• 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!

Do liberals watch fox to get the other side of the story?

Do liberals watch fox to get the other side of the story?

  • Hells yeah!

    Votes: 7 29.2%

  • Are you frigid kidding me??

    Votes: 17 70.8%
  • Total voters
    24
Redress said:
I used to. Not so much any more due to time issues(I don't got enough of it), but I will still catch Bill O'Reilly occasionally. His humor works for me.
Click to expand...

Yeah. I admit to being somewhat of a Bill fan. He is funny, sarcastic, fair and not too bad on the eyes either as he always looks nice:)


I do watch FOX mainly to for kicks and to keep an eye out on what kind of lies and crazy they are talking about though..
 
hazlnut said:
Who would that be?
Click to expand...
I'm guessing that he was implying YOU do.

I used to watch a FOX cable news channel fairly regularly, about 5+ years ago...

But I actually don't pay much attention to news these days...

I listen to the news on my local news/talk radio station (fox news radio for national news), since it's something to do on the drive to work, but as always, I try to factor in the possibility of bias.
 
Councilman said:
A number of years back a story in a Radio Trade Magazine said that Rush Limbaugh's audience was nearly 30% Democrats, The reason they stated was that they wanted to know what the enemy was saying.
Click to expand...

I listen to Limbaugh sometimes, in small doses. But his main schtick is we're good, they're bad. He appeals to the most basic emotions, and it gets very tiresome after only a few minutes. Course, most of the rest of the crowd on AM do exactly the same thing.
 
I can't speak for all Liberals (Democrats), but I do. I also listen to Rush, Hannity, Levin and Neil Borks for the same reason - to better understand what "the other side" has to say whether I agree with them or not. It's one way we learn and derive a better overall view of the nature of politics in this country...atleast that's how I see it anyway. It's the same reason I read from various news sources, i.e., NYTimes, Washington Post just to give two contrasting views.

I think if you focus on only one political slant you really miss the bigger picture. In any case, I like to think that after reviewing both sides of a particular issue I'm better able to give a more informed opinion and, thus, make better decisions politically.
 
Last edited:
tryreading said:
I just threw up. A lot.
Click to expand...

Sorry. But he look better than most older dudes on the networks. It is not really his face but he got some swag and knows how to dress thanks to a stylist:)
 
For me, the only shows that I sometimes watch on Fox News are Bret Baier, Shepard Smith, and Bill O'Reilly. Everything else is a waste of time.

Instead, to better understand the conservative point of view I tend to rely on think tanks and magazines that people have mentioned. Some of my favorites are the Weekly Standard, AEI, Commentary Magazine, The Economist, and random foreign policy blogs like the Foundation for the Defense of Democracy and Michael Totten.
 
Spaceman_Spiff said:
Instead, to better understand the conservative point of view I tend to rely on think tanks and magazines that people have mentioned. Some of my favorites are the Weekly Standard, AEI, Commentary Magazine, The Economist, and random foreign policy blogs like the Foundation for the Defense of Democracy and Michael Totten.
Click to expand...

The Economist is hardly conservative. I find myself agreeing with it more than just about any other news source. I'd classify it as center-left. I agree with you about the others though; those are good sources for intelligent conservative viewpoints.
 
Last edited:
I used to watch fox quite alot, then I switch to msnbc and say "whew, it's not a dystopian psychotropic hell state!" Thank god.
 
I watch O'reilly two or three times a week. Can't watch Beck or Hannity or Van Susterin (sp?). I sometimes watch their daily programming but it's not often that I get to with work and all.
 
I don't watch and news channels anymore. Its faster to get the news from the internet. I tend to go with Google News. I have gotten to the point where I believe that news networks (all of them) are a major source of our problems in this country. In their pursuit of outrage to drum up audiences and ratings, they have gotten people to the point where they are fighting boogieman over real issues. This misinformation (through characterization of one's opponent, selective information, and substituting perspective for fact and truth) is what we act on, over real facts.

What we need is in depth analysis and understanding. Not people who shout soundbites at each other and oversimplify issues.
 
Last edited:
megaprogman said:
I don't watch and news channels anymore. Its faster to get the news from the internet. I tend to go with Google News. I have gotten to the point where I believe that news networks (all of them) are a major source of our problems in this country. In their pursuit of outrage to drum up audiences and ratings, they have gotten people to the point where they are fighting boogieman over real issues. This misinformation (through characterization of one's opponent, selective information, and substituting perspective for fact and truth) is what we act on, over real facts.

What we need is in depth analysis and understanding. Not people who shout soundbites at each other and oversimplify issues.
Click to expand...

I agree completely.
 
Kali said:
Yeah. I admit to being somewhat of a Bill fan. He is funny, sarcastic, fair and not too bad on the eyes either as he always looks nice:)


I do watch FOX mainly to for kicks and to keep an eye out on what kind of lies and crazy they are talking about though..
Click to expand...

kali, i'm so disappointed in you! :lol:
 
megaprogman said:
I don't watch and news channels anymore. Its faster to get the news from the internet. I tend to go with Google News. I have gotten to the point where I believe that news networks (all of them) are a major source of our problems in this country. In their pursuit of outrage to drum up audiences and ratings, they have gotten people to the point where they are fighting boogieman over real issues. This misinformation (through characterization of one's opponent, selective information, and substituting perspective for fact and truth) is what we act on, over real facts.

What we need is in depth analysis and understanding. Not people who shout soundbites at each other and oversimplify issues.
Click to expand...

I agree 100% and wholeheartedly. I had no say in the matter, however, since you were speaking my mind. ;)
 
I wouldn't watch Fox for the other side of a story, they only deal in fairy stories.
 
I am a LIBERAL and I watch FOX on occasion to get a good laugh and to understand where the crazy, right-wing, religious wack-jobs (CONSERVATIVES) get their motivation from. I feel sorry for them for they really are innocent and naive.
 
Yukon said:
I am a LIBERAL and I watch FOX on occasion to get a good laugh and to understand where the crazy, right-wing, religious wack-jobs (CONSERVATIVES) get their motivation from. I feel sorry for them for they really are innocent and naive.
Click to expand...

I'm curious do you define conservative as "crazy, right-wing, religious wack-jobs"?
 
mac said:
I'm curious do you define conservative as "crazy, right-wing, religious wack-jobs"?
Click to expand...


I think he is describing Fox News as that not all Conservatives.
 
I thought this was pretty interesting. It talks about how those of us who get most of our news from the internet often don't even get to see opposing viewpoints, unless we make a conscious effort to do so. Facebook and Google actively filter what we get to see based on our past interests. With Twitter, we filter ourselves. Some of the aggregators, like RealClearPolitics, present diverse viewpoints but they're still based on what others deemed important. It's frightening how much influence anonymous entities have over our political thoughts and opinions.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom