• 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!

White House Escalates War of Words With Fox News

Re: White House [continues to] Escalates War on Fox News

How could they possibly have their crosshairs on O'Reilly when O'Reilly has been more fair to them than most of the rest of the network?

I'm just saying he may be because he used to be the scapegoat that many on the left would use when they would criticize Fox News.
 
Garbage... she said exactly what Wallace says she did. She said that it's not out yet which is a total lie.


She actually didn't ... there are even subtitles. Guess it was slick enough to fool Fox's audience.
 
Re: White House [continues to] Escalates War on Fox News

I'm just saying he may be because he used to be the scapegoat that many on the left would use when they would criticize Fox News.

I know. That scapegoating is what got me watching him to start with. Glad they did because I find the guy to be firm but fair. Fair before anything else.
 
Re: White House [continues to] Escalates War on Fox News

If FNC is the opposition, and the opposition is more likely to be critical of the claims of the administration - by asking the tough questions and finding the inconvenient truths - aren't they then just doing their job?

I mean, isn't the press SUPPOSED to do these things?
 
Re: White House [continues to] Escalates War on Fox News

:rofl So was this after NBC and the New York Times declared war on the Bush administration and its efforts in Iraq based on a BI-PARTISAN decision to go in?

I am fascinated by the lack of coherent arguments from the Bush and Conservative haters when their efforts to attack a news organization for purely hyper partisan political purposes are exposed for being just that.

Again, there is only ONE reason to engage in such partisan hyperbole; and that is because this administration and their Librul allies are attempting to KEEP the truth and the facts from the American people.

The TRUTH is that any open and HONEST debate about healthcare will end up losing them support of their partisan agenda to force Universal Healthcare down our throats in an effort to create a permanent dependent constituency.

There are no FACTS to support this administrations hyperbolic rhetoric, lies and distortions and attempts to demagogue their political opponents.


Hahaha so now you're saying the NY Times and NBC declared war on the Bush administration. Do you have any proof of this? Links please? Do we have an official declaration from the news agencies saying they are at war with the Bush Administration? I thought not.

You seem to forget all the news agencies were gung ho for the Iraq war and helped cheerlead us into the war.

But as for your claim that they declared war on the bush administration are you not in same way also admitting Fox news declared war on the Obama administration much as you'd be admitting they did during the Clinton administration. That's how Fox got started was it not?

There hasn't been an honest and open debate on health care. When you have news agencies claiming there are death panels, veteran death books and people at town hall meetings shutting down debate there won't be an honest discussion.

Most of the polls out there support health care reform. Now let me ask you TD how often do you hear on the news stations about Insurance companies dropping people because of preexisting conditions?

You know that insurance companies consider acne to be a preexisting condition? Women have the greatest obstacles as getting pregnant is considered optional to insurance companies. Women who have C-sections, that's considered a preexisting condition. How often are we hearing about the scams these insurance companies run?

What about the fact that insurance companies are perfectly fine with socialized property insurance? The government covers insurance companies when it comes to disaster insurance I guess the free market doesn't work in that scenario for them.
 
Re: White House [continues to] Escalates War on Fox News

If FNC is the opposition, and the opposition is more likely to be critical of the claims of the administration - by asking the tough questions and finding the inconvenient truths - aren't they then just doing their job?

I mean, isn't the press SUPPOSED to do these things?

That is what the Fourth Estate, the Watchdog of the Government, is supposed to do.
 
To be honest, every now and then when flipping past Fox I will stop if it's on O'Reilly, Hannity or Beck. It interests me to see the other side of an issue.

I agree! I will actually watch Fox sometimes, (although I can't bring myself to watch Hannity)...but only to get the GOP's spin on events.
I have no problem with their bias.....My problem is with outright lies & their pretending to be a real news organization & not the media arm of the GOP....That's lying....Plain & simple!
 
Has reading always been a problem for you???


That is what she said .... and the only reason you know that is b/c the YouTube put in the vid of her original comments, not the clipped ones that Wallace played. Duckworth was talking about the REVISED one not yet out .... NOT the Bush one already out.


and, ps, no, I have no trouble reading .... but why are you asking me personal questions?
 
To be honest, every now and then when flipping past Fox I will stop if it's on O'Reilly, Hannity or Beck. It interests me to see the other side of an issue.

The showmansip is bar non the best.
 
Re: White House [continues to] Escalates War on Fox News

Ah, but to the extent that is true (it wasn't quite the same thing; to my knowledge, the Bush White House never actually snubbed NBC, much as they complained, and most criticisms of the NYT had to do with publishing leaked classified info), the converse also applies -- many attacking Fox News NOW were just as rabid in their defense of those other news outlets.

So yeah, it's entirely about point of view, not principle, however you slice it.

You'll find that its easier to remember the present Harshaw but yes the Bush administration had snubbed reporters. Even Dana Perino admitted near the end of the Bush administration they had essential froze out MSNBC. You had Ed Gillespie writing letters to the president of NBC News complaining.

Fox news had no problem supporting the bush administration's problems with NBC and the NYtimes. Even their contributors suggested a total freezeout of the network

INGRAHAM: Now Karl, why would the White House agree to do an interview with Richard Engel? I mean, this is the guy who, you know, really didn’t want to give the surge any credit and NBC, an organization, obviously that’s called this a civil war. Now it’s kind of not gone back and changed his view on that. We’re in a recession, etcetera, etcetera. I mean, why bother really at this point? [The O'Reilly Factor, 5/19/09]

– E.D. HILL: You know, I’m sure you know from watching this program that, you know, Bill has, you know, has been reporting for more than a year on a pattern suggesting that NBC News basically panders to the left and is, in essence, in the pocket for Barack Obama. Why go on a venue like that to begin with?

GILLESPIE: Go on a venue like MSNBC?

HILL: Yes.

GILLESPIE: I don’t know. It’s — you know, the – you know, there are elements there who are clearly advocates for a candidate or a point of view, not even commentaries or commentators really or analysts. So I don’t know why he would. [The O'Reilly Factor, 5/22/08]
 
Re: White House [continues to] Escalates War on Fox News

I'm just saying he may be because he used to be the scapegoat that many on the left would use when they would criticize Fox News.

Its easy to point to the most loud spoken over the top personality on the network... well before Glenn Beck moved there.
 
Re: White House [continues to] Escalates War on Fox News

He was referring to your argument. Would you care to provide proof that he was attacking you personally there? Regardless, how exactly does that justify your personal attacks? And we aren't even just talking about Gibberish here. Most of your replies to people who don't agree with you have similar personal attacks. Do you take their disagreeing with you as a personal affront to you and then act accordingly? Is that how you justify it?

I linked the wrong thread; here is the correct initial personal attack which contained zero substance and nothing related to the thread topic for no other purpose than to bait and troll:

http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...-escalates-war-fox-news-5.html#post1058315217


You act as if this is the first time, TD. You do it time and time again, which is why a lot of people around here have a problem with you.

Again, your diatribe lacks substance; please illustrate where I engaged in any personal attacks prior to the personal attacks on me in this thread.

I don’t give a damn whether you have a personal problem with me, that is YOUR problem not mine. I just want you to stop your trolling and baiting and selective outrage and your efforts to engage in personal attacks rather than substantive debate which appears to be a typical personality trait of Liberals.

Ah, but see...you appear to characterize damn near any post that disagrees with your point of view as "whiney hyperbolic stupidity." I call you out on it because it gets old. You are good at arguing and you would be a really good debater on these boards if you could focus your attacks on their arguments rather than them personally. Though, you just can't seem to help yourself and always include a personal attack against them.

The above is nothing more than an outright lie. It begs the question, why do feel it is always pertinent to engage in personal attacks that have nothing to do with the thread topic and are merely intended to derail the thread with whiney diatribe?

Perhaps that's how it is from your perspective, but I would be criticizing someone on the left just as much. Regardless, I don't fully disagree with you politically. I don't agree with your generalizations against Liberals, but I also don't agree with Liberals who make generalizations about Conservatives.

Once again this is nothing more than more selective memory and selective outrage. When Gibberish personally attacked me on this thread for no other purpose than to engage in trolling and baiting, you were silent; why do you think that is?

I don't agree with your generalizations against Liberals, but I also don't agree with Liberals who make generalizations about Conservatives.

Why does your personal opinion about my “generalizations” against Liberals matter?

Why don’t you prove that I made a “generalization” when I suggested that the attacks on Fox News are purely Liberal/Democrat attempts to demagogue and silence their political opponents?

The answer is obvious to anyone with a modicum of honesty. It wasn’t “generalizing”, it is a FACT that the attacks on Fox a purely Liberal/Democrat efforts to demagogue a news organization that exposes the lies, distortions and disinformation being disseminated by this administration for purely hyper partisan political purposes.

Frankly, I have to say I have YET to see you whine about Liberals generalizing about Conservatives and if you did, you would have little time for much else. You just cannot be honest that you are engaging in selective outrage for the reason that you cannot engage me factually in honest debate and rather attempt to make this about personality.

Okay, see..this is exactly what I was talking about. Where did I attack you personally first that warranted this comment? I asked you why you do this in a civil manner with no insults and got the same behavior you always exhibit. Frankly, I don't even know why I bother.

The following are attempts to bait and troll and have nothing to do with the thread topic or any relevance in this debate. Your efforts to pretend they had substance merely speak more to your hypocrisy, selective outrage and denial:

I have a serious question for you TD and I'm not attempting to be insulting any way, so I would highly appreciate a serious answer. If, as you say, the thread isn't about you or other people then why do you resort to personal attacks in your replies to people you don't agree with? In many of them you don't argue the point, but instead attack the poster personally by trying to insult their intelligence for daring to have another point of view. So, if you are so interested in staying on topic, why do you fail again and again to do this? For example, in this specific quote above you attack the person because you don't think they have the ability to be honest. That is a personal attack, is it not?

QUOTE=Dr_Patrick; You act as if this is the first time, TD. You do it time and time again, which is why a lot of people around here have a problem with you.

QUOTE=Dr_Patrick;Ah, but see...you appear to characterize damn near any post that disagrees with your point of view as "whiney hyperbolic stupidity." I call you out on it because it gets old. You are good at arguing and you would be a really good debater on these boards if you could focus your attacks on their arguments rather than them personally. Though, you just can't seem to help yourself and always include a personal attack against them.

QUOTE=Dr_Patrick;Don't worry, TD. I wouldn't expect you to see what you do. Few people have that ability.

Carry on. :roll:
 
Re: White House [continues to] Escalates War on Fox News

If FNC is the opposition, and the opposition is more likely to be critical of the claims of the administration - by asking the tough questions and finding the inconvenient truths - aren't they then just doing their job?

I mean, isn't the press SUPPOSED to do these things?

Didn't know saying he went to a madrassa, calling him a muslim, having people on to talk about him being the antichrist, saying he's a socialist, communist, fascist was all about them finding the truth?
 
Re: White House [continues to] Escalates War on Fox News

You'll find that its easier to remember the present Harshaw but yes the Bush administration had snubbed reporters. Even Dana Perino admitted near the end of the Bush administration they had essential froze out MSNBC. You had Ed Gillespie writing letters to the president of NBC News complaining.

Fox news had no problem supporting the bush administration's problems with NBC and the NYtimes. Even their contributors suggested a total freezeout of the network

Yeah well, we're not really taking issue with what FNC said they should do. We are taking issue with what the White House has ACTUALLY done under different administrations. :doh
 
Re: White House [continues to] Escalates War on Fox News

I fail to see how that's so different from what Fox News is doing. Have you seen some of the stuff that Glenn Beck & Sean Hannity have been saying about the Obama Administration?

What part of Talk Show versus NEWS do you continue to not comprehend?

This would be like me suggesting that Keith Olbermann, Rachel Maddow and Chris Matthews' are news Journalists! :rofl

I realize that they are political commentary shows, but the Obama Administration is attacking Fox News in general, not only the news shows. In fact, their cross-hairs are probably more on those two (and perhaps O'Reilly) than anyone else at Fox News.

Got irony? So where are we in disagreement on this topic?

In fact, their cross-hairs are probably more on those two (and perhaps O'Reilly) than anyone else at Fox News.

Again it begs the question; why would ANY Government entity target ANYONE in the media, let alone someone with a talk show like O’Reilly?

ANYONE with a modicum of honesty would not defend such actions and instead be afraid of such a “totalitarian” type of tactic.

Again to my arguments; apparently targeting talk show hosts and media outlets is a Liberal personality trait.
 
Re: White House [continues to] Escalates War on Fox News

Yeah well, we're not really taking issue with what FNC said they should do. We are taking issue with what the White House has ACTUALLY done under different administrations. :doh

Perino admitted to pretty much locking out MSNBC near the end of their term. So its not about what they said they would do but what they did. Ed Gillespie personally wrote a letter to the NBC News president to bitch. Now how often does that happen?
 
That is what she said .... and the only reason you know that is b/c the YouTube put in the vid of her original comments, not the clipped ones that Wallace played. Duckworth was talking about the REVISED one not yet out .... NOT the Bush one already out.


and, ps, no, I have no trouble reading .... but why are you asking me personal questions?

bullsh!t. She got caught lying like a dog and tried her best to get out of it but Wallace had her nailed. She tried to continue with the lie, but was shown screen captures that clearly revealed her lies.

Why did I ask if you have trouble reading?? Because you denied that she said, even with the subtitles, that she said it was not out yet. I did notice that you backtracked and admitted I was right though.
 
Re: White House [continues to] Escalates War on Fox News

Didn't know saying he went to a madrassa, calling him a muslim, having people on to talk about him being the antichrist, saying he's a socialist, communist, fascist was all about them finding the truth?
I'm sorry -- did you answer the question?

Aside from that:
When did Fox NEWS do this?
 
Re: White House [continues to] Escalates War on Fox News

I get my news from a variety of sources as well and I love nothing more than to read an OpEd from someone I don't agree with. It helps me to either confirm or question and further expand my own opinions. If all I ever did was read news I agree with, I think my intellect would stagnate and eventually rot. I'm the girl who will pick up a book by Ann Coulter or Micheal Moore and find something interesting in each one.

I am of the same opinion and cannot agree more; I find shows that agree with my point of view much more boring than those that differ from mine.

I even watched Michael Moore's movies.....they were damned entertaining if not lacking in facts and substance. :rofl :2wave:

This brings us full circle to the thread topic; why then would an adminstration and political party spend so much time trying to silence a single news source they disagree with? :cool:
 
Re: White House [continues to] Escalates War on Fox News

That is what the Fourth Estate, the Watchdog of the Government, is supposed to do.

The Obama must find such things so terribly inconvenient.

Imagine, had this been MSNBC and GWB.
 
Re: White House [continues to] Escalates War on Fox News

When did Fox NEWS do this?

During the election season. So now you're saying he shouldn't have a problem with them because of their past disposition towards him? The school speech, the death panels, the veteran death book. These are current smears not based in truth.
 
Re: White House [continues to] Escalates War on Fox News

The Obama must find such things so terribly inconvenient.

Imagine, had this been MSNBC and GWB.

Yeah they were locked out by Perino near the end of his term.
 
Re: White House [continues to] Escalates War on Fox News

I am of the same opinion and cannot agree more; I find shows that agree with my point of view much more boring than those that differ from mine.

I even watched Michael Moore's movies.....they were damned entertaining if not lacking in facts and substance. :rofl :2wave:

This brings us full circle to the thread topic; why then would an adminstration and political party spend so much time trying to silence a single news source they disagree with? :cool:

Ask the previous administration as they had done the same.
 
Back
Top Bottom