Fox: glaringly imbalanced

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: Konduit

It is pro Trump. Not very hard to see that. Just look at the website.

it is all people over 70 watching them though and their demographic has an expiration date.

They should probaby stop covering the hoaxer O'Keefe though, it will come back to bite them.

Yeah. The Dems are the only ones that can vote from the grave.

originally posted by: Konduit
a reply to: reldra

Being anti-Clinton doesn't mean your pro-Trump. I know... it's a hard concept for some people to wrap their head around.

Fox did a total smear on Trump during the primaries but have shifted their focus more to Clinton to save face. Remember the Megan Kelly debacle during the debates?

Holy Crap.

Yeah. No misogyny there...

i can't believe you posted it.

originally posted by: AboveBoard

originally posted by: Konduit
a reply to: reldra

Being anti-Clinton doesn't mean your pro-Trump. I know... it's a hard concept for some people to wrap their head around.

Fox did a total smear on Trump during the primaries but have shifted their focus more to Clinton to save face. Remember the Megan Kelly debacle during the debates?

Holy Crap.

Yeah. No misogyny there...

i can't believe you posted it.

You saw that, and thought.... SEXIST! Not surprising I suppose...

It only showed white people too!!

a reply to: AboveBoard

Insulting one specific, annoying woman isn't misogyny.

a reply to: reldra

And Juan Williams -- had to leave NPR under duress, got snatched up by FOX.

Even though he's pretty balanced overall.

I saw a vid this morning Megyn vs Gingrich --- ouch. She's gained some respect from me. When her "Jesus was white" remark had her tarred and feathered I couldn't hardly stand to look at her. But she's shown poise and grace throughout this entire cycle.

More than can be said for Hannity or Jones or O'Reilly.

a reply to: AboveBoard

Holy Crap.

Yeah. No misogyny there...

i can't believe you posted it.

I can.
Not one bit surprised. We have to realize, AB, that these folks don't really speak our language. As in, intelligent English....language.

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: AboveBoard

Insulting one specific, annoying woman isn't misogyny.

Insulting dozens is.

originally posted by: Dem0nc1eaner

originally posted by: AboveBoard

originally posted by: Konduit
a reply to: reldra

Being anti-Clinton doesn't mean your pro-Trump. I know... it's a hard concept for some people to wrap their head around.

Fox did a total smear on Trump during the primaries but have shifted their focus more to Clinton to save face. Remember the Megan Kelly debacle during the debates?

Holy Crap.

Yeah. No misogyny there...

i can't believe you posted it.

You saw that, and thought.... SEXIST! Not surprising I suppose...

Not surprising because it IS sexist!

I disagree with Meagan Kelly on a lot of issues, but I would never frame her as a small, leashed, yapping b***h. And notice the men at the podiums, a symbol of power and authority, one of whom is smirking while the dog attacks.

Good God. This is an insult to all professional, intelligent women. I wouldn't paint Kellyanne Conway that way and I pretty much roll my eyes everytime she opens her mouth.

If you can't see what's wrong with this, how it is calling her, and by implication ANY woman who dares challenge or attack DT and his square-jawed Authority, a b***h at the least, and at worst calling them slave-like attack animals of other men. (Jeb! in this case, the "Neocon") Men being the ones with power in the image.

I've explained a touch of why that image is so wrong.

It is rather sick. Sorry folks here can't see that.

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: AboveBoard

Insulting one specific, annoying woman isn't misogyny.

See my reply above. It explains. Thanks.

originally posted by: reldra
On FOX news, you hear Clinton descriobed that way? I don't watch tv ior listen to the radio. I look at their website on occasion. The website still seems way anti-Clinton and pro-Trump.

I just pulled up foxnews.com It is all anti Clinton and pro trump. Even to the point of taking the RNC to task over Trump.

The fox news radio broadcasts are less right wing than the TV stuff, even though it's the same hosts. I mean the actual broadcasts, not just the satellite radio streams of their shows.

I would go as far as to say they're neutral, but maybe they just appear neutral in contrast with the right wing radio hosts they're on during.

a reply to: reldra

Ms. Kelly’s world is, and has been, crumbling for well over a year. Her life’s “professional mentor and personal role model” (her words), Roger Ailes, exited Fox News under a cloud of sexual impropriety. Given the backdrop of her pearl clutching protestations to Newt Gingrich, there’s a profound irony..

After a long run of serious relationship trouble due to her daddy issues (father died when she was 16 – affair with Brit Hume etc…), her current personal life is once again a shambles; and that’s despite her metrosexual subservient husband trying to fill the unfulfillable void.

Her TV ratings are on a downward spiral, and Kelly’s contract is soon to expire. Which is the worst scenario for renegotiation. More unavoidable “dependency”.

Fox owner Rupert Murdoch gave Kelly (via Harper Collins) a $6 million advance on a book deal as payment for services against Trump last year. A book that comes out in two weeks and everyone knows no-one will read it. A looming failure so certain it will surely highlight the real motive for the payment.

And now, to make matters infinitely worse, the primary recipient of her hostile projected insecurity is about to become President of the United States…..

You just gotta laugh.



Megan Kelly , Official Shill of the 2016 Presidential Election .......











theconservativetreehouse.com...


www.youtube.com...