Topic: Fox News - Tucker's Fucked.

[fudge]

Yes,  the family of those killed by the terrorists.  Remember them?  Thousands of them.  Remember them?  Innocents all

How could we forget....There's the same number dying every month in your various occupations spuriously because of 9/11....

[nyctex]

How could we forget....There's the same number dying every month in your various occupations spuriously because of 9/11....

yes we remember them.  thousands of them. 

War is disgusting - an evil thing.

[Eric]

yes we remember them.  thousands of them. 

War is disgusting - an evil thing.

It's bad for the US soldiers too, seeing that 2816 have died and another 20,000 or so wounded.

[hide5seek]

I thought Bush said the war was over

[Eric]

It's bad for the US soldiers too, seeing that 2816 have died and another 20,000 or so wounded.

 "U.S. deaths in Iraq, war on terror surpass 9/11 toll"

(CNN) -- As the fifth anniversary of the September 11, 2001, attack on the United States approaches, another somber benchmark has just been passed.

The announcement Sunday of four more U.S. military deaths in Iraq raises the death toll to 2,974 for U.S. military service members in Iraq and in what the Bush administration calls the war on terror.

The 9/11 attack killed 2,973 people, including Americans and foreign nationals but excluding the terrorists. The 9/11 death toll was calculated by CNN.

the article continues at the link.

http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/09/03/death.toll/

[nyctex]

"U.S. deaths in Iraq, war on terror surpass 9/11 toll"

(CNN) -- As the fifth anniversary of the September 11, 2001, attack on the United States approaches, another somber benchmark has just been passed.

The announcement Sunday of four more U.S. military deaths in Iraq raises the death toll to 2,974 for U.S. military service members in Iraq and in what the Bush administration calls the war on terror.

The 9/11 attack killed 2,973 people, including Americans and foreign nationals but excluding the terrorists. The 9/11 death toll was calculated by CNN.

the article continues at the link.

http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/09/03/death.toll/

This means what exactly?

We lost more people in 10 minutes in World War II than at Pearl Harbor. 


Cynical anti-war spin by the media. 

[Eric]

This means what exactly?

We lost more people in 10 minutes in World War II than at Pearl Harbor. 


Cynical anti-war spin by the media. 

This means that another 2900 dead without reason. 

Are we safer?  Is Iraq stable?  Is the Taliban defeated? Have we caught Osama?  Will any of this ever happen?

[alfonso]

I thought Bush said the war was over

War has never been declared. What was the last declared war (regarding the USA)? WW2?

[alfonso]

It's bad for the US soldiers too, seeing that 2816 have died and another 20,000 or so wounded.

And if they are injured in Iraq, flown out and die in a hospital in Germany or the US, they aren't added to the body count in Iraq.

So many more have died.

[hide5seek]

And if they are injured in Iraq, flown out and die in a hospital in Germany or the US, they aren't added to the body count in Iraq.

So many more have died.

Is that true?

[Alan_X]

Indeed it was a quote about education - but why have a dig at the "uneducated" (my word,his implication) in the forces?

The excerpt was a snippet from a speech given to Pasadena City College. It's taken out of context and demonstrates what exactly. That if you don't do well in college you might end up in the army. I mean how dare he suggest that, after all there's no link between education and privilege and staying away from the front line is there...

From the Chickenhawk database:

Name: George W. Bush (R-TX)
Born: 1946
Employer: The U.S. Taxpayer
Conflict Avoided: Vietnam
Notes: You know when a guy walks away from a National Guard obligation during wartime and gets away with it, he must come from "a good family." Not that his daddy had anything to do with his getting a Guard slot in the first place - oh, no ...

Name: Richard "Dick" Cheney (R-WY)
Born: 1942
Employer: The U.S. Taxpayer
Conflict Avoided: Vietnam
Notes: Says he had "other priorities." You bet he had other priorities. Imagine how early in life you must begin scheming to get away with what this guy has.

Name: Karl Rove
Born: 1950
Employer: Baal
Conflict Avoided: Vietnam
Notes: This little cherub was born on Christmas Day, 1950. Karl “Bush’s Brain” Rove ran George W.’s campaign, right down to the tiny detail of deciding Bush was going to run. 

Name: Paul Wolfowitz
Born: 1943
Employer: The U.S. Taxpayer
Conflict Avoided: Vietnam
Notes: Deputy Secretary for Defense - yet another Bush administration man in the Pentagon who has no idea what it's like to wear a uniform. He got a BA at Cornell in 1965. Maybe if we'd had a guy as bright as he thinks he is in Vietnam, it would have turned out differently.

Name: I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby
Born: 1950
Employer: The U.S. Taxpayer
Conflict Avoided: Vietnam
Clearly “Scooter” is a ballsy kind of guy, so it’s a complete mystery to us why, when he graduated from Phillips Andover in 1968, he didn’t enlist in the Marines or go Airborne instead of going to Yale.

Name: Donald "The Don" Rumsfeld
Born: 1932
Employer: The U.S. Taxpayer
Conflict Avoided: Korea
Notes: When the shooting started in Korea Rummy here was either 18, or about to turn 18. Not to worry for him, though — he spent the war at Princeton, wearing a ROTC uniform.

http://www.forbes.com/business/manufacturing/feeds/ap/2006/10/31/ap3133987.html

"This is the classic GOP playbook," Kerry said in a harshly worded statement. "I'm sick and tired of these despicable Republican attacks that always seem to come from those who never can be found to serve in war, but love to attack those who did. I'm not going to be lectured by a stuffed suit White House mouthpiece standing behind a podium."

Snow was asked about the comment which Kerry made during a campaign rally Monday for California Democratic gubernatorial candidate Phil Angelides. The White House spokesman was clearly ready, consulting his notes to read a fuller account of Kerry's statement and unleashing a sharp attack.

The Massachusetts senator, who is considering another presidential run in 2008, had opened his speech at Pasadena City College with several one-liners, joking at one point that Bush had lived in Texas but now "lives in a state of denial."

Then he said: "You know, education, if you make the most of it, you study hard, you do your homework and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. If you don't, you get stuck in Iraq."





Despite the best endeavours of the "Swift Boats for Truth" campaign there is no doubt that John Kerry fought and served his country winning a silver star, bronze star and three purple hearts.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/kerry/service.asp

I think he has earned the right to comment on war unlike the bunch of shitehawks in the Whitehouse. A nothing comment blown out of proportion.

[nyctex]

So then I can assume with that that you didn't support Bill Clinton for president as he ran against two decorated war heroes in George Bush and Bob Dole and you found Clinton to be totally inept in military matters.

Lt Colonel Oliver North must make you wet with delight as a possible candidate
 

[Alan_X]

So then I can assume with that that you didn't support Bill Clinton for president as he ran against two decorated war heroes in George Bush and Bob Dole and you found Clinton to be totally inept in military matters.

Lt Colonel Oliver North must make you wet with delight as a possible candidate
 

The story was about Kerry not Clinton. The issue is the current Republican administration making a big deal about Kerry's war record and implying he's criticizing the troops when he isn't. I haven't said that an American President needs to have served in the military, the Republicans chose to make this an issue and will have to deal with the responses. And North!.. fuck off! the c*nt should still be serving time.

[nyctex]

The whole reason you posted that list was to imply that Kerry's word is worth more than anyone that didn't serve.

[SMD]

The whole reason you posted that list was to imply that Kerry's word is worth more than anyone that didn't serve.

Why are you so supportive of what the American government does?

[Alan_X]

The whole reason you posted that list was to imply that Kerry's word is worth more than anyone that didn't serve.

No, it was to show the hypocrisy of a government that accuses veterans of cowardice and lies and to demonstrate that despite the wingeing of the Whitehouse press spokesman, there is a correlation between education/privilege and avoiding service on the front line.

Watching the match now... 

[nyctex]

No, it was to show the hypocrisy of a government that accuses veterans of cowardice and lies and to demonstrate that despite the wingeing of the Whitehouse press spokesman, there is a correlation between education/privilege and avoiding service on the front line.

Watching the match now... 

so Kerry gets a pass because of 4 months service (that was honnorable and is commended)?

Wasn't Kerry the one that came on to stage to accept his nomination for the Democratic Party - saluted and announced "I'm ready to serve"  Why did he do that I wonder?  Couldn't have been to make a big deal about his service.

Kerry's background on why he served is a little less heroic then portrayed.  He wasn't much different then the list you gave.
According to the Harvard Crimson (the newspaper for Harvard University), Kerry first received four student deferments before graduating from Yale. He then applied for a fifth deferment so he could study in Paris, but the military turned him down. Shortly before he was to be drafted into the Army, Kerry joined the Naval Reserves.  Seems like he tried a few tricks as well - just got caught out.  Just thought I would spread the hypocracy around for good messure


Great match by the way   

[Alan_X]

Watching the news I was delightd to see your President digging in to Kerry with that stupid self-satisfied grin on his face while American troops are dying in a pointless and seemingly endless war. The more I thought about it the stranger I thought Kerry's remarks were. Then it hit me. Stupidity....  Stuck in Iraq!...  He was having a go at Bush not the troops!

If you don't get educated... you get stuck in Iraq....

Kerry is without doubt a poor public speaker and shouldn't do comedy but the point is fair. The Republicans will no doubt spin it out of all proportion, after all, they've got little else.

[WillieBob]

The more I thought about it the stranger I thought Kerry's remarks were. Then it hit me. Stupidity....  Stuck in Iraq!...  He was having a go at Bush not the troops!

If you don't get educated... you get stuck in Iraq....
 

Nice spin - i'm sure Kerry will think of that excuse for his insulting remarks  sooner or later.

[alfonso]

Is that true?

Yes it is. It's been like that from the start.

[Alan_X]

Nice spin - i'm sure Kerry will think of that excuse for his insulting remarks  sooner or later.

I'm not the only one:

[iwasthere]

The Republicans will no doubt spin it out of all proportion, after all, they've got little else.

When you say republicans do you mean the actual party or Bill "I tell impartiality to shut up" O'Reilly and company at Fox News.

Watched Outfoxed for the first time, I knew Fox was strongly leaning to the right but bloody hell, that's shocking attempt at journalism..fair and balanced my arse.

[A Day 2 Remember]

Back to the original topic.

Lets keep political agenda out of the topic, the fact of the matter is there is not one news service on US public TV that is  not biased. They are all as bad as each other. Instead of reporting the news they just spout their own political agenda by having a dig at some one.

If I want a rant about a political candidate I'll watch comedy central, please keep your view out of the news and just fucking report for a change. If you need a point of view bring in a couple of experts and let them spout off.

The US news is totally unwatchable regardless of your political bias. In fact I cannot think of one show that is worth watching on US TV. Sopranos has been wank for 2-3 seasons, Scrubs is not funny anymore, the reality shit is awful, Braveheart is on every night, HBO will have one decent film on every two months. Unfortunately its freezing outside so I spend my winter indoors and that means I sometimes have to watch the box. I need to get down to the library.

Sorry for the rant but the weather is doing me head in.

[hoonin]

A Day 2 Remember...

Am feeling your point of view, bar the Sopranos bit. Season 6 is defo rocking

[A Day 2 Remember]

A Day 2 Remember...

Am feeling your point of view, bar the Sopranos bit. Season 6 is defo rocking

I hope the last series blows my socks off. I need it to get me through to spring.

[hoonin]

For me, season 5 was as good as the classical seasons 1 or 2. Season 6 is defo up there as well, as it takes you on some mad leftfield shit.

[xavidub]

For me, season 5 was as good as the classical seasons 1 or 2. Season 6 is defo up there as well, as it takes you on some mad leftfield shit.

I don't think its the same since Lorraine Bracco's character was reduced in importance. For me that was the central relationship in the show.

[hoonin]

Just watching Fox News and they're running some "special report" on Radical Islam.

Seems to me they're just preaching a very subtle hatred towards Islam, airing content they openly admit cannot even be verified as authentic.

Amazing how all their expert contributors seem to be on Fox News' payroll. A real hatchet job.

[hoonin]

This was the prog I was referring to:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,249560,00.html

Now theres nothing wrong with, but what really surprised me was the obvious level of post production that had been put on some of their content they claimed to be authentic footage.

They used a video that had been dubbed into English, but it also had atmoshperic music on in the background to, it would appear, build up some kind of tension. Why add this music

[iwasthere]

This was the prog I was referring to:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,249560,00.html

Now theres nothing wrong with, but what really surprised me was the obvious level of post production that had been put on some of their content they claimed to be authentic footage.

They used a video that had been dubbed into English, but it also had atmoshperic music on in the background to, it would appear, build up some kind of tension. Why add this music

Part of the sensationalist mentality that runs through News International and News Corporation. And an Islamic media that glorifies mass murder and cheers on terrorists.  Funny that I haven't seen David Frost or Rageh Omaar in Al Qaeda cheerleading uniforms yet on Al Jazeera.

Either that or Fox are generalising again such as the "liberal" press that Bill O'Reilly uses from time to time.

I can't believe they call themselves news, under British broadcasting regulation they wouldn't get away with that crap over here.  Although having said that that's not for the want of Sky trying to inch that way on some occasions.

[Tsar Kastik]

Fox have got the Beatles hailing from Mankchester now.......another 'fucking perch' we've been knocked off.

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/11/15/apple-itunes-gets-rights-beatles/

[Trada]

Can't believe this poll. In fact it's shocking.

In a stunning rejection of network news and nightly news anchors, cable news, driven by the Fox News Channel and mouthy Bill O'Reilly, is now the top most trusted source—by a mile.

In a new poll from Boston's Suffolk University, more than a quarter of the nation says Fox is tops when it comes to who they trust the most and O'Reilly is the most believable.

"This poll shows two things: first, the network news have completely lost their brand. Second, the only network with any intensity is Fox News," says Brent Bozell, president of the conservative Media Research Center. "Bottom line: the more they attack Fox, the stronger it is getting," he adds.

But at the liberal Media Matters, Executive Vice President Ari Rabin-Havt says the public's trust in Fox is disturbing. A regular Fox critic, he says the poll reveals that "Fox News viewers trust the information that Fox gives them."

The key finding in the telephone poll of 1,070 likely voters is that network news is dying. Some 28 percent say that they trust Fox News the most, followed by CNN at 18 percent. After that, the trust in TV news nose dives. NBC was third, at 10 percent, MSNBC fourth at 7 percent, CBS and ABC tied at fifth with just 6 percent.

"In short, American's TV news preferences have come a long way from the sainted Walter Cronkite telling us, 'That's the way it is,' or Huntley saying good night to Brinkley, or Dan Rather," says Stephen Hess, the presidency and media scholar at the Brookings Institution.

Suffolk offered 28 different TV news personalities for poll takers to decide from on the trust question. As a result, the results were in single digits.

But of the top 10 most trusted new sources, O'Reilly is king, at 9 percent. CNN's Anderson Cooper followed at 6 percent, Fox's Mike Huckabee at 4 percent, Fox's Sean Hannity at 4 percent, Wolf Blitzer was sixth at 3 percent, followed by MSNBC's Chris Matthews at 3 percent, NBC newsman Tom Brokaw at 3 percent, CBS anchor Katie Couric at 3 percent and ABC's Diane Sawyer at 3 percent.

Being in the middle of the Top 10 was good for Blitzer, host The Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer. He tells us, "Happy to be Number Six. It's a very nice number—always has been one of my favorites."

Media Matters' Rabin-Havt added that it was encouraging that at least Cooper was second behind O'Reilly. "That's a very good sign," he says. "That would give me hope."

There was tie for last on the list. CNN's Elliot Spitzer and NBC Meet the Press host David Gregory each were the pick of just two of the 1,070 poll takers.

Hess, author of the newly updated American Political Cartoons: The Evolution of National Identity, 1754-2010, says the domination of cable over network news was big news of the poll. [See the month's best political cartoons.]

"Most interesting are not the tiny percentages for individuals, but rather the contrast of Broadcast vs. Cable," he tells Whispers. "ABC-CBS-NBC together nets 22 percent on the most trusted compared to 53 percent for CNN-MSNBC-Fox. The three broadcast network anchors combined only get 10%, compare to O'Reilly alone who gets 9 percent and CNN's Wolf-Anderson 9 percent," he adds.

http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2011/05/20/poll-fox-oreilly-most-trusted-news-sources

[SMD]

NEW POLL SHOWS LOWEST COMMON DENOMINATOR STUPID

SUN RISES IN EAST

SIMON COWELL INTERESTED IN MAKING MONEY

ALEX FERGUSON SWIGS WHISKY FOR BREAKFAST

And finally, Giuseppe the monkey has died, his organ grinder said that he loved the limelight but now Giuseppe shaddaped his face.

[poolmyfinger]

So let me get this straight...

All I see on this thread is a bunch of posters attacking Fox News because they are the highest rated news organization in the United States. Well, do these same posters consider NBC a news-worthy organization?

Now, yes, I would watch Fox News over NBC anyday simply because I don't sit and drink the "kool-aid" of thinking that Barack Obama is the messiah to the US and the world. It's almost sickening that NBC would employ imdividuals such as Chris "tingle" Matthews, Keith Olbermann (who would defend ANY Democrat regardless if they were a criminal or not), and unprofessional Ed Schultz.

Not saying that Fox News doesn't have their attention seekers, but you'd find a classier bunch (outside Glen Beck) than the hacks at MSNBC. As for CNN, that's a different story...

[biratl]

So let me get this straight...

All I see on this thread is a bunch of posters attacking Fox News because they are the highest rated news organization in the United States.

No they have "attacked" Fox News because it they are lying bastards and Bill O'Reilly is a c*nt. And its shocking that such a propaganda-driven channel is rated so highly.

[Corkboy]

So let me get this straight...

All I see on this thread is a bunch of posters attacking Fox News because they are the highest rated news organization in the United States.

That's because you only appear to have read the last two posts out of 434. That's the kind of thorough analysis that could get you a seat on Sean Hannity's show.

Speaking of Hannity, what did you think of that time when Bachmann was doing a tea party rally and Fox "inadvertently" doctored the footage to make it look like there was about ten times more people there?

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/JS1NWYV1i_E&amp;feature=related" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="bbc_link bbc_flash_disabled new_win">http://www.youtube.com/v/JS1NWYV1i_E&amp;feature=related</a>

[TipTopKop]

It's often overlooked, that a percentage of those 'top ratings' for Fox are simply people watching for the morbid curiosity of some, similar to watching a low budget movie...   seeing just how bad can this really go ?.

[Stateside Red]

Speaking of Hannity, what did you think of that time when Bachmann was doing a tea party rally and Fox "inadvertently" doctored the footage to make it look like there was about ten times more people there?

Sorry don't know how to embed video but this link (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYKQJ4-N7LI) shows an MSNBC news segment 'selectively edited' for their purposes. And to my knowledge they have not acknowledged or apologized for this.

Everyone knows what you get with the opinion shows on Fox, CNN, MSNBC but I try to hold the news orgs to a higher standard and I think Fox News does a pretty good job. I think for stories that have no political slant (e.g. weather-related stories) CNN is probably the best, but for most stories I watch both. But even CNN has a slant. And it's impossible to post videos or point out lies on stories that the networks bury because it doesn't fit their narrative. You don't like Fox news, don't watch it. But to imply they 'lie' more than other networks is laughable.

[Corkboy]

Sorry don't know how to embed video but this link (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYKQJ4-N7LI) shows an MSNBC news segment 'selectively edited' for their purposes. And to my knowledge they have not acknowledged or apologized for this.

A quick google suggests they responded.

An MSNBC spokesperson responded to POLITICO: "Contessa was speaking generally and not about that specific person with the automatic weapon." source

I agree with you, for what's it's worth, if they deliberately cropped the shot then that's pretty sleazy. Fox, on the other hand, seem to do this stuff as a matter of editorial policy.

Here, try this link for some beauties, including....

Fox News's Martha MacCallum presented a clip of Vice President Joe Biden saying "the fundamentals of the economy are strong" -- and presented it as from an interview that weekend. In fact, the clip came from a 2008 campaign event at which Biden was quoting Sen. John McCain.

Fox News's Wendell Goler reported on an Obama question-and-answer session that was cut short to make it seem as if the president wanted a health care system "like the European countries." In fact, he was just restating a question -- he went on to say that he opposed such a system.

Fox News's Jon Scott said the network had decided to look back on how the stimulus "grew, and grew, and grew." In fact, the entire report came from a Senate Republican Communications Center press release, complete with typo.

On the news show "America's Pulse," E.D. Hill described Barack and Michelle Obama's fist bump at a campaign event last summer as a "terrorist fist jab." She later apologized and claimed that was how it had been "characterized in the media."

[Stateside Red]

Fox, on the other hand, seem to do this stuff as a matter of editorial policy.

I guess we'll agree to disagree on this, and I don't feel like looking for similar segments for other networks which I'm sure exist if not compiled somewhere. I remember the MSNBC piece because it was particularly egregious. All I was pointing out with the Hannity clip was that it was an opinion show so I expect 'selective editing' to some extent there but not so much on the news segments. Obviously Hannity screwed up with that piece but I blame that on poor editing rather than trying to fake numbers but you may think differently.

But like I said it's also tough to discuss this without talking about how some networks simply bury news. For me the 'rise' of the tea party comes to mind ... agree with them or not they were a major story long before the results of the 2010 elections and most networks wouldn't even acknowledge them / cover their rallies, and if they did they used disparaging words like 'tea bagger' which I think started with Anderson Cooper who I think is supposed to be strictly a news guy. I think this is just as bad as lying.