Thomas Ricks blast Fox news in a interview

[biggunsbob]

Two different links..

http://www.inquisitr.com/413542/fox-interview-ends-after-author-criticizes-network/

http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/...-news-ends-benghazi-interview-after-thomas--0


Man did fox cut his segment short after he blasted the network for politicizing the Benghazi tragedy...

 

[easye688]

Its about time somebody called them out on there bullshit

 

[KAWDUP]

. . . and you think this will affect either side politically?

Not even news worthy. It changes nothing, and is no more or no less true than the crap the liberal media throws out there.

BTW - people call them out on their bullshit every single day - do you read the news?

 

[easye688]

Yes I do, its just the first time I've seen a guest on that channel call them out like that

 

[byco42]

Yes I do, its just the first time I've seen a guest on that channel call them out like that

You obviously don't watch very FOX very often.

 

[easye688]

Don't watch it at all, all the stuff I get is from the people on this page, don't watch to much political stuff on tv because they have biased towards one party or the other.

 

[KAWDUP]

Not like any of the liberal slappies on this forum would ever exaggerate the truth about Fox news, right?

:no:

But to re-iterate what Byco said, they have guests that call them out relatively often. More often than CNBC has guests that call them out for being a left wing arm of the Democratic party (actual truth about their political bent is about the same for both).

 

[easye688]

Thought MSNBC had more of a liberal bias to? What about the other networks?

 

[KAWDUP]

Thought MSNBC had more of a liberal bias to? What about the other networks?

I am a NOOB. Meant MSNBC not CNBC. Sorry about that.

 

[easye688]

More of a NOOB myself when it comes to politics, so I try to stay as well informed as I can.

 

[byco42]

Looks like Ricks is an equal-opportunity basher of biased TV news organizations: http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2012/11/tom-ricks-isnt-a-fan-of-msnbc-either.html

 

[easye688]

The guy really pulls no punches does he?

 

[Michchamp]

Not like any of the liberal slappies on this forum would ever exaggerate the truth about Fox news, right?

:no:

But to re-iterate what Byco said, they have guests that call them out relatively often. More often than CNBC has guests that call them out for being a left wing arm of the Democratic party (actual truth about their political bent is about the same for both).

CNBC isn't democratic. they're a business channel that gets all their hosts from the ranks of Wall Street people that flunked out of wall street, or former "bankers" who were only in it to land that rich wall street husband and promptly dropped out of the 9-5 routine once they did. the people that talk on CNBC know who butters their bread. the few times they do bring on anyone who criticises the conduct of the big banks, they end up screaming at the critic so he/she can't get a word in.

 

[Michchamp]

Looks like Ricks is an equal-opportunity basher of biased TV news organizations: http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2012/11/tom-ricks-isnt-a-fan-of-msnbc-either.html

I think at one time, MSNBC was probably the closest thing we had to a mainstream news organization that was relatively unbiased.

then a couple years ago, they canned Cenk Uygur for not being "deferential" enough to politically powerful DC persons (the labels "liberal" and "conservative" hold less water in practice than having one's hands on the levers of power), and hired Al Sharpton who promptly vowed never to criticise Obama. At that point, they really did earn the label of being "Fox for Liberals" and since then they've seem to run with it.

but I never thought the people that tried to equate Maddow with Glenn Beck or O'Reilly really knew what they were talking about, and in doing so, pretty much reveal their own biases.

criticising Fox/conservative opinions does not make you "liberal" or put you on "the other side of the coin."

 

[easye688]

I'm kind of partial to Rachel Maddow myself

 

[Michchamp]

I'm kind of partial to Rachel Maddow myself

the thing that a lot of people have trouble grasping (and this is by design) is that you can hold liberal views, and disagree with conservative views, and not be a Liberal with a capital L.

Maddow is more or less candid about her political views, so that at the very least that distinguishes her from the hacks at Fox who still make the "fair and balanced" claim with a straight face.

but anyways... just because one may think higher graduated tax rates, better and more spending on education, better regulation of big business, a stronger EPA, anti-trust regulations, diplomatic solutions vs. military intervention, etc. are good policy doesn't make one a Liberal or a Democrat. it's irritating, but I guess OH so predictable that people who disagree with those things would try to brand a person who does as one. makes any sort of reasoned debate or understanding impossible.

 

[redandguilty]

the thing that a lot of people have trouble grasping (and this is by design) is that you can hold liberal views, and disagree with conservative views, and not be a Liberal with a capital L.

Maddow is more or less candid about her political views, so that at the very least that distinguishes her from the hacks at Fox who still make the "fair and balanced" claim with a straight face.

but anyways... just because one may think higher graduated tax rates, better and more spending on education, better regulation of big business, a stronger EPA, anti-trust regulations, diplomatic solutions vs. military intervention, etc. are good policy doesn't make one a Liberal or a Democrat. it's irritating, but I guess OH so predictable that people who disagree with those things would try to brand a person who does as one. makes any sort of reasoned debate or understanding impossible.

Really? You're going to complain about branding people?

 

[byco42]

Rachel deals her political views like cards from the same marked blackjack deck, where the people she disagrees with always bust. When I do watch her, I can anticipate the payoff most of the time. For all her intelligence, she's a one-note commentator: Conservatives, Bad; Liberals, Good.

 

[Michchamp]

Really? You're going to complain about branding people?

I just did.

 

[Michchamp]

Rachel deals her political views like cards from the same marked blackjack deck, where the people she disagrees with always bust. When I do watch her, I can anticipate the payoff most of the time. For all her intelligence, she's a one-note commentator: Conservatives, Bad; Liberals, Good.

would you admit at least admit that she may be right sometimes?

would you agree with the concept that someone could say "George W. Bush was a terrible president and the policies enacted over his tenure were terrible for most Americans" without being biased?