Fair & Balanced?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: Fair & Balanced?

    Condi sure has a way with psychopathic despots.

     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: Fair & Balanced?

    In response to chiefhowie's comment:

    You are cultured by envioment to form your beliefs and will always justify your beliefs.

    You will look for that support where ever you can find it.

    Some are lucky, resoponsible for themselves. ability to from than opinion based on thier world.

    In todays world, news is about making money.



    If everybody were only interested in re-inforcing their ideologies, there would only be two networks - FOX and MSNBC.  The fact that MSNBC has such poor ratings suggests that liberals are getting their news from variety of sources.  This has driven the right-wing idealogues further and further into the arms of Rupert Murdoch, to the point where conservatives don't trust anything that he doesn't have a hand in.  If conservatives could think for themselves, they could not be spoon-fed all these lies.  

     

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from ThatWasMe. Show ThatWasMe's posts

    Re: Fair & Balanced?

    In response to slomag's comment:

    In response to chiefhowie's comment:

    You are cultured by envioment to form your beliefs and will always justify your beliefs.

    You will look for that support where ever you can find it.

    Some are lucky, resoponsible for themselves. ability to from than opinion based on thier world.

    In todays world, news is about making money.



    If everybody were only interested in re-inforcing their ideologies, there would only be two networks - FOX and MSNBC.  The fact that MSNBC has such poor ratings suggests that liberals are getting their news from variety of sources.  This has driven the right-wing idealogues further and further into the arms of Rupert Murdoch, to the point where conservatives don't trust anything that he doesn't have a hand in.  If conservatives could think for themselves, they could not be spoon-fed all these lies.  

     




    Great theory but the truth of the matter is Fox is enjoying such record breaking high ratings because it is drawing viewers from a large variety of voter groups including democrats and independents.

    Ratings would not be true if those tuning in were just conservatives.

    Basically yours is spoon fed rhetoric usually from those who have never watched FOX but buy into the democrat talking points.

    If you did watch the network your criticism would be more pointed and direct, they aren't because you don't know what you're talking about.

    Other the bogeyman Roger Ailes.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: Fair & Balanced?

    In response to ThatWasMe's comment:

    In response to slomag's comment:

    In response to chiefhowie's comment:

    You are cultured by envioment to form your beliefs and will always justify your beliefs.

    You will look for that support where ever you can find it.

    Some are lucky, resoponsible for themselves. ability to from than opinion based on thier world.

    In todays world, news is about making money.



    If everybody were only interested in re-inforcing their ideologies, there would only be two networks - FOX and MSNBC.  The fact that MSNBC has such poor ratings suggests that liberals are getting their news from variety of sources.  This has driven the right-wing idealogues further and further into the arms of Rupert Murdoch, to the point where conservatives don't trust anything that he doesn't have a hand in.  If conservatives could think for themselves, they could not be spoon-fed all these lies.  

     




    Great theory but the truth of the matter is Fox is enjoying such record breaking high ratings because it is drawing viewers from a large variety of voter groups including democrats and independents.

    Ratings would not be true if those tuning in were just conservatives.

    Basically yours is spoon fed rhetoric usually from those who have never watched FOX but buy into the democrat talking points.

    If you did watch the network your criticism would be more pointed and direct, they aren't because you don't know what you're talking about.

    Other the bogeyman Roger Ailes.




    I do watch Fox, and listen to conservative radio.  I think for the same reason I'm on these forums - a morbid curiosity for understanding how you people think.  

    The topics usually mirror these threads pretty closely - Benghazi has been the number one story, usually incorporating 60-70 percent of any given show.  Then you'll have Dick Morris or Karl Rove telling you why Romney is going to win running away.  Now you're starting to see criticism about the response to the storm, and fake indignation that Obama would dare to campaign at a time like this.

    Laura Ingraham, John Gibson, Sean Hannity, Greta Van Susteren - it's all pretty much the same show.

    I do enjoy Chris Wallace's sunday show, though I usually only watch the round table.  I also watch Meet the Press, This Week, and Chris Matthews (Sunday only).

     

     

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from ThatWasMe. Show ThatWasMe's posts

    Re: Fair & Balanced?

    In response to slomag's comment:

    In response to ThatWasMe's comment:

    In response to slomag's comment:

    In response to chiefhowie's comment:

    You are cultured by envioment to form your beliefs and will always justify your beliefs.

    You will look for that support where ever you can find it.

    Some are lucky, resoponsible for themselves. ability to from than opinion based on thier world.

    In todays world, news is about making money.



    If everybody were only interested in re-inforcing their ideologies, there would only be two networks - FOX and MSNBC.  The fact that MSNBC has such poor ratings suggests that liberals are getting their news from variety of sources.  This has driven the right-wing idealogues further and further into the arms of Rupert Murdoch, to the point where conservatives don't trust anything that he doesn't have a hand in.  If conservatives could think for themselves, they could not be spoon-fed all these lies.  

     




    Great theory but the truth of the matter is Fox is enjoying such record breaking high ratings because it is drawing viewers from a large variety of voter groups including democrats and independents.

    Ratings would not be true if those tuning in were just conservatives.

    Basically yours is spoon fed rhetoric usually from those who have never watched FOX but buy into the democrat talking points.

    If you did watch the network your criticism would be more pointed and direct, they aren't because you don't know what you're talking about.

    Other the bogeyman Roger Ailes.




    I do watch Fox, and listen to conservative radio.  I think for the same reason I'm on these forums - a morbid curiosity for understanding how you people think.  

    The topics usually mirror these threads pretty closely - Benghazi has been the number one story, usually incorporating 60-70 percent of any given show.  Then you'll have Dick Morris or Karl Rove telling you why Romney is going to win running away.  Now you're starting to see criticism about the response to the storm, and fake indignation that Obama would dare to campaign at a time like this.

    Laura Ingraham, John Gibson, Sean Hannity, Greta Van Susteren - it's all pretty much the same show.

    I do enjoy Chris Wallace's sunday show, though I usually only watch the round table.  I also watch Meet the Press, This Week, and Chris Matthews (Sunday only).

     

     




    Laura Ingraham or John Gibson don't have shows on FOX.

    Nice try though.

     
  7. This post has been removed.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from ThatWasMe. Show ThatWasMe's posts

    Re: Fair & Balanced?

    In response to chiefhowie's comment:

    In response to slomag's comment:

    In response to ThatWasMe's comment:

    In response to slomag's comment:

    In response to chiefhowie's comment:

    You are cultured by envioment to form your beliefs and will always justify your beliefs.

    You will look for that support where ever you can find it.

    Some are lucky, resoponsible for themselves. ability to from than opinion based on thier world.

    In todays world, news is about making money.



    If everybody were only interested in re-inforcing their ideologies, there would only be two networks - FOX and MSNBC.  The fact that MSNBC has such poor ratings suggests that liberals are getting their news from variety of sources.  This has driven the right-wing idealogues further and further into the arms of Rupert Murdoch, to the point where conservatives don't trust anything that he doesn't have a hand in.  If conservatives could think for themselves, they could not be spoon-fed all these lies.  

     




    Great theory but the truth of the matter is Fox is enjoying such record breaking high ratings because it is drawing viewers from a large variety of voter groups including democrats and independents.

    Ratings would not be true if those tuning in were just conservatives.

    Basically yours is spoon fed rhetoric usually from those who have never watched FOX but buy into the democrat talking points.

    If you did watch the network your criticism would be more pointed and direct, they aren't because you don't know what you're talking about.

    Other the bogeyman Roger Ailes.




    I do watch Fox, and listen to conservative radio.  I think for the same reason I'm on these forums - a morbid curiosity for understanding how you people think.  

    The topics usually mirror these threads pretty closely - Benghazi has been the number one story, usually incorporating 60-70 percent of any given show.  Then you'll have Dick Morris or Karl Rove telling you why Romney is going to win running away.  Now you're starting to see criticism about the response to the storm, and fake indignation that Obama would dare to campaign at a time like this.

    Laura Ingraham, John Gibson, Sean Hannity, Greta Van Susteren - it's all pretty much the same show.

    I do enjoy Chris Wallace's sunday show, though I usually only watch the round table.  I also watch Meet the Press, This Week, and Chris Matthews (Sunday only).

     

     



    As I posted, you look at Fox to verify your beliefs.

    Most of Fox shows you mentioned are for intertainment . How about Wahn Williams (NPR) and Bob Beckle (CBS) both (Dems)  fired because they were guest on Fox as balance.

    The news editor invites two guest with opposing views the times that I have watched. 




    Joe Trippi, Alan Combs, Kirsten Powers, Heraldo are all regulars.

    All the talk shows have both sides represented unlike say Hardball or Sgt. Schultz or Maddow.

    O'Reilly goes one on one with anybody.

    FOX is more even handed than any of the other networks.

    What they don't like is the criticism of Obama on Fox because none of the other networks do.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: Fair & Balanced?

    In response to ThatWasMe's comment:

    In response to chiefhowie's comment:

    In response to slomag's comment:

    In response to ThatWasMe's comment:

    In response to slomag's comment:

    In response to chiefhowie's comment:

    You are cultured by envioment to form your beliefs and will always justify your beliefs.

    You will look for that support where ever you can find it.

    Some are lucky, resoponsible for themselves. ability to from than opinion based on thier world.

    In todays world, news is about making money.



    If everybody were only interested in re-inforcing their ideologies, there would only be two networks - FOX and MSNBC.  The fact that MSNBC has such poor ratings suggests that liberals are getting their news from variety of sources.  This has driven the right-wing idealogues further and further into the arms of Rupert Murdoch, to the point where conservatives don't trust anything that he doesn't have a hand in.  If conservatives could think for themselves, they could not be spoon-fed all these lies.  

     




    Great theory but the truth of the matter is Fox is enjoying such record breaking high ratings because it is drawing viewers from a large variety of voter groups including democrats and independents.

    Ratings would not be true if those tuning in were just conservatives.

    Basically yours is spoon fed rhetoric usually from those who have never watched FOX but buy into the democrat talking points.

    If you did watch the network your criticism would be more pointed and direct, they aren't because you don't know what you're talking about.

    Other the bogeyman Roger Ailes.




    I do watch Fox, and listen to conservative radio.  I think for the same reason I'm on these forums - a morbid curiosity for understanding how you people think.  

    The topics usually mirror these threads pretty closely - Benghazi has been the number one story, usually incorporating 60-70 percent of any given show.  Then you'll have Dick Morris or Karl Rove telling you why Romney is going to win running away.  Now you're starting to see criticism about the response to the storm, and fake indignation that Obama would dare to campaign at a time like this.

    Laura Ingraham, John Gibson, Sean Hannity, Greta Van Susteren - it's all pretty much the same show.

    I do enjoy Chris Wallace's sunday show, though I usually only watch the round table.  I also watch Meet the Press, This Week, and Chris Matthews (Sunday only).

     

     



    As I posted, you look at Fox to verify your beliefs.

    Most of Fox shows you mentioned are for intertainment . How about Wahn Williams (NPR) and Bob Beckle (CBS) both (Dems)  fired because they were guest on Fox as balance.

    The news editor invites two guest with opposing views the times that I have watched. 




    Joe Trippi, Alan Combs, Kirsten Powers, Heraldo are all regulars.

    All the talk shows have both sides represented unlike say Hardball or Sgt. Schultz or Maddow.

    O'Reilly goes one on one with anybody.

    FOX is more even handed than any of the other networks.

    What they don't like is the criticism of Obama on Fox because none of the other networks do.



    The Dems are always outnumbered, and it's somebody like Sean Hannity asking the "when did Obama stop beating his wife" questions.

    I haven't seen much of Schultz or Maddow, but Matthews has conservatives like Kathleen Parker and Major Garrett as regulars on his Sunday show.  Bill Maher has conservatives on regularly.

    O'Reilly went one on one with Jon Stewart and got his a55 handed to him in the "rumble in the air-conditioned auditorium".

     

     

     

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from StalkingButler. Show StalkingButler's posts

    Re: Fair & Balanced?

    Condi sure has a way with psychopathic despots

     

    too bad she didnt have the same sort of way with the disgusting leftist racists in this country when she was working for GWB.

     

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Fair & Balanced?

    In response to slomag's comment:

    Condi sure has a way with psychopathic despots.




    Actually she does.  Far superior to Obama's amaturish efforts:

     

    http://www.nationaljournal.com/nationalsecurity/bush-era-pact-deprived-libya-of-key-atomic-tech-20110302

     

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: Fair & Balanced?

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

    In response to slomag's comment:

    Condi sure has a way with psychopathic despots.




    Actually she does.  Far superior to Obama's amaturish efforts:

     

    http://www.nationaljournal.com/nationalsecurity/bush-era-pact-deprived-libya-of-key-atomic-tech-20110302

     




    No argument here ...

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2030186/Colonel-Gaddafi-kept-photos-darling-Condoleezza-Rice-lair.html

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Fair & Balanced?

    In response to slomag's comment:

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

    In response to slomag's comment:

    Condi sure has a way with psychopathic despots.




    Actually she does.  Far superior to Obama's amaturish efforts:

     

    http://www.nationaljournal.com/nationalsecurity/bush-era-pact-deprived-libya-of-key-atomic-tech-20110302

     




    No argument here ...

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2030186/Colonel-Gaddafi-kept-photos-darling-Condoleezza-Rice-lair.html




    infantile, like most liberals.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share