I surely do not trust this guy to tell me the truth about anything!
Posted on 10/19/2009 9:50:31 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Last week, when White House communications director Anita Dunn charged the Fox News Channel with right-wing bias, Fox responded the way it always does. It denied the accusation with a straight face while proceeding to confirm it with its coverage.
Take a look at Fox's own Web story on the episode. It begins by quoting a Fox News senior vice president named Michael Clemente, who says: "It's astounding the White House cannot distinguish between news and opinion programming. It seems self-serving on their part." Then it quotes David Gergen, the gravelly voice of Washington's conventional wisdom, who says the attack diminishes President Obama and works to Fox's benefit. Then we hear from Tony Blankley, Newt Gingrich's former press secretary and a frequent Fox contributor, who agrees that criticizing Fox makes no sense: "Fox has an audience of not just conservatives. They've got liberals and moderates who watch too." Then a White House correspondent for Politico echoes the claim that the controversy will boost Fox's ratings. Then comes an old quote from Fox anchor Chris Wallace, who calls Obama's team "the biggest bunch of crybabies I have dealt with in my 30 years in Washington." Then the story's anonymous author cites a joke Obama made at the White House Correspondents Dinner as evidence "that Fox News has gotten under his skin." Finally, the piece cites a Pew study that suggested that while Fox was equally negative about John McCain and Obama during the last six weeks of the 2008 campaign, CNN was more negative about McCain.(continued)
(Excerpt) Read more at slate.com ...
The Partisan Liberal Media gets angry, very angry, when challenged. In their minds, they have a right to tell the rest of us what to think without interference.
LOL...morons
These brainless attacks on Fox have got to stop. What’s with this Democrat who wrote this article? Can’t he respect another opinion? Can he possibly be anything else but a Democrat and liberal who voted for Obama? So why should I take him seriously?
All of the other so-called “news” programs reflect a liberal bias. Why is Fox the only bad actor in the whole bunch?
I think Jacob bites his pillow.
Does Fox News still call Palestinian terrorists “Homicide Bombers?” I love that....calling them suicide bombers is skewing the intent of the action.
Here’s the part that is most difficult to swallow. The “false stories have not been identified, have not been adressed, no specifics noted. It seems to me, that at some point, some specific example would emerge....there hasn’t been any. That is why people side with FOX News ( lies yet to be proven) vs. Obama Administration ( lies proven every day, many, many very specific lies, too many to count). It doesn’t take a genius to figure this one out.
I have a small question for the Left Wing media’s relentless attempts to push Communism. Do they think they will be part of the “elite” when the State becomes a dictatorship?
Where is Liberal “heaven”?
Slate just wants more company down in ignored news outlet hell.
Their argument across the board is - We don’t like the messenger, so you all should ignore the message.
I can’t figure out if these guys really buy into what they’re saying or if they are just the “bullies” that CNN accuses Rush of being.
Jacob:
Moe mindless “my brother is bigger than your brother” crap.
Instead, why don’t you explain to us how bad Glenn Beck is because he played tapes of Anita whats her name bragging that her inspiration is Mao and Glenn asking the question “Why are people like Anita” in the White House (or is it the Red House?).
Then you might explain why Glenn is bad because he showed a tape of Lloyd speaking of how much he admires Chavez and the manner in which Chavez handled the media when he was being criticized in public by his opponents.
And there are a few other questions when you have time.
Pravda would be proud.
They want the old days of walter and dan lying to us because thats the way it is
Anita Dunnage was right: FOX news really IS biased.
They report facts, and the arena of factual reality is exclusively held by conservatives. ABCNBCCBSCNNMSNBC will never understand, because their tiny liberal minds can only process the irrational, the fabricated, and the wishful thinking that makes up liberal reality.
Jacob Weisberg (born 1964) is an American political journalist, serving as editor-in-chief of Slate Group, a division of The Washington Post Company, and a columnist for the Financial Times. He served as the editor of Slate magazine for six years, until stepping down in June 2008.[1] He is the son of Lois Weisberg, a Chicago social activist and connector celebrated in Malcolm Gladwell’s book The Tipping Point. Weisberg’s father, Bernard Weisberg, was a prominent Chicago lawyer and, later, judge. His parents were introduced at a cocktail party by novelist Ralph Ellison.
Weisberg is a frequent commentator on National Public Radio and also writes a weekly column for the Financial Times. He previously worked for The New Republic in Washington, D.C., was a contributing writer for The New York Times Magazine and a contributing editor to Vanity Fair. Early in his career, he worked for Newsweek in the London and Washington bureaus. Weisberg has also worked as a freelance journalist for numerous publications.
The creator and author of the Bushisms series, Weisberg published The Bush Tragedy in 2008. He is also the author, with Robert Rubin, of In An Uncertain World (2003). Weisberg’s first book, In Defense of Government, was published in 1996.
Weisberg graduated from Yale University in 1986, where he worked for the Yale Daily News. When a junior, he was offered a membership in Skull and Bones by Senator John Kerry, but declined the offer, citing the club’s exclusion of women.[2] Instead Weisberg was persuaded by The Washingon Post’s Robert G. Kaiser to join Elihu Society instead.[3] After Yale he attended New College, Oxford on a Rhodes Scholarship.
Weisberg moderated a 2007 debate between Al Sharpton and Christopher Hitchens. This debate hit the news after Al Sharpton made a comment that seemed to charge that Mormons did not “really believe in God.” The moderator, Weisberg, was noted to have also made critical comments regarding Mormons, and in particular presidential candidate Mitt Romney.[4] Weisberg authored an opinion piece on Slate in which he argues it is not bigoted to refuse to vote for a Mormon, especially one who believes in the “founding whoppers of Mormonism.”[5] He also stated that he would never vote for a Scientologist or a young earth creationist.
In August 2008, Weisberg stated on Slate that the only reason Barack Obama would ever lose to John McCain is racism by white Americans against Obama. He stated that “If Obama loses, our children will grow up thinking of equal opportunity as a myth.”[6]
I surely do not trust this guy to tell me the truth about anything!
Slate is a news outlet? I thought it was a commentary by Fred Flintstone’s boss! Go figure! ;-)
I understand what you are saying...the Left is delusional and dangerous, I have literally stopped speaking to any Liberals in our family and circle of friends...I cannot stand their logic and cannot hear another anti-Bush reference.
Their leader is an illegal alien and they love Communism, I cannot stand either.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.