FOX & FOES

New York Post ^ | July 25, 2004

[RayChuang88]

July 25, 2004 -- Liberals sure don't like losing their longtime monopoly on delivering the news.

That's the message behind a recent rash of desperate reactions — from Al Franken's book and radio show to Robert Greenwald's new film screed "Outfoxed" — over the success of our sister company, Fox News Channel.

For years, liberals skewed coverage to the left, virtually unchecked, through outlets like The New York Times, CNN, PBS and NBC.

Then, in 1996, Fox came on the scene, offering "fair and balanced" reports — news that unabashedly permitted conservative as well as liberal viewpoints.

And whaddya know?

Fox became America's top-watched news channel.

[RayChuang88]

Given the fact that Fox News Channel's programs usually WAY out-draw the competition in terms of ratings, no wonder why there is so much envy from the mainstream media.

[beyond the sea]

For years, liberals skewed coverage to the left, virtually unchecked

I don't mean to be harsh, but the news is still virtually unchecked, and all Dem/liberal/socialist leaning. Don't kid yourself. Look at the way the Berger story has been "covered" (suppressed).

95% of Americans don't have a clue about the reality of what Berger did.

The liars are still lying and FoxNews is just a pimple.

Bush may have to come out and tell the American people about the scumbags in the mainstream media. They won't report WMD findings, they won't tell the truth about the a**hole Wilson, etc., etc.

George better speak up or he and WE lose in November!

[Viet-Boat-Rider]

I remember hearing a rumor that a conservative news channel was gong to be on the air. Hannedy & Colms was on some channels but I couldn't ge it. The Lib media did everything they could to prevent FOX from coming on line. Man, have they taken the airwaves by storm. Way to go FOX. God bless your guys.

[Reader of news]

Fox News is the best channel in the world. They do tell the news fair and balanced, not like CBS/NBC/ABC/CNN/etc.

[BallyBill]

Why don't these libs just move to canada, where the government can protect them from Fox.

[Cannoneer No. 4]

How do you know he hasn't been speaking up?

[Mike4Freedom]

Fox News is the best channel in the world. They do tell the news fair and balanced, not like CBS/NBC/ABC/CNN/etc.

Actually, FOX is just as biased as the mainstream media. It is just that their bias fits yours so you like them. If you want to know what is really going on, you have to read multiple sources and compare them. Resolve discrepancies with common sense. If you can't do that, then admit that you do not know what happened. In other words, assume that everyone is lying until proven otherwise. Example:Did Saddam try to buy yellowcake uranium from Niger? The story is so confused now that I would not blame you for throwing up your hands in disgust. But the final answer comes from the question-What would he do with it? He had no refining capability so it was useless to him. Thus no Niger uranium purchase or attempted purchase. Since this simple logic would have been obvious to the administration, we conclude that they lied to get the congressional authorization.

[Reader of news]

Fox News is the most watched news channel. It must be due to it's more balanced than the others.

[finnigan2]

Coincidentally, I happened to catch the first part of Ebert and Roeper's, "At The Movies" last night. They reviewed Outfoxed. After admitting that the movie wasn't even in theaters they still plowed ahead. I was curious, so I stopped to watch what they had to say. Roeper, after saying that it made all the right points, at least had the guts to give it a thumbs down. Ebert, whose Democratic credentials are impeccable went on and on about "how everyone knows that Fox is nothing but a mouthpiece for the Republican Party, yada, yada". I realized then that this was not really a review, just a chance for Ebert to turn a minute of the program into a political speech and that Roeper probably went along just to keep peace on the team.
The irony of it was startling. Here was Ebert, roasting Fox for being one sided and biased, engaging in the most one sided presentation himself. He probably didn't even realize his own stupidity.

[Issaquahking]

Having had close contact with FOX in the past, I will say they are simply the best and know what off-the-record is. Other not so mainstream news places continue to be Drudge, Sierra Times, World Net Daily and Klamath Bucket Brigade.org.

Welcome to FR!

[Chieftain]

Since this simple logic would have been obvious to the administration, we conclude that they lied to get the congressional authorization.

Hell, we'll just turn off the TV, quit surfing the net, and read your daily blurb and we'll have the truth, "because you got it all figgered out"!

Thanks to you, life will be so much easier!

Hey, here's an idea - start your OWN news agency/TV network/newpaper, Mike4Freedom IS THE MAN!

< /SARCASM>

[Dudoight]

Didn't the Israeli's bomb Saddam's nuclear gacility? He DID have one, didn't he?

[sc2_ct]

Actually, FOX is just as biased as the mainstream media. It is just that their bias fits yours so you like them. If you want to know what is really going on, you have to read multiple sources and compare them. Resolve discrepancies with common sense. If you can't do that, then admit that you do not know what happened. In other words, assume that everyone is lying until proven otherwise. Example:Did Saddam try to buy yellowcake uranium from Niger? The story is so confused now that I would not blame you for throwing up your hands in disgust. But the final answer comes from the question-What would he do with it? He had no refining capability so it was useless to him. Thus no Niger uranium purchase or attempted purchase. Since this simple logic would have been obvious to the administration, we conclude that they lied to get the congressional authorization.

--------------------------

FOX's commentators on the talk shows are often fairly Conservative, but if you'll notice, Hannity is presented with Colmes (left vs. right), O'Rielly is definately not a Conservative, but at least he thinks and honestly hates liars.

Almost every time they have a prominent Conservative on, they've also got a prominent Liberal to provide a counter-point.

Almost invariably their news reporting itself is quite balanced, giving point and counter-point while trying to betray the reporter's own bias as little as possible.

If FOX were a Conservative news channel, they'd have people like Pat Buchanan and Thomas Sowell on as commentators, or even give them their own shows (which I would LOVE to see).

When compared to the Left, sure, the middle sure looks like it's from the right. IMHO FOX does a remarkable job of balancing their coverage.

[Bear_in_RoseBear]

What would he do with it? He had no refining capability so it was useless to him. Thus no Niger uranium purchase or attempted purchase.

Your "logic" is flawed. Even if he had no refining capability himself, he could have planned to sell it to countries/regimes which did have refining capability, such as North Korea.

Sometimes the value of having a thing is the value of the thing itself, not whether you have any use for it.

[TheStickman]

Nice spin.

Can you actually call offering both sides a *bias*?

[TN4Liberty]

He had no known refining capability, but did not permit inspection to verify that.

He had lots of friends with refining capability.

He had secretly developed refining and enrichment capability in the past.

He had a history of developing the most deadly weapons he could develop, a category that nukes top.

He had R&D relationships with other terrorist ememies of the US.

Intelligence indicated that he may have been within months of having a nuclear capability.

He had delivery systems to get such weapons at least to our allies, if not to us.

Not so simple a problem as your analysis would imply. And the consequences of wrongly assuming he was benign were horrendous... perhaps enough to cost millions (yes millions) of lives and destroy our Republic.

[Dark Knight]

So, now there is a cable channel that puts up a right wing view of the news, along with dissenting views, and that's bad?

Did Saddam attempt to buy Yellow cake from Niger? He did. Wilson even said so.
http://frankwarner.typepad.com/free_frank_warner/2004/07/yellowcake_joe_.html
Is making weapons grade nuclear material tough? Sure. Is it impossible to anyone but the USA, Britain, France, Germany, Russia, Israel, India, Pakistan, North Korea...

Did Libya have an arrangement to make weapons grade material, in exchange for missiles, with three or more other countries in the ME? They did. The War on Terror busted them. Ghadaffi did not just say, "I want to be back in the world of regular nations." He knew his number was up.

You assumed Saddam had no refining capabilities. Why? It is 30's technology. By your own reasoning, assume Saddam was lying, and go from there.

By the way, Saddam already bought several hundred tons of yellowcake. Your analysis fails on the facts.

DK

[backinthefold]

**O'Rielly is definately not a Conservative, but at least he thinks and honestly hates liars. **

Maybe thats why some people thinks he is conservative, because he HATES lies, and will not tolerate them in any way, shape or form.... and doncha know, to be a lib, you MUST lie.

I cant help it, I am a HUGE O'Rielly fan, I dont agree with him 100%, but you have to admit, he gets to the point, and dont takes any crud from anyone he speaks with...

and he can laugh at himself, which I think makes him quite human.