Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Squash]

Just like cnn and msnbc are democratic stations

You didn't see Bush saying they are not News and don't treat them like News..... end of story

I'm done trying to talk to you on this, it's obvious to me that you let your political beliefs over-ride reality.

Enjoy that island

[EWSoccer64]

Leftie, studies have shown just how left biased CNN and ABC/CBS/MSNBC/NBC/Pravda are towards the Dems.   Don't trust my word for it, take a look at the stats of how many favorable vs unfavorable stories were put out each for each candidate in the run up to the general election in November.   You can find those studies if you look for them.  Of course, the main stream liberal press has ignored them like so many other stories. 

>>>"[Fox is] widely viewed as a part of the Republican Party: take their talking points and put them on the air, take their opposition research and put it on the air. And that's fine. But let's not pretend they're a news organization like CNN is."

    "The reality of it is that Fox News often operates almost as either the research arm or the communications arm of the Republican Party. And it is not ideological... what I think is fair to say about Fox, and the way we view it, is that it is more of a wing of the Republican Party."

    "Obviously [the President] will go on Fox because he engages with ideological opponents. He has done that before and he will do it again... when he goes on Fox he understands he is not going on it as a news network at this point. He is going on it to debate the opposition."

Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/11/anita-dunn-fox-news-an-ou_n_316691.html

Further, if you don't think that you can act as a backhanded spokesman for a particular ideological viewpoint by choosing specific stories to follow and stories to downplay and carefully choose which studies you highlight, you aren't with the game. For gosh sakes, the argument is often made that Fox Spews is a much needed right wing counterweight to the largely left wing media. Can you have it both ways? <<<

[goldengoal]

Leftie, studies have shown just how left biased CNN and ABC/CBS/MSNBC/NBC/Pravda are towards the Dems.   Don't trust my word for it, take a look at the stats of how many favorable vs unfavorable stories were put out each for each candidate in the run up to the general election in November.   You can find those studies if you look for them.  Of course, the main stream liberal press has ignored them like so many other stories. 

>>>"[Fox is] widely viewed as a part of the Republican Party: take their talking points and put them on the air, take their opposition research and put it on the air. And that's fine. But let's not pretend they're a news organization like CNN is."

    "The reality of it is that Fox News often operates almost as either the research arm or the communications arm of the Republican Party. And it is not ideological... what I think is fair to say about Fox, and the way we view it, is that it is more of a wing of the Republican Party."

    "Obviously [the President] will go on Fox because he engages with ideological opponents. He has done that before and he will do it again... when he goes on Fox he understands he is not going on it as a news network at this point. He is going on it to debate the opposition."

Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/11/anita-dunn-fox-news-an-ou_n_316691.html

Further, if you don't think that you can act as a backhanded spokesman for a particular ideological viewpoint by choosing specific stories to follow and stories to downplay and carefully choose which studies you highlight, you aren't with the game. For gosh sakes, the argument is often made that Fox Spews is a much needed right wing counterweight to the largely left wing media. Can you have it both ways? <<<

He will probably read the surveys that fit his needs. Did you hear about the ABC/Washington Post or times where 52% now favor the Obamacare (There were 13% more democrats than independents and Republicans that took the survey)

[GotRhythm]

Leftie, studies have shown just how left biased CNN and ABC/CBS/MSNBC/NBC/Pravda are towards the Dems.   Don't trust my word for it, take a look at the stats of how many favorable vs unfavorable stories were put out each for each candidate in the run up to the general election in November.   You can find those studies if you look for them.  Of course, the main stream liberal press has ignored them like so many other stories. 

>>>"[Fox is] widely viewed as a part of the Republican Party: take their talking points and put them on the air, take their opposition research and put it on the air. And that's fine. But let's not pretend they're a news organization like CNN is."

    "The reality of it is that Fox News often operates almost as either the research arm or the communications arm of the Republican Party. And it is not ideological... what I think is fair to say about Fox, and the way we view it, is that it is more of a wing of the Republican Party."

    "Obviously [the President] will go on Fox because he engages with ideological opponents. He has done that before and he will do it again... when he goes on Fox he understands he is not going on it as a news network at this point. He is going on it to debate the opposition."

Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/11/anita-dunn-fox-news-an-ou_n_316691.html

Further, if you don't think that you can act as a backhanded spokesman for a particular ideological viewpoint by choosing specific stories to follow and stories to downplay and carefully choose which studies you highlight, you aren't with the game. For gosh sakes, the argument is often made that Fox Spews is a much needed right wing counterweight to the largely left wing media. Can you have it both ways? <<<

He will probably read the surveys that fit his needs. Did you hear about the ABC/Washington Post or times where 52% now favor the Obamacare (There were 13% more democrats than independents and Republicans that took the survey)

....and the beat goes on

[meluvsoccer]

The latest:

The Obama administration on Thursday failed in its attempt to exclude Fox News from participating in an interview of an administration official, as Republicans on Capitol Hill stepped up their criticism of the hardball tactics employed by the White House.

The Treasury Department on Thursday tried to make "pay czar" Kenneth Feinberg available for interviews to every member of the network pool except Fox News. The pool is the five-network rotation that for decades has shared the costs and duties of daily coverage of the presidency and other Washington institutions.

But the Washington bureau chiefs of the five TV networks consulted and decided that none of their reporters would interview Feinberg unless Fox News was included. The pool informed Treasury that Fox News, as a member of the network pool, could not be excluded from such interviews under the rules of the pool.

The administration relented, making Feinberg available for all five pool members and Bloomberg TV.

Good for the other News Orgs.  If they don't stand up now, it could be the end of a free press.

[Left Foot]

Leftie, studies have shown just how left biased CNN and ABC/CBS/MSNBC/NBC/Pravda are towards the Dems.   Don't trust my word for it, take a look at the stats of how many favorable vs unfavorable stories were put out each for each candidate in the run up to the general election in November.   You can find those studies if you look for them.  Of course, the main stream liberal press has ignored them like so many other stories. 

>>>"[Fox is] widely viewed as a part of the Republican Party: take their talking points and put them on the air, take their opposition research and put it on the air. And that's fine. But let's not pretend they're a news organization like CNN is."

    "The reality of it is that Fox News often operates almost as either the research arm or the communications arm of the Republican Party. And it is not ideological... what I think is fair to say about Fox, and the way we view it, is that it is more of a wing of the Republican Party."

    "Obviously [the President] will go on Fox because he engages with ideological opponents. He has done that before and he will do it again... when he goes on Fox he understands he is not going on it as a news network at this point. He is going on it to debate the opposition."

Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/11/anita-dunn-fox-news-an-ou_n_316691.html

Further, if you don't think that you can act as a backhanded spokesman for a particular ideological viewpoint by choosing specific stories to follow and stories to downplay and carefully choose which studies you highlight, you aren't with the game. For gosh sakes, the argument is often made that Fox Spews is a much needed right wing counterweight to the largely left wing media. Can you have it both ways? <<<

He will probably read the surveys that fit his needs. Did you hear about the ABC/Washington Post or times where 52% now favor the Obamacare (There were 13% more democrats than independents and Republicans that took the survey)

Uh, oh. Are you saying that there will be contrary studies to the ones that EW is referring to. Egads! Imagine that! Each side of a discussion using evidence which supports each participant's specific views. That sounds terrible.

[goldengoal]

Leftie, studies have shown just how left biased CNN and ABC/CBS/MSNBC/NBC/Pravda are towards the Dems.   Don't trust my word for it, take a look at the stats of how many favorable vs unfavorable stories were put out each for each candidate in the run up to the general election in November.   You can find those studies if you look for them.  Of course, the main stream liberal press has ignored them like so many other stories. 

>>>"[Fox is] widely viewed as a part of the Republican Party: take their talking points and put them on the air, take their opposition research and put it on the air. And that's fine. But let's not pretend they're a news organization like CNN is."

    "The reality of it is that Fox News often operates almost as either the research arm or the communications arm of the Republican Party. And it is not ideological... what I think is fair to say about Fox, and the way we view it, is that it is more of a wing of the Republican Party."

    "Obviously [the President] will go on Fox because he engages with ideological opponents. He has done that before and he will do it again... when he goes on Fox he understands he is not going on it as a news network at this point. He is going on it to debate the opposition."

Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/11/anita-dunn-fox-news-an-ou_n_316691.html

Further, if you don't think that you can act as a backhanded spokesman for a particular ideological viewpoint by choosing specific stories to follow and stories to downplay and carefully choose which studies you highlight, you aren't with the game. For gosh sakes, the argument is often made that Fox Spews is a much needed right wing counterweight to the largely left wing media. Can you have it both ways? <<<

He will probably read the surveys that fit his needs. Did you hear about the ABC/Washington Post or times where 52% now favor the Obamacare (There were 13% more democrats than independents and Republicans that took the survey)

Uh, oh. Are you saying that there will be contrary studies to the ones that EW is referring to. Egads! Imagine that! Each side of a discussion using evidence which supports each participant's specific views. That sounds terrible.

nope not for the EW comments- that was a survey conducted by an independant research firm

[Left Foot]

Leftie, studies have shown just how left biased CNN and ABC/CBS/MSNBC/NBC/Pravda are towards the Dems.   Don't trust my word for it, take a look at the stats of how many favorable vs unfavorable stories were put out each for each candidate in the run up to the general election in November.   You can find those studies if you look for them.  Of course, the main stream liberal press has ignored them like so many other stories. 

>>>"[Fox is] widely viewed as a part of the Republican Party: take their talking points and put them on the air, take their opposition research and put it on the air. And that's fine. But let's not pretend they're a news organization like CNN is."

    "The reality of it is that Fox News often operates almost as either the research arm or the communications arm of the Republican Party. And it is not ideological... what I think is fair to say about Fox, and the way we view it, is that it is more of a wing of the Republican Party."

    "Obviously [the President] will go on Fox because he engages with ideological opponents. He has done that before and he will do it again... when he goes on Fox he understands he is not going on it as a news network at this point. He is going on it to debate the opposition."

Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/11/anita-dunn-fox-news-an-ou_n_316691.html

Further, if you don't think that you can act as a backhanded spokesman for a particular ideological viewpoint by choosing specific stories to follow and stories to downplay and carefully choose which studies you highlight, you aren't with the game. For gosh sakes, the argument is often made that Fox Spews is a much needed right wing counterweight to the largely left wing media. Can you have it both ways? <<<

He will probably read the surveys that fit his needs. Did you hear about the ABC/Washington Post or times where 52% now favor the Obamacare (There were 13% more democrats than independents and Republicans that took the survey)

Uh, oh. Are you saying that there will be contrary studies to the ones that EW is referring to. Egads! Imagine that! Each side of a discussion using evidence which supports each participant's specific views. That sounds terrible.

nope not for the EW comments- that was a survey conducted by an independant research firm

Is that the one where the "independent" research firm got like 90% of its funding from right wing sources? Of course, depending upon how the study was conducted, it might actually have something valid to say.

So which is it, that Fox Spews is unbiased or that Fox Spews just performs the same function for the republican party as MSNBC does for the dems? 

[GotRhythm]

Leftie, studies have shown just how left biased CNN and ABC/CBS/MSNBC/NBC/Pravda are towards the Dems.   Don't trust my word for it, take a look at the stats of how many favorable vs unfavorable stories were put out each for each candidate in the run up to the general election in November.   You can find those studies if you look for them.  Of course, the main stream liberal press has ignored them like so many other stories. 

>>>"[Fox is] widely viewed as a part of the Republican Party: take their talking points and put them on the air, take their opposition research and put it on the air. And that's fine. But let's not pretend they're a news organization like CNN is."

    "The reality of it is that Fox News often operates almost as either the research arm or the communications arm of the Republican Party. And it is not ideological... what I think is fair to say about Fox, and the way we view it, is that it is more of a wing of the Republican Party."

    "Obviously [the President] will go on Fox because he engages with ideological opponents. He has done that before and he will do it again... when he goes on Fox he understands he is not going on it as a news network at this point. He is going on it to debate the opposition."

Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/11/anita-dunn-fox-news-an-ou_n_316691.html

Further, if you don't think that you can act as a backhanded spokesman for a particular ideological viewpoint by choosing specific stories to follow and stories to downplay and carefully choose which studies you highlight, you aren't with the game. For gosh sakes, the argument is often made that Fox Spews is a much needed right wing counterweight to the largely left wing media. Can you have it both ways? <<<

He will probably read the surveys that fit his needs. Did you hear about the ABC/Washington Post or times where 52% now favor the Obamacare (There were 13% more democrats than independents and Republicans that took the survey)

Uh, oh. Are you saying that there will be contrary studies to the ones that EW is referring to. Egads! Imagine that! Each side of a discussion using evidence which supports each participant's specific views. That sounds terrible.

nope not for the EW comments- that was a survey conducted by an independant research firm

Is that the one where the "independent" research firm got like 90% of its funding from right wing sources? Of course, depending upon how the study was conducted, it might actually have something valid to say.

So which is it, that Fox Spews is unbiased or that Fox Spews just performs the same function for the republican party as MSNBC does for the dems? 

In order for humor to be funny, it usually has to have a grain of truth to it. "Fox Spews" isn't funny. Not offensive......just un-funny.

Now, "PMSNBC".....that's funny!

[basketballdad]

Not getting into which media arm supports which party. Not really my point on here. Nice to see me put into so many posts. Left Foot, you and I are more alike politically than most on here but you have to give it a rest. I am an unashamed Obama supporter but am not blind to mistakes that his administration makes. Regardless of who the media is there is no justification for trying to shun, isolate or ignore them. I know some presidents have shunned individual reporters who have irritated them but this is a first where you attempt to shun an entire news division based on some opinion programming that you don't like.

I prefer my President to be more presidential and less petty. With so many huge issues on the line and a political fight of a magnitude he has yet to see President Obama does not have the time or energy to play games with Fox. They are going to do what they do regardless of whether he tries to ignore them. The other news agencies refused to interview the pay czar if Fox was not included. That was not because the love Fox but know if it happens to them it could happen in reverse if a Republican was President. Stifling free speech is not only dumb politically but goes against everything we stand for. Man up send out the smartest person in the administration to go head to head with Fox. If you can't find any call me. Keep the eye on the prize which is health care, foreign policiy, and the economic mess.

[GotRhythm]

Not getting into which media arm supports which party. Not really my point on here. Nice to see me put into so many posts. Left Foot, you and I are more alike politically than most on here but you have to give it a rest. I am an unashamed Obama supporter but am not blind to mistakes that his administration makes. Regardless of who the media is there is no justification for trying to shun, isolate or ignore them. I know some presidents have shunned individual reporters who have irritated them but this is a first where you attempt to shun an entire news division based on some opinion programming that you don't like.

I prefer my President to be more presidential and less petty. With so many huge issues on the line and a political fight of a magnitude he has yet to see President Obama does not have the time or energy to play games with Fox. They are going to do what they do regardless of whether he tries to ignore them. The other news agencies refused to interview the pay czar if Fox was not included. That was not because the love Fox but know if it happens to them it could happen in reverse if a Republican was President. Stifling free speech is not only dumb politically but goes against everything we stand for. Man up send out the smartest person in the administration to go head to head with Fox. If you can't find any call me. Keep the eye on the prize which is health care, foreign policiy, and the economic mess.

Very well said BBD.

[Left Foot]

Not getting into which media arm supports which party. Not really my point on here. Nice to see me put into so many posts. Left Foot, you and I are more alike politically than most on here but you have to give it a rest. I am an unashamed Obama supporter but am not blind to mistakes that his administration makes. Regardless of who the media is there is no justification for trying to shun, isolate or ignore them. I know some presidents have shunned individual reporters who have irritated them but this is a first where you attempt to shun an entire news division based on some opinion programming that you don't like.

I prefer my President to be more presidential and less petty. With so many huge issues on the line and a political fight of a magnitude he has yet to see President Obama does not have the time or energy to play games with Fox. They are going to do what they do regardless of whether he tries to ignore them. The other news agencies refused to interview the pay czar if Fox was not included. That was not because the love Fox but know if it happens to them it could happen in reverse if a Republican was President. Stifling free speech is not only dumb politically but goes against everything we stand for. Man up send out the smartest person in the administration to go head to head with Fox. If you can't find any call me. Keep the eye on the prize which is health care, foreign policiy, and the economic mess.

For gosh sakes folks, I have been consistent in saying that the move was, practically speaking, poor strategy despite the fact that Fox Spews is more of a republican propaganda machine than a news org.  Remember, I don't think the National Enquirer is included in the press pool either so some filter is evidently in place.

But where would any of us be if we didn't have a station or news source that repeats back our own biases? Me --  I don't watch CNN, MSNBC or Fox for news, just want to see how they are pitching the stories in their inadequate 30 second news pieces. You know, Who should I hate today?   

[basketballdad]

Thank you GotRythm.

[EWSoccer64]

Not getting into which media arm supports which party. Not really my point on here. Nice to see me put into so many posts. Left Foot, you and I are more alike politically than most on here but you have to give it a rest. I am an unashamed Obama supporter but am not blind to mistakes that his administration makes. Regardless of who the media is there is no justification for trying to shun, isolate or ignore them. I know some presidents have shunned individual reporters who have irritated them but this is a first where you attempt to shun an entire news division based on some opinion programming that you don't like.

I prefer my President to be more presidential and less petty. With so many huge issues on the line and a political fight of a magnitude he has yet to see President Obama does not have the time or energy to play games with Fox. They are going to do what they do regardless of whether he tries to ignore them. The other news agencies refused to interview the pay czar if Fox was not included. That was not because the love Fox but know if it happens to them it could happen in reverse if a Republican was President. Stifling free speech is not only dumb politically but goes against everything we stand for. Man up send out the smartest person in the administration to go head to head with Fox. If you can't find any call me. Keep the eye on the prize which is health care, foreign policiy, and the economic mess.

For gosh sakes folks, I have been consistent in saying that the move was, practically speaking, poor strategy despite the fact that Fox Spews is more of a republican propaganda machine than a news org.  Remember, I don't think the National Enquirer is included in the press pool either so some filter is evidently in place.

But where would any of us be if we didn't have a station or news source that repeats back our own biases? Me --  I don't watch CNN, MSNBC or Fox for news, just want to see how they are pitching the stories in their inadequate 30 second news pieces. You know, Who should I hate today?   

All the media networks have a slant on their news.   They have for decades.  It has just become so ingrained and accepted that CBS, ABC, CNN, etc. are to the left by nature, that anyone who is not becomes a target.