Female Fox News Anchors...

[whitehall]

"Not allow them to exist"? That's the secret dream of the left isn't it?

 

[blastoff]

"Not allow them to exist"? That's the secret dream of the left isn't it?

Sure is.

Plus, they like their news/commentary women to look like Ritchie Maddow from that cable station virtually no one watches.

 

[boedicca]

Ugly people are always jealous of the Pretty Blonde Gals.

Just sayin'.

 

[AquaAthena]

If you are trying to make silly point that female anchors at FOX are all the same, you obviously forgot about Julie Banderas, Loren Green, Catherine Herridge, Harris Faulkner and Uma Pomarragiu.

Go to hell.

Precisely! Author fails to also mention their backgrounds of success in their endeavors and educational accomplishments. Lawyers, judges ad infinitum. Having said that, I, too, am tired of seeing the prevalence of blondes on Fox, and prefer instead, the rest of the anchors with Judge Jeanine being my favorite anchor with the best program, along with Megan Kelly and her show, when she is actually on it.

 

[whitehall]

It's all part of the sissie left's war on attractive successful women.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Lol, I found this absolutely hilarious, and yes they all are different individuals. They don't show Meghan Kelly as she's just an extreme exception and looks totally different from these blonde-clones:

Fox uses what works I'll give them that. Pretty transparently sexist though. First started watching this phenomenae more attentively during 9/11 coverage when they ditched their commercials. Day before 9/11 their females dressed much as they do now, legs displayed promimently and very sexual attire. During the 9/11 coverage though they weren't doing that and opted for slacks abandoning the camera angles showing their legs, and putting women on the outside of a table nearest the camera for those leg shots. In effect it was like they were saying "this is no time to be using the secondary sexual characteristics of our female talent to get viewers."

Now though they're back to using it to get viewers. Just about every female on-air talent is blonde, showing her legs, and can easily be mistaken for a model. Whereas CNN and MSNBC hire actual journalists with degrees and everything. Fox seems to hire beauty pageant winners who can read sufficiently well.

 

[whitehall]

Sissie metrosexual left wing males never stop commenting on the looks of people who are prettier than they are.

 

[Mad Scientist]

FoxNews infobabes are there for a reason, and that is so you don't pay attention to what they say. Don't believe me?

Next time you see guys gathered around the tube commenting on how hot some FoxNews Infobabe is ask them: What is she reporting on?

See how they react. I've had people say to me "Does it matter?"

Typical FoxNews watcher answer.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Would love to skim their contracts. Thinking of a bit from one of the Ocean's Eleven movies, "wait-staff" were actually hired on as models and thus their appearence could be written in in their contracts. I wonder if Fox does something like that. "We're not hring you as a journalist, don't be ridiculous. We're hiring you on as eye-candy."

 

[westwall]

Lol, I found this absolutely hilarious, and yes they all are different individuals. They don't show Meghan Kelly as she's just an extreme exception and looks totally different from these blonde-clones:

Fox uses what works I'll give them that. Pretty transparently sexist though. First started watching this phenomenae more attentively during 9/11 coverage when they ditched their commercials. Day before 9/11 their females dressed much as they do now, legs displayed promimently and very sexual attire. During the 9/11 coverage though they weren't doing that and opted for slacks abandoning the camera angles showing their legs, and putting women on the outside of a table nearest the camera for those leg shots. In effect it was like they were saying "this is no time to be using the secondary sexual characteristics of our female talent to get viewers."

Now though they're back to using it to get viewers. Just about every female on-air talent is blonde, showing her legs, and can easily be mistaken for a model. Whereas CNN and MSNBC hire actual journalists with degrees and everything. Fox seems to hire beauty pageant winners who can read sufficiently well.

Every correspondent on Fox is every bit as degreed as any of the clowns on MSNBC or CNN. The difference is they are for the most part more pleasant to watch, not shrill, ethical, and actually KNOW something.

A journalism degree is not that big a deal. What's amusing is you think a journalist is more qualified to have an opinion than a lawyer, or a judge.

Laughable.

 

[blastoff]

Face it. The lefty loons hate everything about Fox. Just check out all the Fox threads on this site if there's any doubt.

I just wonder if they know how silly they all sound? They're like children. Very young children.

 

[Mad Scientist]

You know, after getting rid of Cable TV I've found I actually go to MORE lefty web sites!

When I had Cable I knew what the lefty channels were so I avoided them. Now when I click on a headline the source could be HuffPo, MSNBC or whatever. The best part of the online story are the comments. They could even run 90-10 against the story being reported.

 

[Papageorgio]

Lol, I found this absolutely hilarious, and yes they all are different individuals. They don't show Meghan Kelly as she's just an extreme exception and looks totally different from these blonde-clones:

Fox uses what works I'll give them that. Pretty transparently sexist though. First started watching this phenomenae more attentively during 9/11 coverage when they ditched their commercials. Day before 9/11 their females dressed much as they do now, legs displayed promimently and very sexual attire. During the 9/11 coverage though they weren't doing that and opted for slacks abandoning the camera angles showing their legs, and putting women on the outside of a table nearest the camera for those leg shots. In effect it was like they were saying "this is no time to be using the secondary sexual characteristics of our female talent to get viewers."

Now though they're back to using it to get viewers. Just about every female on-air talent is blonde, showing her legs, and can easily be mistaken for a model. Whereas CNN and MSNBC hire actual journalists with degrees and everything. Fox seems to hire beauty pageant winners who can read sufficiently well.

I tire of the sexist bull shit. Liberals are so shallow.


Sent from my iPad using an Android.

 

[Nutz]

Every female pundit on Fox News has a very impressive resume. Most of them being former attorneys and are quite accomplished. Journalists...they are not...they are script readers with nice legs, nothing more.

 

[westwall]

Every female pundit on Fox News has a very impressive resume. Most of them being former attorneys and are quite accomplished. Journalists...they are not...they are script readers with nice legs, nothing more.

So what. They are clearly doing a far better job as witnessed by the constant demolition of the lefty news channels. Shit, even Joe Klein that well known liberal says if you want accurate news you have to watch Fox!


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=teoxjspg0p8]Joe Klein with Jeff Greenfield on Cable News - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Nutz]

Every female pundit on Fox News has a very impressive resume. Most of them being former attorneys and are quite accomplished. Journalists...they are not...they are script readers with nice legs, nothing more.

So what. They are clearly doing a far better job as witnessed by the constant demolition of the lefty news channels. Shit, even Joe Klein that well known liberal says if you want accurate news you have to watch Fox!

I have no problem with Fox. I do find the female pundits to be funny...I worked in the news industry for years...most of the 'Anchors' are nothing more than script readers with a pretty face...whether they are male or female. I have little respect for most anchors...especially the morning news, sit on the couch nonsense. MSNBC being the exception...but they are in a different category altogether!

News is no longer a recap of events...it has evolved into a cross between entertainment and advocacy. I have little respect for the latter.

If there is breaking news (or election coverage) where CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, MSNBC and FOX are covering it...what station are do you to watch? I usually switch between CNN and FOX...I will spend a few moments on CBS...but CNN is usually the main source...mostly because I think they are the most equipped to handle breaking news.

 

[Two Thumbs]

Lol, I found this absolutely hilarious, and yes they all are different individuals. They don't show Meghan Kelly as she's just an extreme exception and looks totally different from these blonde-clones:

Fox uses what works I'll give them that. Pretty transparently sexist though. First started watching this phenomenae more attentively during 9/11 coverage when they ditched their commercials. Day before 9/11 their females dressed much as they do now, legs displayed promimently and very sexual attire. During the 9/11 coverage though they weren't doing that and opted for slacks abandoning the camera angles showing their legs, and putting women on the outside of a table nearest the camera for those leg shots. In effect it was like they were saying "this is no time to be using the secondary sexual characteristics of our female talent to get viewers."

Now though they're back to using it to get viewers. Just about every female on-air talent is blonde, showing her legs, and can easily be mistaken for a model. Whereas CNN and MSNBC hire actual journalists with degrees and everything. Fox seems to hire beauty pageant winners who can read sufficiently well.

so the fact that all have degees, some are lawyers and ones a judge is to much for your sexism to handle.


Don't hate them b/c they are beautiful, be pissed that you're not.

 

[westwall]

Every female pundit on Fox News has a very impressive resume. Most of them being former attorneys and are quite accomplished. Journalists...they are not...they are script readers with nice legs, nothing more.

So what. They are clearly doing a far better job as witnessed by the constant demolition of the lefty news channels. Shit, even Joe Klein that well known liberal says if you want accurate news you have to watch Fox!

I have no problem with Fox. I do find the female pundits to be funny...I worked in the news industry for years...most of the 'Anchors' are nothing more than script readers with a pretty face...whether they are male or female. I have little respect for most anchors...especially the morning news, sit on the couch nonsense. MSNBC being the exception...but they are in a different category altogether!

News is no longer a recap of events...it has evolved into a cross between entertainment and advocacy. I have little respect for the latter.

If there is breaking news (or election coverage) where CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, MSNBC and FOX are covering it...what station are do you to watch? I usually switch between CNN and FOX...I will spend a few moments on CBS...but CNN is usually the main source...mostly because I think they are the most equipped to handle breaking news.

Here I have to agree with you. News is all about entertainment now....and pushing an agenda...

 

[daveman]

Lol, I found this absolutely hilarious, and yes they all are different individuals. They don't show Meghan Kelly as she's just an extreme exception and looks totally different from these blonde-clones:

Let's see...two eyes...nose...lips...hair...

OMG! They're clones!

 

[daveman]

Eww

^^^^ Likes teh peen.