Fox News Alert

[ecopal]

Another prime example of right wing extremist
hate propaganda on Fox News:

The Oh-Really Factor
Fox 'Expert' Decries Bogus Lesbian Gangs
By Susy Buchanan and David Holthouse


O'Reilly
Cable television host Bill O'Reilly put "Fox News crime analyst" Rod Wheeler on his show to claim that lesbian gangs armed with pink pistols are terrorizing the nation by "raping young girls" and attacking others. O'Reilly said Wheeler's report "makes sense."

Read the Hatewatch Blog
A "national underground network" of pink pistol-packing lesbians is terrorizing America. "All across the country," they are raping young girls, attacking heterosexual males at random, and forcibly indoctrinating children as young as 10 into the homosexual lifestyle, according to a shocking June 21 segment on the popular Fox News Channel program, "The O'Reilly Factor."

Titled "Violent Lesbian Gangs a Growing Problem," the segment began with host Bill O'Reilly briefly referencing for his roughly 3 million viewers the case of Wayne Buckle, a DVD bootlegger who was attacked by seven lesbians in New York City last August. Deploying swift, broad strokes, O'Reilly painted a graphic picture of lesbian gangs running amok. "In Tennessee, authorities say a lesbian gang called GTO, Gays Taking Over, are involved in raping young girls," he reported. "And in Philadelphia, a lesbian gang called DTO, Dykes Taking Over, are allegedly terrorizing people as well."

After this introduction, O'Reilly went to a split-screen live interview with "Fox News crime analyst" Rod Wheeler.

"Tell me what's going on," O'Reilly said.

Wheeler, a Washington, D.C., Metropolitan Police Department officer-turned-paid Fox News commentator, launched right in: "Well, you know, there is this national underground network, if you will, Bill, of women that's lesbians and also some men groups that's actually recruiting kids as young as 10 years old in a lot of the schools in the communities all across the country," he reported. "And they actually carry a number of weapons. And they commit a number of crimes."

Wheeler asserted that "we've actually counted, just in the Washington, D.C., area alone, that's Washington D.C., Maryland, and Virginia, well over 150 of these crews. … And they — like I said, they recruit these kids to be members of these gangs."

O'Reilly asked, "Now, when they recruit the kids, are they indoctrinating them into homosexuality?"

"Yes," Wheeler answered. "As a matter of fact, some of the kids have actually reported that they were forced into, you know, performing sex acts and doing sex acts with some of these people."
Rod Wheeler
Rod Wheeler

Flabbergasted by the sheer depravity of it all, O'Reilly nevertheless forged ahead. "I never thought of this," said the host of the "no-spin zone." "It makes sense that, if you had lawless gay people, they would do this kind of thing. You associate homosexuality more with a social movement, not a criminal movement. But you're saying this is all over the country, detective?"

"It's all over the country," Wheeler replied. "I mean, you go from New York to California to wherever you want to name, you can see these organizations."

Next came the pink guns. "Now, the other thing, too, that our viewers are going to find very, very interesting, is the fact that they actually carry—some of these groups carry pink pistols," Wheeler said. "They call themselves the pink-pistol-packing group. And these are lesbians that actually carry pistols. That's 9-millimeter Glocks. They use these. They commit crimes, and they cause a lot of hurt to a lot of people."

The Authorities Disagree
Nine-millimeter Glocks painted pink? Dykes taking over? More than 150 lesbian gangs in the Washington, D.C., area alone? These claims are, as Wheeler suggested, "very, very interesting." They're also very, very flimsy.

Gaithersburg, Md., Detective Patrick Word, president of the Mid-Atlantic Regional Gang Investigators Network, an intelligence-sharing organization of 400 criminal justice professionals in Maryland, Washington, D.C., and Virginia, said there is no evidence whatsoever of a lesbian gang epidemic in his region. "Our membership reports only one lesbian gang," Word told the Intelligence Report.

Sgt. Brett Parson, a member and former commander of the D.C. Metropolitan Police Department's Gay and Lesbian Liaison Unit, also questioned Wheeler's numbers. "We have 150 to 175 total gangs in the D.C. area, and out of those only nine where the predominance of members are female," he said. "You simply can't make the jump that they are lesbians. I think it is fair to talk about violence and female gangs. But to sensationalize or marginalize a community by making a statement like that seems irresponsible."

Confronted by the Intelligence Report, Wheeler was unable, in several phone and E-mail exchanges over a two-day period, to specify a single law enforcement agency or officer, police report, media account or any other source he relied upon for his D.C. area lesbian gangs claim. But he insisted that his report was accurate and that any law enforcement officer who disagrees is "out of touch."

"For some reason or other, these organizations don't lay it on the line because they don't know what is going on on the streets," said Wheeler. "This is a serious crisis and the so-called experts are missing it."

According to Wheeler's personal website — www.rod007.com — he is a member of Jericho City of Praise, a conservative Christian megachurch in Landover, Md., whose leadership publicly advocates against equal rights for gays and lesbians. The website details Wheeler's 500-plus appearances on MSNBC, Court TV and Fox News Channel shows including "The O'Reilly Factor," "On the Record With Greta Van Sustern," and "Hannity & Colmes."

Fox News officials and Bill O'Reilly did not return E-mails seeking comment for this story. O'Reilly is quoted on Wheeler's website heralding Wheeler as "America's most recognized and trusted authority on crime analysis and law enforcement."

Another ringing celebrity endorsement on the site is attributed to White House Press Secretary Tony Snow: "We turn to Rod Wheeler to help us better understand and solve some of these terrible crimes in America."

Wheeler told the Report that he spent seven years in professional law enforcement before going to work as a corporate security officer for McDonald's Corp., a job he has since left. These days, Wheeler is a "food defense specialist" for the American Institute of Baking. Just this spring, he publicly warned that the Big Mac is vulnerable to bioterrorist attacks at "250 points" during production.

Viewers left wondering what, exactly, Wheeler was smoking before he went on "The O'Reilly Factor" might find a 1994 Washington Times article intriguing. The paper reported that Wheeler was suspended from the Metro D.C. police force after testing positive for marijuana in a random drug test. Wheeler told the Report that samples were mixed up and that he was eventually "exonerated."

Facts and Fiction
The only specific instance of actual violent lesbian gang activity that Wheeler cited on "The O'Reilly Factor" was a May 19 attack on a 15-year-old boy who was stabbed near a transit station in Prince George's County, Md. "And the police found out that it was a group of six women who identified themselves as being members of a lesbian gang that actually attacked this young man," Wheeler told O'Reilly.

According to a June 15 article in The Washington Post, however, two of the three individuals arrested in that assault were teenage males, though the article did note that, "Metro officials said the fight was between two gay and lesbian gangs that operate in Maryland."

An extensive Internet search seeking to verify O'Reilly's assertion in the introduction to Wheeler's interview that a lesbian gang called Dykes Taking Over is "terrorizing people" in Philadelphia turned up only one possible source. WCAU-TV, a local NBC affiliate in that city, reported in 2004 that a small group of 8th-grade girls at a West Philadelphia middle school were allegedly "bullying, groping and harassing" other girls in gym class with "gay remarks." The report made no mention of the 8th-graders using pink pistols or other weapons.

Similarly, O'Reilly's introductory mention of a Tennessee lesbian gang called Gays Taking Over that is "involved in raping young girls" appears to have been based solely on a highly dubious Feb. 28 television report from WPTY-TV, an ABC affiliate in Memphis, Tenn. Featuring dramatic "reenactments" of high school bathroom rape scenes shot in grainy black-and-white footage, the lengthy segment's vaguely salacious claims about local high school girls being raped and "sodomized" with "sex toys bought on the Internet" was based almost entirely on the lurid musings of a single Shelby County gang officer.

Titled "Violent Femmes," the sweeps-week segment was so thinly sourced and grotesquely sensationalized that it's difficult to believe that any professional journalist found it to be credible. And it wasn't. Under intense pressure from local gay and lesbian activists, the affiliate's station manager finally admitted that WPTY-TV's reporters had neither independently verified the gang officer's overheated claims nor obtained any documentary evidence such as arrest records or written police reports to substantiate their tale. As the station grudgingly conceded, "Our investigation did not turn up widespread violence in schools due to this."

Rashad Robinson, the senior director of media programs for Gays and Lesbians Against Defamation (GLAAD), said that while he wasn't pleased to see the inflammatory "Violent Femmes" segment used as a source for a national television "report" on Fox News, "I wasn't startled."

"The sad truth is that sensationalized, undocumented, fear-driven reports about [gays and lesbians] preying on children are proven to be a ratings winner, and the station managers and news producers know that because they're reporting about gays and lesbians they don't have to be as concerned about backing up their sensationalism with actual facts and figures," Robinson told the Report.

"The O'Reilly segment essentially reported a national epidemic of lesbian gangs preying on young girls without offering up one solid figure or one credible source. This type of reporting creates a climate of homophobia and fear and perpetuates dangerous stereotypes of gay people and definitely helps feed into a climate of anti-gay discrimination and violence, which is a true national epidemic, but not one you're likely to see reported with such zeal by Bill O'Reilly."

The third case O'Reilly referenced, the assault on 29-year-old Wayne Buckle in New York City last August, did actually occur. Buckle was whipped with belts and stabbed by women who identified themselves as lesbians. But there is no evidence the women are members of a criminal gang, and O'Reilly failed to report that the attack was prompted, according to the New York Daily News, by Buckle spitting, cursing, and flicking a cigarette at the women after one of them rebuffed his sidewalk sexual advances.

And then there are the pink Glocks.

There have been no media reports at all of lesbian gangs committing violence while armed with pink-painted 9-millimeter pistols or calling themselves, as Wheeler colorfully described it, "the pink pistol-packing group." Several law enforcement officers contacted by the Report found the idea laughable.

There is, however, a well-known national organization of gay and lesbian firearms owners called the Pink Pistols. This group has never been implicated in any gang activity. Asked by the Intelligence Report if he'd perhaps confused the Pink Pistols with a criminal organization, Wheeler denied it. "I wasn't referring to their pink pistols," Wheeler said. "These [lesbian] crews, these gangs, they buy a Glock 9-millimeter and you can paint them pink."

Pink Pistols spokesperson Gwen Patton said the pistols the group's members carry are, by and large, not actually colored pink. The Pink Pistols are now demanding an on-air apology from Wheeler, O'Reilly and Fox News.

"A lot of people are confusing these imaginary, lesbian, gun-carrying gangs with our organization," said Patton. "We would appreciate it if Mr. O'Reilly would invite Mr. Wheeler back onto his show to clear up this nonsense in the same arena it started — on national TV."
EDITOR'S NOTE The day after this story was posted on the Southern Poverty Law Center's website in July, Rod Wheeler issued a "clarification and apology," in which he claimed that he had only "inadvertently stated" that lesbian gangs carry pink-painted pistols, that he hadn't meant to say that there were 150 lesbian gangs in the Washington, D.C., area (he said he meant to say there were 150 gangs of all kinds in the area), that he hadn't meant to say that there was a "national epidemic" of lesbian gangs, and that he hadn't meant to defame the Pink Pistols group. A day later, Bill O'Reilly offered his own weak clarification, saying his report featuring Wheeler's false assertions had been "overstated," but insisting it contained a core of truth.


Intelligence Report
Fall 2007

[Bob]

french fried reporter

[sowalgayboi]

Bill O'Reilly is truly an idiot. I will not and cannot take him seriously. He has billed himself as some sort of journalist, but ironically most people can't remember the job he had prior to this one. For those curious, he worked for a tabloid show called Inside Edition. He cries out for deceny on TV yet his previous job regularly had playboy bunnies on it.

As for this little report, for someone who is such a serious jounalist, why FTLOG did you have ALF on your show last night? It was on in a restaraunt.

[wrobert]

As for this little report, for someone who is such a serious jounalist, why FTLOG did you have ALF on your show last night? It was on in a restaraunt.

I think he does it to get those that refuse to watch to see what he will do next.

[Chickpea]

I understand people watching the dribble on this show for its entertainment value - OK - fine. But I would like to think that most sensient people understand that this garbage is hardly news.

[Smiling JOe]

It occurs to me that someone like O'Reily, who says he is fair and balanced, wouldn't have to say that he is fair and balanced if he truly is fair and balanced. His job is to get viewers and listeners, and that gets in the way of being a balanced reporter. I got tired of reading the first post rather quickly.

[wrobert]

I understand people watching the dribble on this show for its entertainment value - OK - fine. But I would like to think that most sensient people understand that this garbage is hardly news.

We distort, you decide. :D

[Chickpea]

We distort, you decide. :D

Clever :clap:

[sowalgayboi]

Fox News - deciding your next president for you.

[wrobert]

Fox News - deciding your next president for you.

They are no different that the DNC news service CNN. Allowing democratic plants and refusing to even use the Governors question, twenty minutes before air time, were nothing more than examples of how they are to the other extreme. It is very difficult to find news that is not slanted for or against a way of thinking. 24 hour news that was just the facts would quickly become boring for the Nintendo generation.

[krafty]

I got tired of reading the first post rather quickly.

I, too, tired reading it. I'm curious if for the same reasons.....

[Andy A.]

I, too, tired reading it. I'm curious if for the same reasons.....
I managed to get through the first sentence and then realized it was posted by a left wing leaning individual. Dare I say begot. Bill O'Reilly is no worse than Anderson Cooper and some of the CNN ilk. He does some good and some bad but his going after judges that fail to recognize certain failings in our society such as child predators, is nothing but comendable.

[InletBchDweller]

They are no different that the DNC news service CNN. Allowing democratic plants and refusing to even use the Governors question, twenty minutes before air time, were nothing more than examples of how they are to the other extreme. It is very difficult to find news that is not slanted for or against a way of thinking. 24 hour news that was just the facts would quickly become boring for the Nintendo generation.

Exactly, some hate fox (Left) some hate CNN (right)
There is good and bad, fact and crap - on both. end of story.

[krafty]

I think it's impossible to have a truly unbiased news source because human beings have opinions. Questions. Do local stations offer more responsible reporting? Agenda and money rule the national scene and integrity is going the wayside. Sometimes it's obvious, but isn't it getting harder and harder to sort through the murkiness of opinion verses fact?

[Diane4145]

:yikes:WHOA...... Ecopal, you win! This is the LONGEST post, ever.:clap:

[ecopal]

I managed to get through the first sentence and then realized it was posted by a left wing leaning individual. Dare I say begot. Bill O'Reilly is no worse than Anderson Cooper and some of the CNN ilk. He does some good and some bad but his going after judges that fail to recognize certain failings in our society such as child predators, is nothing but comendable.

If you really have to resort to name calling at least you could spell it correctly.
It is “bigot” not “beget”.

Also, I doubt that I would qualify for your label as I am a registered independent who just does not like being manipulated by the media, etc.

In particular I do not like hate mongering, name calling, and blatant distortion of the news all of which happens more frequently on Fox News than any other of the networks.

Oh by the way, “commendable” is not spelled “comendable”

[wrobert]

If you really have to resort to name calling at least you could spell it correctly.
It is “bigot” not “beget”.

Also, I doubt that I would qualify for your label as I am a registered independent who just does not like being manipulated by the media, etc.

In particular I do not like hate mongering, name calling, and blatant distortion of the news all of which happens more frequently on Fox News than any other of the networks.

Oh by the way, “commendable” is not spelled “comendable”


Ahhh...NPR. So that is the 'real' news?

[hnooe]

Yes, thus the run of current nicknames for Fox News..."Faux News" and "Fox Noise." Bill OReilly is scraping the bottom at this point....he is becoming the Jerry Springer of radio.

[Romeosmydog]

Woops.

[Romeosmydog]

http://i207.photobucket.com/albums/bb239/romeosmydog/fix-news-290.jpg

[ecopal]

http://i207.photobucket.com/albums/bb239/romeosmydog/fix-news-290.jpg

http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?aid=58

Fair and Balanced?
Two long-time press critics discuss the mainstream American media, its failings, and how it sometimes promotes bigotry

Editor's note: Although the American media is frequently accused of having a liberal bias, a large body of evidence suggests that in a great many cases just the opposite is true.

Time after time, biased, reactionary and even racist ideas — ideas that frequently originate on the radical right — bubble to the surface in news stories, opinion pieces, on talk radio and among the many pundits who interpret current events. Steve Rendall and Norman Solomon are long-time critics of both print and broadcast media who have focused on exposing bias in news coverage.

Rendall is senior analyst at Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR), which issues frequent reports on American press coverage, and has appeared as an expert on that topic in scores of venues. ...

Norman Solomon is a nationally syndicated columnist on media and politics, the author of 10 books on similar subjects, and the founder and executive director of the Institute for Public Accuracy, a consortium of policy researchers and analysts.

The Intelligence Report spoke to both men about the media's role in helping to promote bigoted ideas, individuals and groups.

Below are excerpts from that interview:

INTELLIGENCE REPORT: Fox News has explicitly positioned itself as a conservative alternative to CNN — what it calls a "fair and balanced" alternative. Any thoughts about this?

STEVE RENDALL: Our problem with Fox isn't that it comes from the right. In a healthy media culture, you would have media outlets coming from all kinds of points of view, but getting their facts straight. The problem with Fox is that they claim to be "fair and balanced" but are really airing a lot of ideological opinions.


NORMAN SOLOMON: There are constituencies that Fox plays to that clearly spill over into racism and xenophobia. Fox's coverage is a cause for concern, but it is also a symptom of what is out there in the population. We shouldn't simply hang it on the news media. There is a constituency that is both propagated and extended by the news media, but it's a constituency that also exists apart from the media.

.....

IR: What about the anti-immigration movement and right-wing commentators?

RENDALL: ..... Look who Bill O'Reilly [host of Fox News' "The O'Reilly Factor"] invites to discuss immigration policy issues — [executive director] Dan Stein from the other FAIR [Federation for American Immigration Reform; see Into the Mainstream], an anti-immigrant group that has taken more than $1 million from racist funders [the Pioneer Foundation]. We've documented time after time when Stein has appeared on shows, completely unopposed, saying things that in many cases were inaccurate and in some cases hateful and even racist about certain ethnic groups....

[hnooe]

http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?aid=58

Fair and Balanced?
Two long-time press critics discuss the mainstream American media, its failings, and how it sometimes promotes bigotry

Editor's note: Although the American media is frequently accused of having a liberal bias, a large body of evidence suggests that in a great many cases just the opposite is true.

Time after time, biased, reactionary and even racist ideas — ideas that frequently originate on the radical right — bubble to the surface in news stories, opinion pieces, on talk radio and among the many pundits who interpret current events. Steve Rendall and Norman Solomon are long-time critics of both print and broadcast media who have focused on exposing bias in news coverage.

Rendall is senior analyst at Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR), which issues frequent reports on American press coverage, and has appeared as an expert on that topic in scores of venues. ...

Norman Solomon is a nationally syndicated columnist on media and politics, the author of 10 books on similar subjects, and the founder and executive director of the Institute for Public Accuracy, a consortium of policy researchers and analysts.

The Intelligence Report spoke to both men about the media's role in helping to promote bigoted ideas, individuals and groups.

Below are excerpts from that interview:

INTELLIGENCE REPORT: Fox News has explicitly positioned itself as a conservative alternative to CNN — what it calls a "fair and balanced" alternative. Any thoughts about this?

STEVE RENDALL: Our problem with Fox isn't that it comes from the right. In a healthy media culture, you would have media outlets coming from all kinds of points of view, but getting their facts straight. The problem with Fox is that they claim to be "fair and balanced" but are really airing a lot of ideological opinions.


NORMAN SOLOMON: There are constituencies that Fox plays to that clearly spill over into racism and xenophobia. Fox's coverage is a cause for concern, but it is also a symptom of what is out there in the population. We shouldn't simply hang it on the news media. There is a constituency that is both propagated and extended by the news media, but it's a constituency that also exists apart from the media.

.....

IR: What about the anti-immigration movement and right-wing commentators?

RENDALL: ..... Look who Bill O'Reilly [host of Fox News' "The O'Reilly Factor"] invites to discuss immigration policy issues — [executive director] Dan Stein from the other FAIR [Federation for American Immigration Reform; see Into the Mainstream], an anti-immigrant group that has taken more than $1 million from racist funders [the Pioneer Foundation]. We've documented time after time when Stein has appeared on shows, completely unopposed, saying things that in many cases were inaccurate and in some cases hateful and even racist about certain ethnic groups....

Ecopal..One thing I can say is I think you seem to be a "fair and balanced" person! Thanks for the enlightening, factual and very thorough political dissertation.

[elgordoboy]

If you really have to resort to name calling at least you could spell it correctly.
It is “bigot” not “beget”.

Also, I doubt that I would qualify for your label as I am a registered independent who just does not like being manipulated by the media, etc.

In particular I do not like hate mongering, name calling, and blatant distortion of the news all of which happens more frequently on Fox News than any other of the networks.

Oh by the way, “commendable” is not spelled “comendable”
If you really have to resort to correcting someone's spelling at least you could spell their mispelled word incorrectly just as they did. It was "begot" not "beget" for "bigot" got it? What does it make me when I occasionally find CNN too far right and Fox too far left? My own personal bias seems to weigh more heavily than theirs in my final perception.

[JoshMclean]

If you really have to resort to name calling at least you could spell it correctly.
It is “bigot” not “beget”.

Also, I doubt that I would qualify for your label as I am a registered independent who just does not like being manipulated by the media, etc.

In particular I do not like hate mongering, name calling, and blatant distortion of the news all of which happens more frequently on Fox News than any other of the networks.

Oh by the way, “commendable” is not spelled “comendable”


Ahhhh, an independent. Just like O'Reilly :floor:

[sowalgayboi]

They are no different that the DNC news service CNN. Allowing democratic plants and refusing to even use the Governors question, twenty minutes before air time, were nothing more than examples of how they are to the other extreme. It is very difficult to find news that is not slanted for or against a way of thinking. 24 hour news that was just the facts would quickly become boring for the Nintendo generation.

Hmmm... can you name another privately owned network that ever declared a presidential winner and then used that same arugment all the way to the supreme court to get someone elected?

[wrobert]

Hmmm... can you name another privately owned network that ever declared a presidential winner and then used that same arugment all the way to the supreme court to get someone elected?


What argument is that? He got 537 more votes than the other guy. Every newspaper in the country that did their own study has admitted this. Unless you subscribe to the theory that steel does not melt also.

[elgordoboy]

What argument is that? He got 537 more votes than the other guy. Every newspaper in the country that did their own study has admitted this. Unless you subscribe to the theory that steel does not melt also.
Making this statement in earnest is :lol:. +/-.00000537..or so

[Tootsie]

I am not impressed with any news programs on TV - the stories are just not very interesting, seem to be the same old thing, with a focus on tragic events and criminal activity, but I do look at them on occasion (no young child should view any of it). I absolutely could not imagine watching Fox News for serious news. It is so scarey that it even exists in this country.

CNN works okay for me if I really want to know what's going on outside sowal. I do believe they offer "balance" - at least as much as any serious news network.

Fox News can't be considered a serious news network. But, I do know those who believe it to be such.

[wrobert]

[quote=Tootsie;322193]I am not impressed with any news programs on TV - the stories are just not very interesting, seem to be the same old thing, with a focus on tragic events and criminal activity, but I do look at them on occasion (no young child should view any of it). I absolutely could not imagine watching Fox News for serious news. It is so scarey that it even exists in this country.

quote]

Freedom can be scary at times. Curious though, you think we should filter what is broadcast on cable television, rather than continue to allow our citizens the use of their remote controls?

[elgordoboy]

Freedom can be scary at times. Curious though, you think we should filter what is broadcast on cable television, rather than continue to allow our citizens the use of their remote controls?
You seem to have inferred much from the previous post that I did not (censorship). Fox News "Around the World in 80 Seconds"..the graphics are straight from the Sunday football show, the lilting off kilter cadence of speech by Shep Smith makes me think I'm getting the sports highlights on ESPN. Zero credibility.

[Capricious]

"...fair and balanced..."



If you have to say your are, you aren't.

[JustaLocal]

I am not impressed with any news programs on TV - the stories are just not very interesting, seem to be the same old thing, with a focus on tragic events and criminal activity, but I do look at them on occasion (no young child should view any of it). I absolutely could not imagine watching Fox News for serious news. It is so scarey that it even exists in this country.

CNN works okay for me if I really want to know what's going on outside sowal. I do believe they offer "balance" - at least as much as any serious news network.

Fox News can't be considered a serious news network. But, I do know those who believe it to be such.


CNN? With Lou Dobbs!? :floor:

If by balance you mean left, I agree.

I watch them all and consider the source. I like PBS best but watch CNN, MSNBC, ABC, NBC, & CBS. I don't get FOX because I have "basic" cable but used to watch it too.

[scooterbug44]

I am going to file this "breaking news" in the same trash receptacle as the story that illegal immigrants are going to infect us with leprosy :roll:.

[maeby funke]

He really is unbelievable. He holds himself up to be this moral authority and harbinger of truth, and yet his loyal fans seem to forget that he sexually harrassed one of his employees. Fox News makes my skin crawl.


"...fair and balanced..."



If you have to say your are, you aren't.

[BlueMtnBeachVagrant]

If you really have to resort to name calling at least you could spell it correctly.
It is “bigot” not “beget”.

Also, I doubt that I would qualify for your label as I am a registered independent who just does not like being manipulated by the media, etc.

In particular I do not like hate mongering, name calling, and blatant distortion of the news all of which happens more frequently on Fox News than any other of the networks.

Oh by the way, “commendable” is not spelled “comendable”


Yep....this coming from a true master media manipulator.

Gosh, I hope I spelled everything right.
.
.
.

[Andy A.]

We all need "spell check". I spelled bigot begot in my las post. Oh well, we all have spelling lapses as well as others occasionally.

[wrobert]

Those that you that are not happy with Fox News, keep in mind that the news director is a resident somewhere down around the Camp Creek area. He said he likes to kayak in the dune lakes when he is down here, so seek him out and see if you can show him the error of his ways. Seemed like a reasonable guy. I just can not remember his name. Oh well.

[elgordoboy]

Those that you that are not happy with Fox News, keep in mind that the news director is a resident somewhere down around the Camp Creek area. He said he likes to kayak in the dune lakes when he is down here, so seek him out and see if you can show him the error of his ways. Seemed like a reasonable guy. I just can not remember his name. Oh well.
I prefer your suggestion of using my remote control. Not a big fan of stalking and haranguing a fellow while he is relaxing.

[BlueMtnBeachVagrant]

We all need "spell check". I spelled bigot begot in my las post. Oh well, we all have spelling lapses as well as others occasionally.
Andy A: The differences between ecopal and me go back a lot further than just a few mispelled words.

[30A Skunkape]

The beauty of media you don't care for, be it Fox, CNN, CBS, Limbaugh or Air America-your media device has an on/off button that guarantees an instant termination of the offending agent. If it bothers you that you can't operate the on/off button in your neighbor's house or car, then you favor censorship.

[raven]

Another prime example of right wing extremist
hate propaganda on Fox News:
Intelligence Report
Fall 2007

how ironic that you are suggesting it's fox that's extremist when you regard any report you disagree with as "propaganda".
sad how people are still trying to censor free speech. tragic really.
why is it that non-thinkers are threatened by more information and always want less? facists must have an easy time at the news hours. they probably only watched "approved channels".actual thinkers are busy trying to catch all the news coverage they can. the fact you believe that any other news channel is fair and balance shows your naivete. what about the anti-semitism on bbc or the elitism of cnn or the out and out misreporting of AP & Reuters? sorry..not all of us can be go through life with blinders on and tow a party line. but i suppose it makes it easier for you to believe what you believe if you attack everyone you disagree with. ha!

[Smiling JOe]

I like a well rounded perspective of news, so I listen to many and keep in mind who is saying what. I listen to Fox News and I balance that out with NPR. It is interesting to hear the different slants on the same story, as they spin it one way or another. There is only one story, though there are thousands of journalists who try to beat each other to the story in the story. Back in the days when I had cable, I enjoyed watching any debates on CSPAN. They are the only channel which I've found to try and keep prospective in context. They announce callers' political affiliation before letting them comment or ask questions, and they tend to keep the number of calls from each party fairly balanced. Commentary from the journalists is also fairly balanced and unbiased. Other than CSPAN, I cannot say that I've ever seen a news story regarding poliTRICKS, to be balanced.

Without Line Item Veto, Politicians are able to show a voting history of whatever they want to highlight, and the journalists also have the ability to pick and chose what they want to show. I'll use that example of Hillary saying that while she doesn't support the war, she agreed to provide emergency funding to the soldiers. What she forgets to say is that the only reason she voted in favor of the emergency funding was because of the $21+ Billion of pork (non-emergency and non-military related) which was tied into that Emergency Funding Bill. With the current system in place, journalist will always have a job, politicians will be able to lean which ever way they want depending on who is in their audience, and the public will be fed a bunch of BS and fight for that which they think is the truth, unless they choose to listen to both sides of the story.

[Andy A.]

.

Without Line Item Veto, Politicians are able to show a voting history of whatever they want to highlight, and the journalists also have the ability to pick and chose what they want to show. I'll use that example of Hillary saying that while she doesn't support the war, she agreed to provide emergency funding to the soldiers. What she forgets to say is that the only reason she voted in favor of the emergency funding was because of the $21+ Billion of pork (non-emergency and non-military related) which was tied into that Emergency Funding Bill. With the current system in place, journalist will always have a job, politicians will be able to lean which ever way they want depending on who is in their audience, and the public will be fed a bunch of BS and fight for that which they think is the truth, unless they choose to listen to both sides of the story.
Howtrue! How true! The answer to a lot of the problems we have with Congress would be solved if the president, whethere it be Bush, Clinton or Reagan, had the line item veto. Unfortunately, IMHO, it will never happen because Congress would percieve it as giving up some of their power. It has been needed for a long time and SJ is exactly right. It is sorely needed.

[BeachSiO2]

Howtrue! How true! The answer to a lot of the problems we have with Congress would be solved if the president, whethere it be Bush, Clinton or Reagan, had the line item veto. Unfortunately, IMHO, it will never happen because Congress would percieve it as giving up some of their power. It has been needed for a long time and SJ is exactly right. It is sorely needed.

But with the line item veto, wouldn't the president be able to function somewhat like a monarchy, or even worse support his/her political party's pork and not the other party. I don't see the benefit in giving one person the ability to pick and choose it on that level. I know you could say that Congress could still overturn the veto, but what about if the president and the majority of Congress were of the same party and thus "veto-proof". I could easily see this turning into a situation where one party is able to provide gifts to their constituency that no other party can and then all of the voters would only support the majority party thus leading to a greater majority. Over time this would lead from a two-party system to a one-party system and I don't believe that would be good either. I agree that it doesn't matter who has the power of the pen but I think it would be bad in both cases.

[hnooe]

Those that you that are not happy with Fox News, keep in mind that the news director is a resident somewhere down around the Camp Creek area. He said he likes to kayak in the dune lakes when he is down here, so seek him out and see if you can show him the error of his ways. Seemed like a reasonable guy. I just can not remember his name. Oh well.

Great! If he floats by my house here on Camp Creek Lake, I will put out my MSNBC flag..:roll:

[Tootsie]

how ironic that you are suggesting it's fox that's extremist when you regard any report you disagree with as "propaganda".
sad how people are still trying to censor free speech. tragic really.
why is it that non-thinkers are threatened by more information and always want less? facists must have an easy time at the news hours. they probably only watched "approved channels".actual thinkers are busy trying to catch all the news coverage they can. the fact you believe that any other news channel is fair and balance shows your naivete. what about the anti-semitism on bbc or the elitism of cnn or the out and out misreporting of AP & Reuters? sorry..not all of us can be go through life with blinders on and tow a party line. but i suppose it makes it easier for you to believe what you believe if you attack everyone you disagree with. ha!

I do not believe anyone approves of or has suggested censorship on this thread. only that Fox can't be taken as a serious news agency. that is all. we don't have to watch it, or we can if we choose.

personally, I do catch it on occasion when visiting Bham (big fox fans up that way). it is quite a refreshing perspective... :roll: and entertaining as well.

[BlueMtnBeachVagrant]

how ironic that you are suggesting it's fox that's extremist when you regard any report you disagree with as "propaganda".
sad how people are still trying to censor free speech. tragic really.
why is it that non-thinkers are threatened by more information and always want less? facists must have an easy time at the news hours. they probably only watched "approved channels".actual thinkers are busy trying to catch all the news coverage they can. the fact you believe that any other news channel is fair and balance shows your naivete. what about the anti-semitism on bbc or the elitism of cnn or the out and out misreporting of AP & Reuters? sorry..not all of us can be go through life with blinders on and tow a party line. but i suppose it makes it easier for you to believe what you believe if you attack everyone you disagree with. ha!

WOW! Some people see things clearly. Great post.

See some CLASSIC SoWal ecopal history here....

It is really shocking that BMBvagrant's crude and rude behavior is tolerated on this website.

The above was said during the "heated" seawall debates. I was blown away when some of the anti-seawallers jumped in to actually defend my right to express and defend my views.

I have no problem with ecopal's position on seawalls....just how he makes it.

Censorship, propaganda, bias....all things exhibited by ecopal...a few of the very same things he criticizes Fox News for.:scratch:

[Smiling JOe]

But with the line item veto, wouldn't the president be able to function somewhat like a monarchy, or even worse support his/her political party's pork and not the other party. I don't see the benefit in giving one person the ability to pick and choose it on that level. I know you could say that Congress could still overturn the veto, but what about if the president and the majority of Congress were of the same party and thus "veto-proof". I could easily see this turning into a situation where one party is able to provide gifts to their constituency that no other party can and then all of the voters would only support the majority party thus leading to a greater majority. Over time this would lead from a two-party system to a one-party system and I don't believe that would be good either. I agree that it doesn't matter who has the power of the pen but I think it would be bad in both cases.I don't think that would be the case. We could also have line item Bills, but that would be too easy, eh? By having line-item vetos, what we would actually have is accountability. I understand what you are saying, but I think that having some accountability for each Congresspersons' vote, without them being able to spin it, would have far greater impact on the way they voted. No hiding behind the fence post.

However, Andy A is correct. All of the power of the politicians is bundled in this little convenient Bill building secret, of which apparently, most Americans are not aware. We will see Line-Item Veto right after we see Americans writing a pay check to Uncle Sam each week, rather than having him garnish our wages on each paycheck for the remainder of our working lives.

[BeachSiO2]

I don't think that would be the case. We could also have line item Bills, but that would be too easy, eh? By having line-item vetos, what we would actually have is accountability. I understand what you are saying, but I think that having some accountability for each Congresspersons' vote, without them being able to spin it, would have far greater impact on the way they voted. No hiding behind the fence post.

However, Andy A is correct. All of the power of the politicians is bundled in this little convenient Bill building secret, of which apparently, most Americans are not aware. We will see Line-Item Veto right after we see Americans writing a pay check to Uncle Sam each week, rather than having him garnish our wages on each paycheck for the remainder of our working lives.

And on this one, I am more cynical than you ;-) I understand the need for transparency though and I agree on your second part. They don't call them Christmas Tree bill's for nothing. The trick is to get your constituencies ornament as high on the tree as possible so when elections come around, it's see what I got you last session..

[JoshMclean]

how ironic that you are suggesting it's fox that's extremist when you regard any report you disagree with as "propaganda".
sad how people are still trying to censor free speech. tragic really.
why is it that non-thinkers are threatened by more information and always want less? facists must have an easy time at the news hours. they probably only watched "approved channels".actual thinkers are busy trying to catch all the news coverage they can. the fact you believe that any other news channel is fair and balance shows your naivete. what about the anti-semitism on bbc or the elitism of cnn or the out and out misreporting of AP & Reuters? sorry..not all of us can be go through life with blinders on and tow a party line. but i suppose it makes it easier for you to believe what you believe if you attack everyone you disagree with. ha!

Great post.

[Smiling JOe]

And on this one, I am more cynical than you ;-) I understand the need for transparency though and I agree on your second part. They don't call them Christmas Tree bill's for nothing. The trick is to get your constituencies ornament as high on the tree as possible so when elections come around, it's see what I got you last session..:floor: Too true, and don't think that the lobbyists don't check to see. If a politician is really good (not good like good, good like crafty), he or she will have a lookout(staffer) stand guard, and have another staffer on Tree Detail, rearranging the ornaments just before each lobbyist steps foot in to the office. Don't think it doesn't happen. I know people who stood on Tree Detail. ;-) Guess where my five year old nephew (a Washington DC baby) is flying to on Wed? He and one of his parents has a pass to get priority seats at a NASA launch in Cape Canaveral. On that subject, does anyone think that lobbyists shouldn't be married to Chiefs of Staffs? Nevermind. I guess love knows no boundaries. Today a politician's right hand man, and tomorrow, Chief Lobbyist. All the smart staffers are doing it.

[BeachSiO2]

:floor: Too true, and don't think that the lobbyists don't check to see. If a politician is really good (not good like good, good like crafty), he or she will have a lookout(staffer) stand guard, and have another staffer on Tree Detail, rearranging the ornaments just before each lobbyist steps foot in to the office. Don't think it doesn't happen. I know people who stood on Tree Detail. ;-) Guess where my five year old nephew (a Washington DC baby) is flying to on Wed? He and one of his parents has a pass to get priority seats at a NASA launch in Cape Canaveral. On that subject, does anyone think that lobbyists shouldn't be married to Chiefs of Staffs? Nevermind. I guess love knows no boundaries. Today a politician's right hand man, and tomorrow, Chief Lobbyist. All the smart staffers are doing it.

I have never been one, but I deal with them often and I look for my ornaments to be VERY HIGH and for the last 4-5 years I have not been dissapointed once ;-)

[Smiling JOe]

beachsiO2, you should get another person to walk in and check out the ornament for you, maybe even have them take a photo of the position of "your" ornament. lol

[BeachSiO2]

beachsiO2, you should get another person to walk in and check out the ornament for you, maybe even have them take a photo of the position of "your" ornament. lol

Maybe I should do that :scratch: :biggrin:

[wrobert]

:floor: Too true, and don't think that the lobbyists don't check to see. If a politician is really good (not good like good, good like crafty), he or she will have a lookout(staffer) stand guard, and have another staffer on Tree Detail, rearranging the ornaments just before each lobbyist steps foot in to the office. Don't think it doesn't happen. I know people who stood on Tree Detail. ;-) Guess where my five year old nephew (a Washington DC baby) is flying to on Wed? He and one of his parents has a pass to get priority seats at a NASA launch in Cape Canaveral. On that subject, does anyone think that lobbyists shouldn't be married to Chiefs of Staffs? Nevermind. I guess love knows no boundaries. Today a politician's right hand man, and tomorrow, Chief Lobbyist. All the smart staffers are doing it.

While it would never happen, would it not be great if we elected a President that actually vetoed a whole bill if it included additional pork spending items. Congress would blame him for shutting down government, but that cuts two ways. Of course that would really take some guts.

[Smiling JOe]

That would be awesome!

I'm still wondering why I have to pay $2200 to get cable to run down my driveway, but my nephew gets premo seats curtousy of the taxpayers, to see a NASA launch. I need to make some phone calls... I'll be back!

[BeachSiO2]

That would be awesome!

I'm still wondering why I have to pay $2200 to get cable to run down my driveway, but my nephew gets premo seats curtousy of the taxpayers, to see a NASA launch. I need to make some phone calls... I'll be back!

It sounds like your nephew is who needs to be calling for you!

[Smiling JOe]

That's funny. He wouldn't have to pick up the phone. Hmmm? Maybe I should just tell my BIL that I need some cable for XMas. I don't know why I didn't think about talking to him in the first place, rather than talking to the idiots at Customer NO-Service.

[Caroling]

mispelled words.

My mother taught me not to misspell misspelled.

[BlueMtnBeachVagrant]

My mother taught me not to misspell misspelled.
I will never misspell misspell again. Thanks for sharing your mother's spelling lessons.;-)

[wrobert]

I will never misspell misspell again. Thanks for sharing your mother's spelling lessons.;-)


Brian Wilson is the person I was thinking of earlier in the week.

[ecopal]

"...fair and balanced..."



If you have to say your are, you aren't.

Excellent point Capricious.

The basic premise of Fox News is dishonest. Fox’s use of the slogans” Fair and Balanced” and “we report you decide” are disingenuous .

The problem with Fox News is not that it is giving its watchers a substantial neo-conservative slant, but that it misrepresents itself as non-biased. Fox News was from its inception designed to present a conservative bias.

Fox’s hosts and pundits are carefully screened for their political leanings. Even the so called “liberal pundits” are chosen for their conservatism leanings. Even the so called “balanced “ debates are rigged.

The following background history of Fox News is very revealing.

Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting (FAIR)
http://www.fair.org

Extra! July/August 2001

The Most Biased Name in News
Fox News Channel's extraordinary right-wing tilt

By Seth Ackerman

The following are excerpts:


“......Since its 1996 launch, Fox has become a central hub of the conservative movement's well-oiled media machine. Together with the GOP organization and its satellite think tanks and advocacy groups, this network of fiercely partisan outlets--such as the Washington Times, the Wall Street Journal editorial page and conservative talk-radio shows like Rush Limbaugh's--forms a highly effective right-wing echo chamber where GOP-friendly news stories can be promoted, repeated and amplified. Fox knows how to play this game better than anyone....

Yet, at the same time, the network bristles at the slightest suggestion of a conservative tilt. In fact, wrapping itself in slogans like "Fair and balanced" and "We report, you decide," Fox argues precisely the opposite: Far from being a biased network, Fox argues, it is the only unbiased network.

...Fox's founder and president, Roger Ailes, was for decades one of the savviest and most pugnacious Republican political operatives in Washington...

Fox News Channel's senior vice president is John Moody, a long-time journalist known for his staunch conservative views...

..Fox's managing editor is Brit Hume, a veteran TV journalist and contributor to the conservative American Spectator and Weekly Standard magazines...

... Its top-rated talkshow is hosted by Bill O'Reilly, a columnist for the conservative WorldNetDaily.com and a registered Republican (that is, until a week before the Washington Post published an article revealing his party registration--12/13/00)...

Indeed, Fox's crew of "liberal" pundits seems almost calculated to be either ineffective left-of-center advocates or conciliatory moderates...

The abundance of conservatives and Republicans at Fox News Channel does not seem to be a coincidence. In 1996, Andrew Kirtzman, a respected New York City cable news reporter, was interviewed for a job with Fox and says that management wanted to know what his political affiliation was. "They were afraid I was a Democrat," he told the Village Voice (10/15/96). When Kirtzman refused to tell Fox his party ID, "all employment discussion ended," according to the Voice....

The most obvious sign of Fox's slant is its heavily right-leaning punditry. Each episode of Special Report with Brit Hume, for example, features a three-person panel of pundits who chat about the day's political news at the end of the show.

The most frequent panelist is Fred Barnes, the evangelical Christian supply-sider who edits the Murdoch-owned Weekly Standard. He sits proudly on the rightward flank of the Republican party (and often scolds it for slouching leftwards).

The next most frequent guest is Mort Kondrake, who sits in the middle of the panel. Politically, Kondrake falls at the very rightward edge of the Democratic party-- if not beyond it.

Rounding out the panel is its third-most-frequent pundit, Mara Liasson, who sits on the opposite side of the table from the conservative Barnes, implicitly identifying her as a liberal. But her liberalism consists of little more than being a woman who works for National Public Radio; she has proposed that "one of the roots of the problem with education today is feminism" (Talk of the Nation, 5/3/01)

Less frequent Special Report panelists include conservative Washington Times reporter Bill Sammon, centrist Fortune writer Jeff Birnbaum and NPR host Juan Williams. Williams, the only guest who could plausibly claim to be a liberal, was so outraged over attacks on his friend Clarence Thomas that he declared that "liberals have become monsters" (Washington Post, 10/10/91)...

Even Fox's "left-right" debate show, Hannity & Colmes--whose Crossfire-style format virtually imposes numerical equality between conservatives and "liberals"--can't shake the impression of resembling a Harlem Globetrotters game in which everyone knows which side is supposed to win.

On the right, co-host Sean Hannity is an effective and telegenic ideologue, a protégé of Newt Gingrich and a rising star of conservative talk radio who is perhaps more plugged into the GOP leadership than any media figure besides Rush Limbaugh (Hannity reportedly received "thunderous applause" when he spoke at a recent closed-door House Republican Conference meeting that is usually closed to the media--U.S. News & World Report, 5/7/01.)

On the left is Alan Colmes, a rather less telegenic former stand-up comic and radio host whose views are slightly left-of-center but who, as a personality, is completely off the radar screen of liberal politics. "I'm quite moderate," he told a reporter when asked to describe his politics (USA Today, 2/1/95). Hannity, a self-described "arch-conservative" (Electronic Media, 8/26/96), joined Fox when the network was started, and personally nominated Colmes to be his on-screen debating opponent (New York Times, 3/1/98).

Fox has had trouble at times hiding the partisanship of its main news personalities. In 1996, while already a Fox anchor, Tony Snow endorsed Bob Dole for president in the Republican National Committee magazine Rising Tide (New York, 11/17/97). A former speech-writer for the elder Bush, Snow often guest-hosts the Rush Limbaugh show and wrote an unabashedly conservative weekly newspaper column until Fox management recently pressured him to drop it to avoid the appearance of bias (Washington Post, 5/29/01).

[30A Skunkape]

Ecopal, that article is 6 years old. In the interim, the Republican party has lost control of Congress and apparently is about to lose the White House. Given the fact that Fox trounces CNN, MSNBC, et al in the ratings and this apparently does not translate into action at the polls, why are you so Hell bent on 'proving' Fox is biased? If you don't like it, don't watch! Everyone knows Fox has a rightward slant while all the other outlets tilt left. Don't worry, be happy, listen to NPR and relax.

[Tootsie]

Ecopal, that article is 6 years old. In the interim, the Republican party has lost control of Congress and apparently is about to lose the White House. Given the fact that Fox trounces CNN, MSNBC, et al in the ratings and this apparently does not translate into action at the polls, why are you so Hell bent on 'proving' Fox is biased? If you don't like it, don't watch! Everyone knows Fox has a rightward slant while all the other outlets tilt left. Don't worry, be happy, listen to NPR and relax.

excellent post skunky.:wave:

[ecopal]

Interesting video clips of Fox News on youtube.

Fox News is up to their usual name calling: ” phony, fagot, pinhead, fool...”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Yp-MeXSysE

[Grayton Kid]

"Here's the detail I found most interesting: all the television sets must be tuned to Fox News. Wow! Because god forbid he walks into a hotel room, and the TV is on another channel, and he finds out what a sh---y job he's been doing. He's got avoid not just CNN and MSNBC, I think Animal Planet is doing stories on that now. ... There was one other detail on the bottom of the rider, it was handwritten and somewhat cryptic. He also requests a rifle, some ammo and an old man's face." --Jon Stewart, on Dick Cheney's hotel suite demands



I don't know why I put this it justed seemed to fit in right because it's a joke about fox and Dick Chenny

[Grayton Kid]

:)

[Grayton Kid]

Interesting video clips of Fox News on youtube.

Fox News is up to their usual name calling: ” phony, fagot, pinhead, fool...”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Yp-MeXSysE....
He's a terrorist! OMG...Bill he would't be that high in polotics if he was planning on bombing america...
Bill is a PHONY,Fagot,Pinhead, F O O L!!!!!!@Q:bang::bang::pissed::pissed:

[wrobert]

....
He's a terrorist! OMG...Bill he would't be that high in polotics if he was planning on bombing america...


I guess there are two kind of stores missing in this area. One that sells batteries for remote controls and the other that repairs channel changing buttons on televisions. They are capitalist. The only way to hurt them is to not watch them. Personally, I get 90% of my news online. But after watching the video I am going home to TIVO me some Fair and Balanced Fox News.

[30A Skunkape]

Oh ecopal, quit attacking the damn windmills:lol:

[Andy A.]

Dear ecopal,

I am sorry about the misspelling but I promise I'll get out my dictionary in the future. But then, please cut some of us some slack. We may not be as educated or knowlegeable as you are. Sorry 'bout that. I like Fox News so I watch it and believe it or not, I do know where the "off" button is on the remote. May I respectfully suggest you find out where it is on "your" remote?

[TreeFrog]

I don't care for the yelling and the attacks practiced by on-the-air "personalities" of all the networks. Today I was watching CNBC and they were interviewing Obama's financial policy advisor. I was interested in hearing some actual policy discussed as an answer to a thoughtfully posed question, when Joe (the former stock picker guy) lit into him with what can only be described as a "how can you possibly be right" kind of question, effectively shutting off the info. I didn't learn a thing, other than to discover Joe's recto-cranial inversion.

Couple of weeks ago, Hannity was interviewing Tom Brokaw about his new book and started a similar attack on him. Brokaw, no slouch, answered more or less "I thought you asked me for MY opinion. I can't explain it while you're telling us YOURS".

Not that long ago, before polarization set in, you could listen to all sorts of positions expressed on the tube, with an interviewer whose main intent was to get the position revealed, not to attack it.

[Lollerwaffle]

It really is difficult to get any source of valuable information out of a television interview these days. Often times, the interviewer will interrupt the person before they are even finished speaking. Then it just turns into a match of "Lalalala I CAN'T HEAR YOU" as you listen to them both yell and try to talk over the other.

Personally, I get my news from Fark.com.

[Tootsie]

cable tv is the worst, IMO. all of it.

[wrobert]

cable tv is the worst, IMO. all of it.

Do you currently subscribe to cable television?

[Tootsie]

Do you currently subscribe to cable television?

satellite, which does include cable and the need is for sports only. we do not watch otherwise. ever.

[wrobert]

satellite, which does include cable and the need is for sports only. we do not watch otherwise. ever.

:floor:

[sowalgayboi]

....
He's a terrorist! OMG...Bill he would't be that high in polotics if he was planning on bombing america...
Bill is a PHONY,Fagot,Pinhead, F O O L!!!!!!@Q:bang::bang::pissed::pissed:

First, the correct spelling is faggot. Second, no one in the gay community would ever claim Bill O'Reilly. :roll:

[Beachcoma]

Boy! Ecopal must have been either really, really bored, or really, really incensed at FOX News to start this thread.

I am here because the thread had been rated four stars - oops! my mistake.

My father always told me to never discuss politics or religion unless you are running for office or you are running a church. There are as many opinions out there as there are people and you will surely alienate some, if not most of them, before you're done.

However, those of you that are strong of heart and sound of mind and body, go for it - show us what you're made of.:biggrin:

[hnooe]

First, the correct spelling is faggot. Second, no one in the gay community would ever claim Bill O'Reilly. :roll:

I disagree--I think he is kinda hot in a rather brusk, Irish American sort of way. Sean Hannity use to be kinda cute, but he turned into a fat pig.

[sowalgayboi]

I disagree--I think he is kinda hot in a rather brusk, Irish American sort of way. Sean Hannity use to be kinda cute, but he turned into a fat pig.

Are you outing yourself here? :idontno:

[hnooe]

Are you outing yourself here? :idontno:


Outing? This 2008 I thought everyone was out..Oh well--I could change my name to sowalgayolderboi but I don't want to encroach on your territory! And btw you're are doing a terrific job here in the politico room boi!:bow: :bow::drink2:

[sowalgayboi]

Outing? This 2008 I thought everyone was out..Oh well--I could change my name to sowalgayolderboi but I don't want to encroach on your territory! And btw you're are doing a terrific job here in the politico room boi!:bow: :bow::drink2:

Thanks! Realized in another thread you had already pretty much outted yourself. ;-) Gee, I wonder how many of "us" are on here?

[hnooe]

Jodie Foster, Tom Cruise, Ted Haggard, Da Vinci, Senator Craig, it is endless......

[sowalgayboi]

Jodie Foster, Tom Cruise, Ted Haggard, Da Vinci, Senator Craig, it is endless......

:funn:

Of course half of those I still wouldn't want to call "family".

[Bob]

It really is difficult to get any source of valuable information out of a television interview these days. Often times, the interviewer will interrupt the person before they are even finished speaking. Then it just turns into a match of "Lalalala I CAN'T HEAR YOU" as you listen to them both yell and try to talk over the other.

Personally, I get my news from Fark.com.When TV was scarce and free, there were few choices, and left of center journalism ruled the airwaves. It was a good balance to our longtime tradition in this country to slightly right of center politics. Today with 200 channels, straight journalism has taken a back seat to editorializing and confrontation. It's about "entertaining" the mindset of your narrower target audience. I believe the current style of news reporting supports the polarization of this country's politics, and the gridlock on Capitol Hill. It's how CBS went from Murrow to Couric.

[hnooe]

:funn:

Of course half of those I still wouldn't want to call "family".

What about Ryan Seacrest... ?

[ecopal]

One of the responsibilities of a citizen in a democracy is to be well informed of the facts and to participate in the process.

We should all cherish our right to discuss politics and religion. People in totalitarian countries do not have that privilege.

Many of us have family and friends who have fought and died to protect these freedoms.

We also should not allow ourselves to be be excessively distracted from fulfilling this responsibility by entertainment and/or propaganda media pretending to be factual and objective news.

Why would any responsible citizen in a democracy watch a news source such as Fox News that is so widely documented as being extremely biased?

Below is another example of FoxNew’s “fair and balanced” and “accurate” reporting.

BYW. Obama did not attend a Muslim school. Obama is a Christian, not that it should matter.




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jfc8cn8Yqxk

[JustaLocal]

One of the responsibilities of a citizen in a democracy is to be well informed of the facts and to participate in the process.

We should all cherish our right to discuss politics and religion. People in totalitarian countries do not have that privilege.

Many of us have family and friends who have fought and died to protect these freedoms.

We also should not allow ourselves to be be excessively distracted from fulfilling this responsibility by entertainment and/or propaganda media pretending to be factual and objective news.

Why would any responsible citizen in a democracy watch a news source such as Fox News that is so widely documented as being extremely biased?

Because all news reporting is biased no matter what is professed or how hard they try not to be. I trust my own judgement. I prefer to have news reported with opposing biases. I find that the most informative.

[ecopal]

Because all news reporting is biased no matter what is professed or how hard they try not to be. I trust my own judgement. I prefer to have news reported with opposing biases. I find that the most informative.

You might want to balance the Fox neo conservative propaganda with a news source from the other extreme.
Check this out:
http://english.aljazeera.net/English

You could also listen to some liberal news at:
http://www.airamerica.com/
http://www.democracynow.org/