Fox News Biased against Unbelievers

[Vigile]

Or, we could all just be required to use public transportation systems in the nude. 

 

 

Leave it to a gay Texan to point out the obvious

 

Great idea TFT

[trashy]

My point is that every organization that puts itself out there as a bona fide news outlet should be held to equally high standards.  No matter whether they have a liberal or libertarian or conservative point of view they could still turn out good, honest and fair news content and their viewers/readers/listeners should demand that they do.

I agree wholeheartedly.

[Cynical Realist]

From what I can see online the people behind Outfoxed are part of the liberal/progressive/whatever group that has one unifying characteristic:  hatred of Bush.    Jim Gilliam, Robert Greenwald, News Hounds - It takes less than five minutes at each site to find seething hatred for Bush.  So a bunch of the anti-Bush crowd think that Fox is evil.....why should I find their take on Fox credible?

 

And my apologies for taking this thread a bit off-road.....

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Because maybe both Fox and Bush are fucking lying pieces of shit and that's why there are some well thought out and researched documentaries like Outfoxed. Just because you hate something or someone doesn't mean you can't tell the truth about them. You need to come up with some better logic on that one.

I worked for Fox News for several years (not just an internet boast, I can scan a copy of my Fox news credentials that I have tucked away somewhere and post them after I get back from vacation in a week and a half) I was in the Washington branch on a daily basis and heard Br(sh)it Hume, news writers and reporters talk. I traveled on the Dole/Kemp presidential campain for two months in 96 when Fox news was a start up and heard the talks given during the 2nd Clinton Inauguration coverage that Fox produced. I know the shit that goes on at Fox. Even if I never sat a foot in the place it's pretty easy to see how full of shit they are and their right wing conserative agenda (and please don't say "So, other networks do stuff...blah blahl blah").

 

Fuck bush and Faux News.

[Cynical Realist]

Let me add that even back in 96 and the few years after when I worked for Fox I was a Fundamentalist/Reformed Christian who voted for Bob Dole and was shocked at the bias that I saw. So it's not like I had an axe to grind because I didn't like Fox news or what they were doing.

[Vigile]

I got SO burned out on politics and news in general after the last election that I almost never check on it.  We still listen to a local news/talk station in the morning while we get ready for work but if I can ever talk my wife into it I would switch to a podcast in a heartbeat.  If I could rid myself of news completely I don't think I'd miss it.  That's the problem with being neo-libertarian - conservatives AND liberals piss you off on a regular basis!

 

While our political paradigms are probably slightly in opposition to one another (though I'm probably closest to libertarian also), I couldn't agree more. I burned myself out with political overload before the last election; hell, for most of my adult life. Once it was over I turned it all off and have done my best to tune it out. I'm just sick to death of it all. I'm moving more and more towards the position that both sides of the debate are blinded by agendas and that government serves as just one giant mafia organization whose purpose is to act as a parasite on society. I admit I get sucked into debates every now and then, but personally I would rather spend the rest of my life enjoying my weekends, drinking tequila on the beach and letting the terrorists, the lobbyists, and the other idealists fight it out amongst themselves.

[Vixentrox]

Because maybe both Fox and Bush are fucking lying pieces of shit and that's why there are some well thought out and researched documentaries like Outfoxed. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

You say it like any other politician isn't a liar.....

[Cynical Realist]

You say it like any other politician isn't a liar.....

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I'm sorry if I gave that impression. I don't trust ANY politician. Bush, however takes lying to dizzying heights.

[Vigile]

And yes, I no longer watch CBS News - I felt that Dan Rather's style was too dramatic and that he was too eager to get the exclusive or be the first to report something.  The election report was the last straw.

 

I have been disgusted with Rather for years. After reading one of his books I decided that he is just a blatantly self-aggrandizing blow hard.

 

I wouldn't defend any network media outlet though. Unbiased news is almost an oxymoron when applied to most national news outlets and America is not the exception to the rule on this matter. I could tell you stories from both Russia and Italy that make the media problems in the US appear tame.

[Vigile]

No, my only requirement would be that the source we be at least open to the possibility that Bush isn't a Fascist dictator.   

 

Damn! You just selected me out in one cool slice.

[Cynical Realist]

No, my only requirement would be that the source we be at least open to the possibility that Bush isn't a Fascist dictator.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

So you're basically looking for someone who's deaf, dumb and retarded to be the source?

[trashy]

While our political paradigms are probably slightly in opposition to one another (though I'm probably closest to libertarian also), I couldn't agree more.  I burned myself out with political overload before the last election; hell, for most of my adult life.  Once it was over I turned it all off and have done my best to tune it out.  I'm just sick to death of it all.  I'm moving more and more towards the position that both sides of the debate are blinded by agendas and that government serves as just one giant mafia organization whose purpose is to act as a parasite on society.  I admit I get sucked into debates every now and then, but personally I would rather spend the rest of my life enjoying my weekends, drinking tequila on the beach and letting the terrorists, the lobbyists, and the other idealists fight it out amongst themselves.

I'm with you there, man. I got sucked into this thread and we could throw down another 100 posts without changing one single mind. We would, however, end up pissing each other off. Bush lied, Clinton lied, Fox lied, CBS lied, blah, blah, blah. I have a liberal acquaintance that I've debated off and on since the 2000 campaign. Guess what - he's still liberal, I'm still libertarian and we don't talk at all any more. It's just not good use of my time. Kinda like debating evolution vs. creation. LOL

[trashy]

So you're basically looking for someone who's deaf, dumb and retarded to be the source? 

I hope that's not your best debate tactic.....

[Vigile]

I'm with you there, man.  I got sucked into this thread and we could throw down another 100 posts without changing one single mind.  We would, however, end up pissing each other off.  Bush lied, Clinton lied, Fox lied, CBS lied, blah, blah, blah.  I have a liberal acquaintance that I've debated off and on since the 2000 campaign.  Guess what - he's still liberal, I'm still libertarian and we don't talk at all any more.  It's just not good use of my time.  Kinda like debating evolution vs. creation. LOL

 

I wish you could see how hard I'm laughing right now. If sports and religion is the opiate of the masses, then politics certainly plays that role for the rest of us. I'm closing in on 40 and hopefully I'll be able to turn on and tune it out for the second half of my exisitence. (We need a peace smilie)

[☆ TexasFreethinker ☆]

Minds do get changed about important topics. As Ex-Christians we're living proof of that.

 

Debating may not be the most effective way to accomplish that, tho. I wish I knew what was, especially for the religion disagreements.

[Cynical Realist]

I hope that's not your best debate tactic.....

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

No. I'm sorry. It's a joke. I really am a very nice, fun loving person until it comes to the subject of Bush, Neo Cons and Fundy Christians and then my blood pressure just goes nuts. So I apologize for the comment.

 

Anyway, another thing about Bush that some may find interesting. The utter lack of respect he has for the office and for the US citizens. Jay Leno thinks this is funny but it's really sad.

 

http://www.nobeliefs.com/politics/BushFlip.mov

[Guest Son of Belial]

  Of course, I'm not an atheist though either.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

My mistake and apologies.

[Amethyst]

I personally don't watch the news on TV that much, and when I do, it's CNN or ABC. I tend to go online more so I can look on multiple sites because some sites will have stories the others don't.

[♦ nivek ♦]

I just reload a lotta Vetos for the upcoming Ballistics Parties...

 

Never have enuff vetos..

 

If its teevised, printed, or broadcast, the source is suspect, slanted and biased, no matter who or what source reports it..

 

All *news* is bullshit..

 

kL

[a midnight star]

So in other words, if we believe in the war, we believe that it is not Bush but in reality the ACLU that is facist, then that would mean that I am stupid and moronic?

Even though I have stated my case in intellegent language why I believe the way that I do, I am still stupid?

 

 

Anyways,

hannity and Colmes are both respected radio hosts in their own right. Hannity is conservative while colmes is liberal. This is a show that I enjoy because it shows BOTH sides. Yes the one idiot may have said those things, but I can state with 95% confindence (95 only because I missed the show in question) that there was someone from the other side with a different view point.

 

To me that is fair and balanced. To give BOTH sides a chance to make their argument and letting the people decide who they want to believe. It is so much more balanced than the rest of the media who only shows one side and states it as truth and that if you don't agree then you are an idiot. What is fair and balanced in that? I refuse to watch news programs that will tell me what I should think. I want to see both sides and make up my own mind.

 

I think that this forum is fair and balanced. Does that mean I agree with everthing that is posted? NO. But I respect everybodies right to have that opinion and I thank the staff here for allowing me to have just as much right to vioce my opinions.

[a midnight star]

**** I really am a very nice, fun loving person until it comes to the subject of Bush, Neo Cons and Fundy Christians and then my blood pressure just goes nuts. So I apologize for the comment.*****

 

In other words, your opinion is the only one that is correct and true? I could say the same about your opinion, but I won't. I only ask that you respect me and my right to have my own opinions. Bullying and treating others opinions as garbage is no different that xians who do the same.

[Japedo]

Agreed:  Fox is the UN network - unfair and unbalanced.

 

*******

 

The reason I'm against race-based profiling is three-fold. 

 

1.  If you target someone based solely on their race/ethnicity, then you're going to piss off a lot of innocent people.  The great majority of Arab men are not terrorists.  Many have moved to this country because they whole-heartedly embraced our way of life and our freedoms.  They escaped the existence they hated so much in middle east countries.  Targeting them because they look Arabic does great harm to the faith they've placed in American justice and freedoms.

 

2.  Terrorists are smart.  If you start using racial profiling, they'll just switch tactics or use people who don't fit the profile.  In other words, I think we'd be giving up our idea of fair justice for no additional security.

 

3.  Profiling someone based solely on race gives the signal that it's ok to discriminate against those people.  Sadly, many Americans don't need much incentive or validation to be prejudiced.  If the government can discriminate based on race, then why shouldn't a restaurant be allowed to hang a "No Arabs" sign to "protect" their non-Arab customers from a potential attack?

 

 

 

I agree with you TFT that profiling is not the way to go. For much the same reasons as you state here.

 

 

We already saw in the case of Johnny walker (who was captured over in Afghanistan) A Clean shave and a hair cut he looks anything but the typical taliban "Muslim". Same can be said for any number of photos of the terrorist. Islam also doesn't attract just a "Race" of people, it's a Religion and it carries many different cultures and faces with it. Radicals are Radicals, and it goes a lot deeper then just appearance.

 

 

The shoe bomber looks like he fell out of a dumpster in NY City for gosh sakes. There is nothing about his appearance that would cause one to think he was a "terrorist". IT was the wick sticking out of his shoes he tried to light that alerted everyone.

 

 

Looking at appearance the vast majority of Americans can't tell a Greek from an Egyptian or Iranian by looking at them. Look at some of the major league baseball players for example. Dominic Republic, Mexico, Greece, Turkey, Spain et al. Because someone "appears" to have dark skin doesn't mean jack. Profiling would be a waste of time and money. Not to mention shredding the already dieing Constitution.

Darker skin could mean many different lifestyles and cultures. Profiling sounds good on the surface but realistically it won't work and as you say, Piss off a Lot of Innocent people who deserve to be protected by the Constitution. Government doesn't have the right to say you "Look" guilty of something based on a gut feeling or look. It's madness to suggest a Free county would resort to such things. It's also madness to give excuse to it, Rights can only be abused so long as the people give permission for it.

 

 

 

Tie Bin ladins hair back in a pony tail, shave his face, give him a pair of 501's, sneakers, and a shirt and all American baseball hat and no one would recognize him. Hell most probably wouldn't even suggest he be "Profiled". The poor kid that was shot in the face 5 times a little while back was from Brazil over in South America Christ sakes, That is exactly what the "Profiling" does, Harms innocent and harasses innocent people more then it does 'protecting' society . I'm still pissed about that bullshit too.

[Amethyst]

I agree with you, Japedo. But I seriously doubt Osama would ever shave. It's a fundy Muslim thing, IIRC.

[Japedo]

I agree with you, Japedo.  But I seriously doubt Osama would ever shave.  It's a fundy Muslim thing, IIRC.

 

 

I know, I was illustrating a point of how easy it would be to hide if the Terrorist wanted to.

 

However, He could put on leather and buy a hog, his beard would blend in there of course he would have to lose his sheets. .

[TruthWarrior]

I used to help run the fan club (forum/webpage) for the FOX & Friends morning show. Things started out all fun, but then lots of political events happened in the news and the conservative side of FOX, and their fans, became really blatant. Nearly all the members of the club were conservative, maybe a couple of libertarians, liberals rarely spoke up. Eventually the clubs forum collapsed in flames (personal attacks), and gossiping. The show stopped advertising our club as the official fan club and changed formats to be more serious too.

 

It doesnt really bother me though. But damn, sometimes their jingolisms get nasty! Mostly I watch CNN's Headline News channel and avoid commentary based news channels like the plague. Most of my news I get off the internet from Yahoo or Google. That way I can research it myself and really form my own opinion. With commentary news I noticed it does have an influence on me were I sympathize more with their bias. They seem to be sorta brainwashy.

[Guest aexapo]

I still don't get all the outrage....

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

While there -- in the past -- has been a liberal slant perhaps in the mainstream media (a slant toward fairness, justice, and equality), the mainstream news never forgot the primary reason they were there -- to report the news first, not opinion. The mainstream media was just as tough on Clinton policies as they were on Bush Sr. or Reagan, in fact, it has been said that the media avoidance practiced by the current administration was started by Clinton -- who hated the DC media.

 

At Fox, they don't report -- they digest and regurgitate some of the news important to conservatives, and only through a conservative point of view. When the white house admitted there were no WMDs in Iraq, it was not covered at Fox -- which is why many conservative Fox viewers still believe they're over there (we just haven't found them yet -- apparently).

 

Fox isn't the inverse of ABC News, it isn't even news. "Opinionators" were never part of the old news media -- the movie "Network" illustrates how such people were viewed or treated by news organizations.

 

Apparently, Howard Beale and gang now work at Fox.

 

Can you imagine what would happen if Peter Jennings said conservative CIA spies were "fair game" for assasination during his news report? It's happened on Fox -- are they still equal and balanced?