• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Fox News official position...

mmi said:
It's more than "a belief." The partisan/ideological bias is undeniable. That's why Faux is the "least trusted."

>>Lots of Democrats appear on the channel, and even more talk to the pundits in private.

That doesn't mean anything. Many of the Democrats they feature are "hand-picked." A lot of the regulars are what I'd call "former Democrats." Then there are the times a "real" Democrat appears, … so Handjob or Orally or some other right-wing schmuck can manipulate the appearance, talk over them, etc.
"I asked you a yes-or-no question; why won't you answer? 'Can there now be any remaining doubt that Obummer truly is the Antichrist?' OK, you won't answer, because you know the answer just like the American people do. Goodbye."​
Click to expand...

It's not surprising that your view of Fox News is what it is, given your overall position on the political spectrum.

What's surprising is that you appear to believe that it isn't the same only for the other side of the political spectrum on all the other news channels / broadcasters.
 
pbrauer said:
That Joe Biden will enter the race for president. Bret Baier said this at the beginning of show Special Report. Regardless of whether he's correct or not, why did Fox News make this declaration?
Click to expand...

Remember, FoxNews has tried from the very beginning to dump Trump. And Trump is the only real conservative in the race who has a chance of winning.

Remember the new dynamics of this race. Forget the labels of liberal/conservative; democrat/republican; FoxNews/CNN.

They are irrelevant.

It's Establishment versus anti-Establishment. It is Roger Ailes wanting to promote the son of his dear friend George Herbert Walker Bush. Ailes wants Trump OUT of the race. Trump is the turd in the punch bowl.

FoxNews is no longer the conservative alternative to the liberal media. Fox is establishment.
 
pbrauer said:
I don't have a link, heard him say it say it on live TV.
Click to expand...

pbrauer said:
So? That has nothing to do with my OP, reading is fundamental Bubba. ;)
Click to expand...

Don't be so touchy.

If I told you that Hillary admitted she knew it wasn't the video, you'd ask for a link and I could give you one.

To put it another way ... if someone who relies on David Brock (who has proudly acknowledged "journalistic sleight of hand") as you do, and also humiliates himself by fawning over Hillary, says trust me I personally heard it on live TV but I can't actually produce a link or an accurate quote, they shouldn't be surprised to learn their readers wouldn't be inclined to bestow their trust.

So really, the most you could squeeze out of this is that FOX may have reported what damn near everybody else was.
 
bubbabgone said:
Don't be so touchy.

If I told you that Hillary admitted she knew it wasn't the video, you'd ask for a link and I could give you one.

To put it another way ... if someone who relies on David Brock (who has proudly acknowledged "journalistic sleight of hand") as you do, and also humiliates himself by fawning over Hillary, says trust me I personally heard it on live TV but I can't actually produce a link or an accurate quote, they shouldn't be surprised to learn their readers wouldn't be inclined to bestow their trust.

So really, the most you could squeeze out of this is that FOX may have reported what damn near everybody else was.
Click to expand...

You don't have to trust me Bubba, I know what I heard; it was a personal observation. My post was meant to be provocative, deal with it. Who has said it was a done deal?
 
tres borrachos said:
I do watch a lot more CNN and MSNBC than I watch Fox News
Click to expand...

I'd say that's why you and I get along. Yer not an idiot/lunatic.

pbrauer said:
I don't have a link, heard him say it say it on live TV.
Click to expand...

I think you may have missed the exact quote. But imo that's not the point. There's no doubt in my mind that Faux ardently pushed the "Biden will run" line, and did so much more than other outlets. It's also obvious why they did so. Part of their massive rat-effing operation that's been going on non-stop for many years — a blatant and una(Dana)bashed effort to misrepresent and undermine the Democratic party and liberal policy positions, in this case, the seemingly inevitable nomination of Secretary Clinton. This is why they endlessly trumpet the so-called "scandals" of Benghazi and the emails and the Foundation and WJC's infidelity and how much she pays to get her hair cut and her communications with Sidney Blumenthal and whatever else they can manufacture/exaggerate/overemphasize.

Here's the video. I think the line that hit you was, "Right now, Fox News maintains that Biden is expected to get in the race, and soon, to challenge Hillary Clinton … ." In fact, if you exclude the first word of Baier's opening, you get, "[Whether] vice-president Joe Biden will make a run for the top job … ." Those guys are professionals. And they're not trying to inform; their goal is to manipulate.

eohrnberger said:
you appear to believe that it isn't the same only for the other side of the political spectrum on all the other news channels / broadcasters.
Click to expand...

Yes, I do believe it isn't the same. MSNBC is left-of-center. I'd say CNN isn't. Faux is an embarrassment to journalism, and has a very destructive influence on the country. There's no way you can compare the crap peddled by people like Orally and Handjob to anything on MSNBC, even Sharpton. Maddow, Matthews, and Crazy Larry are liberals, no doubt, but they don't behave the way the jerks on Faux do.

And a big part of the problem is that Faux never lets up — they're at it 24/7. It's the way they run their operation. If you can't see it, you've got a serious blind spot.

reason10 said:
Remember, FoxNews has tried from the very beginning to dump Trump.
Click to expand...

Not true, imo. Handjob loves 'im.

>>Trump is the only real conservative in the race who has a chance of winning.

He's not a conservative. He's a self-promoter. Politics and policy are just tools for him in that effort.

>>Trump is the turd in the punch bowl.

Something we agree on.

>>FoxNews is no longer the conservative alternative to the liberal media. Fox is establishment.

Faux is heavily right-wing. Just not enough for you. Yer not a conservative, yer a reactionary.
 
Last edited:
mmi said:
I'd say that's why you and I get along. Yer not an idiot/lunatic.



I think you may have missed the exact quote. But imo that's not the point. There's no doubt in my mind that Faux ardently pushed "Biden will run" line, and did so much more than other outlets. It's also obvious why they did so. Part of their massive rat-effing operation that's been going on non-stop for many years — a blatant and una(Dana)bashed effort to misrepresent and undermine the Democratic party and liberal policy positions, in this case, the seemingly inevitable nomination of Secretary Clinton. This is why they endlessly trumpet the so-called "scandals" of Benghazi and the emails and the Foundation and WJC's infidelity and how much she pays to get her hair cut and her communications with Sidney Blumenthal and whatever else they can manufacture/exaggerate/overemphasize.

Here's the video. Part of it is clipped off at the beginning, but I think the line that hit you was, "Right now, Fox News maintains that Biden is expected to get in the race, and soon, to challenge Hillary Clinton … ." In fact, if you exclude the first word of Baier's opening, you get, "[Whether] vice-president Joe Biden will make a run for the top job … ." Those guys are professionals. And they're not trying to inform; their goal is to manipulate.



Yes, I do believe it isn't the same. MSNBC is left-of-center. I'd say CNN isn't. Faux is an embarrassment to journalism, and has a very destructive influence on the country. There's no way you can compare the crap peddled by people like Orally and Handjob to anything on MSNBC, even Sharpton. Maddow, Matthews, and Crazy Larry are liberals, no doubt, but they don't behave the way the jerks on Faux do.
Click to expand...
You are right on that. MSNBC is far worse than Fox News, a differing of perspectives apply.
mmi said:
And a big pat of the problem is that Faux never lets up — they're at it 24/7. It's the way they run their operation. If you can't see it, you've got a serious blind spot.
Click to expand...

And vice-versa, WRT MSNBC, and even CNN to some extent. Never letting up is related to being a 24x7 new channel.

mmi said:
Not true, imo. Handjob loves 'im.

>>Trump is the only real conservative in the race who has a chance of winning.

He's not a conservative. He's a self-promoter. Politics and policy are just tools for him in that effort.

>>Trump is the turd in the punch bowl.

Something we agree on.

>>FoxNews is no longer the conservative alternative to the liberal media. Fox is establishment.

Faux is heavily right-wing. Just not enough for you. Yer not a conservative, yer a reactionary.
Click to expand...
 
pbrauer said:
You don't have to trust me Bubba, I know what I heard; it was a personal observation. My post was meant to be provocative, deal with it. Who has said it was a done deal?
Click to expand...

As he was leaving the briefing I heard Josh Earnest say Comey said his agents said Hillary's a felon.
 
mmi said:
I'd say that's why you and I get along. Yer not an idiot/lunatic.



I think you may have missed the exact quote. But imo that's not the point. There's no doubt in my mind that Faux ardently pushed the "Biden will run" line, and did so much more than other outlets. It's also obvious why they did so. Part of their massive rat-effing operation that's been going on non-stop for many years — a blatant and una(Dana)bashed effort to misrepresent and undermine the Democratic party and liberal policy positions, in this case, the seemingly inevitable nomination of Secretary Clinton. This is why they endlessly trumpet the so-called "scandals" of Benghazi and the emails and the Foundation and WJC's infidelity and how much she pays to get her hair cut and her communications with Sidney Blumenthal and whatever else they can manufacture/exaggerate/overemphasize.

Here's the video. I think the line that hit you was, "Right now, Fox News maintains that Biden is expected to get in the race, and soon, to challenge Hillary Clinton … ." In fact, if you exclude the first word of Baier's opening, you get, "[Whether] vice-president Joe Biden will make a run for the top job … ." Those guys are professionals. And they're not trying to inform; their goal is to manipulate.



Yes, I do believe it isn't the same. MSNBC is left-of-center. I'd say CNN isn't. Faux is an embarrassment to journalism, and has a very destructive influence on the country. There's no way you can compare the crap peddled by eople like Orally and Handjob to anything on MSNBC, even Sharpton. Maddow, Matthews, and Crazy Larry are liberals, no doubt, but they don't behave the way the jerks on Faux do.

And a big part of the problem is that Faux never lets up — they're at it 24/7. It's the way they run their operation. If you can't see it, you've got a serious blind spot.



Not true, imo. Handjob loves 'im.

>>Trump is the only real conservative in the race who has a chance of winning.

He's not a conservative. He's a self-promoter. Politics and policy are just tools for him in that effort.

>>Trump is the turd in the punch bowl.

Something we agree on.

>>FoxNews is no longer the conservative alternative to the liberal media. Fox is establishment.

Faux is heavily right-wing. Just not enough for you. Yer not a conservative, yer a reactionary.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the video. I was slightly off on what he said, however he did say "Fox News" which I thought was unusual. Has other channels / networks done the same thing as well?
 
bubbabgone said:
As he was leaving the briefing I heard Josh Earnest say Comey said his agents said Hillary's a felon.
Click to expand...

Last I recall, it's a judge and jury who decide that. I've been a chief investigator in the Navy, and as such I supervised other investigators...and I can tell you from personal experience that investigators who assume guilt - especially given that all seven previous investigations have shown ZERO wrongdoing by Hillary - need to learn that assumption of guilt is the very worst thing an investigator can do. It is a blatant violation not only of the investigator's duties but also corrupts the very spirit of the investigation itself.

When you hear an investigator declare someone else's guilt or innocence, that should be your first clue that that investigator...isn't much of an investigator.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
Last I recall, it's a judge and jury who decide that. I've been a chief investigator in the Navy, and as such I supervised other investigators...and I can tell you from personal experience that investigators who assume guilt - especially given that all seven previous investigations have shown ZERO wrongdoing by Hillary - need to learn that assumption of guilt is the very worst thing an investigator can do. It is a blatant violation not only of the investigator's duties but also corrupts the very spirit of the investigation itself.

When you hear an investigator declare someone else's guilt or innocence, that should be your first clue that that investigator...isn't much of an investigator.
Click to expand...

Was Lee Harvey Oswald a murderer?
 
mmi said:
It can be. In this case, it's related to being a propaganda organ.
Click to expand...

That being the criterion, then you'd have to discount Fox News on that count, and include MSNBC, I'd think, but not much else.
 
pbrauer said:
That Joe Biden will enter the race for president. Bret Baier said this at the beginning of show Special Report. ...
Click to expand...

mmi said:
...

... "Right now, Fox News maintains that Biden is expected to get in the race, and soon, to challenge Hillary Clinton … ." ...


...
Click to expand...

HOLY FREAKIN' HELL.

Two observations are warranted here ...
1) those 2 statements are not in any way the same.
2) it explains the continued appeal of Media Matters to the Left.
 
bubbabgone said:
Was Lee Harvey Oswald a murderer?
Click to expand...

It does. not. matter. Investigators MUST NOT assume guilt or innocence. That's NOT their job. You want to give Oswald as an example, sure, let's go with that. I'm sure you're well aware that even to this day there's a whole bevy of conspiracy theories about why Oswald assassinated JFK. Do any of them hold water? I don't know...but I do know that there's enough anomalies in the matter that it would have been an epic failure for the investigators to not address those other possibilities. Was Oswald part of a conspiracy? Was he insane? Was he blackmailed into assassinating Kennedy? Was he the only one involved? These are the kinds of questions that an investigator MUST address...and in order to do so objectively, the investigator MUST NOT assume guilt or innocence of anyone.

What part of this do you not get?
 
eohrnberger said:
That being the criterion, then you'd have to discount Fox News on that count, and include MSNBC, I'd think, but not much else.
Click to expand...

Fox has many times the ratings as does MSNBC.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
It does. not. matter. Investigators MUST NOT assume guilt or innocence. That's NOT their job. You want to give Oswald as an example, sure, let's go with that. I'm sure you're well aware that even to this day there's a whole bevy of conspiracy theories about
why Oswald assassinated JFK.
Click to expand...
Do any of them hold water? I don't know...but I do know that there's enough anomalies in the matter that it would have been an epic failure for the investigators to not address those other possibilities. Was Oswald part of a conspiracy? Was he insane? Was he blackmailed into assassinating Kennedy? Was he the only one involved? These are the kinds of questions that an investigator MUST address...and in order to do so objectively, the investigator MUST NOT assume guilt or innocence of anyone.

What part of this do you not get?
Click to expand...

What do you mean "why Oswald assassinated JFK" ... that's pretty presumptuous isn't it?
 
bubbabgone said:
What do you mean "why Oswald assassinated JFK" ... that's pretty presumptuous isn't it?
Click to expand...

Every crime has a "why"...and while your political lean is "undisclosed", I've noticed that a whole heck of a lot conservatives have a real problem with the importance of "why". They'll look at a crime, assign blame to the one who did it, and care not at all about WHY the individual committed the crime. They seem to choose the simplistic - "let's give him a fair trial and then let's hang him" - over the not-simple-at-all factors that drove the individual to commit the crime.

But addressing that "why" is the biggest single tool in preventing such crimes in the future.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
Every crime has a "why"...and while your political lean is "undisclosed", I've noticed that a whole heck of a lot conservatives have a real problem with the importance of "why". They'll look at a crime, assign blame to the one who did it, and care not at all about WHY the individual committed the crime. They seem to choose the simplistic - "let's give him a fair trial and then let's hang him" - over the not-simple-at-all factors that drove the individual to commit the crime.

But addressing that "why" is the biggest single tool in preventing such crimes in the future.
Click to expand...
Not the point.
Aren't you assuming Oswald murdered Kennedy?
There was no trial.
 
bubbabgone said:
Not the point.
Aren't you assuming Oswald murdered Kennedy?
There was no trial.
Click to expand...

It was determined during the investigation and declared by the Warren Commission - which did have authority to declare such - that Oswald assassinated Kennedy. The hardest question, as usual, is "why" Oswald did it.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
It was determined during the investigation and declared by the Warren Commission - which did have authority to declare such - that Oswald assassinated Kennedy. The hardest question, as usual, is "why" Oswald did it.
Click to expand...

pbrauer said:
I think he was a murder, however there are many who believe it wasn't his shots that killed JFK.
Click to expand...

Cool.
Hillary's a multiple felon.
The "why" is her ambition.
This is easy.
 
pbrauer said:
I think he was a murder, however there are many who believe it wasn't his shots that killed JFK.
Click to expand...

And those people post frequently on another forum on this site that is especially designed for the gullible.
 
bubbabgone said:
Cool.
Hillary's a multiple felon.
The "why" is her ambition.
This is easy.
Click to expand...

Which felonies has Hilary been convicted of? Could you list them please? You do know that in order for somebody to be a felon they have to - you know - be convicted of a felony? Or is there some right wing definition of felon that mostly involves fantasies and a lot of mouth-breathing?
 
Wiggen said:
bubbabgone said:
Cool.
Hillary's a multiple felon.
The "why" is her ambition.
This is easy.
Click to expand...
Which felonies has Hilary been convicted of? Could you list them please? You do know that in order for somebody to be a felon they have to - you know - be convicted of a felony? Or is there some right wing definition of felon that mostly involves fantasies and a lot of mouth-breathing?
Click to expand...
Don't expect him to give a valid answer?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom