Fox News Biased against Unbelievers

[Guest aexapo]

  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.

 

The idea that "Hannity & Colmes" is a bi-partisan talkshow (ala' CNN's Crossfire) is the biggest joke in all of liberaldom (if there is such a place), and the joke's on Alan Colmes (if he hasn't figured it out yet). No one heard of "colmes" until that show went on the air. H&C is Hannity's show, and he hired that meek dumbass doofus (colmes) off of the stand-up comedy circuit -- and he must have sucked at that, too, cause he no one ever heard of him doing that, either.

 

Respected radio hosts? Do you know what liberal radio network runs the Alan Colmes Show? None. The producers gave Colmes his "talk-radio" show on the (now, get this) the FOX RADIO NETWORK just to make the appearance of balance.

 

Hannity hired a sheep to bleet foul occasionally on cue, and that wouldn't mind getting ran over continuously throughout the show -- that's exactly how it happens on H&C. It's almost funny -- especially when Ann Coulter is on -- they treat poor Colmes like he's the idiot uncle that lives up in the attic.

 

---------------------------------------

 

Ann: "Aww, look Sean . . . did you see that little frown when you bashed Hillary? Little Alan has grown a point of view! Good boy!"

 

Sean: "See how balanced we are?" he says, patting Alan on the head. "Now, go wash my car -- and don't fart in it like you did last time."

[Guest aexapo]

Sorry - I based the defending remark based on what you said earlier...

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.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Hopefully, we'll get back to high standards one day. The way it is now, Fox sets the tone (which is mostly witch-hunting anyone who has the slightest criticism of arch-fundamentalism), and the other news organizations just play along -- refusing to ask the hard questions, or appear even slightly critical of the Prez (none of them want to get Rathered).

 

All in all, people are turning off the news media in general -- not believing a bit of it. Despite the hestitance of the news media to investigate any Bush criticism, Americans in general are slowly seeing past this and garnering a growing distrust of the President -- all by themselves.

 

Had Fox been the pace-setter for US news "reporting" during the 70's, Nixon would have finished his second-term, and would have been the hero of Vietnam. Woodward and Bernstein would still be in jail for "treason."

[trashy]

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.

With that opinion you have millions of liberals in agreement with you. And you have millions of conservatives holding the exact opposite opinion. And both groups think they are right, and neither can understand how the other can't see the truth.

 

Thusly, and yeah, I shall not enter the fray.

 

(hey, that rhymes!)

[Fweethawt]

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

That's hysterical!

Leave it to a gay Texan to point out the obvious

 

Great idea TFT

 

Can you imagine the reaction and the look on people's faces when the bus goes over uneven railroad tracks?

 

 

Everyone would be looking everywhere, and the explosive laughter would probably blow the windows out of the bus.

[Sokudo Ningyou]

And that is why I don't watch the news. I'll read bits of USA Today, the local Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, and the independent Shepherd Express, scan the Daily Kos blog, and otherwise get my information from outlets other than television, as I never watch it period. My boss, the raging conservative, thinks I'm an idiot who has no idea what she's talking about because I don't watch FOX News. I just try not to talk politics or religion with him, period; brick wall.

[I Broke Free]

This is a show that I enjoy because it shows BOTH sides.

 

 

That may be “balanced” but it is not journalism. Real journalism means letting both sides speak then investigating both claims for truth and accuracy and then reporting that information to the readers or viewers.

 

Allowing a liar to give his side of the story just for the sake of “balance” does a disservice to the public who needs accurate reporting to vote.

[Purple Rhino]

As in everything else neither side is 100% correct.

 

If I listened to only one viewpoint be it right or left I am only feeding my own POV and will likely learn nothing.

 

The main problem IMO is tha news is now big business and it is more entertainment than actual facts. Talking points have replaced researching a story. The population of the US is far too content with the political divide and fuels the propaganda machines by buying hook lin and sinker whatever their talking heads spew.

 

Those who support blindly either side deserve exactly what they get. The rest of us have to go for the ride granted, but at least going for a ride I did not support leaves my conscience clear.

 

PR

[Vixentrox]

Had the liberal media of today been around in WW2 we would have lost.

[Vigile]

Had the liberal media of today been around in WW2 we would have lost.

 

 

Now Vixentrox, in general we stand politically opposed, but I also generally respect your oppinions as they are well stated and to the point. But this statement is a bit unfair and ungrounded don't you think?

[☆ TexasFreethinker ☆]

Now Vixentrox, in general we stand politically opposed, but I also generally respect your oppinions as they are well stated and to the point.  But this statement is a bit unfair and ungrounded don't you think?

At the very least it's pure conjecture stated as fact.

[Lanakila]

As in everything else neither side is 100% correct.

 

If I listened to only one viewpoint be it right or left I am only feeding my own POV and will likely learn nothing.

 

The main problem IMO is tha news is now big business and it is more entertainment than actual facts. Talking points have replaced researching a story. The population of the US is far too content with the political divide and fuels the propaganda machines by buying hook lin and sinker whatever their talking heads spew.

 

Those who support blindly either side deserve exactly what they get. The rest of us have to go for the ride granted, but at least going for a ride I did not support leaves my conscience clear.

 

PR

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I agree with what you are saying here. I mostly get my news online for this reason.

[a midnight star]

***Respected radio hosts? Do you know what liberal radio network runs the Alan Colmes Show? None. The producers gave Colmes his "talk-radio" show on the (now, get this) the FOX RADIO NETWORK just to make the appearance of balance.****

 

Umm, no. He is being paid now (outside of his show on fox) by XM radio

 

**That may be “balanced” but it is not journalism. Real journalism means letting both sides speak then investigating both claims for truth and accuracy and then reporting that information to the readers or viewers.****

 

Again WRONG. Both sides do show their proof. It is that proof that is shown to debunk either side.

[Vixentrox]

Now Vixentrox, in general we stand politically opposed, but I also generally respect your oppinions as they are well stated and to the point.  But this statement is a bit unfair and ungrounded don't you think?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Can you imagine what have happened? Whining becuase of causulties, wanting to show the American public bodies and caskets of dead Americans, harping on every defeat and mistaken intelligence, demanding the incompotent administration to step down, claim it was "America's" fault that we were at war. Hounding the military for every percervied crime and claiming the tactics were racists. Oh and heaven forbid if the government squashed some reporting like they did in WW2. The press would be crucifying the governemnt for trying to keep secrets.

[a midnight star]

***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).****

 

Funny how I don't listen to anyother news channel and I heard that they didn't FIND any. But then again there is a difference between saying that they "didn't find any" and "there wasn't any". Seems to me the Bush admin stated that they haven't "found" any. Not that there wasn't any. HUGE difference and exactly why I do not watch ABC, CNN etc... they are the opinion pieces and they do misconstrue the facts in order to fit the "liberal" model.

[Vigile]

Can you imagine what have happened?  Whining becuase of causulties, wanting to show the American public bodies and caskets of dead Americans, harping on every defeat and mistaken intelligence, demanding the incompotent administration to step down, claim it was "America's" fault that we were at war.  Hounding the military for every percervied crime and claiming the tactics were racists.  Oh and heaven forbid if the government squashed some reporting like they did in WW2.  The press would be crucifying the governemnt for trying to keep secrets.

 

Ok, I can see this is not going to go anywhere good so I will regretfully abstain.

[☆ TexasFreethinker ☆]

Can you imagine what have happened?  Whining becuase of causulties, wanting to show the American public bodies and caskets of dead Americans, harping on every defeat and mistaken intelligence, demanding the incompotent administration to step down, claim it was "America's" fault that we were at war.  Hounding the military for every percervied crime and claiming the tactics were racists.  Oh and heaven forbid if the government squashed some reporting like they did in WW2.  The press would be crucifying the governemnt for trying to keep secrets.

Of course the situation was different then, and many Americans are able to see the difference.

 

WWII - we were attacked. Iraq - we did the attacking.

WWII - Germany and Japan invaded other countries first. Iraq - we did the invading.

 

Some wars are justified and some aren't. Just because a president puts our country into a war doesn't automatically make it valid, and thank dog for citizens and a press that will call him on it when it's not valid.

[TruthWarrior]

Can you imagine what have happened?  Whining becuase of causulties, wanting to show the American public bodies and caskets of dead Americans, harping on every defeat and mistaken intelligence, demanding the incompotent administration to step down, claim it was "America's" fault that we were at war.  Hounding the military for every percervied crime and claiming the tactics were racists.  Oh and heaven forbid if the government squashed some reporting like they did in WW2.  The press would be crucifying the governemnt for trying to keep secrets.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Not to mention what the reaction would be to Hiroshima and Nagasaki!

[Vixentrox]

Not to mention what the reaction would be to Hiroshima and Nagasaki! 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yeah...not "hurray the war is over" but...cries for trials of the American war criminals.

[a midnight star]

Exactly. If it wasn't for the liberals now, we would have already won this war. Hey, we may have been able to win in nam too.

[I Broke Free]

**That may be “balanced” but it is not journalism. Real journalism means letting both sides speak then investigating both claims for truth and accuracy and then reporting that information to the readers or viewers.****

 

Again WRONG. Both sides do show their proof. It is that proof that is shown to debunk either side.

 

I disagree totally. Having both sides present their “proof” is a good place to start, but a journalist is supposed to investigate that information and present their findings to the public. It is the job of journalists to investigate, not just present arguments.

[Purple Rhino]

It seems that this thread is going to be as productive as a season of crossfire. So I'll bow out. I'm hopeful that no matter which side turns out to be more flawed in their perspective they will be able to stand by what they have/had believed.

But that too would be unamerican.

 

 

PR

[Guest Son of Belial]

***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).****

 

Funny how I don't listen to anyother news channel and I heard that they didn't FIND any. But then again there is a difference between saying that they "didn't find any" and "there wasn't any". Seems to me the Bush admin stated that they haven't "found" any. Not that there wasn't any. HUGE difference and exactly why I do not watch ABC, CNN etc... they are the opinion pieces and they do misconstrue the facts in order to fit the "liberal" model.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Not true. They have recordings of Bush admitting he knew from the beginning there were no WMD. He just wanted to invade Iraq.

[a midnight star]

Show your sources.

[Guest Son of Belial]

Show your sources.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Try http://www.downingstreetmemo.com/

 

You can read for yourself that Bush made up the whole WMD scare so he could attack Iraq. As such, he should be held accountable for every life that was lost in a war with no reason to exist aside from his lies.

 

Funny that the Republicans wanted to impeach Bush for perjury, but now we can see Bush's perjury has cost thousands of lives... and the same Republicans are being awful quiet about it.

[shy1680]

I'm sorry that people here in America have to be searched but the terrorists aren't playing favorites here, they'll blow up their race just as soon as look at em', just like they'll do to us.  I might not be a Christian anymore but that shouldn't automatically put me in a category of blame for ease on terrorism.  On the contrary, I think we that we should fight it HERE in the US, with everything that we have.  That means protecting our borders and yes, searching based on appearance.  It isn't Christians, African-Americans, Chinese, Japanese, Russians, etc. who are blowing up MASSES of people at a time on a REGULAR AND RECURRING BASIS, it is sadly people of Arab decent. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Well we can say whatever our government is doing right now in the US is working. I also believe we havent had any problems do to the fact the terrorist are too busy with their version of a Jihad in Iraq and resetting up shop in Afghanistan. I disagree with racial profiling though, I believe it would actually send some people over the edge if it were to increase. I and many other people are already facing challenges just living and moving around in this country simply based on our names, how we look or religion. To limit that even more would make life not worth living for some people, this could possibly lead to suicide bombers. Its like damn i dont have a reason to live so why live, then they go blow things up.

 

To be innocent but viewed as guilty of murder or thinking about murdering simple based on how you look, your name or your religion can have a major mental impact. And this is exactly how I felt the first time I got questioned based on my name and how I look, i felt like they were treating me like i was a murderer. Im a female so im lucky, I have only had a few incidents. But its got me wanting to change my name.

 

Dont want to turn it into a race debate, but it is based on race. Whenever I get into a discussion about this I always ask white people who agree with racial profiling of Arab looking people how would they feel if everytime a white man between the age of 18-45 with brown hair raped a woman and the government required every male in the country fitting the profile to provide DNA, have their picture taken and be finger-printed. Oh of course they objected because most of the time, they fit that profile or someone in their family did.

 

And also it should be noted that Americans are America's biggest threat. Did a little reach on the US Department of Justic site and discovered in 2002 there were 14,983 (not included in this number is District of Columbia and Floriada) homicides in the US. Americans dont kill masses at a time, just one or two at a time, sometimes 4. Just take 2 years of American homicide stats, that number adds up to be way more than every American killed or injured by an Arab terrorist in the history of the US involvement in the Middle East.

 

Most people in this country tend to ignore these numbers because its assumed that its just a black on black ghetto thing. But its not, it affects every race, religion, socio-economic group, gender and age group. I personally believe more needs to be invested in protecting us from our very own citizens. They could start with better gun control laws, since guns seem to be the weapon of choice with a lot of those homicides. And I dont object to cracking down on the borders, check every car and maybe they will stop bringing drugs into our country that way.