Fox News' War on the White House

[midcan5]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YDR47EKTrCQ]YouTube - Fox News' War on the White House[/ame]

 

[WillowTree]

obama could just identify what Fox has wrong and clarify it! No?

 

[midcan5]

obama could just identify what Fox has wrong and clarify it! No?

Do you really think all those pejorative labels and associations requires an articulate, reasoned response?

When someone calls you a "?????" do you rationalize a reply. Roger Ailes is a partisan republican who determines what passes for news on Fox. That Murdock allows it surprises me as you notice sane advertisers have left the more controversial shows.

 

[WillowTree]

obama could just identify what Fox has wrong and clarify it! No?

Do you really think all those pejorative labels and associations requires an articulate, reasoned response?

When someone calls you a "?????" do you rationalize a reply. Roger Ailes is a partisan republican who determines what passes for news on Fox. That Murdock allows it surprises me as you notice sane advertisers have left the more controversial shows.

what do you think of MSNBC?

 

[California Girl]

obama could just identify what Fox has wrong and clarify it! No?

Do you really think all those pejorative labels and associations requires an articulate, reasoned response?

When someone calls you a "?????" do you rationalize a reply. Roger Ailes is a partisan republican who determines what passes for news on Fox. That Murdock allows it surprises me as you notice sane advertisers have left the more controversial shows.

Is that so? LOL.

Try booking advertising space on Glenn Beck's show. Or maybe he's not contraversial enough!

 

[code1211]

obama could just identify what Fox has wrong and clarify it! No?

Do you really think all those pejorative labels and associations requires an articulate, reasoned response?

When someone calls you a "?????" do you rationalize a reply. Roger Ailes is a partisan republican who determines what passes for news on Fox. That Murdock allows it surprises me as you notice sane advertisers have left the more controversial shows.

I don't know what you're driving at. I watched your YouTube thingy and it looked like the opinion guys on FOX doing their thing. Bill Mahr and Keith Oberman along with the Liberal gaggle savaged Bush on a regular basis.

This is how it works. The press is supposed to have a robust debate. If you expect a well reasoned and fair and balanced approach to the events of the day from Hannity, Limbaugh, Oberman, Mahr, O'Riley, Donna Brazil, or any of the rest, you're either completely in the tank for your extreme end of the political spectrum or you just don't understand editorial opinion pieces.

I remember when Nixon was fighting the press. My Dad, wise beyond my years, observed that only an idiot picks a fight with those who buy printing ink by the barrel. It was true then and it's true now.

Just like FOX, the NY Times and the Washington Post had news and opinion sections. If you and Obama can't tell the difference, that's a problem that has nothing to do with FOX, the NY Times or the Washington Post. To his credit, Nixon knew that the news gathering parts of his press adversaries were his problem.

To the damning discredit of both Nixon and Obama, trifling with the press through intimidation from the White House is, in my opinion, not far from being prior restraint. This is a Constitutional infraction and impeachable when it crosses into becoming actual prior restraint.

How long will it be until we hear Obama tell us that he's not a crook?

Of course, he is a product of Chicago machine politics. Why would he have to?

 

[crpravens]

Beck, Oreilly, Hannity are not the news portions of FOX News. Why can't these libs understand that.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

obama could just identify what Fox has wrong and clarify it! No?

Do you really think all those pejorative labels and associations requires an articulate, reasoned response?

When someone calls you a "?????" do you rationalize a reply. Roger Ailes is a partisan republican who determines what passes for news on Fox. That Murdock allows it surprises me as you notice sane advertisers have left the more controversial shows.

Well, Obama is clean AND articulate so we'd except no less.

 

[Oddball]

obama could just identify what Fox has wrong and clarify it! No?

Do you really think all those pejorative labels and associations requires an articulate, reasoned response?

When someone calls you a "?????" do you rationalize a reply. Roger Ailes is a partisan republican who determines what passes for news on Fox. That Murdock allows it surprises me as you notice sane advertisers have left the more controversial shows.

Yes...It's much better that the media be compliant lap dogs and administration transcription services.

I hear the NY Times is having financial troubles...Maybe a merger with ITAR-TASS would help them out.

 

[California Girl]

Beck, Oreilly, Hannity are not the news portions of FOX News. Why can't these libs understand that.

What appears a simple concept to some is like pondering the meaning of life to others. Some of us recognize the difference between 'news' and 'comment'and some are stupid.

 

[Si modo]

LMAO. What a whiney joke the OP is.

 

[theHawk]

YouTube - Fox News' War on the White House

I love how liberals act as if the media didn't give the same treatment to Bush the last 8 years. You could just as easily show a collection little 2 second snips of CNN commentators berating Bush. Then there is always MSNBC, the penacle of professional journalism in America.

 

[Luissa]

obama could just identify what Fox has wrong and clarify it! No?

Do you really think all those pejorative labels and associations requires an articulate, reasoned response?

When someone calls you a "?????" do you rationalize a reply. Roger Ailes is a partisan republican who determines what passes for news on Fox. That Murdock allows it surprises me as you notice sane advertisers have left the more controversial shows.

I don't know what you're driving at. I watched your YouTube thingy and it looked like the opinion guys on FOX doing their thing. Bill Mahr and Keith Oberman along with the Liberal gaggle savaged Bush on a regular basis.

This is how it works. The press is supposed to have a robust debate. If you expect a well reasoned and fair and balanced approach to the events of the day from Hannity, Limbaugh, Oberman, Mahr, O'Riley, Donna Brazil, or any of the rest, you're either completely in the tank for your extreme end of the political spectrum or you just don't understand editorial opinion pieces.

I remember when Nixon was fighting the press. My Dad, wise beyond my years, observed that only an idiot picks a fight with those who buy printing ink by the barrel. It was true then and it's true now.

Just like FOX, the NY Times and the Washington Post had news and opinion sections. If you and Obama can't tell the difference, that's a problem that has nothing to do with FOX, the NY Times or the Washington Post. To his credit, Nixon knew that the news gathering parts of his press adversaries were his problem.

To the damning discredit of both Nixon and Obama, trifling with the press through intimidation from the White House is, in my opinion, not far from being prior restraint. This is a Constitutional infraction and impeachable when it crosses into becoming actual prior restraint.

How long will it be until we hear Obama tell us that he's not a crook?

Of course, he is a product of Chicago machine politics. Why would he have to?

you might not want to use Bill Mahr as an example especially since he got fired from ABC.

 

[Luissa]

YouTube - Fox News' War on the White House

I love how liberals act as if the media didn't give the same treatment to Bush the last 8 years. You could just as easily show a collection little 2 second snips of CNN commentators berating Bush. Then there is always MSNBC, the penacle of professional journalism in America.

and the Bush admin froze out MSNBC.

 

[code1211]

Do you really think all those pejorative labels and associations requires an articulate, reasoned response?

When someone calls you a "?????" do you rationalize a reply. Roger Ailes is a partisan republican who determines what passes for news on Fox. That Murdock allows it surprises me as you notice sane advertisers have left the more controversial shows.

I don't know what you're driving at. I watched your YouTube thingy and it looked like the opinion guys on FOX doing their thing. Bill Mahr and Keith Oberman along with the Liberal gaggle savaged Bush on a regular basis.

This is how it works. The press is supposed to have a robust debate. If you expect a well reasoned and fair and balanced approach to the events of the day from Hannity, Limbaugh, Oberman, Mahr, O'Riley, Donna Brazil, or any of the rest, you're either completely in the tank for your extreme end of the political spectrum or you just don't understand editorial opinion pieces.

I remember when Nixon was fighting the press. My Dad, wise beyond my years, observed that only an idiot picks a fight with those who buy printing ink by the barrel. It was true then and it's true now.

Just like FOX, the NY Times and the Washington Post had news and opinion sections. If you and Obama can't tell the difference, that's a problem that has nothing to do with FOX, the NY Times or the Washington Post. To his credit, Nixon knew that the news gathering parts of his press adversaries were his problem.

To the damning discredit of both Nixon and Obama, trifling with the press through intimidation from the White House is, in my opinion, not far from being prior restraint. This is a Constitutional infraction and impeachable when it crosses into becoming actual prior restraint.

How long will it be until we hear Obama tell us that he's not a crook?

Of course, he is a product of Chicago machine politics. Why would he have to?

you might not want to use Bill Mahr as an example especially since he got fired from ABC.

Mahr is still on one of the movie channels. HBO? I'm not really sure. He has a show on that deals to the Liberal point of view.

 

[Missourian]

Fox News' War on the White House

The White House lost.