What the hell is with Fox News?
It seems that they are stuck in the 1990s with the false hope that if they act "fair and balanced" by bending over backwards to give much time and attention to Democrats on their shows, they will somehow be rewarded. It was nauseating watching Geraldo Rivera preening for the camera last night and they seemed to have on more than a fair share of Democrats talking up the bill. Perhaps Fox News wants the cred of the liberal broadcasters they might hang out with or the one in their head.
But as long as they are not liberals, it's not going to happen, so they should focus on the viewers who are looking for a place where conservative or libertarian ideas are not seen as aberrant. Growing conservative and libertarian media, like PJTV, is more important than trying to act like liberal lite.
But as long as they are not liberals, it's not going to happen, so they should focus on the viewers who are looking for a place where conservative or libertarian ideas are not seen as aberrant. Growing conservative and libertarian media, like PJTV, is more important than trying to act like liberal lite.
Labels: health care, politics
posted by Helen at 12:18 PM
35 Comments:
Dr. Helen, really? I was watching "Fox News" here in Israel, and I was astounded at the bias against the bill and intellectual dishonesty committed by the anchors and commentators.
I grant that other television outlets are also biased, but isn't the ideal solution to be as neutral (or at least as fair) as humanly possible?
In a world in which most people only consume one television news-outlet, would this not be the best for society so each individual would be able to see all sides?
Then again, expecting a reasoned, nuanced debate on television is, well, an exercise in journalistic futility.
Samuel Scott (former journalist)
www.samueljscott.com
Why do you even watch TV news programming?
Seriously.
I'm with Bowen, I find so little content on cable TV at all and dealing with the cable system sucks so bad I'm about to ditch my Comcast entirely.
Save for a couple of items, network TV isn't even worth discussing (especially not its news programming), and in any event I can get networks free in HD over the air.
Samuel: Please be specific. I haven't seen it, but would like to know what you mean.
I too wish there was more intellectual integrity on the news channels (including their programming).
Take for example, Glenn Beck. While I agree with quite a bit of his position, I am embarrassed and ashamed at having such an obvious showman and academic sloth as the "voice" of Libertarianism/Conservatism.
I suppose that since most of America really does not understand important nuances such as the difference between correlation and causation, or the uselessness of ad hominem attacks, they may as well suckle up to the pablum offered up as " news" ("infotainment"?) on television programming.
I don't watch TV news to get the "news". I watch it to learn which propaganda the power mongers are force-feeding to the sheeple.
Today, after seeing "health care" rammed down America's throat that clearly was not wanted, I am feeling quite disappointed in "democracy". I truly hope that this will cause every person in America to get up off their sagging supersized backsides and vote those bastards out this fall. I fear that it will not happen, however.
TO: Dr. Helen
RE: Yeah....Right....
Growing conservative and libertarian media, like PJTV, is more important than trying to act like liberal lite. -- Dr. Helen
So why is it I can't comment on PJM anymore?
Someone ought to ask Charlie (Colorado) Martin about that.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[The Truth...it's out there.....]
Save for a couple of items, network TV isn't even worth discussing
What, aside, perhaps, from sports events, on network TV can you not get over the net? All TV programming is either on Hulu, on network websites, or can be downloaded from .torrent sites.
Samuel: Please be specific. I haven't seen it, but would like to know what you mean.
Here's a paste from a brief blog-entry of mine on the issue of intellectual dishonesty yesterday:
(quote)
The bill goes against the will of the American people. Well, how many times have Republicans passed bills that are not supported by a majority of Americans? A republican form of government cannot — and should not — be governed by polls.
The bill is the product of back-door politics and political dealings. Every major bill is the product of back-door politics and political dealings! Every congressman and senator knows this.
The bill institutes socialism. I have news for the Republicans — the United States has not been a purely-capitalist country ever since the federal government instituted “horrible” things like child-labor laws, minimum-wage laws, and workplace-safety regulations in the early twentieth-century. In economic terms, the United States has been a mixed-economy for a hundred years. I even doubt that the average Republican knows the actual definition of socialism — the government owning the means of production.
The agreement to ban federal funding of abortion comes through an executive order, which is only a “piece of paper” and would subservient to the statutory law as passed. Have Republicans not heard of court-upheld signing statements — loved, in fact, by President George W. Bush — that let the executive branch (wrongly in my opinion) enforce laws (or not) as it sees fit?
(end quote)
Now, this is not to say that I don't have any issues with the bill myself. I just wish the opposition-of-the-moment would stop pretending to be outraged when they do the exact same thing when they are in power.
Chuck, you can't comment on PJM because I told them you were a prick.
See you after the burial, princess.
Mr. Scott,
You're sadly one of those who believes he knows but really doesn't. You're just as intellectually dishonest as the ones you accuse.
The bill goes against the will of the American people. Well, how many times have Republicans passed bills that are not supported by a majority of Americans? A republican form of government cannot — and should not — be governed by polls.
The bill is the product of back-door politics and political dealings. Every major bill is the product of back-door politics and political dealings! Every congressman and senator knows this.
First off, the first two statements. You first say we are a republic. Granted, you are right but you're off to the matter of degree the founders intended. They intended for less democracy than we have now(after all, the States use to elect the federal senate).
However, in your next statement, you go on with how this should be expected. Once again it should be, but it's not how it ought to actually be.
The bill institutes socialism...
Once again, you are correct. However, your own diatribe acts as if there is no degree with it. When a Republican, libertarian, or conservative says they're for "capitalism" they're NOT saying they're for anarchy in the market place more oft than not. They're saying they're for reduced regulation and simplified regulation. Also, the average Democrat doesn't know the definition of socialism(Democrats not only have the most PhDs but also the most high school dropouts).
Furthermore, your own understanding of socialism is incomplete. Socialism not only can mean owning the means of production(Marx-style) but also the regulation of the means of production in such a way that it gives virtual ownership of the commodity or service(nation socialism, fascism). I would argue that this bill just happens to be very fascistic, turning insurance into pseudo-agents of the federal government.
As for your last point, I have no clue what you're attempting to say with it. Care to elaborate?
At the end of the day it's a question of degree. Most conservatives just don't like the same degree of a mixed economy as liberals do.
---
Now to address your first post, which is based far more on opinion than fact. I completely disagree with you. No news network, no human in fact, can be without bias. Bias will always find it's way into the reporting(let it be what stories get aired or the slant those stories take). Hence, I prefer the approach the English newspapers take, where the bias of each paper is well known and hence you can go into a story knowing what slant you'll be receiving.
I was disgusted with the utter glee that Geraldo was illustrating while he commented on the votes in the “house” last night. He was giddy with excitement as further destruction to our economy and our country was conducted in the late hours of the day. His condescending attitude toward those who wanted no part of this unconstitutional legislation was even more irritating to me. I watched one of the votes with my daughter and could only think of how this country will not me be the same one that I grew up in.
I see Samuel loves to sing the same old song that says "Well - George Bush did it!" and "Well, Republicans, blah, blah, blah!" What-EVER. Get over it. Bush isn't President anymore. Not EVERYONE was pleased with Bush's presidency - especially his last four years.
Just because GWB did something doesn't mean it's okay for Obama and his groupies to do the same thing. Geeze you people who spout off "But BUSH did it! BUSH did it! So YOU can't say anything!" act like a bunch of whining children. If you want to be so childish, why don't you think about what your mother told you - if George Bush and the Republicans jumped off a cliff, would you guys do the same? Sheesh - give it a freaking rest!
No President or Congress has EVER been LESS transparent than the Obama Administration and their idiot Democrat-led Congress - after Obama and Nasty Pelosi both promised to run a transparent administration - with stuff on C-SPAN and crap like that. So what do they do? They do EVERYTHING behind closed doors. EVERYTHING the man does has to be staged - with props that include busloads of PAID supporters, and gaggles of unsmiling, intimidating purple-shirted thugs standing around when he goes out to shill for his health care farse.
Hey - Bill Clinton isn't exactly what I would call a man of outstanding character, but Obama makes Clinton look like George Washington.
TO: Samuel J. Scott
RE: Yeah?
Now, this is not to say that I don't have any issues with the bill myself. I just wish the opposition-of-the-moment would stop pretending to be outraged when they do the exact same thing when they are in power. -- Scott
Show US where a Republican controlled Congress passed THIS monstrosity.
Go on. I defy you.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[The Truth will out. And Samuel isn't going to like it....one....little....bit...]
P.S. Satan....go to hell....
TO: All
RE: Heh
The REALLY funny thing is going to be watching the likes of Geraldo, Samuel, (local) Anne and so many others who were praising this POS when they suddenly realize THEY'RE the ones who are going to be suffering from it.
I had a side-bar 'exchange' with a 20-something 'progressive' at the local public forum on this matter last August.
She hadn't even READ the fool thing. But she 'loved' it. Talk about your classic 'True Believer'. However, when I said, let's see how much you 'believe' in it when you have a child of your own and the government decides it's not worth the effort to care for it.
Just a stunned expression on the young woman's face....was my only reply.....
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[Few people REALLY recognize a 'threat' until it actually smacks them where it hurts. -- CBPelto]
...and even fewer people recognize their stupidity when they're regularly thrown off a web site...over...and over...and over...
Your room's ready, punkin. As soon as you hear that first shovel of dirt hit the box, you're all mine!
Anybody looking for a really good laugh need merely use a good search engine and type in: "Chuck Pelto"+Chuck(le)
You'll get over 13,500 hits and see some of the insipid, brain-dead memos written by our favorite Jesus junkie and memo troll. If you have the stomach to deal with a terminal case of narcissism addled with snake-bit born again superstition, boy are you in for a treat!
...and he claims to wonder why this web sit is the last place on the Internet that tolerates his non sequitors and pomposity. Personally, I don't think anyone can achieve his level of stupid by accident. Chuck's brand of stupid is sheer talent (and genes that came out of a trailer park).
TO: All
RE: [OT] I Guess....
....and even fewer people recognize their stupidity when they're regularly thrown off a web site...over...and over...and over... -- Satan
....Satan doesn't recognize the reality of the situation: vis-a-vis, "the world will hate you because of Me".
Regards,
Chuck(le)
P.S. Satan.....we'll be seeing you, but not as you would care to think. How's your 'swan dive'? I know of a 'Lake of Fire' waiting for you and your ilk.....
P.P.S. Howz about you come round to www.comensarations.info and we can carry on this OT discussion without disturbing the rest of this society? Or is your 'pride' getting in your way....again....
Oh, I think it's far more interesting to let you make a total ass of yourself in front of the last group of victims still forced to put up with your pompous bullshit. Pseudointellectual smug goes over so well with the libertarian crowd.
Sam, you should read your own posts pal.
You criticize the inaccuracy of Fox news, then you say what they stated, then you agree with it!
And your definition of socialism and how the so called health care screw up is NOT socialism is a distinction without a difference.
Trey
TO: All
RE: [OT] As I Was Saying....
....Satan has an issue with 'pride'. It's one of the mortal sins, ya know.
So, as I suggested earlier, 'to hell with him'. Gutless flock that he is.
'nuff said on THAT.
RE: Back On Topic
Earlier it was mentioned about not bothering with television.
As I've stated before, numerous times in all my 13+K comments, I killed my television back in '97. And I'm glad for it. And probably much smarter. Certainly much more so than some other 'characters' around these here parts {nudge-nudge, wink-wink}.
Fox may be okay. But they are STILL 'major media' and subject to the economic-socio-political pressures put upon them. I prefer to get solid information from reliable sources on the web. From people not obliged to get essential monies from such communications.
On the other hand, maybe Fox had Geraldo on because they knew he'd make an ass out of himself. After all, he DID do that...based on reports by Dr. Helen and others in this thread.
And, as I stated earlier, they'll learn their lesson 'the hard way', when the government starts euthanizing their loved ones. Or themselves.
I'm just wondering how much longer it will be before we start seeing (1) organ harvesting, vis-a-vis Larry Niven's 1970s writings, and/or (2) Soylent Green?
They can't be too far away now that the government has control of the medical industry.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[Voice over PA: First stage removal. First stage removal. Streets prohibited to non-permits in one hour. Streets prohibited to non-permits in one hour. -- aggressive 'curfew' as practiced in Soylent Green]
Dear Helen:
Pj media is a conservative site. It says it is. It is proud it is. Fox, though owned by the very conservative Murdoch, along with his other places, wants to give the impression it claims publicly day after day: Fox is fair and balanced. Now I don't think that is the case at all, and clearly that station is known as conservative, but they themselves choose to try to be identified as Fair and Balanced. So that is why they do what they do that you object to but which seems in their best interests.
Samuel makes a very common error of non-Americans and even many Americans; he fails to realize that the US Constitution created a federal government of LIMITED powers. These limits slowly been eroded, largely by liberals, but also by conservatives who prefer power over principal. The plain reading of the US Constitution finds that the health care bill violates those limits in dozens of ways. Even how the bill was passed violated the plain reading of the Constitution.
Another thing many people fail to respect is that the power of the majority can easily become a tyranny of the majority. One of the most extreme examples of which was the Reign of Terror following the French Revolution.
A more vivid example is what if Congress passed a law with an overwhelming majority prohibiting any American from posting comments on blogs. Using the logic of Samuel and others, the majority has spoken! Oh, but I hear the protests, that's clearly unconstitutional. Well, so is the health care bill. I'd maintain this even if the health care bill was otherwise the greatest thing ever invented.
If Congress is permitted to get away with this, what will stop them next time?
TO: PoliticalJunkie2008, et al.
RE: Well....
So This is How Liberty Dies…With Thunderous Applause: -- PoliticalJunkie2008
....I'm reminded of a famous observation from over 200 years ago....
Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide. -- John Adams
We're witnesses to the truth of it.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[History repeats itself. That's one of the things wrong with history.]
P.S. This begs the question....
How do we restore our representative republic?
I wondered what would be the result of the come-to-Obama meeting with Ailes and Murdoch.
Maybe we're seeing it now.
Forget fair and balanced. They need to get Democrats on the show simply to avoid becoming an Echo chamber.
@Prime Designer: Well said! FoxNews has become self-parody. They all sound like a pack of whining little boys hiding from the world in their tree house.
PS: Congrats to the Canadians who kept fascist media whore Ann Coulter from spewing her Nazi invective in Ottawa!
It's always humorous to see someone exercise their freedom of speech by applauding someone losing theirs. It's all the more comedic when the word Nazi (and thus fascism) is thrown around. It's almost like that person doesn't understand what some words, concepts or rights mean.
TO: The Other Joe, et al.
RE: Either That....
It's almost like that person doesn't understand what some words, concepts or rights mean. -- The Other Joe
....or they're a hypocritical agent of Satan.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[Where there is no religion, hypocrisy becomes good taste.]
Other Joe: Coulter was in Canada, not your trailer park. No freedom of speech lost.
Other Asshole: Pound salt, hayseed.
Bill O'Reilly used to have some fire and passion, now he's just a lightweight who tries to play the centrist angle. He's a phony.
It's obvious he's closer to the end of his career and he made his money so none of the stuff that affects us proles is of concern to him.
I appreciate what he did over the years, especially on illegal immigration, but he's past his due and we need someone new. Glenn Beck has good ideas and exposes these radical leftist crooks running our country but he comes off like an unhinged crazy man sometimes which undermines his credibility and makes him easy to ridicule.
Hannity has always been in the tank for the Republicans so basically he just rants in an echo chamber.
We need new blood on FOX, or even better, a new channel. Why only just FOX? There's obviously a market for right-wing news. People are tired of hearing the same old liberal drivel that we get from the liberal idiot media.
I'm a mean old self proclaimed conservative Libertarian Bastard also living in Knoxtown on the Banks of the Mighty Tennessee River.
A friend of mine linked to your blog commentary on FOX News and I wandered over here to take a look.
I don't agree with almost anything you and your commenters have to say here, but I respect your right to say it and by the way, if I ever ran into you in public I would run up, say hello, and possibly shake and kiss your hand because you're a dang fine looking woman, and there's always hope for your philisophical redemption because like so many other people in history you will most likely mellow with age and learn from your mistakes.
Keep writin', and we'll keep readin' and enjoy the polite yet spirited discourse...
No, Satan, Free Speech was lost. You know, that inalienable right. You see, free speech isn't something given you by the government, but taken away.
Fred is most correct -- "Fair and balanced" means, at best, some rabid Republicans and some rabid Democrats.
Preferably with some moderates looking at facts, mostly, with less analysis.
It was good of Fox to have some Dems, they should possibly have more. And critics should be asked what TV news they like, and how many Reps are on those shows.
Post a Comment
<< Home