• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Is FOXNEWS fair and balanced?

Is FOXNEWS fair and balanced?

  • Yes, they present both sides of issue

    Votes: 20 26.7%
  • No, they definatly slant toward conservative news

    Votes: 50 66.7%
  • I don't watch FOXNEWS

    Votes: 2 2.7%
  • They used to be very conservative, now they are fair and balanced.

    Votes: 3 4.0%

  • Total voters
    75
anomaly said:
First, read Pacridge's post. How 'bout Bush lying about the WMDs? The Iraq 9/11 connection? The SS 'going bakrupt in 2042' (his current lie)? during his campaign he said he will not make and amendment against gay marriage and is now pursuing one? These are lies, plain and simple.

First of all, you are naive to think that Bush lied when he had all the evidence (from ours and the WORLDS intelligence) to believe that Sadam had weapons. I don't hear you calling France a liar ... they voted for the resolution too. Bush acted on it when Germany and France would not. Goes to show the integrity of the governments of both of them - does it not?

Of course you will ignor this as you seem to do on many "facts" that do not fall in your favor. Here is a little more meat to add to the flame.

Source
If Social Security is not changed, payroll taxes will have to be increased, the benefits of today's younger workers will have to be cut, or massive transfers from general revenues will be required. Social Security's Chief Actuary states, "If benefits were reduced to meet the shortfall in revenue for the combined program, the reduction would need to be 27 percent starting with the exhaustion of the Trust Fund in 2042 and would rise to 32 percent for 2078. Alternatively, if additional revenue were provided beginning in 2042, revenue equivalent to a payroll tax rate increase of about 3.1 percentage points (from 12.4 percent under current law to about 15.5 percent) would be needed for the year. The additional revenue needed for 2043 would be equivalent to a payroll tax rate increase of about 4.5 percentage points for the year. Thereafter, the amount of additional revenue needed would gradually rise, reaching an amount equivalent to an increase in the payroll tax rate of about 5.9 percentage points for 2078 (or about 50 percent higher than today's rate).

As far as Gay marriage, he said before that it should be left up to the states. But, that was WELL before Mass and the states justices re-wrote the law. But alas, I will choose to be as closed minded as you - I don't care if he was for or against it before. Thank heaven above he is for an amendment to define marriage between a man and a woman now.
 
First off about the wmd like he sead all the intell agencies told him thay had them, second Saddam was a wmd, and us going to war and taking him out was one of the best thangs we could have done for the world. About him lieng about SS going bankrupt its not a lie its true Bill Clinton sead so and so did Theodor Roosevelt unless thay where all lieing about it.
 
skabanger13 said:
First off about the wmd like he sead all the intell agencies told him thay had them, second Saddam was a wmd, and us going to war and taking him out was one of the best thangs we could have done for the world. About him lieng about SS going bankrupt its not a lie its true Bill Clinton sead so and so did Theodor Roosevelt unless thay where all lieing about it.


First off, a man can not be a WMD. He can be in Hollywood movies. But only in Hollywood movies. Second Clinton didn't say Social Security's going bankrupt. He has said it faces major problems he's even said it faces crisis if we do not address these problems. It is not possible for Social Security to go bankrupt. It has no creditors. No creditors, no possibility of bankruptcy. Not possible.

Lastly, Theodore Roosevelt was President of the United States from 1901 until 1909. He died on January 6th 1919. Social Security didn’t even come into being until a fifth cousin of his became President. A gentleman by the name of Franklin D. Roosevelt. He was President from 1932 until 1945. He was our longest serving President. He guided us through World War II and is known as the "Father of Social Security." On August 14, 1935, Franklin Roosevelt signed the Social Security Act. And he never said Social Security is going bankrupt.
 
Ok a wmd is a weapon that can kill thousands of people and can decimate a country. Saddam killed thousands of people and decimated his country. Why isn't he a wmd because hes not made of mettle? So it was FDR, thanks for the history lession, but regardless he sead SS wasn't perfect and that privet accounts where a more logical solution. If all the money put into SS is used up and where paying out more than has been put in, i would say that sounds a Little like being bankrupt. Ok its not bankrupt in the typical fasion because we will still have to pay out but that will mean it will be tacked on to the defeset.
 
skabanger13 said:
Ok a wmd is a weapon that can kill thousands of people and can decimate a country. Saddam killed thousands of people and decimated his country. Why isn't he a wmd because hes not made of mettle? So it was FDR, thanks for the history lession, but regardless he sead SS wasn't perfect and that privet accounts where a more logical solution. If all the money put into SS is used up and where paying out more than has been put in, i would say that sounds a Little like being bankrupt. Ok its not bankrupt in the typical fasion because we will still have to pay out but that will mean it will be tacked on to the defeset.

FDR said Social Security would be more logical as private accounts? When and where did he say that?

Even by the numbers Bush is putting forth, the amount the Social Security system will be short in 2042 is 28%. It will still have enough to cover 72% of it's cost. And so far Bush's plan only calls for the removal of more funds from that system to create these private account. His plan does not address the systems lack of funding. So even if you want to continue say it "going bankrupt," which it's not. Bush's plan, so far, does nothing to address the the "bankruptcy." Exactly how does any of this make sense?
 
:rofl yes fair and balanced, we distort you deny! :spin:
 
I think they are balanced and here is why!

Conservative:
Britt Hume
Fred Barnes
John Gibson
O'Reilly (Some-times)

Liberal
Greta Van Sustran
Alan Combs
Maria Eliason
Juan Williams
O'Reilly (Sometimes)

Moderate
Shepard Smith
Mort Kondrake
Bill Crystal (No one will EVER convince me he is conservative - if HE is McCain is and that ain't happening)

I think the above is about as fair and balanced look at Fair & Balanced Fox News as you can get. :mrgreen:
 
skabanger13 said:
So what, fox may slant a little to the right, every other news group cnn, msnbc, etc is nothing but liberals. So if fox isn't real news because it has some what of a right wing slant, than every other news group isn't real news because thay are blatantly Bush bashing liberals. Hay if you don't like fox news its your prerogative, don't watch my news and I wont watch yours. No news group is unbiased, leave us Conservatives our one yall have all the rest of them to choose from.
Geez! you've drank enough of the koolaid :drink if you think you only have one right wing source. Right now the right wing controlls the news media!
 
Jack Dawson said:
I think they are balanced and here is why!

Conservative:
Britt Hume
Fred Barnes
John Gibson
O'Reilly (Some-times)

Liberal
Greta Van Sustran
Alan Combs
Maria Eliason
Juan Williams
O'Reilly (Sometimes)

Moderate
Shepard Smith
Mort Kondrake
Bill Crystal (No one will EVER convince me he is conservative - if HE is McCain is and that ain't happening)

I think the above is about as fair and balanced look at Fair & Balanced Fox News as you can get. :mrgreen:

You're joking right? To begin with Alan Combs is a self admitted moderate. Plus you don't even have Hannity on your list. And O'Reilly and Hume lie so much what difference does it makes what list they're on? Lastly what does it matter, really, the number of people representing either side?
 
Why do you have to be so nasty? Is that a macho thing. List the conservatives for me on CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, CNN Headline News, MSNBC, CNBC?

:rofl
 
I have been listing to the NEWS for some 40 Years . I 'm willing to BET $5000
I can show you that ABC, CBS, NBC,
60 Minutes , 20/20 Dateline , Nightline , World News Tonight, Fleesing of AMERICA all have done shows THAT ARE PRO LEFT and PRO RIGHT

I will give FOX a TON of CREDIT it took a loser Bill Reilly who up until FOX his biggest CLAIM TO FAME was doing THAT so CALLED LOW LIFE NEWS SHOW """""" INSIDE EDITION """"""" OR AS MOST PEOPLE CALL IT TRASH NEWS

It's so easy to see right though FOX'S GAME all they do is call everone else NAMES

FREEDOM69
 
Jack Dawson said:
Why do you have to be so nasty? Is that a macho thing. List the conservatives for me on CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, CNN Headline News, MSNBC, CNBC?

:rofl

I'm not trying to be nasty at all. Honestly I'm not. But all the netwoks you list have conservatives on them. Robert Novak had an owning interest in the show Crossfire and is on CNN all the time. He was a co-producer and owned part of the show. And other Conservatives are on those networks all the time. Just like Fox does have Liberals on their network. Seriously you and I both know I could go get you a list of conservatives who regularly appear on those networks. But really what does that mean?

The botton line is Fox really isn't doing anything other then pushing an agenda. That's why they make statements like "and he was using the oil for food money to fund his evil chemical weapons programs." They make that statement. Never back it up with any facts or evidence. While they know good and well all the evidence including the Duelfer report http://www.cia.gov/cia/reports/iraq_wmd_2004/ states Saddam was not making chemical weapons. Even the Bush White House has came out and said Saddam was not making chemical weapons. But if you watch Fox he was and he was funding his "evil weapons" programs with the food for oil money. This is exactly why, when polled, Fox viewers are found to be the least likely to have accurate information. Because they're misleading you. They're lying to you. Fox is trying to sell you something and it isn't just the "Abdominizer" or the "George Foreman Grilling Machine."
 
I thank your drinking something a little stronger than koolaid if you thank all media, aside from fox, is Conservative. That point really came out during the election, every channel was bashing Bush and praising Kerry, every once in a wile you might see something negative about Kerry but as inept as he is their should have been more, thay had plenty of negative thanges to say against Bush, even if some of them where lies.
 
skabanger13 said:
I thank your drinking something a little stronger than koolaid if you thank all media, aside from fox, is Conservative. That point really came out during the election, every channel was bashing Bush and praising Kerry, every once in a wile you might see something negative about Kerry but as inept as he is their should have been more, thay had plenty of negative thanges to say against Bush, even if some of them where lies.

Not so. In fact several studies were done about this. The fact is news coverage was pretty even, well except on FNC. Until the Swift Boat Vets came along sometime in mid-summer and then it went in Bush's favor by some 13-15%.

What were the lies told about Bush?
 
The real problem I have with FOX is they trully are a BUNCH of BLOW HARDS
they love to DEMENIZE all the other networks they say are a BUNCH of COMMIE , LIFTEST LIBERIALS ,

I must say in my 53 years of living have never seen ANY PROFESSIONAL NEWS network spend their time just BASHING another NETWORK

All I ever hear is I'm so SMART ,I'm so GREAT , I'm the only one

who is LOOKING OUT FOR YOU !!, !!

Will you please buy my BOOK !!.

Will you please BUY my NEWS letter ,

will you please GO to my WEB site !.

Will you PLEASE BUY my T. Shrits , Jackets , Umbrella's , WILL YOU PLEASE BUY MY JUNK

The sad thing is it's WORKING their RATING are GREAT THE FOX PIGS are betting the true NEWS MEDIA THESE BUNCH OF STUPID MORONS have a lot of STUPID AMERICAN people FALLING IN LOVE with THEM and for this I give them CREDIT

As P T Bardem & Baily SAID their's one born every minute

( What I FIND REALLY IRONIC is peopl are going to read thisand say THAT I SHOULD NOT CALL PEOPLE NAMES )[/U]
And all I can say to that is IF IT'S GOOD ENOUGH FOR FOX IT'S GOOD ENOUGH FOR ME
 
Throughout history every media giant has had arrogance. Look at Howard Stern. He proclaims himself the "king of all media". People eat it up.

Why not go for what is successfull?
Same aplies to O'reilly. His true arrogance is what sells.
 
Last edited:
vauge said:
Throughout history every media giant has had arrogance. Look at Howard Stern. He proclaims himself the "king of all media". People eat it up.

Why not go for what is successfull?
Same aplies to O'reilly. His true arrogance is what sells.

I completely agree with that. Esp. Howard Stern, why does anybody listen to this guy? Course I don't like Jerry Springer either. He doesn't come across as much as arrogant as ignorant, least to me. But the arrogance of FNC news has gone way beyond anything ever seen before. Those that believe what they don't understand are left to suffer. Fox gives people cut and dry answers to complex problems and their cut and dry answers are often based on lies.
 
Hi Vauge COME ON HOWARD STERN IS MEDIA

HA!! HA!! HA!! HA!! HA!! HA!! HA!! HA!! HA!! HA!! HA!! HA!! HA!! HA!! HA!! HA!! HA!! HA!! HA!! HA!! HA!! HA!! HA!! HA!! HA!! HA!! HA!! HA!! HA!! HA!!


I nearly fell out of my chair laughing at that ONE

Howard Stern is GREAT ENTERAMENT

**** & ASS **** & ASS **** & ASS TIT'S TIT'S & ASS TIT'S & ASS !!!!

I TRY GETTING MY FAMILY TO GO TO THIS WEB SITE !!!!..

AND ALL THEY SAY i I DON'T WANT TO TALK POLITICS

I'm SORRY THEY JUST DO NOT GET IT THIS IS ABOUT FUN YOU CAN HAVE AND STILL HAVE YOUR PANTS ON
 
It would appear to me the Liberals on this board, like at the head of the Democratic party, have their heads completely buried in the sand. I got the name Bob Novak as a conservative on one of the networks, ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNBC, CNN, CNN Headline News. Now for those of you Liberals not completely blasted on coke or meth or crack, PLEASE PLEASE list the Conserviatives sitting or anchoring any news program on ANY of those networks. I am NOT talking about guests.

Seriously Libs, please LIST ANY conservative in a a program HEAD capacity on any of the networks I listed. You SAY you can, so be my guest and please list those for me and the rest of the board to observe. To say Alan Combs is a moderate is a TOTAL JOKE, listen to him sometime.

Once again I plead with you to please LIST those conservatives on ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNBC, CNN or CNN Headlines NEWS OTHER than Bob Novak.

This will DEFINITELY be FUN to watch.
 
Hi Vauge COME :D ON HOWARD STERN IS MEDIA NEWS

HA!! HA!! HA!! HA!! HA!! HA!! HA!! HA!! :D HA!! HA!! HA!! HA!! HA!! HA!! HA!! HA!! HA!! HA!! HA!! HA!! HA!! HA!! HA!! HA!! HA!! HA!! HA!! HA!! HA!! HA!!
HA!! HA!! HA!! :D HA!! HA!! HA!! HA!! HA!! HA!! HA!! HA!! HA!! HA!! HA!! HA!

I nearly fell out of my chair laughing at that ONE

Howard Stern is GREAT ENTERAMENT

**** & ASS **** & ASS **** & ASS TIT'S TIT'S & ASS TIT'S & ASS !!!!

I TRY GETTING MY FAMILY TO GO TO THIS WEB SITE !!!!..

AND ALL THEY SAY I DON'T WANT TO TALK POLITICS

I'm SORRY THEY JUST DO NOT GET IT THIS IS ABOUT FUN YOU CAN HAVE AND STILL HAVE YOUR PANTS ON [/QUOTE]
 
NEWS MEN are Tim Russert Ted Kopel , Peter Jennings , Walter Cronkit , David Brinkly ,

NOT STEARN NOT JERRY SPRINGER NOT BILL O'REILL NOT RUSH LIM-BUM
 
You would think the other networks would figure out why FOX NEWS continues to GAIN in the ratings while they lose their proverbial butts in the ratings race. When you have BLATANT liberals like Alan Combs, Juan Williams, Mort Kondrake, Maria Elias, Greta Van Sustran and balance them with Sean Hannity, Shepherd Smith, Britt Hume, Bill O'Reilly, John Gibson what happens? You get both sides of the story and people will actually watch to find out what BOTH sides of a story actually are. Greta's husband campaigned for Kerry, Juan William and Maria WORSHIPPED Kerry. Please don't try to SPIN Fox into being a conservative network. I can EASILY paint ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNBC, CNN and CNN Headline News into being LIBERAL. They have NO CONSERVATIVE voices in ANY time slot. PERIOD, end of statement FACT
 
Tim Russert Ted Kopel , Peter Jennings , Walter Cronkite , David Brinkly REAL NEWS MEN - All have been on the Clinton Yacht at one time or another. True NEWSMEN. All you mentioned are LIBERALS to the very BONE.
 
Jack Dawson said:
It would appear to me the Liberals on this board, like at the head of the Democratic party, have their heads completely buried in the sand. I got the name Bob Novak as a conservative on one of the networks, ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNBC, CNN, CNN Headline News. Now for those of you Liberals not completely blasted on coke or meth or crack, PLEASE PLEASE list the Conserviatives sitting or anchoring any news program on ANY of those networks. I am NOT talking about guests.

Seriously Libs, please LIST ANY conservative in a a program HEAD capacity on any of the networks I listed. You SAY you can, so be my guest and please list those for me and the rest of the board to observe. To say Alan Combs is a moderate is a TOTAL JOKE, listen to him sometime.

Once again I plead with you to please LIST those conservatives on ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNBC, CNN or CNN Headlines NEWS OTHER than Bob Novak.

This will DEFINITELY be FUN to watch.

I don't know what to tell you Mr. Dawson. First let me just say that this comment is basically just offensive: "Now for those of you Liberals not completely blasted on coke or meth or crack" I have no idea if you mean it to be offensive, but it is. Secondly I, in part, find Comb's to be a moderate by watching and listening to the points he makes. And in part to the fact when the Hannity and Comb's Show first came on the air he told a USA today interviewer who asked him: "So you're the liberal on the show?" he responded "Well, actually I'm quite moderate" I'd say between what I seen him do and what he's said- he's a moderate. Now, if he's not moderate enough for you- I don't know what to tell you. Most Liberals certainly would not consider Combs to be a liberal. In fact most Liberals I've ever met can't stand the guy.

As for the rest of your post I think you're probably right and there may not in fact be any other network anchors that are conservative. But when you watch their news, other then the Dan Rather BS, I don't see and hear constant lying I like I do on Fox. As I've said before I rarely watch and just turned it on again one night and watched a show about the food for oil debacle and in a half hour or hour show caught two lies, rather large lies. And let's be honest, I'm not that bright a guy.
 
Back
Top Bottom