Fox News.

[Kendo 2]

I can't run for public office. I just dissed Rupert Murdoch. All of Glen-Beckistan will now assassinate me. My only hope is to throw myself at Obama's feet, and beg for Democratic-ness.

 

There'll be plenty of room for grovelling idolatry after November. You can have Pelosi's spot. ;)

Just be sure your tetanus vaccine is current. Rom Emanuel bites. Don't make any sudden movements and you should be fine.

[Maxwell the Fool]

Fox news as the face of the republican party has very little legitimacy. Most of it's commentators are full of themselves, and just keep saying the same thing over and over again "What would Reagan do!!!" It's not that he wasn't a decent president.... But COME ON!!!

 

Note that I said "most." There is one exception: Glenn Beck. Glenn is the target of burning criticism from both sides more than anyone else. He is a conservative, but above all, he is an AMERICAN. He believes in those crazy American ideals like free speech and the Tenth Amendment, which, google it if you don't know, has been torn to shreds, and, in and of itself, outlaws the majority of federal laws in existence, including this health care bill. The federal government has two rights: Tax and defend. THAT'S IT!!! Reread the constitution, and you'll see that Beck has the facts right, even if his delivery lacks politeness and political correctness.

 

Also, I'm a LIBERAL! I was for Obama (if only because I was against McCain). In every election that I've been around for I've ALWAYS been for the Democrat. I've also been listening to Beck since his radio first went national, well before he was on Fox, and even before he was on Headline News.

[Trandoshan]

Fox news as the face of the republican party has very little legitimacy. Most of it's commentators are full of themselves, and just keep saying the same thing over and over again "What would Reagan do!!!" It's not that he wasn't a decent president.... But COME ON!!!

 

Well, think about it. Reagan was probably the only non-joke president the republicans had since good old T.R. (I'm being a bit harsh, but I don't see anyone else's presidency being 'great')

 

Democrats have Clinton, Kennedy, and maybe F.D.R.

 

Faux has no choice anyways. I again state that Murdoch and Reagan were just the best-est of friends :wub:

 

If they (Fox Correspondents) happened to hash anything else than Reagan, they automatically lose their jobs.

[Aurielius]

Well, think about it. Reagan was probably the only non-joke president the republicans had since good old T.R. (I'm being a bit harsh, but I don't see anyone else's presidency being 'great')

Democrats have Clinton, Kennedy, and maybe F.D.R.

 

@Trandoshan

I can live with most of your assessment except Clinton, a Rhodes Scholar who stated under oath that he was not sure of the definition of "is", someone who can't conjugate the verb 'to be' in their native tongue is hardly a candidate for greatness. His luck was to be at the helm during a decade of prosperity, his legislative record was relatively thin on the vine. Clinton's foreign policy or lack there of, is what landed us in our current position. I like him best in his current role......retired and Hilary's problem not mine. As for your assessment of Murdoch I concur, he's a blight on the national landscape.

[Trandoshan]

@Trandoshan

I can live with most of your assessment except Clinton, a Rhodes Scholar who stated under oath that he was not sure of the definition of "is", someone who can't conjugate the verb 'to be' in their native tongue is hardly a candidate for greatness. His luck was to be at the helm during a decade of prosperity, his legislative record was relatively thin on the vine. Clinton's foreign policy or lack there of, is what landed us in our current position. I like him best in his current role......retired and Hilary's problem not mine. As for your assessment of Murdoch I concur, he's a blight on the national landscape.

 

I know this, sadly. He actually helped along the financial crises, and bush sealed it with a kiss. I however, love the man dearly. He is quite the smooth talker, even smoother than Reagan.

 

You have to realize though, that I had also mentioned Reagan to be a good president. His failure 'Trickled Down Economics' did very little to decrease national debt. As presidents go however, He and Clinton are not the worst of failures. Of course, I'm no political expert. I just sit and see everything fall apart in front of me, that's all.

[Maxwell the Fool]

I also have a problem with the Clinton thing (also the Roosevelt thing). Clinton used military grade weaponry to kill 80 something men, women, and children. Blew the crap out of their cult compound with tanks. What happened to freedom of religion? And you can say they shot first, but then why did the government grab all the evidence? Once they show me the proof I might be able to forgive Clinton.

 

The only two non-joke presidents of the last 100 years, the only presidents that were Americans, with American ideals were Kennedy and Reagan. That's what I think, and I also think that the media has chosen one of the two to idolize. For Fox it's Reagan. For everyone else (on cable TV, at least) it's Kennedy. Or, at least, the man they wished that he was, not the man he really was, and the things he really did. They tend to equate his politics to Ted Kennedy, who was completely different than his (younger?) brother.

 

Anyway, the only pundit I've ever been able to stand by, at all, is Glenn Beck, because he stresses learning history and forming your own opinion. And the things he says are things you can check up on for yourself, not the wild conspiracies people often attribute to him (like Feema camps, which he publicly stated were a lie).

[Aurielius]

I'm old enough to remember when the news was at least a semblance of impartial, the national debate used to all of us not just ideological right and left. I honestly do not believe that there is an unbiased version of the news put out by ANY country. There was a time when I held the BBC in reasonable regard but no longer. For the age of information we seem to be paired down to the lowest common denominator, which makes me look back at the age of print with nostalgia. Pundits... just another version of the old fashioned snake oil salesmen of the 19th century. Between Fox and MsNBC the only difference is political point of view, they are both shams of news agencies. Both only preach to the faithful, the rest of us are out in the cold. I remember when the New York and London Times were paragons of journalistic integrity....that day has passed. Here we are huddled around the electronic campfire with less useful reasoned information than the founding fathers. Just my two cents worth.

[Trandoshan]

I'm old enough to remember when the news was at least a semblance of impartial, the national debate used to all of us not just ideological right and left. I honestly do not believe that there is an unbiased version of the news put out by ANY country. There was a time when I held the BBC in reasonable regard but no longer. For the age of information we seem to be paired down to the lowest common denominator, which makes me look back at the age of print with nostalgia. Pundits... just another version of the old fashioned snake oil salesmen of the 19th century. Between Fox and MsNBC the only difference is political point of view, they are both shams of news agencies. Both only preach to the faithful, the rest of us are out in the cold. I remember when the New York and London Times were paragons of journalistic integrity....that day has passed. Here we are huddled around the electronic campfire with less useful reasoned information than the founding fathers. Just my two cents worth.

 

I have no piece to say about the founding fathers, but....

 

Funnily enough, I've looked through my Will Durant history collection, and can find no evidence of when any type of news/media was not biased towards the country it was serving. It may have not been 'bad' in the old times, but after the revolutionary concept of nationalism it became astronomically biased. Media is a tool of control, Fox is a tool of control. Since the ancient times of soothe-sayers, prophets, and caliphs, news has never been truthy. Lies will always infest the media forever and always. All media has it's roots in trying to prove something is right to its readers. The New York times is a strange paradox. I have read some of the earlier texts they have, and it seems to be unbiased, but Henry Jarvis Raymond was still a republican, and so was George Jones, a banker (Founder and Co-Founder).

 

All of this has been rehashed in the thread several times though.

 

Off-Topic...

 

Thread almost went off on who was a better president, and such.

 

Kudos @ Aurelius for putting us back on topic. The 'Americans' thread was just closed for the same reason, a deviation from topic.

 

The problem with that now, is the fact that we are now just regurgitating point after point.

[Maxwell the Fool]

Yeah, that's the way most debates go :p

 

Anyway, there seem to be three camps. People who love fox, hate fox, and people who have no illusions about the news being unbiased and are fed up with the whole thing.

[Kendo 2]

Obama is scheduled to be interviewed on Fox today (6pm US est/12am GMT). :yes: