Fox News' Alternate Reality

[Karl]

Heard yesterday (02 Jan 14) @ 1310-1330 Eastern time on XM Radio's Fox News Channel (just audio from their TV feed) while driving. The male host was speaking (I don't know the name of the particular program or the Fox News host). The quotes are from the male host and, while from memory, are accurate:

"If you have $5000 deductible then you don't really have insurance" (re: Obamacare discussion)

"If you share your information with a 3rd party, like a telephone company, then you have no expectation of a right to privacy" (re: NSA phone call database)

Setting aside the staggering implications of those statements (one is idiotic, the other usurps the Constitution), clearly the bias is against Obamacare and against the 4th amendment (in favor of a police state, which the right generally and historically supports).

Given the time of day, I suppose this was supposed to be a news show :doh

 

[Carleen]

Heard yesterday (02 Jan 14) @ 1310-1330 Eastern time on XM Radio's Fox News Channel (just audio from their TV feed) while driving. The male host was speaking (I don't know the name of the particular program or the Fox News host). The quotes are from the male host and, while from memory, are accurate:

"If you have $5000 deductible then you don't really have insurance" (re: Obamacare discussion)

"If you share your information with a 3rd party, like a telephone company, then you have no expectation of a right to privacy" (re: NSA phone call database)

Setting aside the staggering implications of those statements (one is idiotic, the other usurps the Constitution), clearly the bias is against Obamacare and against the 4th amendment (in favor of a police state, which the right generally and historically supports).

Given the time of day, I suppose this was supposed to be a news show :doh

News is a loosely used word on Fox news. They are for the most part a joke.

 

[Gipper]

Heard yesterday (02 Jan 14) @ 1310-1330 Eastern time on XM Radio's Fox News Channel (just audio from their TV feed) while driving. The male host was speaking (I don't know the name of the particular program or the Fox News host). The quotes are from the male host and, while from memory, are accurate:

"If you have $5000 deductible then you don't really have insurance" (re: Obamacare discussion)

"If you share your information with a 3rd party, like a telephone company, then you have no expectation of a right to privacy" (re: NSA phone call database)

Setting aside the staggering implications of those statements (one is idiotic, the other usurps the Constitution), clearly the bias is against Obamacare and against the 4th amendment (in favor of a police state, which the right generally and historically supports).

Given the time of day, I suppose this was supposed to be a news show :doh

Might not totally agree with the latter, but I agree with the former. For all the people bitching about "affordable" health insurance and not being able to afford catastrophe, they sure want to think that a sudden 5K bill is hardly a big deal.

Ask the average paycheck-to-paycheck liberal scrub if there's much difference between him suddenly going into debt 5K or 50K. He'll just shrug, grab his lunchpail and go about his merry way.

 

[Woodman909]

News is a loosely used word on Fox news. They are for the most part a joke.

Indeed... much like Chris Matthews or Sharpton on MSNBC.

 

[Grim17]

So you don't know who was talking, what show you were listening to, and you have you transcripts or audio to support your claim... Why should anyone doubt you though, I mean I'm sure millions of progressives like yourself are always driving down the road listening to Fox News radio... Right?

 

[Kobie]

So you don't know who was talking, what show you were listening to, and you have you transcripts or audio to support your claim... Why should anyone doubt you though, I mean I'm sure millions of progressives like yourself are always driving down the road listening to Fox News radio... Right?

Yay for simply accusing someone of lying when they point out, rightfully, that Fox is just as partisan and lousy as any of the "liberal" networks you complain incessantly about.

 

[Utility Man]

Alternate Reality:


:lamo

 

[bubbabgone]

Heard yesterday (02 Jan 14) @ 1310-1330 Eastern time on XM Radio's Fox News Channel (just audio from their TV feed) while driving. The male host was speaking (I don't know the name of the particular program or the Fox News host). The quotes are from the male host and, while from memory, are accurate:

"If you have $5000 deductible then you don't really have insurance" (re: Obamacare discussion)

"If you share your information with a 3rd party, like a telephone company, then you have no expectation of a right to privacy" (re: NSA phone call database)

Setting aside the staggering implications of those statements (one is idiotic, the other usurps the Constitution), clearly the bias is against Obamacare and against the 4th amendment (in favor of a police state, which the right generally and historically supports).

Given the time of day,

I suppose this was supposed to be a news show

:doh

News is a loosely used word on Fox news. They are for the most part a joke.

To either of you ... what do you disagree with and why?

 

[joG]

Heard yesterday (02 Jan 14) @ 1310-1330 Eastern time on XM Radio's Fox News Channel (just audio from their TV feed) while driving. The male host was speaking (I don't know the name of the particular program or the Fox News host). The quotes are from the male host and, while from memory, are accurate:

"If you have $5000 deductible then you don't really have insurance" (re: Obamacare discussion)

"If you share your information with a 3rd party, like a telephone company, then you have no expectation of a right to privacy" (re: NSA phone call database)

Setting aside the staggering implications of those statements (one is idiotic, the other usurps the Constitution), clearly the bias is against Obamacare and against the 4th amendment (in favor of a police state, which the right generally and historically supports).

Given the time of day, I suppose this was supposed to be a news show :doh

I am not sure I can see it that way, though, 5ooo dollars is an out of the money option. But the implications of the Internet, privacy, safety and control over government are not as simple as that.

 

[Karl]

[...] I'm sure millions of progressives like yourself are always driving down the road listening to Fox News radio... Right?

A wise man once said to keep your enemies close

 

[Grim17]

Yay for simply accusing someone of lying when they point out, rightfully, that Fox is just as partisan and lousy as any of the "liberal" networks you complain incessantly about.

I wasn't accusing anyone of lying, just pointing out that if a progressive wants to make a post attacking what they see as a conservative media outlet, they really need to back up what they say... If I were to do something similar, I would get the same type of replies.

 

[Renae]

5k Deductible means that outside the little pissant freebies, if you have to been seen for a real medical issue you're paying the first 5,000 of it.

My wife had a Hysterectomy (cost https://www.healthcarebluebook.com/page_Results.aspx?id=102&dataset=MD ) we paid the 500 Deductible, the rest was covered. We would not have been able to cover this had it been 5k.

Now we're no longer pay check to pay check, but a 5k hit is still significant.

 

[Grim17]

A wise man once said to keep your enemies close

I hear you... I would just like to see some transcripts, some audio, or something to back up what you wrote. All too often mistakes are made and things inadvertantly taken out of context and that's the basis for my post.

 

[Karl]

5k Deductible means that outside the little pissant freebies, if you have to been seen for a real medical issue you're paying the first 5,000 of it.

My wife had a Hysterectomy (cost https://www.healthcarebluebook.com/page_Results.aspx?id=102&dataset=MD ) we paid the 500 Deductible, the rest was covered. We would not have been able to cover this had it been 5k.

Now we're no longer pay check to pay check, but a 5k hit is still significant.

The comment made by the host is moronic. That is self-evident. Now if you don't think it is bias against Obamacare, fine -- argue that if you like. But please don't try to argue that the comment is not moronic. Insurance is generally intended for catastrophes, and everyone should know that in the medical world a $5,000 bill is peanuts (compare to heart surgery, for example -- probably $250K and up). Cancer -- what do you think it costs to get that treated? I can't believe I have to explain this . . . . . . :roll:

 

[eohrnberger]

Alternate Reality:


:lamo

To be fair, Fox and Friends is a morning show, and not a hard news show, such as what Chis Wallace does every Sunday morning.

Need to be sure to be comparing apples and apples.

What sort of leftist agenda pushing could be found on Good Morning America, or instances? Or the View perhaps?

Yeah, apples vs. apples people.

 

[Harshaw]

"If you share your information with a 3rd party, like a telephone company, then you have no expectation of a right to privacy"

Smith v. Maryland, 442 U.S. 735, (1979):

Given a pen register's limited capabilities, therefore, petitioner's argument that its installation and use constituted a "search" necessarily rests upon a claim that he had a "legitimate expectation of privacy" regarding the numbers he dialed on his phone.

This claim must be rejected. First, we doubt that people in general entertain any actual expectation of privacy in the numbers they dial. All telephone users realize that they must "convey" phone numbers to the telephone company, since it is through telephone company switching equipment that their calls are completed. All subscribers realize, moreover, that the phone company has facilities for making permanent records of the numbers they dial, for they see a list of their long-distance (toll) calls on their monthly bills. In fact, pen registers and similar devices are routinely used by telephone companies "for the purposes of checking billing operations, detecting fraud, and preventing violations of law."

And:

Telephone users, in sum, typically know that they must convey numerical information to the phone company; that the phone company has facilities for recording this information; and that the phone company does in fact record this information for a variety of legitimate business purposes. Although subjective expectations cannot be scientifically gauged, it is too much to believe that telephone subscribers, under these circumstances, harbor any general expectation that the numbers they dial will remain secret.

Your memory, your anti-Fox animus, and your limited understanding of the Fourth Amendment do not add up to a convincing case that they weren't referring to this.

If you have transcripts as to what exactly they said, then we'll discuss it in full context.

 

[Morton]

Was it a news or editorial? Do you know how to tell the difference?

Heard yesterday (02 Jan 14) @ 1310-1330 Eastern time on XM Radio's Fox News Channel (just audio from their TV feed) while driving. The male host was speaking (I don't know the name of the particular program or the Fox News host). The quotes are from the male host and, while from memory, are accurate:

"If you have $5000 deductible then you don't really have insurance" (re: Obamacare discussion)

"If you share your information with a 3rd party, like a telephone company, then you have no expectation of a right to privacy" (re: NSA phone call database)

Setting aside the staggering implications of those statements (one is idiotic, the other usurps the Constitution), clearly the bias is against Obamacare and against the 4th amendment (in favor of a police state, which the right generally and historically supports).

Given the time of day, I suppose this was supposed to be a news show :doh

 

[Karl]

[1] Was it a news or editorial? [2] Do you know how to tell the difference?

1. The Fox News TV schedule (online) shows "America's News HQ" in that time slot, hosted by Alisyn Camerota, Bill Hemmer

2. On Fox, there is no difference :mrgreen:

 

[Karl]

Smith v. Maryland, 442 U.S. 735, (1979): [...]

Well that is certainly an excellent find and an interesting, if disappointing, read. It would appear that in a limited extent the Fox host was correct, but I think overall the dragnet of total NSA capture of all telephone numbers dialed will eventually be ruled unconstitutional. However the point of the thread is his apparent support of it (bias) rather than simply reporting the news.

Had he reported this SCOTUS decision instead of pontificating he would have appeared much more professional as a journalist.

 

[Harshaw]

Well that is certainly an excellent find and an interesting, if disappointing, read. It would appear that in a limited extent the Fox host was correct, but I think overall the dragnet of total NSA capture of all telephone numbers dialed will eventually be ruled unconstitutional. However the point of the thread is his apparent support of it (bias) rather than simply reporting the news.

Had he reported this SCOTUS decision instead of pontificating he would have appeared much more professional as a journalist.

As I say, you're in no position to say he wasn't referring to it. You don't even know who it was who was speaking.

 

[loader]

A wise man once said to keep your enemies close

Now it is clear why Obama keep close Hillary after winning the 2008 election.

 

[Renae]

The comment made by the host is moronic. That is self-evident. Now if you don't think it is bias against Obamacare, fine -- argue that if you like. But please don't try to argue that the comment is not moronic. Insurance is generally intended for catastrophes, and everyone should know that in the medical world a $5,000 bill is peanuts (compare to heart surgery, for example -- probably $250K and up). Cancer -- what do you think it costs to get that treated? I can't believe I have to explain this . . . . . . :roll:

You're a progressive, you think Government dictated solutions are the cats meow. I do not. I chose my employer partially based on the coverages I could obtain for my family. I've seen the "Obamacare" alternatives, did the math and realized none of them are as good for my family in coverage, cost and benefits.

This is reality, I make the best decision for my family, not some **** in DC.

 

[mpg]

Given the time of day, I suppose this was supposed to be a news show

There's no doubt that Fox is biased, but what makes you think it was a news show rather than commentary/entertainment?

 

[Deuce]

Might not totally agree with the latter, but I agree with the former. For all the people bitching about "affordable" health insurance and not being able to afford catastrophe, they sure want to think that a sudden 5K bill is hardly a big deal.

Ask the average paycheck-to-paycheck liberal scrub if there's much difference between him suddenly going into debt 5K or 50K. He'll just shrug, grab his lunchpail and go about his merry way.

And if you ask the average libertarian college sophomore whose tuition is being paid by daddy and thinks he earned it, and who read Ayn Rand and suddenly thinks he understands the universe, he'll say that literally dying in the street is a better outcome if the free market dictated it.

 

[Karl]

There's no doubt that Fox is biased, but what makes you think it was a news show rather than commentary/entertainment?

The first clue is the title of the show that runs in this time slot: "America's News HQ"

The second clue is that it was not identified as editorial content on what is claimed to be a news channel: "Fox News"

The third clue was the time slot in general; Fox News defenders generally claim that editorial/commentary programs run in the morning and in the evening, while the middle of the day is hard news (or so those defenders claim).

Of course we all should know that most of cable news is commentary/entertainment and therefore generally not a reliable source of information, but unfortunately not all are so astute.