Fox Blatently Pitches for GOP Senate Candidate

[Soggy in NOLA]

No, it's fucking advertising for Scott Brown. A promo my ass.

Again, damn you fucking libs are stupid.

 

[Modbert]

instead of attacking dogbert why dont you look at the source of his story instead. Case Closed

Thank you Pilgrim but attacking the source is another logical fallacy.

Besides, even sites like the Daily Kos are right once in awhile. I found a article recently from that site that was avoided like the plague here.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

You can't expect a lib to differentiate between fact and fiction. They live a lie 24/7.

Fagetaboudit!!!

 

[GHook93]

Like at Keith "Slanderer and Arrogant Fuck" Olberman

Quote: By Keith Overbite:
Scott Brown is an irresponsible, homophobic, racist, reactionist, ex-nude model, teabagging, supporter of violence against women and politician who disagree with him (yet worst person in the world is not hating your enemy), at any other stage of this nations history he would have been laughed off the stage as unqualified...he is a bad joke..."

Sorry but not only was that worst that ANYTHING Fox has ever done, that was outright slander and hate filled!
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ueji0Q4RZyo]YouTube - Keith Olbermann: Republican Candidate Scott Brown 'A Bad Joke' - 01/18/10[/ame]

 

[drsmith1072]

ha ha ha, after this, you can't say shit about FOX.

YouTube - MSNBC's Schultz- I'd Cheat To Keep Brown From Winning In Massachusetts

LOL So you are actually trying to compare the "crazy guy" on msnbc who is supposed to be a coutnerpoint to the "crazy guy" on foxnews, glenn beck, to the entire network of foxnews shilling for brown and you actually believe that is a fair comparison?? You are comparing ONE GUY to an entire network. Do you not see how absurd that is??

I flipped through the news channels the other day and foxnews was campaigning for brown from one of his events as they spread his talking points to prop him up and tear his opponent down. They don't even pretend to be fair and balanced anymore. However, once again the right turns a blind eye to it and makes excuses for it because as usual for the right, they believe the end justifies the means. They don't care how dishonest they have to be, they will do or say whatever it takes to win.

Thanks for proving that.

 

[RykerWrite]

You have a bridge to sell me? That is what the democratic party is all about -- selling us bridges that don't exist. The Obama health care bridge is so messed up that nobody knows what it says, and apparently the democrats don't care. 60% of the people are against it; and they vote the party line; then tell us that they represent the people. Some bridge!!

Fox tells us that Browns election could save the American taxpayer money. Just how do you think that the democrats are going to pay for this health care bridge? ...with the taxpayer's money.

"A bridge that you are going to sell me." I would expect that from a democrat. All you do is sell us bridges, then we end up paying for it.

RykerWrite at talkinnow.com

 

[uscitizen]

"That is the truth that if brown wins it will save the taxpayers money "

LMAO

Good one.

 

[drsmith1072]

YouTube - Fox News Promo A Blatant Pitch For GOP Senate Candidate

I read the article and watched the clip (link above)

People are really pulling at straws over this whole senate race thing eh? Seriously?

Is cavutos show news reporting or and opinion show? Neil Cavuto - FOXNews.com


Ah the laughs.....i'm done with this blatantly biased thread, enjoy patting each other on the back.

So your excuse for foxnews campaigning for a republican is that neil cavutos show isn't a news program but an opinion show?? LOL Aren't campaign ads opinon based and is foxnews giving too much to a campaign by way of their advertising and campaigning for brown?

Besides that you tend to make several blatantly biased remarks, the above excuses included, and start plenty of blatantly biased threads that you rarely walk away from so it's funny that you would use that as a reason to justify leaving this thread. LOL

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

instead of attacking dogbert why dont you look at the source of his story instead. Case Closed

Thank you Pilgrim but attacking the source is another logical fallacy.

Besides, even sites like the Daily Kos are right once in awhile. I found a article recently from that site that was avoided like the plague here.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

If all news is liberal but Fox why did all the stations beat the drums for war in Iraq?

do you really want my answer? Because it was a bi-partisan thing with both parties thinking that IRAQ had WMDs and was a danger. And before you go down the typical road just know one thing, the senate intelligence comitte which had dem members on it had the same intelligence as bush and never questioned him pre-invasion.

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
--Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
--Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by:
-- Democratic Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others, Oct. 9, 1998

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
-Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
-- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by:
-- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), and others, Dec 5, 2001

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and th! e means of delivering them."
-- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
-- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
-- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
-- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
-- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do"
-- Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
-- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..."
-- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

"That is the truth that if brown wins it will save the taxpayers money "

LMAO

Good one.

lets clarify that...if Brown does win and his victory stops the CURRENT VERSION of health care (I say current because brown was a big supporter of our reforms here in MA and wants to export our system to the nation instead of the proposed big pharm/health insurance kickback bill we have now) reform it will save all americans, even those that dont pay taxes, money.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

YouTube - Fox News Promo A Blatant Pitch For GOP Senate Candidate

I read the article and watched the clip (link above)

People are really pulling at straws over this whole senate race thing eh? Seriously?

Is cavutos show news reporting or and opinion show? Neil Cavuto - FOXNews.com

So your excuse for foxnews campaigning for a republican is that neil cavutos show isn't a news program but an opinion show?? LOL Aren't campaign ads opinon based and is foxnews giving too much to a campaign by way of their advertising and campaigning for brown?

Besides that you tend to make several blatantly biased remarks, the above excuses included, and start plenty of blatantly biased threads that you rarely walk away from so it's funny that you would use that as a reason to justify leaving this thread. LOL

Im not making excuses just stating the fact that Cavuto is an opinion guy who's opinion is that a Scott Brown victory will be good for taxpayers who want lower taxes and a coakley win will lead to higher taxes.

But feel free to disparage and distract all you want.

 

[Modbert]

Im not making excuses just stating the fact that Cavuto is an opinion guy who's opinion is that a Scott Brown victory will be good for taxpayers who want lower taxes and a coakley win will lead to higher taxes.

But feel free to disparage and distract all you want.

And what about Fox & Friends?

 

[drsmith1072]

YouTube - Fox News Promo A Blatant Pitch For GOP Senate Candidate

I read the article and watched the clip (link above)

People are really pulling at straws over this whole senate race thing eh? Seriously?

Is cavutos show news reporting or and opinion show? Neil Cavuto - FOXNews.com


Ah the laughs.....i'm done with this blatantly biased thread, enjoy patting each other on the back.

BTW, that promo is 'promoting' anything but Cavuto's show, and its also accurate, as brown will kill that ludicrous barrycare and its huge tax hike.

So basically some of you are complaining about something that isn't so (FOX promo promoting brown doesn't exist) when at the same time ignoring that the promo for the show is actually accurate.

I know i wasn't going to post again but I have to quote xeno's truthful post so when my 24 hours is up its easy to find for me to rep.

truthful?? LOL That promo is clearly meant to PROMOTE a GOP victory in Mass. by claiming that they will tell you how a republican victory will save taxpayers and NOT proving anything.

As usual the right doesn't need FACTS they just assume that it's the truth because it's what they want to believe and then pat each other on the back as they rush to agree with something that hasn't been proven yet.

 

[NO!bama08]

....so i block MSNBC and the Communist News Network on my TV, you block FNC on yours. So what. Who cares.... the ratings are all that matter. FNC rules, the rest drool.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Im not making excuses just stating the fact that Cavuto is an opinion guy who's opinion is that a Scott Brown victory will be good for taxpayers who want lower taxes and a coakley win will lead to higher taxes.

But feel free to disparage and distract all you want.

And what about Fox & Friends?

Jesus another opinion show.....what does fox news only have one news only show, the one I watch at 7pm eastern? Thats the only time I have fox on.

 

[drsmith1072]

Such a promo doesn't exist, since given the overwhelming evidence to the contrary nobody in their right mind would make such a claim let alone believe it.

That being said, the author of the article needs to learn the difference between news content and opinion commentary since all the major news outlets offer both and most people are able to distinguish between the two.

Well, your initial premise is questionable. I'd suggest that's your OPINION -- to which you have every right, no matter how wrong you are.

I have no problem with Fox airing it's opinions. I have a problem with it pretending it's news and not political commentary.

Cavuto's show is billed as political commentary.

If this loon site misrepresented that to you, then its THE SITE that lied to you, not FOX.

You suere about that?? his own bio on foxnews' website says different.

Responsible for anchoring the daily, one-hour daytime financial program, Your World With Neil Cavuto, (4-5 p.m. ET, Monday through Friday) and a wrap-up program highlighting the week's business news, "Cavuto On Business" (10:30-11 a.m. ET on Saturdays), Cavuto oversees all business coverage for FNC and serves on the network's executive committee. Your World is currently the No. 1 rated cable news program in its 4 p.m. timeslot and covers the business world from all angles. In addition to his television duties, Cavuto began anchoring a financial newscast, The Cavuto Money Report, for FOX News Radio in January 2007. - FOXBusiness.com

So do you have anymore spin to offer or is that it?

 

[Some Guy]

Anyone who can't see the obvious bias in Fox News, MSNBC and CNN is either stupid, blind, or both. Generally, they all offer more "news reporting" shows during the day, then political commentary at night. For every Glenn Beck on Fax, there's a Chris Matthews on MSNBC.

 

[JimH52]

FOX is not, nor it will ever be unbiased news. It is the GOP marketing station. MSNBC can be as blantantly leaning to the left, but FOX as a News Station, is a joke. Now they need to hire Blimpy Limbaugh and they will be set.

 

[drsmith1072]

People will gravitate to the news outlet that most closely reflects their personal bias calling it fair while simultaneously labeling all other news outlets biased.

And that says a lot considering the fact that the right shows how truly paranoid they are when they preach about how they believe there is a liberal bias to the rest of the media and how they are all out to get them but foxnews is the only one that is honest. LOL