Didn't Oreilly say something to that effect?
I don't know nor really care. My opinion is that Fox news is the news channel dedicated to sensationalized yellow journalism. Shame on the WH and shame on the NAACP for taking them catre blanch.
So then why are there three threads on FOX News and none on the NAACP and Obama on this matter? Seems lopsided if you ask me. :shrug:
Again, no one is defending the WH or the NAACP. Debate requires someone to disagree.
No shame on obama?
No shame on NAACP?
Not my point. my point is, that no matter when FOX news aired this stuff, that if they are to "blame" that means that Obama reacted to FOX NEWS.... That would make him a hammer in my opinon...
Come now, I don't get my view of the war in afghanistan from al jazeera. :lol:
So then why are there three threads on FOX News and none on the NAACP and Obama on this matter? Seems lopsided if you ask me. :shrug:
yeah, in this thread and about 3 others. but its not balanced. Its attack a news channel and says "well yeah Obama naaclp too", then continue to bash a news channel.
BTW Didn't Oreilly say something to that effect of getting it wrong?
If you really feel that there hasn't been a "fair and balanced" condemnation against the WH and/or the NAACP on this matter, why don't you start your own thread on the matter. Frankly, I don't see any need to considering both entities have admitted their wrong doing on the matter (the President continues to do so as recently as yesterday when he gave a speech before a Civil Rights organization). If you really feel that strongly about it, let your fingers do the talking, buddy. (Damn! Did I just advocate reading more Rev_HellB0und anti-Obama drivel? Oh, the inhumanity!!! :2razz
did they? We can't all agree on whether FOX NEWS really reported on it other than thier opinion journalists...
No shame on obama?
No shame on NAACP?
This is this unbalanced feigned outrage that makes one shake thier head.
I said shame on the WH do you really want to nit pick that?
I don't know nor really care.
Again, no one is defending the WH or the NAACP. Debate requires someone to disagree.
This is a cop-out. :shrug:
No shame on the NAACP? :ssst:
.
Never looked at the truth as a cop out. Seeanyone defending the WH or the NAACP?
Ohhhh sheesh go back and read what I said in my post:roll:
nope, all I see is three + threads of hacks bitching about FOX NEWS.... :shrug:
And how many are defending Fox? See, you prove my point.
Glad you appreciate the humor.
I did, it was a cleaver post.
And since this thread is going off track (again), I will state (again) the analysis of the OP is just his opinion and Media Matters wasn't busted at all.
Furthermore, adding to what I previously said about news style, Media Matters published time stamps when they were available, but Foxnews.com doesn't follow the practice of some other news organizations such as Reuters. Reuters stories show date and time it was published online.
To me the time line, though important, doesn't matter as much as FoxNews' refusal to show contrition in this matter. Again, they were the first news agency to report the story, everyone knows they reported it wrongfully and as such an individual lost her job. Now granted, the WH and the NAACP should have checked their facts first, but FoxNews is just as liable for this blunder as the WH and the NAACP. Still, it's their refusal to acknowledge their wrong-doing that upsets me here.
Where you this upset at Dan Rather?
The Good Reverend requires cogent logical and topical responses in order to have a conversation, please consult your comprehension manual and try again. :thumbs: