Fox News Is Turning Gay!

reply to post by burdman30ott6


FOX has kissed Obama's ass? How can you possibly say that? I can't believe anyone with any kind of intellectual honesty or more than 2 brain cells could possibly buy into this "we're not far enough to the Right", that the GOP is spewing... LMFAO!

A TV news channel is caving in to someone's agenda, to stay relevant in 2013? I can hardly believe something like this would happen, to mass media news outlets.

Originally posted by Kali74
FOX has kissed Obama's ass?

Numerous times. FOX is a very active participant in the Left/Right paradigm in which they focus Obama-Negative "news" on only those issues with the least significance while joining the rest of the MSM in burying issues which are legitimately damning of his Admin. They serve as an artificial conservative news outlet to ensure that at least a few million Americans sick to death of CNN/MSNBC will still recieve their daily dose of federal propaganda by putting on a fascade of conservativism.

reply to post by burdman30ott6


That's absurd. The only reason FOX blows their stack over paltry issues is because if they didn't they might actually get accused of agreeing with a *gasp* Democrat.

Originally posted by Kali74
reply to post by burdman30ott6

 

That's absurd. The only reason FOX blows their stack over paltry issues is because if they didn't they might actually get accused of agreeing with a *gasp* Democrat.

How often do you watch FOX News, Kali?

So what are they going to do about Bill O'Reilly then?

reply to post by burdman30ott6


There's enough clips on this site to qualify me as an afficianado.

Megan Kelly is homosexual? Really? huh ... I had no idea. (really)
So where is the homosexual agenda that she is supposedly pushing?
I'm not seeing it.

Good news about Fox if you like sports.
Later this month Fox will roll out an all sports channel 24/7.

Originally posted by Kali74
reply to post by burdman30ott6

 

There's enough clips on this site to qualify me as an afficianado.

...so you don't actually watch FOX News, then? Well, hopefully your "research" gained from watching selective clips on ATS has given you some solid ground to rest your opinion on.

I used to watch FOX News quite a bit... they became too liberal for me, kind of like CNN was in the early 90s to be honest. Of course with all these folks who scarcely watch the channel being told about how conservative FOX is and how the GOP has moved "further right", plus how much further to the left the other MSM outlets have moved, one can scarcely blame a person who's sole exposure is from agenda driven snipets and clips from believing the outlet is significantly further right than they actually are.

Any one that thinks the Conservative leaning of Fox is anything other than pandering to a demographic is stupid. Expanding that demographic only makes good business sense.
The Fox corporate model is rating driven as are all "News" channels. It's about profits for the shareholders.
The New Corps execs are brilliant in choosing the right platforms for their various production companies.

www.nytimes.com...

I have worked on a few 21th Century Fox productions and they are a class act; treat the cast and crew very, very well and pay accordingly; occasionally above union scale. Unlike that cheapass Disney.

All you conservatives should know that FOX is a Union shop just like all Media/production houses.

All your favorite rightwing news readers are Union......SAG and AFTRA merged........

Originally posted by tothetenthpower

Can I get an Amen?!

Now let's be real here. Fox new is a lot of things, but it certainly isn't pro homosexuality. When conservatives start harping on the MOST conservative media outlet in the US as a means of pushing it's own extremists agenda, I think we know whose wrong.

Now who would have thought I would come to the defense of Fox.

All over a move to prime time for a particular anchor. 92 pages of hate apparently.

Some people's kids.

~Tenth

Amen!

And yes I can say I definitely know who is wrong here.

Knowing a bit about the group, I am not at all surprised that you came to the defense of Fox.

A few years ago I attempted a conversation with Mr. LaBarbera, it was the closest I have come to talking to a brick wall. I pointed out documented errors in information he was distributing regarding a local school I was very familiar with, I pointed out legal documents that denied a claim he made regarding some Christians being arrested for "quietly praying" at a pro-gay event, he did not respond to my letters describing the harm publishing lies such as this could inflict upon others, not to mention the harm being done to true Christians by using claims of being a devout Christian to promote an agenda using known provable lies. When I wrote an discussed the fact that often in school, children who are different in some way, such as non athletic, more academic, quieter, and so forth are often the brunt of bullying, and through the years people tend to turn a blind eye to bullying when there are accusations that the student is gay, whether or not they are. He actually responded stating his group did not condone harming or bulling gay or maybe gay students, but went on to say that they shouldn't be protected from bullying because everyone is automatically protected from bullying in school. I asked him why if that were so are there protected classes specifically listed? I received no response so I answered it for him, because without specifying protected classes people have shown through history that until it is set out undeniably in words that they are not allowed to harm someone because of religious beliefs, race and so forth people will continue doing so. He went on to explain that if we don't stop them from being gay now they will suffer far greater in the future from the many diseases they will succumb to.

I could go on and on....I lived too close to him to be taken in by his lies.

reply to post by burdman30ott6


I actually do quite a bit of research on FOX and other media outlets.

Originally posted by projectvxn
Megyn Kelly is gay?

I'm not sure what these people are trying to say.

The article mentions Megyn Kelly making a comment supporting gay marriage in an interview. I don't really get why the op didn't bother mentioning that in the snippet from the article.

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by semperfortis

 

Because far too many people buy in to the hyperbole, and vitriol against conservatives.

Which is why conservatives always get labeled as 'haters' as most people know there are gay and lesbian conservatives.

edit on 15-8-2013 by neo96 because: (no reason given)

Except that isn't the reason. The actual reason is due to conservative opposition to gay rights issues, the biggest example of which being marriage equality. That's why conservatives and gays are seen as mutually exclusive.

reply to post by technical difficulties

Except that isn't the reason. The actual reason is due to conservative opposition to gay rights issues, the biggest example of which being marriage equality. That's why conservatives and gays are seen as mutually exclusive.

That argument fails simple fact gays and do what ever the hell they want, love who they want, and do whatever the hell they want.

So if money and giving their other haves the ability to take everything they own means they hate gays sorry still hyperbole and vitriol.

Even more so as already stated there are LGBT conservative's.

Sorry most conservatives out there DON"T CARE as their opposite's just love to vilify them,

And us Gays will utilize it to brainwash the populace with our Gay agenda!

Eat it!

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by technical difficulties

 

Except that isn't the reason. The actual reason is due to conservative opposition to gay rights issues, the biggest example of which being marriage equality. That's why conservatives and gays are seen as mutually exclusive.

That argument fails simple fact gays and do what ever the hell they want, love who they want, and do whatever the hell they want.

So if money and giving their other haves the ability to take everything they own means they hate gays sorry still hyperbole and vitriol.

Even more so as already stated there are LGBT conservative's.

Sorry most conservatives out there DON"T CARE as their opposite's just love to vilify them,

I'm going to dumb this down as much as possible, so if you still don't understand this, then there's nothing I can really do.

When you oppose to union of two individuals because they're gay, people are going to call you anti-gay. Why?

Well, for one it doesn't effect you in anyway whatsoever.

Two, all of the arguments against marriage equality are, to put it kindly, stupid. Whether it be comparisons to pedophiles and doglovers, claims of it harming the children, or implications that the United States is ruled by the Bible, the arguments opposing marriage equality are terrible, if you can really even call them arguments.

Now that we see there's no logical basis for opposing the union of two same-sex individual, especially since it doesn't effect you in anyway whatsoever, people take this to it's next logical conclusion, which is that they're anti-gay. I disagree with this, as I believe some of them are just irrational.

Since it's a commonly held conservative position though, people assume conservatives are anti-gay, and as such, see conservativism and homosexuality as mutually exclusive. To say that that is hyperbole/vitriol is extremely misleading to everyone here.

As for "We have gay conservatives" (that statement sounds similar to something else............), you're missing the point. You don't get to magically be pro-gay because you reach a particular quota of homosexuals in your group, especially with the aforementioned opposition to marriage equality. It's a kind of a dumb way to think.

Bear in mind, i'm not saying that all conservatives are homophobes, I'm just explaining why they're seen as such, since your post did a terrible job of doing so.

reply to post by technical difficulties


Like wise this is as 'dumbed down' as it gets :

Stop telling me ' I hate Gays'.

Because I don't.

reply to post by technical difficulties


Actually for some of us it's the notion that government will decide on marriage issues that concerns us. I'm all for people getting married, all people. I am not for government forcing a notion of equality on to institutions who traditionally perform marriages. Any legislation that does that would be in violation of the 1st Amendment. I'm speaking of religious institutions who genuinely feel threatened in this way. There have been several instances where such legislation was proposed under the guise of 'marriage equality'. Those were resoundingly defeated either by voters or by the courts for those very reasons. But you won't hear about that because as soon as the measures were defeated it became about hating gays rather than protecting one of the most important facets of our constitutional republic.

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by technical difficulties

 

Like wise this is as 'dumbed down' as it gets :

Stop telling me ' I hate Gays'.

Because I don't.

Nobody made that claim but you. I'm simply explaining why conservatives/marriage equality opponents are seen as anti-gay.

Originally posted by projectvxn
reply to post by technical difficulties

 

Actually for some of us it's the notion that government will decide on marriage issues that concerns us. I'm all for people getting married, all people. I am not for government forcing a notion of equality on to institutions who traditionally perform marriages. Any legislation that does that would be in violation of the 1st Amendment. I'm speaking of religious institutions who genuinely feel threatened in this way. There have been several instances where such legislation was proposed under the guise of 'marriage equality'. Those were resoundingly defeated either by voters or by the courts for those very reasons. But you won't hear about that because as soon as the measures were defeated it became about hating gays rather than protecting one of the most important facets of our constitutional republic.

Then you're not really opposed to marriage equality, just an anti-constitutional variant of it. My arguments only apply to those who full on oppose it.