Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Wasn't this one of the only people ever to apologize for saying something stupid and hateful on Fox News? If I remember correctly she apologized and it wasn't one of those "I'm sorry people heard my comments wrong and want America to become soviet russia" type apologies it was a real apology.
No, you don't get it. delusianne started that thing with some twisted talk and you didn't read the linked material, at least at first. Both sources said in their article, right in the beginning paragraph that they were talking about the campaign. I even offered that they wouldn't probably do anything different now since it worked so well in the campaign.
You can't defend one of my favorite people, delusianne, with all this trash and garbage. She accused we of the Fox listeners/readers of being the ones that don't read beyond the title and it appears that you and she failed to do that on this one.
Advertising is their major souce of income. So if the WH keeps their pressure on saying the Fox is not a real news source, will those advertisers leave?
If that happens, will Fox news have to shutdown and the WH have succeded in silencing them?
I keep asking this question, but you are bouncing around so much, you may have overlooked it.
For one of THEM to answer your question would be to admit that the White House is playing old time Chicago political games and that wouldn't make them look too good.
I do. Seems as FOX is the only one to directly challenge Obama the "God" and his radical disciples.
Be thankfull someone is watching them.
Ever consider the possibility that you like Fox "News" because it agrees with you?
It will never challenge your fundamental assumptions about the world in which you live, so in that sense it's like a warm glass of milk before bed.
That is not news. News should challenge you. It should make you think outside your box, give you perspectives you otherwise wouldn't have considered. That's why progressives tend toward NPR, because, while not perfect, they do that the best of American media. I think it's something hardwired in the psychology of staunch conservatives to desire their own views regurgitated back to themselves, because I've found most outside of that ideology get bored of that and prefer to see different sides of issues.
In all the viewing of done of Fox, I'm yet to see them fully engage in different sides (the best they do is something like Hannity and Colmes - where Colmes is physically and emotionally weaker, and not nearly as strong-willed, so they made their bias clear. Stand Hannity up against Olbermann for some real balance).
Ever consider the possibility that you like Fox "News" because it agrees with you?
It will never challenge your fundamental assumptions about the world in which you live, so in that sense it's like a warm glass of milk before bed.
That is not news. News should challenge you. It should make you think outside your box, give you perspectives you otherwise wouldn't have considered. That's why progressives tend toward NPR, because while not perfect they do that the best. Most do not want their own views regurtitated back to themselves.
I seldom watch FOX, no time for TV.
Nice try.
P.S. maybe take your own advice, you are one of the most partisan posters on here and I have yet to read where you disagreed with Obama in any post.
No, you don't get it. delusianne started that thing with some twisted talk and you didn't read the linked material, at least at first. Both sources said in their article, right in the beginning paragraph that they were talking about the campaign. I even offered that they wouldn't probably do anything different now since it worked so well in the campaign.
You can't defend one of my favorite people, delusianne, with all this trash and garbage. She accused we of the Fox listeners/readers of being the ones that don't read beyond the title and it appears that you and she failed to do that on this one.
"We Control News Media." "We Controlled News Media During Campaign."
For one of THEM to answer your question would be to admit that the White House is playing old time Chicago political games and that wouldn't make them look too good.
I don't get what question there is to answer. If advertisers leave, I guess FN shuts down.
I don't get why you think people are avoiding answering that. It's just simple economics.
P.S. maybe take your own advice, you are one of the most partisan posters on here and I have yet to read where you disagreed with Obama in any post.
You post here pretty consistently, so I doubt time is the issue. But, if that's the case, then you shouldn't be defending an entity for which you do not have firsthand experience.
Seems you'd be guilty of just rallying the wagons to protect your ideology for the sake of ideology without any factual evidence and you wouldn't have much to offer a conversation about a news channel you do not watch.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
