secret Service to warn them about you.
October 13th, 2009 at 5:47 pmpete. Come on. The study doesn’t seem to account for the propensity of partisans to refute bad news about their own party.
If 100% verifiable data came out that was damaging to either President Obama or his agenda, who do you think would more likely or readily adopt it, conservatives or progressives? Who would more likely resist or refute the information? Obama supporters or opponents?
October 13th, 2009 at 5:48 pmshoeless says:
October 13th, 2009 at 5:50 pmaksarben60, do you have Google? You sure are one lazy wingnut. Try doing your own homework instead of trying to make everyone else look things up for you. You are so uninformed on almost any subject, we would have to spend all of our time trying to educate you.
—
hey, if you’re going to make a ridiculous comment, you’d better be able to back it up. Besides, people ask me to provide links all the time which makes you peeps just as lazy as I, according to you.
backup says:
No.
Why?
For one thing because Think Progress does not need an FCC licence.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairness_Doctrine
October 13th, 2009 at 5:50 pmhttp://www.fcc.gov/licensing.html
shoeless says:
——————————————————————————–
aksarben60 says:
——————————————————————————–
shoeless says:
Sounds like aksarben60 should be investigated by the Secret Service and the FBI. If not a right-wing terrorist herself, she is a sympathizer, and could be aiding and abetting domestic terrorists.
Bring it.
Oh please just give me your name, and will be happy to call the Secret Service to warn them about you.
October 13th, 2009 at 5:50 pm—-
Sure, my name is Shoeless.
Looks to me like Pastor dumb-ass made a stupid comment, not a direct threat.
October 13th, 2009 at 5:53 pm——————————————————————————–
Anyone who does think it is legal and defends those who threaten to murder the President are deeply unpatiriotic and dangerous. aksarben60 obviously hates our country.
October 13th, 2009 at 5:53 pmhey, if you’re going to make a ridiculous comment, you’d better be able to back it up. Besides, people ask me to provide links all the time which makes you peeps just as lazy as I, according to you.
A ridiculous comment like this?
October 13th, 2009 at 5:53 pm
what is substantially different between transmitting information on airwaves vs. transmitting information over the internet?
How are the medium substantially different so that one requires an FCC license and the other does not?
October 13th, 2009 at 5:54 pmaksarben60 says:
And it looks to me like Fox argued for the right to lie, strange.
October 13th, 2009 at 5:54 pmHow are the medium substantially different so that one requires an FCC license and the other does not?
Ask the FCC.
October 13th, 2009 at 5:55 pmshoeless says:
——————————————————————————–
——————————————————————————–
belaccifer lacca says:
——————————————————————————–
It’s legal to say what you want according to the First Ammendment.
It is not legal to threaten the President.
Anyone who does think it is legal and defends those who threaten to murder the President are deeply unpatiriotic and dangerous. aksarben60 obviously hates our country.
October 13th, 2009 at 5:55 pm—-
Did you bash those who threatened Bush? I bet not. You probably supported them or were actually one of them.
What’s the matter? You don’t have anything to hide, do you?
October 13th, 2009 at 5:56 pmDid you bash those who threatened Bush? I bet not. You probably supported them or were actually one of them.
What the hell does it matter?
October 13th, 2009 at 5:57 pmIf shoeless was, (and that’s a big IF) it was wrong and perhaps illegal. Why are YOU defending those that are doing it today?
shoeless says:
October 13th, 2009 at 5:57 pmWhat’s the matter? You don’t have anything to hide, do you?
—
Yep. I have my privacy to hide. Would you like to give me your name so that I might report you as well?
Agreed Shoeless. It is unacceptable to threaten any president.
http://www.zombietime.com/zomblog/?p=621
October 13th, 2009 at 5:58 pmbelaccifer lacca says:
If shoeless was, (and that’s a big IF) it was wrong and perhaps illegal. Why are YOU defending those that are doing it today?
October 13th, 2009 at 5:58 pm—
I’m NOT defending them, moron. I’m defending their right to say what they want. That pastor didn’t directly threaten the president; he made an idiotic comment but it wasn’t a threat. You’re a fool.
And it’s even stranger that they won the right to lie.
But, the strangest thing of all is that pathetic wingnut wretches still watch it, even after they know it is lies.
October 13th, 2009 at 5:59 pmFlaggie… were the gun toters arrested? No?
What about the sign carriers and t-shirt wearers? They were!?!
Weird.
October 13th, 2009 at 5:59 pmI’m NOT defending them, moron. I’m defending their right to say what they want. That pastor didn’t directly threaten the president; he made an idiotic comment but it wasn’t a threat. You’re a fool.
And you made an idiotic comment about how MSNBC’s failure to mention that ONE protester was black proves that they are hopelessly biased.
You’re an imbecile! Hey, This is fun!
October 13th, 2009 at 6:01 pmYou “progressives” are so tiring with your mistruths and misunderstandings. Later nerds!
October 13th, 2009 at 6:02 pmIt is not illegal to criticize the Presient. No one on the left was calling for the murder of George W. Bush, and no one was taking assault weapons to his events.
October 13th, 2009 at 6:03 pmaksarben60 says:
You “progressives” are so tiring with your mistruths and misunderstandings. Later nerds!
Like FOX never argued that they have no obligation to the truth?
Later!
October 13th, 2009 at 6:03 pmReagan’s unemployment average was HIGHER than Carter’s. Carter’s job-growth-rate was HIGHER than Reagan’s.
US national debt first 200 years (thru end of Carter) totaled $0.9 Trillion. Twelve years later, at end of GHW Bush, it was $4.1 Trillion.
There were record number of bankruptcies for individuals and businesses under Reagan.
Reagan’s Director of the Budget said noone ever believed “trickle-down” would work—it was just a way to reward his donors.
From WWII to end of Carter, US was always world’s leader in trade surplus. Since four years(?) into Reagan, US has always been world leader in trade deficit!
Carter’s budget deficits were better than Ford’s. Carter’s job-growth-rate was better than Ford’s. I could easily find an unskilled job for $24k under Carter.
CNN is a wing of the Corporate Party.
October 13th, 2009 at 6:05 pmI am not the domestic right-wing terrorist sympathizer, you are. We already know you freepers are dangerous. You told me to bring on the authorities. This was your idea. I’ll just be happy to help them.
October 13th, 2009 at 6:06 pmShoeless says: It is not illegal to criticize the Presient. No one on the left was calling for the murder of George W. Bush
Shoeless, did you look at the link I sent you? Those appeared to be people on the left calling for the death of Bush. http://www.zombietime.com/zomblog/?p=621
The threats against any President should be pursued.
October 13th, 2009 at 6:08 pmThey were not only wearing loaded weapons at Obama’s events, they were wearing tee-shirts about the need to spill the “blood of tyrants”!
They were shouting “kill him!” when Palin mentioned Obama.
They really DID kill JFK, RFK, MLK, and Malcomb X. It’s not my imagination!
October 13th, 2009 at 6:09 pmBig deal. I assure I do not know those people, and I would not defend them, as some right-wing psycho has been doing here today. There always a few crazys, but the right-wing threats against President Obama are a movement.
October 13th, 2009 at 6:11 pmThe threats against any President should be pursued.
Did you look at the link I sent you, flaggie?
Many WERE arrested for wearing t-shirts!
Strange, you said it wasn’t happening…
October 13th, 2009 at 6:12 pmThat’s Malcolm X. Duhhhhhh
October 13th, 2009 at 6:12 pmPeople WERE arrested at Bush’s events for having tee-shirts slightly critical. Nowhere near “blood of tyrants”!
October 13th, 2009 at 6:14 pmflag. I don’t think the people should be pursued, but the images are significant because they highlight the idea that many of the same examples of extreme rhetoric that occurs today against President Obama happened to President Bush.
I do believe that it has gotten worse and there is a racial element today that should cause us all concern.
Progressives did it too, but it does seem to be getting worse.
October 13th, 2009 at 6:18 pmhttp://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/barackobama/5967942/Barack-Obama-faces-30-death-threats-a-day-stretching-US-Secret-Service.html
Yeah, it always happens… but it happens WAY, WAY more to Obama.
Strange…
October 13th, 2009 at 6:20 pmBelaciffer said:
Many WERE arrested for wearing t-shirts!
Strange, you said it wasn’t happening…
I didn’t say anything about people not being arrested. My point was that the death threat is not a new phenomenon, or strictly isolated to the right.
shoeless says:
——————————————————————————–
Big deal. I assure I do not know those people, and I would not defend them, as some right-wing psycho has been doing here today. There always a few crazys, but the right-wing threats against President Obama are a movement.
Come on Shoeless, it is no more of a movement than it was against Bush. There are crazies on both sides….and there is no way to defend the reprehensible behavior.
October 13th, 2009 at 6:23 pmaksarben60 says:
You “progressives” are so tiring with your mistruths and misunderstandings. Later nerds!
Later, dumb jock.
October 13th, 2009 at 6:24 pmI didn’t say anything about people not being arrested. My point was that the death threat is not a new phenomenon, or strictly isolated to the right.
And yet it happens way, way more to Obama… who has arrested way, way fewer people… strange.
October 13th, 2009 at 6:26 pmUnder Bush, people with tee-shirts arrested.
Under Obama, people with tee-shirts AND LOADED WEAPONS NOT arrested.
Should I draw you a picture?
October 13th, 2009 at 6:30 pmBelaccifer, And yet it happens way, way more to Obama… who has arrested way, way fewer people… strange.
Point taken. It is reprehensible and unfortunate. However, it is not new.
October 13th, 2009 at 6:33 pmaksarben60 says:
You “progressives” are so tiring with your mistruths and misunderstandings. Later nerds!
Project much? LOL! Sorry, but we’ve “seen” you Eric Odom! There’s nothing more “nerdy”, ignorant and dishonest than a GOP wingnut tea bagger! ;)
October 13th, 2009 at 6:36 pmI’m not defending threats against anyone and don’t make them myself. However, I think it’s important to note that the threats against the Chimperror came after he had started at least one indefensible war, if not two, while President Obama’s biggest crime seems to be that he’s a Democrat. Plus some racism.
And there certainly wasn’t the same kind of childish, yet violent, rhetoric from “the left” simply because Chimpy was elected. Alas, history itself is mutable to the Reichwing mind.
October 13th, 2009 at 6:36 pmaksarben60 says:
Yep. I have my privacy to hide. Would you like to give me your name so that I might report you as well?
Says the domestic terrorist! LOL! ;)
October 13th, 2009 at 6:37 pmThe constant attacks/criticism over outright lies and bullshit ARE new.
He’s a Kenyan. He’s a muslim. He’s a Manchurian candidate. He’s a communist. He’s a socialist. He’s a fascist. He’s a Nazi. He ordered orange juice at a coffee shop! He pals around with terrorists. He’s a racist. He hates white people. His pastor hates white people. He was a community organizer. He eats arugula lettuce. He’s a bad bowler. He made a joke about the disabled. He’s going to take your guns away. He criticized a Cambridge, MA policeman. He uses a teleprompter. He asked for mustard on a hamburger! And not American mustard! He did a terrorist fist bump. His wife hates America. Etc, etc,
October 13th, 2009 at 6:44 pmPete, actually chimpy was not elected. Just sayin
October 13th, 2009 at 6:46 pmKeith, You forgot that his wife is trying to destroy agri-business and grocery stores through her “farmers market”! LOL! ;)
October 13th, 2009 at 6:47 pmKeith says:
Pete, actually chimpy was not elected. Just sayin
When you’re a conservative, it helps to have “low” friends in “high” places. Like the SCOTUS! LOL! ;)
October 13th, 2009 at 6:48 pmjust the bleepn facts, right! Michelle’s White House garden will really knock the fertilizer out of Archer Daniel Midlands!
You mean “his daddy’s friends” on the SCOTUS. And his brother and Katherine The Great running the Florida election (exit polls say Gore won Florida by 300,000)!
October 13th, 2009 at 6:52 pmHuge “I (swastika) OBAMA” cut into golf course.
October 13th, 2009 at 7:01 pmHe’s a Kenyan. (no) He’s a muslim. (no) He’s a Manchurian candidate. (no) He’s a communist. (no) He’s a socialist. (very possible) He’s a fascist. (no) He’s a Nazi. (no) He ordered orange juice at a coffee shop! (don’t know) He pals around with terrorists. (Bill Ayers, yes) He’s a racist. (no) He hates white people. (he shouldn’t, they elected him) His pastor hates white people. (yes) He was a community organizer. (yes) He eats arugula lettuce. (maybe?)He’s a bad bowler. (don’t know) He made a joke about the disabled. (don’t know) He’s going to take your guns away. (maybe?) He criticized a Cambridge, MA policeman. (yes) He uses a teleprompter. (yes) He asked for mustard on a hamburger! (don’t know) And not American mustard! (don’t know) He did a terrorist fist bump. (no) His wife hates America. (recently became proud) Etc, etc,
October 13th, 2009 at 7:05 pmHe did catch a fly with his bare hands….that was awesome.
October 13th, 2009 at 7:07 pmaksarben60 says:
——————————————————————————–
shoeless says:
Where in the Constitution say that it is legal to threaten to murder the President?
—
It’s legal to say what you want according to the First Ammendment.
I dare you to mention you have a bomb the next time you’re in an airport.
And as others have mentioned, it *is* against the law to threaten the President. Even LiveJournal knows this over you. That’s just sad.
October 13th, 2009 at 7:10 pmI forgot to add, that in a nutshell: while you have the right to Free Speech, your right ends when it infringes on my well-being. Hence why you can’t threaten people or advocate hurting them. That’s the law.
October 13th, 2009 at 7:11 pmaksarben60 says:
It’s legal to say what you want according to the First Ammendment.
All rights have limits, including the First Amendment. Your limits seem to include “spelling”, “grammar”, “logic”, “reason” and “sanity”… LOL! ;)
October 13th, 2009 at 7:18 pmflag,
October 13th, 2009 at 7:26 pmlot of “don’t know’s” in there. Have you tried reading a decent source of news? Michelle said she had recently become “really proud” of America, meaning she was somewhat proud of America before.
He didn’t “pal around” with Bill Ayers. He was on the same mainstream foundation as he was. John McCain was paling around with Gaddafi a few days ago. I’ve seen the photos of Rumsfeld paling around with Saddam Hussein. Reagan and GHWBush strongly funded Saddam Hussein, the Taliban, al Qaeda, bin Ladin, the terrorist state of Iran under Ayatollah Khomeni, Saudi Arabia (which funded the terrorists) and Pakistan (which funded the terrorists).
politifact says of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge (Obama’s alleged tie to terrorism):
Annenberg was a lifelong Republican and former ambassador to the United Kingdom under President Richard Nixon. His widow, Leonore, has endorsed McCain. Kurtz might just as plausibly have accused Obama and the foundation of “translating Annenberg’s conservatism into practice.”
Among the other board members who served with Obama were: Stanley Ikenberry, former president of the University of Illinois; Arnold Weber, former president of Northwestern University and assistant secretary of labor in the Nixon administration; Scott Smith, then publisher of the Chicago Tribune; venture capitalist Edward Bottum; John McCarter, president of the Field Museum; Patricia Albjerg Graham, former dean of the Harvard University Graduate School of Education, and a host of other mainstream folks.
October 13th, 2009 at 7:45 pmKeith says:
politifact says of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge (Obama’s alleged tie to terrorism):
Looks like a list of flaming radicals to me.
October 13th, 2009 at 8:23 pmI reachd the age of senior citizenship many years ago, so I have been around a long time and have seen the characteristics described in the fable blow many, many time among my community. The fable descrives the “crabs in a barrel syndrome” which,in my opinion fits Juan Williams and 99.9 % of the black commentators, pundits and gasbags that appear on networks like Fox and pundits on CNN.
Whose Planet Is It Anyway?
by abfh (Autistic B**** from Hell)
February 11, 2008
“A bunch of crabs were sitting in a barrel at a seafood restaurant, waiting to be cooked. One of them said to the others, “Hey, you know what, if we all climb to the top and push on the lid, it’ll come off and then we can escape.”
The other crabs all laughed. They knew it was impossible to escape. What could this foolish dreamer be thinking? It was nonsense. Couldn’t be done. Not even worth trying.
After a few minutes, when it was clear he wouldn’t be getting any help, the one hopeful crab climbed up and started pushing on the lid alone. The other crabs just laughed harder, until they heard a faint creaking noise and realized that the lid was starting to shift a little. Then they all got angry. How dare one crab try to escape by himself? He was just another crab, and he needed to be shown that he was no better than the rest of them.
So they grabbed the crab who had been trying to escape and dragged him back down to the bottom of the barrel. They all got cooked and eaten soon afterward, but at least they had the satisfaction of knowing that no other crab was able to achieve more than they had”.
Self-destructive jealousy and invidiousness are probably not unique to the black community, but it is widely practiced by many black people. Many of us don’t celebrate the success of our own which leads some of us to happily go on tee-vee shows like those on Fox and trash other black people.
Crabs in a Barrel.
October 13th, 2009 at 8:38 pmLike CNN, CNBC, MSNBC, CBS, ABC and NBC arent liberal audience-oriented programming?
October 13th, 2009 at 9:25 pmconservative guy says:
October 13th, 2009 at 9:35 pmCompared to Fox News and the Republican right wing, those networks may appear to be liberal. But that is because the right wing has moved further right while those networks have stayed the same which is mainstream.
conservative guy says:
Like CNN, CNBC, MSNBC, CBS, ABC and NBC arent liberal audience-oriented programming?
Not according to Jeffie Bovine who seems to think only “MSnbc” is liberal. Which of you is lying? Both of you? ;)
October 13th, 2009 at 10:24 pmconservative guy says:
Like CNN, CNBC, MSNBC, CBS, ABC and NBC arent liberal audience-oriented programming?
They’re all “corporate” media that serve wall street and the GOP… ZZZzz…
October 13th, 2009 at 10:25 pmconservative guy says:
Like CNN, CNBC, MSNBC, CBS, ABC and NBC arent liberal audience-oriented programming?
Said another way. You saying that despite this Fox can only get 1% of Americans to watch? Not even 5% of Conservatives? LOL! That doesn’t say much for you conservative idiots does it? LOL! ;)
October 13th, 2009 at 10:26 pmKeith,
Here are her exact words….America is just downright mean.
Michelle Obama
For the first time in my adult lifetime, I am really proud of my country. And not just because Barack has done well, but because I think people are hungry for change. And I have been desperate to see our country moving in that direction.
Michelle Obama
My personal favorite…sounds awfully familiar
The truth is, in order to get things like universal health care and a revamped education system, then someone is going to have to give up a piece of their pie so that someone else can have more.
Michelle Obama
From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs…..name that quote.
October 13th, 2009 at 10:52 pm.
Q U E S T I O N:
Which MainStream Media Network “PLATFORMS”:
~ SINGLE PAYER
~ GAY/CIVIL RIGHTS
~ WOMEN’S CHOICE
~ RACIAL EQUALITY
~ USES NON-MILITARY POLITICAL AND MILITARY ANALYZERS
~ ACCOUNTABILITY FOR ILLEGAL ACTIVITIES THAT INCLUDE:
ABC-CNN-NBC-CBS-FOXPRAVDA(read: ABCNNBCBS&FOXPRAVDA), None or All?
Q U E S T I O N:
Which MainStream Media Network “PLATFORMS”:
~ Private/Corporate Health Insurance
~ Loyalty to a Political Party
~ Showcases bigotry and (R)acism
~ Uses women to advance sexism
~ Employs retired Generals as their qualified and objective political and military analyzers
~ Questions the necessity of accountability for illegal activities(as mentioned above)
ABC-CNN-NBC-CBS-FOXPRAVDA(read: ABCNNBCBS&FOXPRAVDA), None or All?
.
October 14th, 2009 at 1:12 amflag,
October 14th, 2009 at 3:10 amWe are saying the same thing. I can understand it and you cannot. For the first time she is really proud—-meaning she was somewhat proud before.
Dubya, I’m sure was proud of his country. Yet that did not prevent him from being the worst president in the history of the USA. He did tremendous harm to the country!
And Laura killed her boyfriend after he broke up with her. And she acts like she is on drugs.
October 14th, 2009 at 3:13 amKeith, so she was somewhat proud of the downright mean America whose rich people need to GIVE up a piece of their pie so that others can have more…..sigh.
What a rousing endorsement from our FLOTUS.
October 14th, 2009 at 12:14 pmAnd Laura killed her boyfriend after he broke up with her. And she acts like she is on drugs.
Keith, you are a tribute to the progressive movement.
October 14th, 2009 at 12:18 pmThank you for your sharing.!
October 17th, 2009 at 10:57 amCNN/ABC/CBS all are conservative leaning ideologue despite the myth of liberal media. The difference here is Fox ‘News’ is a fake network that perpetuates lies and smear campaign. burun estetigi
October 19th, 2009 at 7:11 am