Nearly unanimous vote for Obama = "split" on FOX

I just saw this on another site and thought i HAD to post it on ATS. Really shows up the propaganda that media throw into their 'news' in order to support their political preference.



P.S. I thought the old lady smacking her husband for voting McCain was hilarious.

Yeah, I saw that lady smack his arm down - then hold it up when Obama was mentioned.

And yeah, how disgusting. If we count that one guy trying to support McCain, I guess it was "split." But if *I* was reporting, *I* would have said, "Looks like nearly a unanimous support for Obama here at this time."

Geez. I HATE Faux "News."

I don't know if this actually counts as propaganda, as much as just failed journalism. The story is obviously that it's a battleground state and they wanted to illustrate this with an even show of hands in a random diner.

But this is a very funny clip, and Fox News in a nutshell, thanks for sharing it

And yeah the old lady slapping her husband for voting Mccain is hilarious!

[edit on 1-10-2008 by MrVertigo]

I've said this before, but I'm going to say it again: I watch Fox News. I also watch CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, and NBC. I have found that everyone except Fox is in the tank for Obama. Of course, I will exclude Glen Beck and Lou Dobbs, who occaisionally uses the phrase, "Fair and Balanced."

reply to post by kettlebellysmith


To many libs, fair and balanced actually means 100% concensus on any given issue.
Can someone please explain this logic to me?

!! Bahahaha Wow. I wonder how people who actually believe that FAUX is fair and balanced, actually reconcile it mentally... It's unbelievable anyone takes them seriously

Originally posted by Alxandro
reply to post by kettlebellysmith

 

To many libs, fair and balanced actually means 100% concensus on any given issue.
Can someone please explain this logic to me?

On what grounds do you make that statement? I'm really curious if you employed any thought, or if you just saw something bashing Fox, and felt compelled to say something derogatory about "libs". So I can't explain the logic to you, because I strongly suspect it's your own logic, and not shared by those of us who believe that personal liberties are the paramount virtue of a free society. Or 'libs', as you'll undoubtedly prefer.


[edit on 2-10-2008 by '___'eviant]

Originally posted by Alxandro
reply to post by kettlebellysmith

 

To many libs, fair and balanced actually means 100% concensus on any given issue.

I'll settle for less than consensus. How about "being fair and balanced means you don't drum up the non-existant threat from Saddam's non-existant WMDs in the run-up to the war"?

Hey, it was a split though! One person for McCain and the rest of the room for Obama! Not that I could bring myself to vote for either of them if I were American. I'll have to check again; I didn't see the woman slap the man for raising his hand on McCain.

"Whut I sed wuzz"

..actually what I meant was that folks on the left seem to have a different definition for the term "fair and balanced".
They say Fox leans way to the right yet they say nothing when it comes to MSNBC leaning way, way to the left.
Fox has opposing viewpoints with commentators like Hannity and Colmes, MSNBC has Olbermann and Matthews.

But my main point is that when you take all the networks that lean to the left, MSNBC, NBC, CBS, ABC to some degree, CNN has gotten better but still left leaning (at least they have Beck), these are the main 6 that immediately come to mind, you take these 6 versus the 1 that leans right and they still gripe about Fox.

I don't understand the Liberal math, how can 1 be greater than 6?
Does Fox really carry that much weight?

This is no way fair and certainly not even close to being balanced.

This is the Liberal logic I wrestle with, someone please explain.