I knew I wasn't the only one pissed at Fox! LOL

[Vicki]

Although, I'd rather it were David Tennant. I don't like Matt Smith.

 

[lwien]

There are a LOT of things regarding Fox News that drives me up a wall, but one of the BIGGEST things is what they say about themselves.

"Fair and Balanced"
"The No Spin Zone"

Hell, they spin their news in the most unfair and unbalanced way than anyone else other than MSNBC.

But what really gets me is their constant whining, bitching and complaining about how biased the so called mainstream media is. Um................excuse me, but....... you're not biased?

They take whining and the term "pot calling the kettle black" to a whole new level. It is sooooo fucking transparent that I find it almost impossible for any of their "serious" viewers to take them seriously but their serious viewers DO take them seriously, and THAT's kinda scary 'cause that means that there's just wayyyyy too many blind people who cannot think rationally in this world.

Fox News is doing a parody of themselves, and they themselves don't even realize it.

And, btw, while I'm on this rant (thanks to you Vicki ), what's also amazingly transparent is when the Republicans accuse the Democratic President of doing the exact same thing that their Republican President did in the past, while the Democrats accuse the Republicans of doing the exact same things that they themselves have done in the past and the worst part about it is that there are many, many people that really buy into this bullshit. And the absolute best place to see how this gets played out is The Daily Show. Stewart points this crap out in just about every show he does.

Fair and balanced in the no spin zone?

 

[Vicki]

This is why I never trust Fox News, and why I slam them all the time. They are so screwed up it's crazy!! They have since changed the title of this article.

Here is a link to Fox News. The "new title" is right on the home page.

http://www.foxnews.com/

The title now says, "Obama backs gay marriage."

 

[lwien]

It's about fucking time and will further separate him from the Conservative Right. Good for him.

Could this cost him the election or increase his chances of winning? I think that Biden pulled the trigger a bit too soon and Obama came out with this stance before he really wanted to but now that the cat is out of the bag, I applaud him.

But I still think that he believes it's a state issue and not a federal issue, so I don't know how much this will actually change things, but back on topic............Fox News---War on Marriage, from the No Spin Zone.

Even they had to step back from that one. Maybe, just maybe, they're beginning to see that they are becoming a parody of themselves, eh?

 

[Vicki]

Fox News---War on Marriage, from the No Spin Zone.

Even they had to step back from that one. Maybe, just maybe, they're beginning to see that they are becoming a parody of themselves, eh?

One can hope, but it's doubtful, unfortunately.

 

[lwien]

I don't know Vicki. Before you ever posted this, I was beginning to see just very small changes from them.........not from Hannity 'cause he's a Conservative Right Winged zealot (much in the save vain as Olbermann is on the left) with absolutely no credibility as far as I'm concerned, but O'Rielly seems to have pulled back..............just a little bit, along with supporting commentators. Make no doubt, he still spins things like crazy and he's not Fair and Balanced, but the scales don't seem to be tipping as far as they did a year ago.

It's a simple money game. I believe that the country is becoming more socially liberal. It's the way things are heading, and the acceptance of Gay Marriage is but one indication of this, and Fox News, in the long run, doesn't want to lose any potentially new viewers while at the same time not wanting to alienate their current viewers, so little by little, I do think that they will relax their socially conservative stance on issues such as this but the changes will be small and incremental.

I do think that if this happened 2 years ago, they would have gone with their initial headline.

 

[Vicki]

I don't know Vicki. Before you ever posted this, I was beginning to see just very small changes from them.........not from Hannity 'cause he's a Conservative Right Winged zealot (much in the save vain as Olbermann is on the left) with absolutely no credibility as far as I'm concerned, but O'Rielly seems to have pulled back..............just a little bit, along with supporting commentators. Make no doubt, he still spins things like crazy and he's not Fair and Balanced, but the scales don't seem to be tipping as far as they did a year ago.

And then they go and do something like this. I'll be keeping an eye on them, as I always do.

 

[lwien]

And then they go and do something like this. I'll be keeping an eye on them, as I always do.

Yeah, but they pulled back from their original headline. I don't think they would have done that a few years ago.

 

[turk]

...I've only watched "fox news" once...at ohare airport...chicago..before obama was pres....flight was delayed by storm 6hours..it's all they would play on the monitors...I'm an atheist but if there's a hell..(and there's not)....that was it...I was with a gf...our relationship didn't survive this trip...being stuck at ohare listening to these idiots babble on for hours was just too much.....this is NOT news...it's the republican national committee report...and I'm NOT a democrat..

 

[lwien]

....this is NOT news...it's the republican national committee report...and I'm NOT a democrat..

Fox News = Stealth Republican Super Pac

 

[turk]

....in europe I believe, they are re-examining their relationship with mr. murdoch...here...they want to give him a medal....the interesting thing is most find it perfectly acceptable for one man/corp to control most major "news" outlets/formats...because he has no bias, and is only interested in reporting the facts....yeah right.

 

[lwien]

....in europe I believe, they are re-examining their relationship with mr. murdoch...here...they want to give him a medal....the interesting thing is most find it perfectly acceptable for one man/corp to control most major "news" outlets/formats...because he has no bias, and is only interested in reporting the facts....yeah right.

And the hypocrisy there is that they will vehemently complain that George Soros exerts too much control over his media associations.

Fox News is the definition of hypocrisy.

 

[djonkoman]

an american president backing gay marriage? that was about time... when I as a kid first found out gay marriage isn't as normal as straight marriage I was surprised. here it's already legal for a while tough(once read we were actually the first in europe to allow full marriage, but I think the danes were first with some kind of marriage-like construction... kind of makes me think of cannabis prohibition where we now have some legalisation-like/aproaching things like our gedoogpolicy and the medical marijuana system, gives me hope for the future, that once we cam look back on it like gay marriage, or in the US alcohol prohibition)

 

[turk]

...what country are you in?...in the american model religion plays a dominant role in this sort of thing...and religion is NOT known for its tolerance of those that don't mimic the dogma...that said, frankly I'm a bit surprised...this guy has made a career out of never taking a stand on anything...so I'm surprised he did now...(I've yet to see him address black unemployment numbers.)...that said it certainly was the correct position...don't think it's enough to make me vote for him though...

 

[lwien]

.....in the american model religion plays a dominant role in this sort of thing...and religion is NOT known for its tolerance of those that don't mimic the dogma...

Not all religions.

Biden may have pushed the agenda forward, but Obama's move on this was ballsy non-the-less. It WILL cost him votes in states such as North Carolina which just voted to ban gay marriage. The question is if this will energize his base along with the youth vote and if this will overcome the potential loss of votes of "some" independents. Gutsy move.

 

[turk]

...not sure about the "gutsy" part....he's stil lost me....unions..the housing crises...no aids to cities/but plenty for banks...no jobs for black youth...I could list more....I'm still pissed.....

 

[lwien]

It was a gutsy move on stating how he felt about gay marriage. Never meant to imply that all of his moves are gutsy.

 

[turk]

...point taken....

 

[djonkoman]

...what country are you in?...in the american model religion plays a dominant role in this sort of thing...and religion is NOT known for its tolerance of those that don't mimic the dogma...that said, frankly I'm a bit surprised...this guy has made a career out of never taking a stand on anything...so I'm surprised he did now...(I've yet to see him address black unemployment numbers.)...that said it certainly was the correct position...don't think it's enough to make me vote for him though...

it does depend on the interpretation of the religion.
I live in the netherlands, officuially we are a protestant country. my fathers whole family is christian, and they still support gay marriage.

there has been some controverse tough, I think it was a few years back, when a member of a small christian party(the CU, christian union) said something against homosexuality or so, I don't really remember what he said but I think it was something along the lines that it was okay to be gay but not to show it(like the don't tell, don't ask policy in the US military

an example of how the interpretation can change:
when women viting rights were introduced here, the christian parties were morally/fundamentally against. the others didn't have a sufficient majority to change ot of the christian parties voted against. but at the same time there was an issue around schools. the christians wanted their own se[erate christian schools, while the others wanted public schools for everyone.
so they struck a deal. the non-christian would vote in favor of christian schools, abd in turn the christians would abstain from voting for the women voting rights(because of their principles they didn't want to vote in favor, but by abstaining from voting they still gave the others enough majority)

so at that time, women voting rights must've been similar to how gay marriage now is viwed in the US. but by now you won't see members of our biggest christin party saying anything against women voting rights. only the SGP, our most radical christian party(with their powerbase in the biblebelt), is still against women voting rights, altough now only against passive voting rights, not active voting rights.