You actually have to ask? What version of Fox News are *you* watching?

Let's take a deeper investigation into this shard of misfired cognition graciously defecated onto the forums by a profoundly lazy and delusional boy.

Here is an itemized list of everything that has not happened in this thread:

He thinks something significant has occurred that warrants even more of his non-specific and disjointed commentary.

He thinks a person exists who would be willing to accept the intellectual risk of siding with him in any debate.

He thinks he's done something.

He thinks anybody in this debate has an ulterior motive beyond what was literally written. He also thinks he's established the specifics of such a thing.

He thinks there exists a non-specific 'you' that disagrees with his opinion in variously non-specific ways so he doesn't have to actually learn or read anything.

He thinks sitting in an office chair typing vitriolic diatribes is equivalent to an 'action.'

He thinks there is evidence for the non-specific accusations being made by non-specific people toward a non-specific target.

He thinks that it is possible for him to learn and understand basic concepts such as literary criticism.

Based on this and other threads, he seems to believe this forum exists as an alternative to getting a real job or getting a real high school diploma.

I have on occasion changed my mind simply to avoid agreeing with Goldie.

Remember when Fox News decided to start saying "homicide bomber" in news reports instead of the far more useful and descriptive "suicide bomber" because they felt "suicide bomber" wasn't condemnatory enough? Yeah, those were good times.

Or the time that they kept cutting off the girl that, during that whole Georgia/Russia mess, corrected them in saying that it was the Georgians that were the aggressors.

Jon'C might hate me, but I love him.

I don't watch any news, but I think some of you are being a bit harsh on Wookie and Gold.

I find it hillarious that so many people here are commenting on Fox News manufacturing news when the most obvious recent examples that, and this is sincere, jump to my mind was the obviously manufactured false critical of George W Bush National Guard memorandum that CBS stood behind for awhile and the very recent manufactured slavery Limbaugh "quotations" that virtually every network except Fox carried and later quietly appologized for.

See, that's the difference. When other news networks make mistakes, they apologize, and punishment is dealt... When Fox makes things up and people call them out on it, those people are just unamerican. Fox then backs itself up with more editorializing and lying.

...you are proposing that we think CBS is good?

It's the oddest thing: the Fox News ticker has this strange glitch where it 'accidentally' calls corrupt or controversial Republicans 'Democrats.'

I'm sure Wookie06 and SF_GoldG_01 and friends are right and there's nothing at all suspicious going on.

After all, there's no way Fox would think an intelligent and affluent audience like the majority of voting conservatives wouldn't even know the parties of their own representatives. Right?

I am constantly amazed by how much Canadians care about American politics. Is it really that boring up there?

Haha. Joncy wins another thread.

Worse yet, some Canadians understand US politics better than most Americans do. PS I'm not talking about Jon'C.

What you are all missing is that, however much you may piss and whine about Fox news, it is recognized as a legitimate news source in the US. Therefore if the whitehouse is censoring a legitimate news source that affects EVERY OTHER news company out there.

I'm sure if this was NBC or CNN you'd all have your panties in a bunch.


The point is that this is a pretty heavy violation on the freedom of speech, whether or not you like the news company is completely irrelevant.

I don't suppose your research found any similar errors by other networks, did it? Although this is not the same as the glaring errors you post, I remember I was living in the San Joaquin Valley during the represtative Gary Condit / Chandra Levy scandal. The other news organizations routinely reported the scandalous tale of "the conservative representative" from California. I find that type of thing to actually be dishonest rather than some dolt obviously confusing political parties. Of course Fox went straight to the gutter and accurately noted his political offiliation. It has also been speculated that Fox News actually murdered the woman in order to fabricate a democrat scandal. This would be similar to the incident where Fox News contributed to George W. Bush driving intoxicated so they could later break the story on election eve in a sad attempt to display their lack of bias.

Well, I've got good news and bad news:

The bad news is that crying 'censorship' where none exists dilutes the very idea of censorship. Refusing an interview is not the same ****ing thing as being sent to a gulag for insulting the Glorious Leader. If you equate the most minor, petty **** with a strong crime you're only making it harder to stop the more egregious offenses.

The good news is that you aren't saying Fox reporters are Jews being shoveled into an oven by Black Hitler, so you're still a few steps up from Fox News. Pat yourself on the back; you've earned it.

Although I probably would generally agree with you more than disagree in this issue, there is a difference between refusing access and censoring. Of course had Bush made such blatant attacks against the far-left MSNBC it would have been widely reported similarly to what you are saying here.

I see. So... how many times does it have to happen before you'll ever think it's intentional?

Infinity times, because you're Wookie06?



Actually someone faxed an old police record to WPXT (Portland, Maine CW affiliate - a happy and productive Fox affiliate, right up until around the same time they broke the story... hmmmmmmm).

Of course Bill O'Reilly loves perennially trotting out that old chestnut. Fair and Balanced, you see. Because Newscorp totally had anything to do with it.

Really?

I don't remember anybody calling the RNC's moratorium on Daily Show and Colbert Report interviews 'censorship.' Cowardly, sure.

I guess I find it unremarkable that you are lumping comedy programs in with news media. Still, since I don't consider a lack of access to be censorship, I don't understand the relevance.

And I guess the answer to your other question would be three. Three times. You're right, they are making **** up.

Sorry, my recollection of the 2000 election has nothing to do with anything O'Reilly brings up. I just remember the news breaking.

Wait... are you kidding?

The fact that they are comedy shows doesn't make a difference... I really hope someone can say what I'm trying to....

Well, someone is going to say that they are as much news as Fox but beside the fact of how irrelevant they might be lack of access is not censorship. Or at least not when Chairman Obama does it.

Chairman Obama? Are you ****ing kidding me? You're crossing the ****in' line. You can go curl up with Glenn Beck and Sean Hannity and all those pathetic bastards all you want.

People like you are the reason I don't join the military.

I'm sure you probably call yourself a patriot.

Don't worry. Don't Ask, Don't Tell should be removed soon.

I like Glenn Beck and Sean Hannity. I also don't see what's so horrible about what Wookie said. I don't think he's saying Obama will kill 60 million people.

To be honest, I haven't heard any of my conservative idols use that language yet although I don't regularly check Coulter's website. I just want to make sure that I get Chairman, Premier, and Our Glorious Leader out there before they bring it into the mainstream and I'm accused of parotting the Talking Points.

Oh, and Anakin, you've just discredited yourself at The Daily Kossassi so you really shouldn't post in this thread anymore.

yeah, sorry there is no real freedom of speech issue here. if the whitehouse had granted and interview to fox news and then gone back and said "oh... about that interview, if you repeat any of it you will be thrown in prison" that would be censorship!



please, bush was called just as foul if not worse things. now i am not saying you are not entitled to your opinion just as much as wookie is, only that your being a bit of a ninny about it.

I can't begin to explain the amount of anger that comment creates... You personify everything that is wrong with the military.

You are a juvenile idiot. You shame my friends who have served this country honorably... I can't even find words to describe how ashamed I am of the fact that you wear the badge of my country.

Oh, and I've been wearing it for over two decades. I mean, if it bothers you so much that I represent this country in uniform, how much does it bother you that the American tax payer (which fortunately for many here basically only includes the "rich") is already committed to paying me every month until I die (and then wife if she has the audacity to live longer than I)? Maybe it will give you some comfort that I am about to embark on a fulltime student career in a university so there is some hope that I will be indoctrinated to pro-communist/Obamanism however my education and living expenses will also be entirely subsidised by the tax payer so it might not.

It must really suck to be so easilly offended. It might be mentally helpful to pretend you are a conservative for awhile. The attacks that many here, such as Jon'C, will level at you will soon jade your emotions and possibly make you a much more stable person.

How do you feel about the fact that the rich people in america have voted to decrease your pay again and again?

You guys need to get in on the Massassi conservative party.

Considering that my pay has increased every year since the 80s, pretty indifferent. It is funny that I recently came to an epiphany that democrats are better for the military than Republicans. Republicans generally vote for and approve so much additional funding that standards end up being lower and bonuses better so that more people that might otherwise get out or not come in, stay or join. When democrats rule the day, trucks might sit in the motorpool for months waiting for parts and few get bonuses but only those that really want to be here join or stay.

you might want to think about telling us just how Fox has been censored?

Because that's how I would have ended that sentence.

I can't be bothered with this anymore. Emon, Jon`C, somone...

Fox hasn't been censored. I don't understand your question.

Oh don't worry, whenever they wake up they'll be back to post some more material from media matters or whatever. Until then just sleep soundly under the protection of Our Glorious Leader.

What's with the capitalization of our glorious leader? Is that the new GOP? **** off man. You make my tax dollars look bad.

I wish I could write you off on my taxes.