Idiots Rule
Nevada's Democratic Party just announced plans to let Fox News host a presidential primary debate.
Yes, please, Bill O'Reilly can write the questions and Sean Hannity can pose them. Then we can listen to jerk-offs mispronounce Barack Obama's name accidentally-on purpose or spread lies about the good Senator attending a terrorist school.
Sign this petition asking the Democratic Party of Nevada to 1) get its collective head out of its collective ass and 2) drop Fox as its partner for the presidential primary debate.
posted by kate @ 5:53 AM
22 comments
22 Comments:
come on girl, fox is nowhere near as bad as people say. O'reilly is much more independent than media matters says. He is a traditionalist, but he is clearly independent.
Besides, it will probably be Chris Wallace or someone like that doing the debate.
Fox is awful. They claim to be fair and balanced when they are most certainly tilted toward the right.
No thanks.
Kate,
So i suppose that you believe that stephanopolis, john stewart, keith olbermann, chris matthews, and the rest of the mainstream media is perfectly fair and balanced.
The only difference between fox and the rest of the networks, is that they will actually put a traditional belief person on tv as a host. No other network will even consider it.
Now if it was based on viewership for each show, fox would be conservative. B/c O'reilly, who fully discloses that he is a traditionalist independent, has the most viewers, and hannity, who fully discloses that he drinks the kool-aid of the right, is the second most viewed.
Greta, and shepard smith are moderate democrats, who still report mostly middle road, and alan colmes for that matter is liberal. I dont know anyone outside prime time, but when i used to watch the business block on saturday mornings, it was fully split 50/50.
Yeh, it doesn't sound like a good idea, but it might get some people to watch.
Oh, I can not resist this one.
Rich, thank you for standing up for FOX News. I do not know where people get the idea that the good people at FOX are somehow right-wing mouth pieces. I mean come on, Roger Ailes shoots straight down the middle of the isle. John Gibson is as middle-of-the-road as one man can be. Sheppard Smith is all about fairness and Chris Wallace is beyond reproach, I mean look who his father is—Mike Wallace is the father of straight reporting. Sean Hannity’s balanced approach is legendary, and, well, Alan Combs is not attractive enough to a valid point of view, so he really does not count. Bill O’Reilly can be a bit gruff and to the point, but he has a heart of gold and a mind as open as a big empty space. And that Brent What’s-His-Face guy is really something special. He doesn’t have a biased bone in his head.
So to those of you who might bash the networks, MSNBC, CNN and FOX, thinking the top brass are right-wing conservatives, think again. Right-wingers are wealthy people who cherish their money and think they earned it themselves. Everyone knows the very definition of wealth implies reliance on others; therefore it is impossible for even a single person to be a self-made millionaire. You know it and I know it.
And liberals get it through your fat heads, conservatives are compassionate and FOX NEWS is Fayer and Balanized.
goader and dave, there is no even arguing with you on this. You two are clearly brainwashed by the media matters and dailykos and moveon.org folks.
I will leave it at that, and just tell you to look at the ratings. Fox primetime averages 1.3 million to 2.4 million viewers, depending on the show. CNN averages 600K to 1.2 million viewers on primetime, and MSNBC, well that station averages 350K to 600K primetime viewers, they are the joke of the cable news industry.
When you tout numbers to defend Fox News, just remember: the masses are asses.
Except when they rush to read my sh*t. Then it's just good sense.
I think we would do well to remember that neither party is as much a national party as a collection of state organizations. The Nevada Dems should be trusted to do what's best for Dems in Nevada. I say this from the vantage point of someone splitting time between Mn and FL. Minnesota's Republican governor would be painted as a far left wacko in FL because of his environmental, transportation, and tax positions. I can hear it now- "Yes he's pro-life but he's such a commie on everything else."
Yes I realize trusting the left in Nevada, which is far to the right of me, is a scary proposition with the emergence of the Inter-Mountain West as an electoral factor as important as the South. However, if you really want to drive western folks into the arms of the Reps have a bunch of people from other places sign a petition telling them what to do.
Calling any of the cable media outlets a "news" station is being very overly generous. CNN is nearly as tabloid and slanted as Fox these days. The local stations are a bit better, but I fear it's only a matter of time before they're beyond help as well.
Only a Republican would call O'Reilly an Independent.
Rich,
Are you serious? I am a conservative. O'Reilley is a conservative and Hannity is an extreme right wing conservative. For both of these individuals, the word liberal is a bad word. So to try to tie the word Independent to either one is pathetic. O'Reilley has done some good things, especially after 911 when he went after the Red Cross.
As an American, to think members of the opposite party are bad, evil, or want our country to lose a war is unamerican. We are a great nation because we have two parties whose position are different. If one party is in full control, the country loses, as is painfully evident from our current situation domestically and abroad!
Under Reagan, both parties got along and were civil to one another. Under our current president, that has ended. He promised to be the uniter and will go down in history as one of the biggest dividers this country has ever had.
I would be curious to see what I have said that you disagree with as I can defend every statement with a barage of facts and then some.
davidl,
first, i never called hannity an independent. Why dont u actually read my earlier posts. O'reilly is a "traditional independent", you have NO facts that he is conservative, and if you actually read up on his positions, you would see he is independent. Oreilly only barages "secular progressives", which are the 10%-20% of our population that wants the US to become Sweden or France, and believe in something called restorative justice, even for horrendous felons.
Other than that, i dont disagree with any of your other points.
Rich—
I have been trying to figure out what you mean when you say: “The…difference between fox and the rest of the networks,...they will…put a traditional belief person on tv as a host.” What exactly is a “traditional belief person”?
I swear you neo-cons produce more labels than a Brother PT-9500PC industrial labeler. I cannot keep up with all the different names you folks have for those who disagree with you.
traditional belief people represent about 60-80% of the population, believe generally in personal responsibility, and want "generally" the govt not to control absolutely everything. They believe that society does have to set some basic moral guidelines to live by (as opposed to sweden, france), and thus implement laws limiting drug use, sex crimes, etc. These people generally believe that america is a noble country that does from time to time make mistakes.
the opposite is "secular progressives", im sure you have heard that term. It represents the people who believe america was flawed to begin with, needs major changes, moral relativity, no judgements on virtually any action, you know, stuff like that.
With the exception of legalizing mary jane, and prostitution, i am a traditionalist. (im sure you knew that one)
Count me a traditional belief person.
May I take issue with something you said, traditional belief person to traditional belief person? You stated: “No other network will even consider it” (put a traditional belief host on TV). You must have mistyped; you certainly are not implying that Wolf Blitzer—for example—does not believe in personal responsibility, does not to want limit government, does not believe society must set some moral standards, or does not believe the United States is a noble country, are you?
goader, I probably mistyped. I meant conservative beliefs person.
I pursue the smartass route in order to initiate argument or debate. Since I have already used that one on this particular post I will continue in a more civil tone here. However, you have exposed yourself to one major political wupass.
If only lily-livered liberals (bless their peace-lovin’ souls) would stand up, challenge neo-cons and right-wing bigots, hold their feet to the fire and not let them change the subject, we, more moderate types, would control the debate more often. The other side of the isle has become masters at these very strategies.
You have seriously mixed your metaphors in a post further up the line. You did what many in your camp do: You use a broad brush to paint the opposition into a corner—and it is very effective. However, unlike some of the other so-called liberal pundits, I am not going to let you get away that easy.
You clearly implied that most hosts at the cable networks other than FOX are anti-American, immoral and do not believe in personal responsibility. Further, your implication suggests many who disagree with your political views fall in to that category. You are in good company though, since President Bush and his cronies are guilty of the same offense.
I resent the fact that those on the other side of the political aisle than I am continually spout inaccurate characterization of their opponents. I can’t say I blame you though, since my group usually rolls over and doesn’t adequately call you on it. Really, my side is such a bunch of wimps.
When Howard Dean, a real man with balls, succeeded in becoming a viable candidate, the Republican machine did a masterful job of shooting him down. All I can say now is congratulations on that one. But for god’s sake, is their no other candidate with similar attributes? Do we have to wait another decade for someone with courage of his or her convictions to once again enter the arena? I’m sorry I am off a rant, jeeze, my group sure are a bunch of panty wastes.
Liberals, Democrats, and free-thinking, open-minded people everywhere take heed. When one challenges conservative, right-wing Republican, and close-minded opponents by pointing out the flaws in their positions, they usually shut down. The present string of comments is a good example of that fact. Do not let right-wing neo-cons and the like get away with spout inaccuracies—call them out and set them straight.
goader, what the hell are you talking about? Exactly how did i shut down?
You talked about my mistyping, which i admitted and was certain that i did, considering i am currentytly working 40 hrs per week, and studying for a professional exam another 30 hours per week, so i can then be called one of the "fortunate" if i pass.
Then you ranted about Howard Dean, which has nothing to do with me. So what would i actually respond to? You think everytime i decide there is no need to continue a string, that you won and i gave up. Not quite there idiot.
Looks like somebody woke up on the wrong side of the rock;-)
that commercial is hilarious!!!!!
Post a Comment
<< Home