Anita Dunn...

[Wicked Jester]

I will say Fox is a pretty easy target - I mean only 23% of Americans find Fox believable anyway. They rank below CNN, Local newscasts, NPR, C-SPAN, NBC, ABC, and MSNBC in believability among broadcast news outlets.

So there's little or no chance of blowback.

So why does your beloved messiah continue to toss those that FOX continually exposes under the bus?

Hell, that weak lil' pile of garbage doesn't even have the balls to stand up for 'em. But then, ya' can't really blame the anti-ameican pile o' garbage. FOX is exposing them based on TRUE facts.

Fact is, FOX news is tearing this sham presidency and administration down based on FACTS. And that is driving boot licking ADMITTED communists such as yourself stark raving bonkers!

FOX news is ensuring that there will NEVER be a marxist, far left anti-american pile of garbage elected to lead this great country ever again. And that, is a very good thing!

In the meantime, Obama needs to get another bus!

 

[nodoginnafight]

I guess that explains Fox's declining believability ratings .....

 

[Sinatra]

While other news outlets flounder with dropping ratings and loss of ad revenue, Fox News dominates.

Coincidence?

 

[nodoginnafight]

While other news outlets flounder with dropping ratings and loss of ad revenue, Fox News dominates.

Coincidence?

by that do you mean is it a coincidence that only 23% of Americans find Fox news believable? That even MSNBC is graded as more believable than Fox?
I would argue that it is no coincindence.

 

[saveliberty]

I will say Fox is a pretty easy target - I mean only 23% of Americans find Fox believable anyway. They rank below CNN, Local newscasts, NPR, C-SPAN, NBC, ABC, and MSNBC in believability among broadcast news outlets.

So there's little or no chance of blowback.

I found your poll numbers were exactly the same as a May 2008 NBC poll. Interesting as another poll put it this way:

Americans see:

-- Growing media attempts to influence public opinion and policies

-- Poor quality

-- A strong liberal bent in most media

-- Fox News, CNN and NBC as the most accurate

Americans Slam News Media on Believability | Reuters

 

[nodoginnafight]

I found your poll numbers were exactly the same as a May 2008 NBC poll.

The poll I cited was conducted by the Pew Project for Excellence in Journalism.
And Fox rated below CNN, Local news outlets, NPR, C-Span, NBC, ABC, and MSNBC.

I cannot speak to what other polls may or may not have found. I would tend to give the most credibility on the poll conducted by an organization that is not a stakeholder in the outcome, but obviously each are free to use their own criteria.

 

[Coyote]

I will say Fox is a pretty easy target - I mean only 23% of Americans find Fox believable anyway. They rank below CNN, Local newscasts, NPR, C-SPAN, NBC, ABC, and MSNBC in believability among broadcast news outlets.

So there's little or no chance of blowback.

I found your poll numbers were exactly the same as a May 2008 NBC poll. Interesting as another poll put it this way:

Americans see:

-- Growing media attempts to influence public opinion and policies

-- Poor quality

-- A strong liberal bent in most media

-- Fox News, CNN and NBC as the most accurate

Americans Slam News Media on Believability | Reuters

Fox does poorly in believability - ranking in the bottom third according to Journalism.org- The State of the News Media 2009 which is the site what Nodog was referencing.

 

[Sinatra]

According to polling from last month, Fox News is the most trusted by a wide margin - and least trusted. Anyone at the top will enjoy a divisive audience.

It certainly drives the libs nuts - namely due to its enormous ratings lead...

Those named most frequently as the television news organization most trusted for accurate reporting in 2009 included: Fox News (30.0%), CNN (19.5%), NBC News (7.5%) and ABC News (7.5%). Fox News was also the television news organization trusted least. Just over one-quarter, 26.2%, named Fox News, followed by NBC News (9.9%), MSNBC (9.4%), CNN (8.5%), CBS News (5.3%) and ABC News (3.7%).


SHU National Poll: Trust and Satisfaction With the National News Media - Sacred Heart University

 

[Coyote]

According to polling from last month, Fox News is the most trusted by a wide margin - and least trusted. Anyone at the top will enjoy a divisive audience.

It certainly drives the libs nuts - namely due to its enormous ratings lead...

Those named most frequently as the television news organization most trusted for accurate reporting in 2009 included: Fox News (30.0%), CNN (19.5%), NBC News (7.5%) and ABC News (7.5%). Fox News was also the television news organization trusted least. Just over one-quarter, 26.2%, named Fox News, followed by NBC News (9.9%), MSNBC (9.4%), CNN (8.5%), CBS News (5.3%) and ABC News (3.7%).


SHU National Poll: Trust and Satisfaction With the National News Media - Sacred Heart University

Sacred Heart University....mhhhmmmmhh

 

[Murf76]

Surprise. Surprise. Once again the left demands we not believe our lyin' eyes.
(Hey, check it... I'm a poet and didn't know it. ... )


I just caught the tail end of this thread, and........ semantics?... really???
The best defense the lefties of this board have is a debate of the word "admire".
C'mon. That's pretty damn weak.

Since you admittedly only caught the tailend of this thread - you missed a lot.

There's no mistaking what was said. And anybody who actually believes Dunn's moronic excuse of failed wittiness isn't taking her audience into account... high schoolers, like they're going to get the proposed nuance of a mass murderer also being a great "philosopher".

There is plenty of mistaking what she said when you read through the thread and realize how many false quotes are attributed to her.

Her own facial expressions upon delivering her lines put the lie to her story. There wasn't a pause for laughter or a smile until AFTER she said the bit about Mother Theresa and Mao being "coupled". If she was holding Mao up for ridicule the pause would have been there, right at the time she said his name.

Talk about nitpicking.

She was LYING, people. She came to the cameras with some bizarre excuse about how she was only joking and she LIED.

The only thing that puzzles me is WHY the lefties here would prefer us to believe them to be abject morons or worse, bobble-headed communists, rather than simply abandon an obvious whackadoodle. I mean, just because Dunn is a card-carrying nutjob doesn't mean any of you have to be. It's not like anybody here recommended that she uphold Chairman Mao as an admirable example for America's school children, is it?

Seriously, just some friendly advice... but it really looks like a few of you lefty-type folks would do well to dig deep, rootle through your jeans, find your bollocks... and get some self respect. Just because somebody espouses the bulk of your ideology doesn't mean you're obligated to embrace their personal crazy.

Your self-mastabatory excess' here seem to have diminished your own bollocks to the point where you need hyperbole to find them.

I see you managed to get the truth rubbed on your nose several times over and still ignored it.
That takes real determination, the kind only a really well-trained bobble-head can manage. Kudos.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

I done seen this shit a hundred times... I'm no fan of Mao Tse Dung (and that's the way I'm gonna spell it!), but this really ain't nothing new. George W. Bush recomended Karl Rove to read the man's autobiography.
They're all a bunch of tyrant worshipers... cause they're tyrants too.

So if one was to read the bio of lets say.. Hitler, that would make them a tyrant also? There is a big difference between reading Mao's book and claiming him as a favorite philosopher. Wouldn't you say?

 

[Coyote]

According to polling from last month, Fox News is the most trusted by a wide margin - and least trusted. Anyone at the top will enjoy a divisive audience.

It certainly drives the libs nuts - namely due to its enormous ratings lead...

Those named most frequently as the television news organization most trusted for accurate reporting in 2009 included: Fox News (30.0%), CNN (19.5%), NBC News (7.5%) and ABC News (7.5%). Fox News was also the television news organization trusted least. Just over one-quarter, 26.2%, named Fox News, followed by NBC News (9.9%), MSNBC (9.4%), CNN (8.5%), CBS News (5.3%) and ABC News (3.7%).


SHU National Poll: Trust and Satisfaction With the National News Media - Sacred Heart University

Fox News, however, was also deemed the least trusted news source, with 26.2 percent of respondents naming it untrustworthy. It was followed by NBC News, which 9.9 percent of those polled said they trusted least.

Castonguay said Fox's status as both the most and least trusted news source among those polled makes an interesting point about how polarized news audiences have become.

Interesting contradictions that also support what the Pew research found - more sharply divided and partisan audiences.

 

[Sinatra]

According to polling from last month, Fox News is the most trusted by a wide margin - and least trusted. Anyone at the top will enjoy a divisive audience.

It certainly drives the libs nuts - namely due to its enormous ratings lead...

Those named most frequently as the television news organization most trusted for accurate reporting in 2009 included: Fox News (30.0%), CNN (19.5%), NBC News (7.5%) and ABC News (7.5%). Fox News was also the television news organization trusted least. Just over one-quarter, 26.2%, named Fox News, followed by NBC News (9.9%), MSNBC (9.4%), CNN (8.5%), CBS News (5.3%) and ABC News (3.7%).


SHU National Poll: Trust and Satisfaction With the National News Media - Sacred Heart University

Sacred Heart University....mhhhmmmmhh

Even the polling review you linked to - the more dated one, shows Fox as losing the least percentage in the believability bracket than the other news outlets.

The fact remains Fox enjoys the largest audience on cable news, and is seen as both the most believable, and least believable - given to partisan divide of course. And if the trends of the last couple of years continue, Fox News will begin to rival the audiences of the network evening news programs.

Fox News averaged 2.25 million total viewers in prime time for the third quarter, up 2% over the previous year. That's more than CNN (946,000, down 30%) and MSNBC (788,000, down 10%) combined.

"The O'Reilly Factor" led all cable news programs with an average of 3.295 million total viewers for the quarter, up 12% over the previous year. "Hannity" (2.603 million, up 9%), "Glenn Beck" (2.403 million, up 89%), "On the Record with Greta van Susteren" (2.150 million, up 16%), and "Special Report with Bret Baier" (1.997 million, up 20%) rounded out the top five.



Read more at: Fox News Dominates 3Q 2009 Cable News Ratings

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Republicans are dumb as a box of rocks. Here is the real story...

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- White House communications director Anita Dunn fired back at criticism from TV commentator Glenn Beck on Friday, saying that a Mao Tse-tung quote Beck took issue with was picked up from legendary GOP strategist Lee Atwater.

White House communications director Anita Dunn she picked up Mao Tse-tung from a legendary Republican.

"The Mao quote is one I picked up from the late Republican strategist Lee Atwater from something I read in the late 1980s, so I hope I don't get my progressive friends mad at me," Dunn told CNN.

As for Beck's criticism: "The use of the phrase 'favorite political philosophers' was intended as irony, but clearly the effort fell flat -- at least with a certain Fox commentator whose sense of irony may be missing."

Obama aide fires back at Beck over Mao remarks - CNN.com

Here's an excerpt from her speech., please highlight that of which you're referring to.

"A lot of you have great deal of ability. A lot of you work hard. Put them together and that answers the why not question. There is usually not a good reason. And then the 3rd lesson and tip actually come from two of my favorite political philosophers. Mao Tse-tung and Mother Teresa, not often couple with each other, but the two people that I turn to most to basically deliver a simple point which is you’re going to make choices, you’re going to challenge, you’re going to say why not. You’re going to figure out how to do things that have never been done before. But here’s the deal, these are your choices, they’re no one else’s.

In 1947, when Mao Tse-tung was being challenged within his own party, on his plan to basically take China over, Chiang Kai-shek and the nationalist Chinese held the cities, they had the army, they had the air force, they had everything on their side and people said how can you win, how can you do this, how can you do this against all odds against you, and Mao Tse-tung said “You fight your war and I’ll fight mine.” Think about that for a second, you don’t have to accept the definition of how to do things and you don’t have to follow other people’s choices in the past. Okay. It is about your choices in your path, you fight your own war. You lay out your own path. You figure out what is right for you. You don’t let external definition how good you are internally. You fight your own war. You let them fight their’s. Everybody has their own path."

 

[Sinatra]

Republicans are dumb as a box of rocks. Here is the real story...

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- White House communications director Anita Dunn fired back at criticism from TV commentator Glenn Beck on Friday, saying that a Mao Tse-tung quote Beck took issue with was picked up from legendary GOP strategist Lee Atwater.

White House communications director Anita Dunn she picked up Mao Tse-tung from a legendary Republican.

"The Mao quote is one I picked up from the late Republican strategist Lee Atwater from something I read in the late 1980s, so I hope I don't get my progressive friends mad at me," Dunn told CNN.

As for Beck's criticism: "The use of the phrase 'favorite political philosophers' was intended as irony, but clearly the effort fell flat -- at least with a certain Fox commentator whose sense of irony may be missing."

Obama aide fires back at Beck over Mao remarks - CNN.com

Here's an excerpt from her speech., please highlight that of which you're referring to.

"A lot of you have great deal of ability. A lot of you work hard. Put them together and that answers the why not question. There is usually not a good reason. And then the 3rd lesson and tip actually come from two of my favorite political philosophers. Mao Tse-tung and Mother Teresa, not often couple with each other, but the two people that I turn to most to basically deliver a simple point which is you’re going to make choices, you’re going to challenge, you’re going to say why not. You’re going to figure out how to do things that have never been done before. But here’s the deal, these are your choices, they’re no one else’s.

In 1947, when Mao Tse-tung was being challenged within his own party, on his plan to basically take China over, Chiang Kai-shek and the nationalist Chinese held the cities, they had the army, they had the air force, they had everything on their side and people said how can you win, how can you do this, how can you do this against all odds against you, and Mao Tse-tung said “You fight your war and I’ll fight mine.” Think about that for a second, you don’t have to accept the definition of how to do things and you don’t have to follow other people’s choices in the past. Okay. It is about your choices in your path, you fight your own war. You lay out your own path. You figure out what is right for you. You don’t let external definition how good you are internally. You fight your own war. You let them fight their’s. Everybody has their own path."

Some in here will defend the indefensible to the very end...

 

[Lonestar_logic]

So according to this post Obama considers Fox News to be an arm of the GOP and thus the enemy.

When is Obama going to make friends with his opponents?

He's made friends with all of our enemies. When is he gonna start using this same philosophy and start making friends with other Americans?

FoxNews is the enemy of all Americans.

Prove it.

 

[nodoginnafight]

I done seen this shit a hundred times... I'm no fan of Mao Tse Dung (and that's the way I'm gonna spell it!), but this really ain't nothing new. George W. Bush recomended Karl Rove to read the man's autobiography.
They're all a bunch of tyrant worshipers... cause they're tyrants too.

So if one was to read the bio of lets say.. Hitler, that would make them a tyrant also? There is a big difference between reading Mao's book and claiming him as a favorite philosopher. Wouldn't you say?

Or quoting Mao on the campaign trail .....
or expressing any type of admiration for anything Mao said or did .....

My personal opinion is that being able to find something of merit in otherwise dispicable persons is not necessarily a bad thing. In this particular case I find using Mao to illustrate an example of someone who stayed true to his convictions in spite of those who attempted to sidetrack him with THEIR convictions is not a bad thing. I understand her comments to be a endorsement of staying true to your own principles and I don't have a problem with that.

It is all too easy to nitpick a line or two out of context, twist the purpose and the meaning and come up with something sinister. I think that's a common M.O. of a particular commentator who uses this tactic often.

It's still a molehill imho.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

I done seen this shit a hundred times... I'm no fan of Mao Tse Dung (and that's the way I'm gonna spell it!), but this really ain't nothing new. George W. Bush recomended Karl Rove to read the man's autobiography.
They're all a bunch of tyrant worshipers... cause they're tyrants too.

So if one was to read the bio of lets say.. Hitler, that would make them a tyrant also? There is a big difference between reading Mao's book and claiming him as a favorite philosopher. Wouldn't you say?

Or quoting Mao on the campaign trail .....
or expressing any type of admiration for anything Mao said or did .....

My personal opinion is that being able to find something of merit in otherwise dispicable persons is not necessarily a bad thing. In this particular case I find using Mao to illustrate an example of someone who stayed true to his convictions in spite of those who attempted to sidetrack him with THEIR convictions is not a bad thing. I understand her comments to be a endorsement of staying true to your own principles and I don't have a problem with that.

It is all to easy to nitpick a line or two out of context, twist the purpose and the meaning and come up with something sinister. I think that's a common M.O. of a particular commentator who uses this tactic often.

It's still a molehill imho.

I see, so you simply ignore the 62 million people that he was responsible for killing, because well he had stayed true to his convictions.

 

[Coyote]

So if one was to read the bio of lets say.. Hitler, that would make them a tyrant also? There is a big difference between reading Mao's book and claiming him as a favorite philosopher. Wouldn't you say?

Or quoting Mao on the campaign trail .....
or expressing any type of admiration for anything Mao said or did .....

My personal opinion is that being able to find something of merit in otherwise dispicable persons is not necessarily a bad thing. In this particular case I find using Mao to illustrate an example of someone who stayed true to his convictions in spite of those who attempted to sidetrack him with THEIR convictions is not a bad thing. I understand her comments to be a endorsement of staying true to your own principles and I don't have a problem with that.

It is all to easy to nitpick a line or two out of context, twist the purpose and the meaning and come up with something sinister. I think that's a common M.O. of a particular commentator who uses this tactic often.

It's still a molehill imho.

I see, so you simply ignore the 62 million people that he was responsible for killing, because well he had stayed true to his convictions.

Nice strawman.

 

[Vel]

Jake Tapper tweeted about the video and now Dunn is claiming that she was "joking".

It is remarkable the defense of this woman - she gives a pro Mao speech at a high school commencement ceremony.

And she is a top official/advisor in the White House - and a top advisor during his campaign. She ranks right below the architect David Axelrod. Anyone attempting to state she has no direct influence on Obama is outright lying.

ONCE AGAIN, we must ask why Obama surrounds himself with such people.

How many others are supportive of figures such as Mao - complete statists who controlled all facets of government and the daily lives of their people?

What is going on with this White House?

It's pretty much a a takeover of our government in the middle of two wars by enemies of the state.

Makes me wonder why we allow people like this to run for POTUS without having to pass a patriotism test and a background check. If you can't get a security clearance you shouldn't be allowed to run for POTUS.

In years passed, we had a national press corp that actually did their jobs so you didn't need some type of "patriotism test". The press used to be counted on to find the truth of who a candidate was and present it to the people. Not so in this last election.