Right Wing Garbage Report
A couple of observations about the garbage that the right wing will give us, and we are suppose to stupidly not question it.
No matter about what you think about the lawsuit against Bill O'Reilly (which was actually filed after O'Reilly filed his) from FoxNews, his statement about it is GARBAGE. I will explain.
O'Reilly has claimed that the charges of sexual harrassment are "politically motivated." Yet O'Reilly has repeatedly said that he has not endorsed either candidate George Bush or John Kerry, claiming that he has not made up his mind and portraying himself as neutral. So where is the political motivation for the charge against him? Either O'Reilly is admitting that he is indeed a backer of one political party or candidate over another or he is just throwing out "politically motivated" as an unsubstantiated attack. We the viewers are suppose to believe his garbage, don't questions it.
~~~~
I accidently caught the post debate "analysis" from FoxNews that followed the third presidential debate. Right wing monopolizing garbage.
It is quite easy to see that all four of the talking heads regaling the viewers with their "expertise" had no interest in giving John Kerry any credit for his debate performance. Just look at their pedigree. Fred Barnes is executive editor for the Weekly Standard a far right wing low circulation magazine. FoxNews regular Bill Kristol is a long time contributer and currently an editor to the Weekly Standard. Roll Call executive editor Morton M. Kondracke tries to give an image of being a neutral voice, yet constantly harped on Kerry's performance. And finally Brit Hume who as the host is supposed to give no opinion, strongly suggested Bush won the debate.
Where in that gang of four were ANY representatives of the left? Two of the four are arch conservatives, far right wing mouthpieces. To be "fair and balanced" two voices should have been arch liberals, far left wing progressives, to balance out Barnes and Kristol. Hume as a host is suppose to be opinionless. So that left Kondrake who might at best be described as a centrist, but sure sounded like a conservative when I was listening.
No surprise that they had a consensus about who won the debate, they all thought it was George Bush. Yet, as they were pontificating and wallowing in right wing religion, all the snap polls were showing John Kerry won.
But this is what FoxNews does, propaganda. Stack the panels with right wingers and declare victory.
It is more than shameless. It is so transparent and obvious what they are doing. When I see the day that two of their panelists are writers or editors from the Nation magazine (a left wing publication that out sells the Weekly Standard) I might actually believe they are trying to be "fair and balanced." But I know that day will NEVER arrive at FoxNews.
No matter about what you think about the lawsuit against Bill O'Reilly (which was actually filed after O'Reilly filed his) from FoxNews, his statement about it is GARBAGE. I will explain.
O'Reilly has claimed that the charges of sexual harrassment are "politically motivated." Yet O'Reilly has repeatedly said that he has not endorsed either candidate George Bush or John Kerry, claiming that he has not made up his mind and portraying himself as neutral. So where is the political motivation for the charge against him? Either O'Reilly is admitting that he is indeed a backer of one political party or candidate over another or he is just throwing out "politically motivated" as an unsubstantiated attack. We the viewers are suppose to believe his garbage, don't questions it.
~~~~
I accidently caught the post debate "analysis" from FoxNews that followed the third presidential debate. Right wing monopolizing garbage.
It is quite easy to see that all four of the talking heads regaling the viewers with their "expertise" had no interest in giving John Kerry any credit for his debate performance. Just look at their pedigree. Fred Barnes is executive editor for the Weekly Standard a far right wing low circulation magazine. FoxNews regular Bill Kristol is a long time contributer and currently an editor to the Weekly Standard. Roll Call executive editor Morton M. Kondracke tries to give an image of being a neutral voice, yet constantly harped on Kerry's performance. And finally Brit Hume who as the host is supposed to give no opinion, strongly suggested Bush won the debate.
Where in that gang of four were ANY representatives of the left? Two of the four are arch conservatives, far right wing mouthpieces. To be "fair and balanced" two voices should have been arch liberals, far left wing progressives, to balance out Barnes and Kristol. Hume as a host is suppose to be opinionless. So that left Kondrake who might at best be described as a centrist, but sure sounded like a conservative when I was listening.
No surprise that they had a consensus about who won the debate, they all thought it was George Bush. Yet, as they were pontificating and wallowing in right wing religion, all the snap polls were showing John Kerry won.
But this is what FoxNews does, propaganda. Stack the panels with right wingers and declare victory.
It is more than shameless. It is so transparent and obvious what they are doing. When I see the day that two of their panelists are writers or editors from the Nation magazine (a left wing publication that out sells the Weekly Standard) I might actually believe they are trying to be "fair and balanced." But I know that day will NEVER arrive at FoxNews.
posted by jon at 2:25 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home