Jump to content

White House War On Fox News


Marksmu

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 266
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Not all the polls I've seen. Which one are you looking at? The Fox News poll that probably asked if you want the guvment to kill your grandma? It looks like the GOP will break the mold and not gain seats in an off year election. Not because the Dems are doing such a great job but because the GOP has nothing to offer.

The most recent rasmussen poll: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/september_2009/health_care_reform

56% oppose to only 42% in Favor. (thats a majority) Seniors of course are much more adamantly against it with 59% opposed.

The GOP doesnt have to offer anything other than no more OBAMA - for once the GOP is going to get to run against a figure head like the democrats have been doing for the last 8 years of BUSH. All the problems in the world are now Obamas problems, just like they were Bush's. He had time to fix them, and didnt....its a simple strategy pulled straight of the DNC playbook. Blame the guy everyone hates.

I didnt think it was possible, but Obama is actually more polarizing than Bush - His policies are more radical and left, than Bush's were right. He will go down in History as another Carter - one of the biggest mistakes ever made by this country.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The most recent rasmussen poll: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/september_2009/health_care_reform

56% oppose to only 42% in Favor. (thats a majority) Seniors of course are much more adamantly against it with 59% opposed.

The GOP doesnt have to offer anything other than no more OBAMA - for once the GOP is going to get to run against a figure head like the democrats have been doing for the last 8 years of BUSH. All the problems in the world are now Obamas problems, just like they were Bush's. He had time to fix them, and didnt....its a simple strategy pulled straight of the DNC playbook. Blame the guy everyone hates.

I didnt think it was possible, but Obama is actually more polarizing than Bush - His policies are more radical and left, than Bush's were right. He will go down in History as another Carter - one of the biggest mistakes ever made by this country.

Not sure the question they asked but I believe it was based on the reform outlined in that Senate Finance committee plan.

A poor excuse for bipartisanship that ensures a bill that no one could support. The link goes on to say that 61% believe Congress should reform health care.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The most recent rasmussen poll: http://www.rasmussen...lth_care_reform

56% oppose to only 42% in Favor. (thats a majority) Seniors of course are much more adamantly against it with 59% opposed.

The GOP doesnt have to offer anything other than no more OBAMA - for once the GOP is going to get to run against a figure head like the democrats have been doing for the last 8 years of BUSH. All the problems in the world are now Obamas problems, just like they were Bush's. He had time to fix them, and didnt....its a simple strategy pulled straight of the DNC playbook. Blame the guy everyone hates.

I didnt think it was possible, but Obama is actually more polarizing than Bush - His policies are more radical and left, than Bush's were right. He will go down in History as another Carter - one of the biggest mistakes ever made by this country.

Jimmy Carter. The conscience of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. He calls it like he sees it.

From FOX News...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rtfzMLS_-NU

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fifty-seven percent of all Americans now favor a public insurance option, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll, up from 52% in mid-August.

with the devil (republicans) - when they don't need to.

the sampling would explain quite a bit. i also prefer to use actual voters vs random adults when a poll like this is done.

Generally speaking, do you usually think of yourself as (a Democrat), (a Republican), an independent or what? IF NOT DEMOCRAT OR REPUBLICAN: Do you lean more towards the (Democratic Party) or (Republican Party)?

................................................................................................................--Non-Partisans-

................Democrat ........Republican .....Independent ...Other ....No op. Dem. Rep. Lean

10/18/09 ....33 ...................20 ........................42 .................4 ...........1 .........20 .... 19 .....8

INCOME. Which of the following CATEGORIES best describes your total annual household income before taxes, from all sources?

..................-------Less than $50k------- .--------More than $50k--------

...................NET <20k 20-35k 35-50k NET 50-75k 75-100k 100k+

10/18/09 .....53 ....17 ....19 .......17 ......44 .....18 ........ 12 ........ 15

EDIT: sorry for poor formatting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For those citing statistics, polls, numbers, and other relevant information - it would offer much better level of discourse here if you cite your sources (and thanks to those of you who make an effort to do so). Anecdotal stuff, well, we all take that for what is is. Thanks.

Why would I need to cite statistics when I can talk directly to God through prayer and he tells me so?

God one. Gallup zero.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The most recent rasmussen poll: http://www.rasmussen...lth_care_reform

56% oppose to only 42% in Favor. (thats a majority) Seniors of course are much more adamantly against it with 59% opposed.

Rasmussen? Seriously? Hey, guess what? The Daily Kos poll has 82% of Americans favoring it. Take that, Rasmussen!

Not sure the question they asked but I believe it was based on the reform outlined in that Senate Finance committee plan.

A poor excuse for bipartisanship that ensures a bill that no one could support. The link goes on to say that 61% believe Congress should reform health care.

B-b-b-b-but Rasmussen says only 42%! Rasmussen! You know, that keenly objective pollster without an agenda?! Surely you've heard of Rasmussen?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe the WH did a good thing after all, as other news organizations/blogs are digging into the Fox 24-hour distortion machine. That or The Huffington Post is reading HAIF.

The Ten Most Egregious Fox News Distortions (VIDEO)

1. Bill Hemmer Accuses Obama "Czar" Of Condoning Statutory Rape

2. Fox News Crops Biden Dishonestly

3. Fox News Deceptively Crops Obama On Health Care

4. Megyn Kelly Accuses Sonia Sotomayor Of "Reverse Racism"

5. Fox News Passes Off Republican Talking Points As Its Own Reporting

6. Fox News Misleads On PATRIOT Act

7. Chris Wallace Promotes "Death Book" Smear

8. Fox News Anchor Calls Obama Fist Bump A "Terrorist Fist Jab"

9. Fox News Makes Up Math

10. Fox News Promotes Tea Party Protests

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/20/the-ten-most-egregious-fo_n_327140.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For as long as I can remember, there has always been an attack on the sitting president by the rival party in both the press and politicians.

The main difference from the past is the "competition" of additional news outlets and the availability of information on the web (both reliable and not). Let's not forget all those "talk panels" that have sprung up like mushrooms, few if any, are nuetral in any definition of the word.

Our responsibilities as consumers of news is to set aside our own personal political bias and look at the news, whatever its source, and digest it accordingly.

If we fail to do so, then our political system as a whole may not survive the petty name calling and finger pointing that has been growing over the past few years.

Disclosure:

Did not vote for Obama, but support SOME of his policies, and watch several network and cable based news shows and a couple of talking panels.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Ten Most Egregious Fox News Distortions (VIDEO)

1. Bill Hemmer Accuses Obama "Czar" Of Condoning Statutory Rape

2. Fox News Crops Biden Dishonestly

3. Fox News Deceptively Crops Obama On Health Care

4. Megyn Kelly Accuses Sonia Sotomayor Of "Reverse Racism"

5. Fox News Passes Off Republican Talking Points As Its Own Reporting

6. Fox News Misleads On PATRIOT Act

7. Chris Wallace Promotes "Death Book" Smear

8. Fox News Anchor Calls Obama Fist Bump A "Terrorist Fist Jab"

9. Fox News Makes Up Math

10. Fox News Promotes Tea Party Protests

OK Number 4 illustrates the absurdity of this debate. You can't deny that Sonia Sotomayor often describes herself as a wise Latina woman. A lot of people believe that going around saying things like that is reverse racism. Imagine a white male Supreme Court justice describing himself as a wise white man. It's not appropriate and it indicates that you have a level of wisdom that only comes from being white.

To some people it's not reverse racism but to others it is. You can report that Sonia is a reverse racist and you'd be right. You can also report that she's not and you'd be right. It just depends on how you perceive it.

Right wing people have lived for 40 years with a liberal press and complained about it profusely. It's time for left wing people to have to live with a right wing press for a while. So far Obama has not done it gracefully.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even more criticism of Fox News from the real media.

http://www.newsweek....92/output/print

The Fox News pundits are on the defensive now.

The real shame is that it took the White House calling a spade a spade before the mainstream media would even begin to scrutinize itself. For how long have internet jockeys and basic cable comedians been the only ones with the courage to call attention to the gross propaganda pushed by Fox? More importantly, how can the average American be so dumb as to be duped by such apparent parlor trickery and truthiness sleights of hand? It's ridiculous that Fox acts the way they do, it's more ridiculous the rest of the media doesn't fry them for it, but it's most ridiculous people actually watch that garbage and swallow it whole.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm a regular viewer of both news networks... can't stand Lou Dobbs though.

Fox news is slanted and CNN is slanted, but the problem is that there are more left-leaners (CNN/HLN, MSNBC,) than right-leaners. Same thing with print media... the left far outnumbers the right. But there is a reason for that... we are becoming a left-of-center nation. There's no point in trying to deny that as a fact.

The other problem is that we're leaning more to the left, but not necessarily leaning more to the democrats. I personally think that CNN understands that a bit better than Fox News at this point. They're branching out and working hard to promote themselves as a "global channel" more than a partisan mouthpiece. Of the shows I regularly watch on Fox News (O'Reilly Factor, Huckabee, Shepard Smith), it's kind of disappointing that they don't focus on the growing diversity of our country. They continue to preach to a very slim segment of society. Juan Williams (a regular FNC contributor) has even said this on Hannity's show.

The best opinion show on television was Hannity and Colmes... hands down. It was a great way to try and make sense of the logic (or lack thereof) between the two groups, and then try to find your own viewpoint. I really miss that show.

But anyway, FNC serves a really important purpose by boldly proclaiming the opposing viewpoint. I don't want that to end or even be diminished. But I think they would do better to learn from CNN and try to look at a broader scope of the issues. They seem to gravitate around the same group of talking points... national debt, support our troops, Obamanomics... etc. Open up the eyes a little bit more, and it really is a good network.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To some people it's not reverse racism but to others it is. You can report that Sonia is a reverse racist and you'd be right. You can also report that she's not and you'd be right. It just depends on how you perceive it.

Not really. Not every subjective response has validity. I can call the sky green and then say that it's just my opinion, but it doesn't make my stupid statement valid. It's still a stupid statement, and it's still not true. It's not as true as calling the sky blue, no matter how much I try to justify it. It's still a false statement.

There seems to be some confusion on your part as to what exactly racism means, so here, from Merriam-Webster:

Main Entry: rac·ism Pronunciation: \ˈrā-ˌsi-zəm also -ˌshi-\Function: noun Date: 19331 : a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race<BR itxtvisited="1">2 : racial prejudice or discrimination

rac·ist \-sist also -shist\ noun or adjective

Explain to me how Sotomayor calling herself a "wise, Latina woman" in any way constitutes racism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not really. Not every subjective response has validity. I can call the sky green and then say that it's just my opinion, but it doesn't make my stupid statement valid. It's still a stupid statement, and it's still not true. It's not as true as calling the sky blue, no matter how much I try to justify it. It's still a false statement.

There seems to be some confusion on your part as to what exactly racism means, so here, from Merriam-Webster:

Explain to me how Sotomayor calling herself a "wise, Latina woman" in any way constitutes racism.

Because it implies that her wisdom comes from being latina. Even if she's not a racist she should have better sense that to say something like that. I would not tell anyone that I'm a wise white man so that's why I can make better decisions than others.

No matter how many times you say that describing herself as a wise latina is not racist it's not going to change the facts. You have to be able to respect other people. I respect your opinion that it's no racist. Can you respect mine? I don't need to insult the Huffington post becuase I don't agree with their beleifs. I just ask the same from democrats.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Explain to me how Sotomayor calling herself a "wise, Latina woman" in any way constitutes racism."

No more so than when someone who opposes the political direction our President wants to take our country is branded as a racist. Or maybe when two white kids stick it to ACORN. Or maybe when Limbaugh says Mcnabb ain't that good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guess I'm the only one in the forumn who would remotely ever consider the so called "mainstream news outlets" going on the Fox news attack due to their own poor ratings and share.... Purely desperation on their parts IMO.

Nuff said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Explain to me how Sotomayor calling herself a "wise, Latina woman" in any way constitutes racism."

No more so than when someone who opposes the political direction our President wants to take our country is branded as a racist. Or maybe when two white kids stick it to ACORN. Or maybe when Limbaugh says Mcnabb ain't that good.

Here is her exact quote.

"I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would, more often than not, reach a better conclusion."

By bringing her race into it she implies that her race gives her superior decision making ability to other races.

She has said that she will not be using this phrase again.

"Explain to me how Sotomayor calling herself a "wise, Latina woman" in any way constitutes racism."

No more so than when someone who opposes the political direction our President wants to take our country is branded as a racist. Or maybe when two white kids stick it to ACORN. Or maybe when Limbaugh says Mcnabb ain't that good.

Rush Limbaugh would have had to say "I think I would be a better quarterback than McNabb because I'm a wise white man." for it to be comparable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

so an article written by the author of The Bush Tragedy is the real media?

'The Bush Tragedy' is considered one of the best books written about a sitting president. It is an analysis of the Bush administration, something we should be grateful to have. Authors such as Jacob Weisberg often write for MSM publications, and I don't see how his writing this heavily researched book would change that. If he had written a factually inaccurate or slanderous book about the administration, that would be something else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is her exact quote.

"I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would, more often than not, reach a better conclusion."

By bringing her race into it she implies that her race gives her superior decision making ability to other races.

She has said that she will not be using this phrase again.

Rush Limbaugh would have had to say "I think I would be a better quarterback than McNabb because I'm a wise white man." for it to be comparable.

jgriff - nail - hit - head - her statements WERE racist - Attica, you saying that its not a racist statement is just disingenuous. Her attempt to clarify it was that she would think that her diversity of experiences, that white people do not experience, would lead her to come to a more compassionate decision.

Any way you skin that horse, Sotomayer is a racist - she said she would make a better decision than a white person because she is a hispanic with a more diverse background.

Thats like me saying - I will make better choices than you because I am white and you are not. Its just a different way of saying it. She is a racist.

And the other networks are on the defensive. FOX is crushing them - more people watch Fox than all the other networks combined, on ALL of the shows... the Democrats want the main stream media to make you think that the FOX channel is only for extremists and that its not news, because they want to control what news actually gets to you. Unfortunately for them, their audience is shrinking, and Fox's is growing - its b/c more people are disgusted with this administration than are happy with it. People are sick and tired of hearing the same tired rhetoric coming from the "news" channels...they hear one thing on the "news" and then when they step outside their house, their eyes show them something completely different. Common sense is about to take over again, and when it does, the liberal left are in big trouble.

They are fighting a losing battle - the Democrats power is a going to be a short 4 years, but a very destructive 4.

Fox news sad commentary on the education of America? Are you effin kidding me? - I watch Fox, dont buy into it all, but sure as heck like it alot more than the other networks, and I have more education than 99.99% of Americans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is her exact quote.

"I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would, more often than not, reach a better conclusion."

By bringing her race into it she implies that her race gives her superior decision making ability to other races.

She has said that she will not be using this phrase again.

She won't use it anymore because it's become a political hot button. That's it. That's the only reason.

She doesn't say her being Latina gives her the ability to inherently make decisions better than old white dudes, just that the experiences she's had as a Latina (as opposed to the experiences old, white dudes have - for those keeping track at home) give her a different perspective than the norm. And, considering minorities and the poor are more often targeted by the judicial system, that perspective will tend to be less lopsided and more judicious. Why is that a difficult concept to grasp? Here, as an example of an accurate comparison, consider that I'm over six feet tall. I would hope a wise, tall man, with the frequency that he hits his head against the door lintel, would be better able to judge how high that lintel should be. Yeah, I've got a better understanding of how high it should be, better than Muggsy Bogues, not just because I'm simply taller, but because I'm taller and that extra height causes me to frequently bump my head. You get it now?

Again I request for you to explain how that's racist. Or, do you deny the judicial system targets certain groups over others?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

She won't use it anymore because it's become a political hot button. That's it. That's the only reason.

She doesn't say her being Latina gives her the ability to inherently make decisions better than old white dudes, just that the experiences she's had as a Latina (as opposed to the experiences old, white dudes have - for those keeping track at home) give her a different perspective than the norm. And, considering minorities and the poor are more often targeted by the judicial system, that perspective will tend to be less lopsided and more judicious. Why is that a difficult concept to grasp? Here, as an example of an accurate comparison, consider that I'm over six feet tall. I would hope a wise, tall man, with the frequency that he hits his head against the door lintel, would be better able to judge how high that lintel should be. Yeah, I've got a better understanding of how high it should be, better than Muggsy Bogues, not just because I'm simply taller, but because I'm taller and that extra height causes me to frequently bump my head. You get it now?

Again I request for you to explain how that's racist. Or, do you deny the judicial system targets certain groups over others?

1) Its still racist - you dont think so - we do. She chose race to make her decision better. Unlike race, height can be measured, easily - with any number of tools. I can design a billion different doors you can walk through or stairs you can go up without hitting your head. Like it or not, I can do that. I can not, though change my race, I could be raised in an adopted Hispanic family in freaking Mexico, and they would still say I dont understand their plight because I am white and not hispanic. Is that TOO difficult for you to grasp?

2) The judicial system does not target anyone - its color blind by definition. I challenge you to show me a single law or statute that includes race as a factor in a judicial setting. Do minorities commit a disproportionate number of crimes? yes they do. Is that racist to say? NO - its a fact - but you will probably think its racist.

Just because minorities use up more judicial resources because they commit more crimes, does not mean the courts target these groups.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

jgriff - nail - hit - head - her statements WERE racist - Attica, you saying that its not a racist statement is just disingenuous. Her attempt to clarify it was that she would think that her diversity of experiences, that white people do not experience, would lead her to come to a more compassionate decision.

Any way you skin that horse, Sotomayer is a racist - she said she would make a better decision than a white person because she is a hispanic with a more diverse background.

Thats like me saying - I will make better choices than you because I am white and you are not. Its just a different way of saying it. She is a racist.

And the other networks are on the defensive. FOX is crushing them - more people watch Fox than all the other networks combined, on ALL of the shows... the Democrats want the main stream media to make you think that the FOX channel is only for extremists and that its not news, because they want to control what news actually gets to you. Unfortunately for them, their audience is shrinking, and Fox's is growing - its b/c more people are disgusted with this administration than are happy with it. People are sick and tired of hearing the same tired rhetoric coming from the "news" channels...they hear one thing on the "news" and then when they step outside their house, their eyes show them something completely different. Common sense is about to take over again, and when it does, the liberal left are in big trouble.

They are fighting a losing battle - the Democrats power is a going to be a short 4 years, but a very destructive 4.

Fox news sad commentary on the education of America? Are you effin kidding me? - I watch Fox, dont buy into it all, but sure as heck like it alot more than the other networks, and I have more education than 99.99% of Americans.

Er... ok. Whatever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just in case some of you don't think that the media has had a liberal bias for 40 years. Here's a quote from the father of TV journalism, Walter Cronkite.

I believe that most of us reporters are liberal, but not because we consciously have chosen that particular color in the political spectrum. More likely it is because most of us served our journalistic apprenticeships as reporters covering the seamier side of our cities – the crimes, the tenement fires, the homeless and the hungry, the underclothed and undereducated.

Source: http://www.thezephyr.com/cronkite/cronkite081403.htm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1) Its still racist - you dont think so - we do. She chose race to make her decision better. Unlike race, height can be measured, easily - with any number of tools. I can design a billion different doors you can walk through or stairs you can go up without hitting your head. Like it or not, I can do that. I can not, though change my race, I could be raised in an adopted Hispanic family in freaking Mexico, and they would still say I dont understand their plight because I am white and not hispanic. Is that TOO difficult for you to grasp?

2) The judicial system does not target anyone - its color blind by definition. I challenge you to show me a single law or statute that includes race as a factor in a judicial setting. Do minorities commit a disproportionate number of crimes? yes they do. Is that racist to say? NO - its a fact - but you will probably think its racist.

Just because minorities use up more judicial resources because they commit more crimes, does not mean the courts target these groups.

1) Again, not everything is subjective. The definition for racism is pretty clear on this. It isn't racism, pure and simple. It doesn't matter how loudly you scream it.

2) Yes it does. It does target poor people and minorities. Do you really have the gall to deny that? Really?

BTW, nice rhetorical style, Glenn Beck. I challenge you to produce the woman that Glenn Beck didn't rape and murder in 1990. Can't find her? That must mean he raped and murdered a woman in 1990, huh?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just in case some of you don't think that the media has had a liberal bias for 40 years. Here's a quote from the father of TV journalism, Walter Cronkite.

I believe that most of us reporters are liberal, but not because we consciously have chosen that particular color in the political spectrum. More likely it is because most of us served our journalistic apprenticeships as reporters covering the seamier side of our cities – the crimes, the tenement fires, the homeless and the hungry, the underclothed and undereducated.

Source: http://www.thezephyr...nkite081403.htm

This is telling that you cite an opinion as a declarative fact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


All of the HAIF
None of the ads!
HAIF+
Just
$5!


×
×
  • Create New...