According to Most Libs, Fox News Lies.........

[slukasiewski]

So please, if you can cite one (and you should be able to if you've made this assertion), then post one of those lies in this thread that Fox News has broadcast.

Not affiliates....

Fox News, national.

Post away !!

This should be as entertaining as watching Dan Rather lie.... or Katie Couric getting fired, or MSNBC's ratings.

 

[Cuyo]

So please, if you can cite one (and you should be able to if you've made this assertion), then post one of those lies in this thread that Fox News has broadcast.

Not affiliates....

Fox News, national.

Post away !!

This should be as entertaining as watching Dan Rather lie.... or Katie Couric getting fired, or MSNBC's ratings.

Slookie, it's more that they market themselves as a legitimate news source, where in fact they're an extremely biased opinion source that can scarcely be described as "News." But if you want to search for actual 'Lies,' they are readily accessible via any search engine.

Here's a few to get you started.
10 Most Ridiculous Fox News Lies, Creative Edits, and Half-Truths - Spiteful Critic

 

[slukasiewski]

So please, if you can cite one (and you should be able to if you've made this assertion), then post one of those lies in this thread that Fox News has broadcast.

Not affiliates....

Fox News, national.

Post away !!

This should be as entertaining as watching Dan Rather lie.... or Katie Couric getting fired, or MSNBC's ratings.

Slookie, it's more that they market themselves as a legitimate news source, where in fact they're an extremely biased opinion source that can scarcely be described as "News." But if you want to search for actual 'Lies,' they are readily accessible via any search engine.

Here's a few to get you started.
10 Most Ridiculous Fox News Lies, Creative Edits, and Half-Truths - Spiteful Critic

You're fucking kidding with this, right?

Still waiting...

Anyone else?

 

[Cal]

So please, if you can cite one (and you should be able to if you've made this assertion), then post one of those lies in this thread that Fox News has broadcast.

Not affiliates....

Fox News, national.

Post away !!

This should be as entertaining as watching Dan Rather lie.... or Katie Couric getting fired, or MSNBC's ratings.

For one, the whole death panel bullshit. Steve Dooshbag and friends.. along with the ever so hawt Megyn Kelly.. and all the other FNC anchors, ran that line during the whole health care debate. And never once did they mention that the individual mandate was a Heritage Foundation idea.. and was the conservative response to a single-payer system.

I guess it's more selectively reporting and editing more than lying.. but they've certainly done their share of that too.

 

[slukasiewski]

So please, if you can cite one (and you should be able to if you've made this assertion), then post one of those lies in this thread that Fox News has broadcast.

Not affiliates....

Fox News, national.

Post away !!

This should be as entertaining as watching Dan Rather lie.... or Katie Couric getting fired, or MSNBC's ratings.

For one, the whole death panel bullshit. Steve Dooshbag and friends.. along with the ever so hawt Megyn Kelly.. and all the other FNC anchors, ran that line during the whole health care debate. And never once did they mention that the individual mandate was a Heritage Foundation idea.. and was the conservative response to a single-payer system.

I guess it's more selectively reporting and editing more than lying.. but they've certainly done their share of that too.

The whole death panel thing?
Are you fucking serious too?

When was this "LIE" broadcast on Fox News? Who was the anchor or reporter? And Megyn Kelly is NOT an anchor - dumb ass.

And you mention "they've done their share" of lying?

Going to cite some examples, or are you going to blather along with your opinions...

 

[Truthmatters]

They repetedly labeled republicans as democrats when there was a rash of republicans trying to fuck aides or suck someone off in an airport bathroom.

They did it over and over.

BTW what the hell do you think affiliate means?

 

[Truthmatters]

affiliate: Definition, Synonyms from Answers.com






American Heritage Dictionary:
af·fil·i·ate


(ə-fĭl'ē-āt')

v., -at·ed, -at·ing, -ates.

v.tr.
1.To adopt or accept as a member, subordinate associate, or branch: The HMO affiliated the clinics last year.
2.To associate (oneself) as a subordinate, subsidiary, employee, or member: affiliated herself with a new law firm.
3.To assign the origin of.
v.intr.
To become closely connected or associated: The two unions voted to affiliate.



Read more: http://www.answers.com/topic/affiliate#ixzz1McV7vR4A

 

[xsited1]

So please, if you can cite one (and you should be able to if you've made this assertion), then post one of those lies in this thread that Fox News has broadcast.

Not affiliates....

Fox News, national.

Post away !!

This should be as entertaining as watching Dan Rather lie.... or Katie Couric getting fired, or MSNBC's ratings.

Slookie, it's more that they market themselves as a legitimate news source, where in fact they're an extremely biased opinion source that can scarcely be described as "News." But if you want to search for actual 'Lies,' they are readily accessible via any search engine.

Here's a few to get you started.
10 Most Ridiculous Fox News Lies, Creative Edits, and Half-Truths - Spiteful Critic

Those aren't outright lies. That's just standard operating procedure for news outlets, regardless of political bias.

 

[PoliticalChic]

So please, if you can cite one (and you should be able to if you've made this assertion), then post one of those lies in this thread that Fox News has broadcast.

Not affiliates....

Fox News, national.

Post away !!

This should be as entertaining as watching Dan Rather lie.... or Katie Couric getting fired, or MSNBC's ratings.

Slookie, it's more that they market themselves as a legitimate news source, where in fact they're an extremely biased opinion source that can scarcely be described as "News." But if you want to search for actual 'Lies,' they are readily accessible via any search engine.

Here's a few to get you started.
10 Most Ridiculous Fox News Lies, Creative Edits, and Half-Truths - Spiteful Critic

Shreddy, this from your link...
"When the false "death panel" rumors started in August of 2009, Fox News reported on a supposed, "death book" by the Veterans Health Administration. In liu of actual reporting, they fanned the death panel flames by promoting a number of falsehoods that would have been cleared up had they actually read the thing."



Exhibit A. Last year, bureaucrats at the VA's National Center for Ethics in Health Care advocated a 52-page end-of-life planning document, "Your Life, Your Choices." It was first published in 1997 and later promoted as the VA's preferred living will throughout its vast network of hospitals and nursing homes. After the Bush White House took a look at how this document was treating complex health and moral issues, the VA suspended its use. Unfortunately, under President Obama, the VA has now resuscitated "Your Life, Your Choices."

Who is the primary author of this workbook? Dr. Robert Pearlman, chief of ethics evaluation for the center, a man who in 1996 advocated for physician-assisted suicide in Vacco v. Quill before the U.S. Supreme Court and is known for his support of health-care rationing.

"Your Life, Your Choices" presents end-of-life choices in a way aimed at steering users toward predetermined conclusions, much like a political "push poll." For example, a worksheet on page 21 lists various scenarios and asks users to then decide whether their own life would be "not worth living."

There also are guilt-inducing scenarios such as "I can no longer contribute to my family's well being," "I am a severe financial burden on my family" and that the vet's situation "causes severe emotional burden for my family."

When the government can steer vulnerable individuals to conclude for themselves that life is not worth living, who needs a death panel?

This hurry-up-and-die message is clear and unconscionable. Worse, a July 2009 VA directive instructs its primary care physicians to raise advance care planning with all VA patients and to refer them to "Your Life, Your Choices." Not just those of advanced age and debilitated condition—all patients. America's 24 million veterans deserve better.
Jim Towey: The Death Book for Veterans - WSJ.com

Exhibit B. Interviewed on Fox News Sunday, August 23, 2009 Jim Towey by Chris Wallace. The following were from my notes on the interview:

1. The Department of Veterans Affairs has promoted as the VA's preferred living will throughout its vast network of hospitals and nursing homes to direct veterans, all 24 million, with whom it comes in contact- elderly or not- to a booklet called “Your Life, Your Choice.” A July 2009 VA directive instructs its primary care physicians to raise advance care planning with all VA patients and to refer them to "Your Life, Your Choices."

2. The booklet presents end-of-life choices in a way aimed at steering users toward predetermined conclusions, much like a political "push poll." For example, a worksheet on page 21 lists various scenarios and asks users to then decide whether their own life would be "not worth living."

3. Are you unable to shake the ‘blues’? Are you disabled? Are you in a nursing home? Are you confined to a wheelchair? Are you an emotional burden for your family? Can you control your bladder? Bowels? Do you need kidney dialysis to keep you alive?

4. One can only imagine a soldier surviving the war in Iraq and returning without all of his limbs only to encounter a veteran's health-care system that seems intent on his demise. The government, with a financial stake in reducing the cost of veterans care, tries to steer vulnerable individuals into believing that their lives are not worth living.

5. When the government can steer vulnerable individuals to conclude for themselves that life is not worth living, who needs a death panel? When revised 2007-2008, only one organization was listed in the new version as a resource on advance directives: the Hemlock Society (now euphemistically known as "Compassion and Choices").

6. The Bush Administration suspended the use of this booklet, and the Obama Administration reinstated it July 2, 2009 and tells providers to refer to it.

7. The main author of the booklet, was. Dr. Robert Pearlman, chief of ethics evaluation for the center, a man who in 1996 advocated for physician-assisted suicide in Vacco v. Quill before the U.S. Supreme Court and is known for his support of health-care rationing. His research has explored euthanasia, the role of quality of life in decision-making, the validity of life-sustaining treatment preferences, medical futility, advance care planning, physician-assisted suicide, and relief of patient suffering.

8.The booklet can be found at Page Not Found

How about we assume that your link is just as flawed on the other nine examples?

 

[PoliticalChic]

So please, if you can cite one (and you should be able to if you've made this assertion), then post one of those lies in this thread that Fox News has broadcast.

Not affiliates....

Fox News, national.

Post away !!

This should be as entertaining as watching Dan Rather lie.... or Katie Couric getting fired, or MSNBC's ratings.

For one, the whole death panel bullshit. Steve Dooshbag and friends.. along with the ever so hawt Megyn Kelly.. and all the other FNC anchors, ran that line during the whole health care debate. And never once did they mention that the individual mandate was a Heritage Foundation idea.. and was the conservative response to a single-payer system.

I guess it's more selectively reporting and editing more than lying.. but they've certainly done their share of that too.

I'm about to destroy the essence of your post, the same with your understanding of the 'death panel' question...

...the only question is how many millenia it will take for you to accept same.


"[Liberal] Economist and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman says the only way the U.S. will get its debt crisis under control is by the use of "death panels" and a national sales tax.

The national sales tax, referred to as value-added tax (VAT), which governments across Europe use widely, will help cut the U.S deficit, Krugman argues.

Krugman made his comments on ABC's “This Week with Christiane Amanpour” during a roundtable discussion about the economy and the recent findings of the U.S. Debt Reduction Commission.

Here's the key excerpt:

"Some years down the pike, we're going to get the real solution, which is going to be a combination of death panels and sales taxes. It's going to be that we're actually going to take Medicare under control, and we're going to have to get some additional revenue, probably from a VAT. But it's not going to happen now." Krugman: Death Panels, VAT Will Fix Debt Crisis

 

[peach174]

Oh yeah?
What about the main stream media who conveniently left out the fact that Paul Ryan's budget plan did not take effect for Medicare recipients until age 54 and under.
And that seniors who are on Medicare now would not be effected.
It scared all the Seniors, how about that kind of biased reporting Huh?

 

[slukasiewski]

They repetedly labeled republicans as democrats when there was a rash of republicans trying to fuck aides or suck someone off in an airport bathroom.

They did it over and over.

BTW what the hell do you think affiliate means?

They repeatedly did this? When? Who did? Cite a source.

An affillate - i.e. WTTG, Channel 5 - is not FOX NEWS. It's an affilitate of the network - dumb fuck.

 

[PoliticalChic]

They repetedly labeled republicans as democrats when there was a rash of republicans trying to fuck aides or suck someone off in an airport bathroom.

They did it over and over.

BTW what the hell do you think affiliate means?

August 26, 2001 - FraudFactor - Democrats in the news media and entertainment industry have misrepresented disgraced Democrat Congressman Gary Condit (D-CA, 18th CD) as a conservative and a Republican in an attempt to shift blame and disgrace away from the Democratic Party and onto the Republican Party. However, the American Conservative Union (ACU) and the Americans for Democratic Action (ADA) voting record scores show that Gary Condit is anything but a conservative. At best, Condit is a liberal "moderate" who supports dangerous gun control laws that target and punish ordinary nonviolent citizens. At worst, Condit is an extreme liberal masquerading as a moderate or conservative.
Fraud Factor - Disgraced Democrat Congressman Gary Condit misrepresented as conservative, Republican


On July 9, ABC’s George Stephanopoulos confidently predicted on Good Morning America that "I don’t think the rest of the Democratic Party is going to get tarred by Gary Condit" as a result of the California Congressman’s adulterous affair with a young woman, Chandra Levy, who has been the subject of intense police activity since she ominously disappeared on May 1.
Probably not, and one reason may be that ABC and its broadcasting brethren have downplayed Condit’s partisan affiliation through-out their coverage of the Levy story. Normally, a "Republican" or "Democrat" label is presented nearly every time a member of Congress is cited, as in "Rep. Gary Condit (D-CA)." But since May, the three broadcast networks have practically erased the "D" from Condit’s political identity, detaching the scandal-plagued politician from the rest of his party.
Media Reality Check -- 07/12/2001 -- Avoiding Gary Condit’s Democratic ID

 

[PoliticalChic]

They repetedly labeled republicans as democrats when there was a rash of republicans trying to fuck aides or suck someone off in an airport bathroom.

They did it over and over.

BTW what the hell do you think affiliate means?

For Second Night, ABC and NBC Refuse to Utter Spitzer's Party ID
By Brent Baker | March 11, 2008 | 21:44

0Share
Change font size: A | A

Just as occurred Monday night, viewers of Tuesday's ABC and NBC evening newscasts never heard the word “Democrat” applied to New York Governor Eliot Spitzer, nor did they even put a “(D)” on screen by his name as ABC did briefly Monday. CBS didn't announce his party either on Tuesday night, but Katie Couric had done so Monday night. The ABC and NBC newscasts, however, did put “(R)” on screen over soundbites from Republicans and NBC's Mike Taibbi twice referred to the reaction from “Republican” politicians.

Fill-in ABC anchor Elizabeth Vargas avoided any party tag: “New York's Governor, Eliot Spitzer, spent most of the day today huddled behind closed doors debating whether to resign after being linked to a prostitution ring.” On NBC, substitute anchor Ann Curry led: “Tonight, the investigation of New York Governor Eliot Spitzer's fall from grace is broadening...”

Viewers could only figure out Spitzer's party by implication as both shows aired a soundbite from Republican Congressman Peter King with an “(R)” on screen. ABC's Brian Ross led into it by referring to how Spitzer will soon “end what even his political enemies called a once-brilliant career.” NBC's Taibbi cited King's party as he described “Republicans threatening impeachment if he doesn't resign.” Before video of State Rep. James Tedisco with an “(R-NY)” on screen, Taibbi also noted how “some Republicans in Albany would welcome” the move up by Lieutenant Governor David Paterson.



Read more: For Second Night, ABC and NBC Refuse to Utter Spitzer's Party ID | NewsBusters.org

 

[Nic_Driver]

 

[rightwinger]

Fox News Wins Lawsuit To Misinform Public

In February 2003, Fox appealed the decision and an appellate court and had it overturned. Fox lawyers argued it was their first amendment right to report false information. In a six-page written decision, the Court of Appeals decided the FCC’s position against news distortion is only a “policy,” not a “law, rule, or regulation.”

So, Fox and the other gladiatorical cable news channels were given the okay to legally lie right around the time of the Iraq War’s birth – when media lies coincidentally hit a peak in both frequency and severity.

In February 2003, a Florida Court of Appeals unanimously agreed with an
assertion by FOX News that there is no rule against distorting or
falsifying the news in the United States.

"Fox" argued that, under the First Amendment, broadcasters have the right
to lie or deliberately distort news reports on public airwaves. Fox
attorneys did not dispute Akre's claim that they pressured her to
broadcast a false story, they simply maintained that it was their right to
do so."

 

[Nic_Driver]

 

[rightwinger]

 

[PoliticalChic]

Fox News Wins Lawsuit To Misinform Public

In February 2003, Fox appealed the decision and an appellate court and had it overturned. Fox lawyers argued it was their first amendment right to report false information. In a six-page written decision, the Court of Appeals decided the FCC’s position against news distortion is only a “policy,” not a “law, rule, or regulation.”

So, Fox and the other gladiatorical cable news channels were given the okay to legally lie right around the time of the Iraq War’s birth – when media lies coincidentally hit a peak in both frequency and severity.

In February 2003, a Florida Court of Appeals unanimously agreed with an
assertion by FOX News that there is no rule against distorting or
falsifying the news in the United States.

"Fox" argued that, under the First Amendment, broadcasters have the right
to lie or deliberately distort news reports on public airwaves. Fox
attorneys did not dispute Akre's claim that they pressured her to
broadcast a false story, they simply maintained that it was their right to
do so."

I'm tempted to state that only a dolt fully invested with Left-wing mind-altering and emptying atavistic tendencies would belive this...

...on second thought, there is no other explanation.

"To begin with, the popular portrayal almost always omits the rather crucial fact that Akre and Wilson lost almost every one of their claims at the trial court. As the Florida Second District Court of Appeal noted in their ruling:

Akre and Wilson sued WTVT alleging... that their terminations had been in retaliation for their resisting WTVT's attempts to distort or suppress the BGH story and for threatening to report the alleged news distortion to the FCC. Akre also brought claims for declaratory relief and for breach of contract. After a four-week trial, a jury found against Wilson on all of his claims. The trial court directed a verdict against Akre on her breach of contract claim, Akre abandoned her claim for declaratory relief, and the trial court let her whistle-blower claims go to the jury. The jury rejected all of Akre's claims except her claim that WTVT retaliated against her in response to her threat to disclose the alleged news distortion to the FCC.


It is also not correct to claim, as the Gaddy story quoted above states, that the jury ruled that the FOX affiliate had, in fact, found that the station had attempted to force Akre and Wilson to air "a false, distorted or slanted story..."

But the FCC does not share Akre's interpretation of the jury verdict. In a 2007 decision by the FCC denying a petition by Akre and Wilson demanding that WTVT's broadcast license not be renewed, the FCC includes the following footnote:

Although there has been much back-and-forth among the parties about whether the jury in the employment lawsuit found that Station WTVT(TV) violated the news distortion policy, the verdict form did not ask the jury to determine whether WTVT(TV) violated the news distortion policy, but rather to determine whether Station WTVT(TV) fired either employee for threatening to disclose what the Petitioners reasonably believed would be a violation of the news distortion policy.

So the trial jury never reached a conclusion on whether the FOX affiliate had violated the news distortion policy, nor did they have to in order to determine she had been fired in response to the threat by Akre and Wilson to file a complaint with the FCC.

More importantly, and more relevant to the examination of whether WTVT actually asserted a"right to lie"in its newscasts, is that there is nothing on record to show that this argument was ever advanced in court.

Whatever the truth of the dispute between the two reporters and WTVT, it seems clear that the station did not at the trial court level admit that it had attempted to distort the news story or assert the"right to lie"in its broadcasts.

It is also worth noting that of all the web sites, blog postings, and online commentary on the subject of the FOX "right to lie" argument, not a single one that I've seen links to anything that would substantiate the claim. Very few even bother to link to the actual 2nd District opinion overturning Akre's whistleblower verdict, or anything else related to the case itself.

Yet in all the claims and charges leveled directly by Akre and Wilson against the FOX affiliate across multiple venues and platforms, there is not a single mention of any "right to lie" argument allegedly offered by WTVT. They seemingly accuse the station of nearly every other sin imaginable in the world of journalism, but are completely silent on this charge.

FOX, Lies & Videotape: debunking an internet myth*»*Blog*»* Center for Competitive Politics



Poor baby...need a tissue to get that egg off your face?

 

[slukasiewski]

Not seeing any examples of on-air lies folks - but, keep spinning. Eventually you'll wear yourselves out.