If you've ever had any doubt that FoxNews is actively helping Bush, This should clear all that up Options

[mfk]

You gotta be shittin' me.

You actually think referring to someone as "our man" means "Our bought and paid for operative"??

when you have a former US president referring to a "news" organization that has pretty much only served as the propaganda "catapult" for one party, then yeah, I would take Bush 41's comment of Roger Ailes being "our man" to mean that he is their operative.

[smcd]

when you have a former US president referring to a "news" organization that has pretty much only served as the propaganda "catapult" for one party, then yeah, I would take Bush 41's comment of Roger Ailes being "our man" to mean that he is their operative.

Then your partisan outlook has turned you into a retard.

[mfk]

Then your partisan outlook has turned you into a retard.

what exactly is partisan about that? Is there another way to take those comments? "how's our man, ailes?... oh we're on the radio? I'll watch what i say then".

So this is yet another case of "nothing to see here, move along citizen"?

And you call ME the retard...

[smcd]

what exactly is partisan about that? Is there another way to take those comments? "how's our man, ailes?... oh we're on the radio? I'll watch what i say then".

So this is yet another case of "nothing to see here, move along citizen"?

And you call ME the retard...

Guy.... c'mon... get a grip on yourself. The term "our/your man", "our/your guy" is incredibly commonplace. I use it all the time. Either you're hopelessly out of touch, or your so blindly partisan that you'll believe anything.

[mfk]

Guy.... c'mon... get a grip on yourself. The term "our/your man", "our/your guy" is incredibly commonplace. I use it all the time. Either you're hopelessly out of touch, or your so blindly partisan that you'll believe anything.

ok, retard, then riddle me this? Why did Bush 41 back away and say he'd watch what he was saying after finding out he was on the air?

and frankly, having read thousands of your posts, I've never heard you ONCE use the phrase, "our man" in any form or context. Feel free to link to an example proving me wrong there.

[Slavic Wax]

what exactly is partisan about that? Is there another way to take those comments? "how's our man, ailes?... oh we're on the radio? I'll watch what i say then".

So this is yet another case of "nothing to see here, move along citizen"?

And you call ME the retard...

Yeah, you can argue that it's rampant for both Dems/Repubs but you can't say this radio clip isn't damning. That just makes you sound one of the kids from Family Circus SMCD.

[smcd]

ok, retard, then riddle me this? Why did Bush 41 back away and say he'd watch what he was saying after finding out he was on the air?

and frankly, having read thousands of your posts, I've never heard you ONCE use the phrase, "our man" in any form or context. Feel free to link to an example proving me wrong there.

Bush backed away because such a statement could and would be misconstrued by partisan nitwits.


The very fact that you can't see this is hilarious. It must be very hard being you.




Y'know, just the other day I used the phrase "Your man Deval Patrick" to a friend. Now contrary to what you might think, I wasn't claiming that this friend of mine actually owned Deval Patrick as a slave. Nor was I inferring that Deval Patrick was at the beck and call of this friend of mine. I was making a mildly snide crack that because my friend usually leaned left, he held some responsibility for Deval's poor record as a governor.

And y'know... I didn't have to explain what I was saying. Because my friend understood this. And he's not an idiot.

[smcd]

Yeah, you can argue that it's rampant for both Dems/Repubs but you can't say this radio clip isn't damning. That just makes you sound one of the kids from Family Circus SMCD.

Could you write this ^^ in English?

[Truth be known]

Any politician worth his salt knows who is neutral in the media, where the friendly forums are, and who are the people with aggendas for and against you. This is true for democrats and republicans.

Lefties dominiate news print and blogging except for the WSJ. All the rest that lean right are the 2nd fiddles in their towns like the Boston Herald and the Washington Times
Righies dominate talk radio
Of the major TV news outlets only ABC news really goes after democrats with any volition. MSNBC has taken over for CNN as the official left at all costs news channel. Fox leans right of course. The rest... NBC, CBS, CNN all lean as left as fox leans right.

Bush knows who is who. So does Obama. So do the Clintons. So does McCain.

Prove the bold please.

And since when does Fox "lean" right. Are you fucking kidding me? On every news show or panel, the Repubs always dominate 2-1...just watch the Fox Report with a lineup of Barnes, Kondrackie, Krauthammer. Yeah sure...that is def. "leaning" right.

Get a grip, MHav. Your such a bullshit partisan these days. What happened to you...

[mfk]

Prove the bold please.

And since when does Fox "lean" right. Are you fucking kidding me? On every news show or panel, the Repubs always dominate 2-1...just watch the Fox Report with a lineup of Barnes, Kondrackie, Krauthammer. Yeah sure...that is def. "leaning" right.

Get a grip, MHav. Your such a bullshit partisan these days. What happened to you...

It's such bullshit and the media falls for it every time.

The right wingers will denounce the media for being "liberally biased" when in fact they're not anything of the sort and the media will say "oh, we don't want to give that impression so we'll be more critical of the left".

The right wing laughs all the way to the bank until someone else reports on some shady GOP dealings and then it's all "Librul Media!!!".

Or they'll point to a paper's op-ed section and then tarnish all their stories with that brush.

lame.

[mhaverty]

Prove the bold please.

And since when does Fox "lean" right. Are you fucking kidding me? On every news show or panel, the Repubs always dominate 2-1...just watch the Fox Report with a lineup of Barnes, Kondrackie, Krauthammer. Yeah sure...that is def. "leaning" right.

Get a grip, MHav. Your such a bullshit partisan these days. What happened to you...

Maura Eliason and Juan Williams make up 2 of 3 on that show all the time. You make it sound like it is only those three you mention all the time. Easton is pretty moderate most of the time. Hannity and Combs is 50/50. I will give you fox leans righter than the networks I mention as leaning left but it is clear to me they are far from centrist in there perspectives.

[Truth be known]

Maura Eliason and Juan Williams make up 2 of 3 on that show all the time. You make it sound like it is only those three you mention all the time. Easton is pretty moderate most of the time. Hannity and Combs is 50/50. I will give you fox leans righter than the networks I mention as leaning left but it is clear to me they are far from centrist in there perspectives.

Dude, you are grasping. H&C is not 50/50 no matter what you want to believe. Rove and Morris are on that show every night spouting their partisan hackery. There is never any legitimate counter-balance, period. Don't even try to bring up Kirsten Powers. Beckel is the only legitimate lefty who gets any airtime on that show.

I think your problem is that you are accustomed to expect a "balanced" view on EVERY piece of news, period. Foxnews has trained you well. The problem is that the media isn't supposed to give people the "we report, you decide" option. They are there to report the news and tell it like it is. Now if you can show me BLATANT bias in news coverage and reporting of facts and happenings, go for it. News is not some talk show, bra.

[fake guest]

[woof.]

Hannity and Combs is 50/50.

[mhaverty]

equal time ding dong. No doubt Hannity wins on style. Combs just looks like a wimp even when making fair and good points.

[mfk]

equal time ding dong. No doubt Hannity wins on style. Combs just looks like a wimp even when making fair and good points.

of course. it's staged that way. YOu have the good looking jock alpha male on the Republican side and the nerdy, ugly and wimpy guy on the democrat side.

it's staged like that on purpose so even though colmes might be right about something, the viewer will still side with the "handsome jock" because they'd rather not associate their beliefs with those of the "wimp's".