Fox News

[MrJim]

My mistake Mr.Jim.

 

[Naal]

I prefer Jon Stewart or the BBC.

Amen, Brother. I can't stand news networks. These days it seems like you'll get more unbiased news from Jon Stewart than anything else. He makes fun of Bush AND Obama.

It seems like these days the news networks make a better parody of themselves than Jon Stewart/Stephen Colbert.

 

[Sketcher]

Amen, Brother. I can't stand news networks. These days it seems like you'll get more unbiased news from Jon Stewart than anything else. He makes fun of Bush AND Obama.

This is a shameful attitude. The Daily Show is good for laughs if that's your thing, and nothing more. To say nothing of the fact that Jon Stewart was shamelessly partisan the last 4-8 years.

What really burns me is that I witnessed this attitude being taught to mentally retarded people.

 

[E.C.]

Are you saying or implying that only those at the level of the mentally retarded watch Jon Stewart?

 

[Lady Bug]

Yeah I know~just too bad Fox has to insult my intelligence with the skin; it's as though they have to supplement their reporting with "Hey dude, check out this rack while you're here"

for being a conservative site it sure has racy stuff at the bottom, maybe the liberals will have less to complain about...or maybe not, they may say Fox is hypocritical - it's a lose-lose situation LOL

 

[Sketcher]

Are you saying or implying that only those at the level of the mentally retarded watch Jon Stewart?

No. In fact, the mentally competent and partisan liberal teacher who was teaching them watched it. And he taught them that it was a good news source. That really made me mad.

 

[E.C.]

No. In fact, the mentally competent and partisan liberal teacher who was teaching them watched it. And he taught them that it was a good news source. That really made me mad.

Ah, okay. I misunderstood a little and decided to ask questions first before shooting (if needed).

 

[Albion]

for being a conservative site it sure has racy stuff at the bottom, maybe the liberals will have less to complain about...or maybe not, they may say Fox is hypocritical - it's a lose-lose situation LOL

But the Left seldom criticizes Fox for this reason. It's WE who do.

They almost always attack the news coverage, saying it doesn't present their issues as they would like.

 

[Lady Bug]

But the Left seldom criticizes Fox for this reason. It's WE who do.

They almost always attack the news coverage, saying it doesn't present their issues as they would like.

ah, ok.

Fox does seem to lean on the right side. But if you're right-leaning to begin with, I suppose that the bias would not perturb you.

You will see more vitriol towards Fox than you probably ever will for, say, MSNBC and CNN - then again, people think that the liberals are more tolerant

 

[E.C.]

They almost always attack the news coverage, saying it doesn't present their issues as they would like.

Not really. My brother is such a person from, as much as I hate to use such polarizing and dehumanizing language, "the left" and the main criticism is the blatant bias.
-Spelling "Osama" instead of "Obama".
-Reporting within three months of the Iraq invasion that the USA found three biochemical plants in Iraq when no such plants existed.
-O'Riley's reaction to Eminem's newest music video in the section where he made fun of Palin. O'Riley acts as if Eminem may as well have assassinated the president, the pope and the dalai lama in the same day.


[rant beginning]

Either way, it is exactly why I do not watch those network news stations because they all nothing more than garbage and toxins for the brain. I would rather be in a room full of mustard gas because that is what network stations do to one's mind, especially the ultra-sensationalist like Fox, MSNBC, CNN etc. They all have a bias. None report the facts. They'll either say that Einstein drank a glass of water that was either half-empty or half-full instead of just reporting that Einstein drank a glass of water!

They're all too polarizing. They are all damaging America because they dehumanize our fellow Americans. If my next door neighbor were a pedophile, MSNBC would attack him because he voted Republican. Fox would attack him because he voted Democrat. No one would attack him because he lives across the street from a day care. Jon Stewart would attack the neighbor both for his pedophilia and the system that allowed him to live there. Colbert would attack him because his American flag in the front lawn wasn't big enough. That is my issue with network news using a very exaggerated example.

Now, I'd better shut up before I'm accused of being a Communist, a Liberal, a Conservative, a Fascist or all four of the above.

[/rant ending]

 

[Albion]

Not really. My brother is such a person from, as much as I hate to use such polarizing and dehumanizing language, "the left" and the main criticism is the blatant bias.

Seems to me that's what I said.

-Spelling "Osama" instead of "Obama".

I don't believe I've ever witnessed that done on Fox News.

O'Riley's reaction to Eminem's newest music video in the section where he made fun of Palin. O'Riley acts as if Eminem may as well have assassinated the president, the pope and the dalai lama in the same day.

That's quite an exaggeration, if you ask me, and nothing that advances your point.

They're all too polarizing. They are all damaging America because they dehumanize our fellow Americans. If my next door neighbor were a pedophile, MSNBC would attack him because he voted Republican. Fox would attack him because he voted Democrat. No one would attack him because he lives across the street from a day care. Jon Stewart would attack the neighbor both for his pedophilia and the system that allowed him to live there. Colbert would attack him because his American flag in the front lawn wasn't big enough. That is my issue with network news using a very exaggerated example.

I appreciate that concern. So long as it's understood that the Left and the Right both have their favorite news services, I can't argue with that. Where I came in was on a thread specifically dealing with Fox, as though the Left's claim that somehow Fox is the only one with a bias has a shred of truth to it.

 

[Lady Bug]

Where I came in was with a thread specifically dealing with Fox, however, as though the Left's claim that somehow it's the only one with a bias has a shred of truth to it.

that was basically my point as well. the notion that Fox is the only unfair news source, when that simply isn't true. That was all.

 

[BelindaP]

I view Fox and MSNBC as slanted equally--in opposite directions. CNN is slanted a bit to the left. NPR is the closest I can find to unslanted.

 

[Sketcher]

ah, ok.

Fox does seem to lean on the right side. But if you're right-leaning to begin with, I suppose that the bias would not perturb you.

Or you could say that the mainstream news media is biased to the left, and the fact that Fox is not makes it LOOK like it's biased to the right. You'll find it interesting to know that Ed Rendell, Democrat, publicly stated that the fairest coverage of the Democratic Primary was on Fox.

 

[BelindaP]

Or you could say that the mainstream news media is biased to the left, and the fact that Fox is not makes it LOOK like it's biased to the right. You'll find it interesting to know that Ed Rendell, Democrat, publicly stated that the fairest coverage of the Democratic Primary was on Fox.

Who is Ed Rendell?

 

[Albion]

I view Fox and MSNBC as slanted equally--in opposite directions. CNN is slanted a bit to the left.

I think that's an accurate comment.

NPR is the closest I can find to unslanted.

Can't agree there. NPR is probably more slanted to the Left than any others. They just do it more carefully than MSNBC or the Big Three (ABC, NBC, CBS) do.

 

[Albion]

Who is Ed Rendell?

Governor of Pennsylvania and former chairman of the Democratic National Committee.

 

[BelindaP]

I just looked him up. He didn't give blanket approval to Fox' political coverage. Just to their coverage of the Democratic primary campaign. Given that he was a big-time Hillary supporter, it makes sense that he would dub the network who constantly referred to Barack Hussein Obama and happily carried coverage of his potentially being the antichrist as 'unbiased.'

As one of Hillary Clinton's staunchest supporters, Rendell has argued that most media outlets coverage of her campaign have been biased. On March 31, 2008 he congratulated Fox News on what he considered to be the best campaign coverage. Addressing Fox & Friends host Steve Doocy, he said, "I think during this entire primary coverage, starting in Iowa and up to the present, Fox has done the fairest job, has remained the most objective of all the cable networks." Rendell continued, "You actually have done a very balanced job of reporting the news, and some of the other stations are just caught up with Senator Obama, who is a great guy, but Senator Obama can do no wrong, and Senator Clinton can do no right."

 

[Sketcher]

Who is Ed Rendell?

Governor of Pennsylvania. Former DNC chair.

 

[Albion]

I just looked him up. He didn't give blanket approval to Fox' political coverage. Just to their coverage of the Democratic primary campaign.

If you re-read Twisted Sketch's post, that's exactly what he said.

Given that he was a big-time Hillary supporter, it makes sense that he would dub the network who constantly referred to Barack Hussein Obama

Are you just making that up or are you forgetting where you heard that usage?