DescentBB

tunnelcat wrote:So my middle finger gives a big salute....EFF YOU FOX NEWS AND PHIL GRIFFIN!.

LOL yes yes yes we all know that every problem in the world stems from George Bush and Fox news.

it is a shame though that you chose to lie to yourself and blame Fox News for Olberman breaking the terms of his Employment.

null0010 wrote:It's clear that this suspension is little more than a publicity stunt.

Naaaa, I don't think so. Olbermann seemed pretty angry on last Thursday. I think he was trying to make a point about FOX News and their aprox. 30 personalities that give donations to conservative candidates and call themselves the "Fair and Balanced" network, but the MSNBC chief didn't want to play ball this time. Worse, I think Keith was played.

Joe Scarborough asked for permission to make a donation to a conservative candidate in 2006 and was given permission to do so. Now I've heard that Keith DID ask for permission and didn't receive an answer in time for the elections, so he went ahead and did it. I think he was conveniently given the stall tactic by Griffin and THEN called onto the carpet. I smell a double standard at MSNBC.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/08/busin ... ?src=busln

Many here extol the virtues and truths of FOX News, but there needs to be a counterbalance to their outright corporate propaganda, which much of it is. Some of MSNBC's personalities may spout leftie propaganda, but at least it's back out there NOW for us to decide what's what.

CUDA, speaking of little Bushie, I've noticed that he's out there giving interviews to NBC's Matt Lauer (leftie my rear end) trying to buff up his crappy presidency for history with his 'Book of Delusional History Rewrites'.

tunnelcat wrote:

null0010 wrote:It's clear that this suspension is little more than a publicity stunt.

Naaaa, I don't think so. Olbermann seemed pretty angry on last Thursday. I think he was trying to make a point about FOX News and their aprox. 30 personalities that give donations to conservative candidates and call themselves the "Fair and Balanced" network, but the MSNBC chief didn't want to play ball this time. Worse, I think Keith was played.

Joe Scarborough asked for permission to make a donation to a conservative candidate in 2006 and was given permission to do so. Now I've heard that Keith DID ask for permission and didn't receive an answer in time for the elections, so he went ahead and did it. I think he was conveniently given the stall tactic by Griffin and THEN called onto the carpet. I smell a double standard at MSNBC.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/08/busin ... ?src=busln

Many here extol the virtues and truths of FOX News, but there needs to be a counterbalance to their outright corporate propaganda, which much of it is. Some of MSNBC's personalities may spout leftie propaganda, but at least it's back out there NOW for us to decide what's what.

CUDA, speaking of little Bushie, I've noticed that he's out there giving interviews to NBC's Matt Lauer (leftie my rear end) trying to buff up his crappy presidency for history with his 'Book of Delusional History Rewrites'.

TC, I realise that its always easier to blame someone else for your problems than to man up and say HEY I SCREWED UP. but if thats what helps your sleep at night have at it, although it does nothing for your credibility.

CUDA wrote:

Mjolnir wrote:

CUDA wrote:

null0010 wrote:

CUDA wrote:well I guess with 90% of the Media leaning left I can understand why the lefties dont like Fox it goes against the liberal indoctrination to have a News Media outlet that leans to the right.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_as ... orporation

and this effects the studies how?????

In a nut shell, enjoy your echo chamber.

Also, Wall Street Journal is a leftist paper? L O L. Now that is quite funny.

AH I see. your "OPINION" out weighs the "FACTS" of the study. I see how it works

Putting facts in sarcastic quotation marks was the correct thing to do, as Wall Street Journal is absolutely known as a right wing paper, that's why Fox News uses them as a source so much... it couldn't have something to do with Murdock owning both of those companies could it?

well you obviously didnt read the study now did you. either that or you dont pay attention. it was a 2005 study. Murdock didnt purchase the WSJ until 2007. so it would seem you were wrong in your assessment. but again dont let the facts get in the way.

Don't let the fact that your study is out of date but you were presenting it as if it were timely and correct get in your way, either.

I have to agree, I think FNC has taken considerable leaps to the right in that time frame. Hanity lost colmes, GB was brought in without any constraints. At that time W had just been reelected, so there really wasn't any need to be over the top, etc.

Gooberman wrote:I have to agree, I think FNC has taken considerable leaps to the right in that time frame. Hanity lost colmes, GB was brought in without any constraints. At that time W had just been reelected, so there really wasn't any need to be over the top, etc.

Although Hannity "lost" Colmes, Colmes still appears on FOX news as a "contributor" on a regular basis. He appears on the ORLY Factor as well as other shows. As a matter of fact I think he moved in with Mara Liasson and Juan Williams.

null0010 wrote:Don't let the fact that your study is out of date but you were presenting it as if it were timely and correct get in your way, either.

so because you dont read, that somehow invaliates the results of the study? because if you had even opened the link you would have seen that the first line of the article states 2005 not to mention I even quoted an article from 2002

A 2002 study by Jim A. Kuypers of Dartmouth College

but you apparently didnt read that either.

and I'm also guessing you didnt read the Wiki article, where it said this, which point directly to TC's whine about political donations,

These arguments intensified when it was revealed that the Democratic Party received a total donation of $1,020,816, given by 1,160 employees of the three major broadcast television networks (NBC, CBS, ABC), while the Republican Party received only $142,863 via 193 donations.[17] Both of these figures represent donations made in 2008

so to sum it all up. your lack of reading skills do not constitute an attempt at deception on my part.

I'm contemplating saving that pic of the angry person from faux newz on my computer xD

I read that Olbermann's 4 or 5 viewers got really ticked that happened.

AlphaDoG wrote:Although Hannity "lost" Colmes, Colmes still appears on FOX news as a "contributor" on a regular basis. He appears on the ORLY Factor as well as other shows. As a matter of fact I think he moved in with Mara Liasson and Juan Williams.

I agree, and admit to not being able to watch it as much. I tend to like most of FNC's "liberals," as they seem shoot pretty straight. But you have to admit that they are all very moderate-liberal thinkers. I.e., there is no counter to GB, Hanity, etc.

I\"ll agree with that about the Liberals.

Personally I think Hannity is an Ass, while I agree in principle with many of his stances his 1st choice of action is belittle and club someone instead of debate. on GB Honestly I've only watched his show twice. while I've found him interesting and he tries to base his show on History which I have a love for history. BUT, I have not had the chance to validate what he says.

CUDA wrote:BUT, I have not had the chance to validate what he says.

It's almost all nonsense word salad coming from that guy. Don't examine it too closely; you'll cry.