RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
read more of todays top articles

Intro: "Asked what most viewers and observers of Fox News would be surprised to learn about the controversial cable channel, a former insider from the world of Rupert Murdoch was quick with a response: 'I don't think people would believe it's as concocted as it is; that stuff is just made up.'"

Billionaire media mogul, News Corp and Fox News owner Rupert Murdoch. (photo: Saul Loeb/Getty Images)
Billionaire media mogul, News Corp and Fox News owner Rupert Murdoch. (photo: Saul Loeb/Getty Images)

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 

Comments   

We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.

General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.

Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.

- The RSN Team

 
+63 # Herbert Dorfman 2011-02-11 23:44
The weiredest thing is they interview each other -- not outside experts -- people who work for Fox and are so identified. And they're shocked -- shocked!! when the other people are viciously ant-Obama. Dick Morros, who's hated Clinton for a dozen years, now uses that hatred on Obama. On TV, on radio, and on the Internet. And he's brought on because his comments are all of a kind -- "Obama is a proto fascist and a socalist". It never changes. And they're all the same. All hating.
 
 
+14 # fbacher 2011-02-14 10:26
Being left or right leaning is not the problem, as long as everything is above board. More important to me is does the program correct errors in fact and do they repeat clearly known falsehoods. Rachel Maddow is clearly a liberal, but she strives to be factually accurate and clear in her reasoning for her opinions. Faux, on the other hand, makes up facts, rarely admits to errors and presents opinions as facts all of the time.
 
 
+105 # cake eater 2011-02-12 00:19
MSNBC has a few shows with a stated liberal leaning. Fox News is an entire network devoted to the promotion of misinformation, disinformation and the furthering of the agenda of this country's oligarchs in their rapidly escalating war on the middle class.
 
 
+22 # DaveM 2011-02-12 01:02
TV News makes things up? You have to be kidding! I mean, that'd be like lying on the Internet!
 
 
+12 # Tina 2011-02-12 01:06
IRONY 101

Well said
 
 
+53 # Ken Hall 2011-02-12 01:08
Didn't we know this was happening all along, the "vast right-wing conspiracy" supported by the many rich elites who share the same agenda, i.e., the bilking of the lower classes? And they have propagandized the hapless TPers to support their agenda of More For The Rich. I predict RW posters will claim it's a hoax, a la the ACORN or Sherrod tapes, but their strategy has ever been to impute to others the tactics they use themselves.
 
 
+8 # DaveW. 2011-02-12 18:03
Ken Hall, I agree with your comments but until the "source" is "identified and verified" it'll just be a case of "somebody lied." I honestly believe Fox is nothing but a propaganda outlet for right wingers but any attempt to bring them down will HAVE to be accompanied by more that just "the source says" or "the insider stated" remarks. If not, these types of articles do nothing but provide ammunition to the morons who think Fox is somehow "divinely inspired, fair and balanced journalism."
 
 
+4 # stonepig 2011-02-13 10:15
Dave W, what part of 'source' or 'insider' don't you understand? I suppose Assange should just blather who sent him the cables, or the whistleblowers should just all be hung out to be shot at...are you nuts? You almost sound like a Fox insider yourself, what with wanting to know who's squealing on the rats.
 
 
+6 # DaveW. 2011-02-13 14:35
stonepig, You're WAY off base concerning the "possibility" of me being "a Fox insider." Whistle blowers who "actually" have an effect on whatever is they're whistling about are the ones who are identified and present "verified, empirical data." Juries or the American people need to put a face on someone before declaring guilt or innocence...sen tence or walking papers. How many articles have you read or heard on TV about "Source" being convicted or exonerated? Same question for "insider." A few years ago we on the left had a great time laughing at the film "Outfoxed." The films makers created a montage of endless, repetitive statements by Fox broadcasters using the term "some people." The question overwhelmingly asked by the left, including myself, was who the hell are "some people?" What's the difference between an unidentified "source" or "insider" than "some people?" What part of this analogy do you not understand? We went to war in Iraq based on allegedly reliable "sources." Ahmad Chalabi was considered a reliable "source." How many guys are sitting in Guantanamo because someone who'd been paid off had "insider" information? Get the picture? You might go back through the archives of RSN to see some my comments. I don't appreciate even the implication I'm a "Fox Insider." I'm asking once...nicely.. .please, don't do it again.
 
 
+4 # billy bob 2011-02-13 21:09
BELIEVE ME, DaveW. is NO "Fox insider".
 
 
+4 # soularddave 2011-02-13 22:38
Quoting DaveW.:
until the "source" is "identified and verified" it'll just be a case of "somebody lied."... but any attempt to bring them down will HAVE to be accompanied by more that just "the source says" or "the insider stated" remarks. "


One must remember what happened to Vallerie Plame after her husband, Joe Wilson, had his comments published in the NYT, debunking the "Bushies" outlandish claim that S.H. was negotiating for yellow cake from Niger. That was a horrible mess that probably could have been avoided - and just as effectively - had it been brought to our attention "anonymously".

I applaud the efforts, though, but we need to protect the whistle blowers. That's an entirely different topic, but of utmost importance. There's certainly a place for Wikkileaks.
 
 
+9 # bluescat48 2011-02-12 01:16
Tell me something I don't know
 
 
+16 # giraffe 2011-02-12 01:30
The FDA should make "those who spin the news" put on a lable with calories, etc. and ingredients: "Spin and opinion"
 
 
+43 # gordontaurus 2011-02-12 02:09
this report only reconfirms the sorry truth that rightwingers are paranoid and solipsistic. that is, they believe their own b.s. and propaganda, and that they alone know what is going on in society. they are cryptofascist. why lump them in with now totally discredited term "conservative"? the kindest thing you can call them is "reactionary" and anti-intellectu al.
 
 
+67 # Ralph Averill 2011-02-12 04:55
I have a problem with news stories that cite "unnamed" sources. Not that I doubt the information. It is well known that Fox is the propaganda wing of the Republican Party. Nothing new there, but it doesn't change anything. If the source would come out of the shadows, name names, produce some documents, perhaps inspire others to do the same, and publicly, loudly, force Murdoch and Ailes to defend what is indefensible. That would be something.
 
 
+23 # maryeor 2011-02-12 11:10
I agree entirely, Robert Averill. I'd love to be able to forward this piece to my FOX-'News' loving acquaintances, but they'd be within their rights to dismiss it, since the 'source' isn't identified.

I would be very happy to be able to give them black-and-white proof that they're being lied to and manipulated, but the proof will have to be much more iron-clad than this to convince them.
 
 
0 # stonepig 2011-02-13 10:17
So Ralph, you want the mole to come forward so he can be disappeared. How clever. When did you in the past demand the sources names when the right wingers were spewing lies and private sources?
You ever call Fox out on their BS?
 
 
+20 # Tom Degan 2011-02-12 05:28
So, Fox Noise is merely a propaganda arm of the Republican party? Tell me something I didn't already know. Good article though.

http://www.tomdegan.blogspot.com

Tom Degan
 
 
+15 # Dakotahgeo 2011-02-12 05:35
Nobody in their right mind would not believe this story. However, we had Faux Noise figured out long ago and listen to the Murdoch mind with chuckles and pity. FN was never taken seriously by anyone other then FN enthusiasts. They're finally exposed, however, by one who's been there, done that, and full of true facts. That ought to really upset the rotten apple cart!
 
 
-69 # lnason@umassd.edu 2011-02-12 06:48
Most of the readers above obviously do not actually watch FOX at all. FOX is biased but so is MSNBC, NBC, CNN, and everyone else in the business. One cannot help but choose stories based on one's assumptions and perspective. Get over it.

In response to Ralph Averill, I cannot see that FOX is the propaganda wing of the Republican Party. They consistently berated Bush for overspending (and now they more heatedly berate Obama for even more overspending) and they routinely have on libertarians, some with their own shows on FOX Business, who regularly argue strongly against civil liberties violations like the Patriot Act and against foreign interventions like the invasion of Iraq or even Obama's attempt to influence the recent revolt in Egypt. Several clearcut progressives or liberals routinely are heard on various shows (I think Ms. Powers is especially effective but others might prefer Dr. Hill or Mr. Colmes).

I watch all news stations regularly and follow network news intermittently. FOX has, by far, presented the widest range of opinion on a consistent basis. Yes, they are, at heart, conservatives but they do allow progressives and liberals and libertarians an opportunity to present views that are at variance to their preferences. That is a heck of a lot less biased than their competitors.

Lee Nason
New Bedford, Massachusetts
 
 
+17 # gordontaurus 2011-02-12 09:31
Lee Nason uses his name with his vacuous observations. but there is one problem. what planet does he inhabit?
 
 
+18 # Ken Hall 2011-02-12 11:09
Hey, Lee, I've got a bridge I'd like to sell you!
 
 
+4 # stonepig 2011-02-13 10:20
Lee, you fall off a turnip truck or what?
 
 
+31 # Mike K 2011-02-12 12:00
It's not a matter of being biased, it's about makeing stuff up, not fact checking and being a Right Wing propoganda machine that spreads hate, fear and intolerance. It's about enabling pollutuers and corruption as well as peadophiles or "family values" conservative who cheat on there wives.
Jounalists are supposed to be neutral but Fox is not only biased it openly fundraises for the GOP as well as contributing money.
 
 
+7 # othermother 2011-02-13 10:50
Quoting lnason@umassd.edu:
Most of the readers above obviously do not actually watch FOX at all. FOX is biased but so is MSNBC, NBC, CNN, and everyone else in the business. One cannot help but choose stories based on one's assumptions and perspective. Get over it.

. . .


I watch all news stations regularly and follow network news intermittently. FOX has, by far, presented the widest range of opinion on a consistent basis. Yes, they are, at heart, conservatives but they do allow progressives and liberals and libertarians an opportunity to present views that are at variance to their preferences. That is a heck of a lot less biased than their competitors.

Lee Nason
New Bedford, Massachusetts


I simply do not agree that Fox is balanced in the range of comment it presents.
 
 
+42 # genierae 2011-02-12 07:21
If you look closely at the face of Rupert Murdoch you will see an unhappy man. Despite his earthly riches he has no peace, and he thinks that attacking the poor and middle classes of this country is necessary for the survival of his elitist way of life. He has no conception of equality and compassion, and uses his ill-gotten gains to divide and conquer the ignorant, who are only too willing to be duped. The longer he lives, and the more money he makes, the unhappier he will be, and the backlash from the bad karma he continues to create, will be terrible.
 
 
+9 # Carolyn W W 2011-02-12 22:15
[genierae
You are mostly right. I agree with you about his unhappiness! I think Rupert Murdoch is not after money as much as power. I think he wants to be the ruler of the world through his scary network I know several people in rural areas who are literally addicted to FOX I find it frustrating and frightening.
 
 
+4 # genierae 2011-02-14 08:42
Carolyn W W: In this corrupt country money IS power, those who have no money, have no power. Rich people like Murdoch keep wanting more because they still feel unsatisfied no matter how much material wealth they get. This is because they are bankrupt of spiritual things such as integrity and compassion. They have closed their hearts to love and truth, and so they continue to feel this vast emptiness inside that they can't seem to fill. This is their true state, and no matter how rich they become in worldly things, they will continue to feel an immense poverty.
 
 
0 # billy bob 2011-02-14 07:20
I tried. It didn't work for me. I stared straight at his face and all I saw was a happy dinosaur gorging himself on the meat of Pebbles Flintstone. Maybe I should change the angle of the computer monitor, wait...

Nope, now he just looks like the monster from the movie Alien happily sucking the brains out of one of his victims. Either way, I don't see anything warm blooded.
 
 
+1 # billy bob 2011-02-14 07:24
Correction: I just remembered, dinosaurs WERE warm-blooded. Maybe it wasn't a dinosaur I saw. Sorry Murdoch! Don't sue me! Maybe it was some other type of overgrown extinct reptile devoid of a conscience.
 
 
+9 # John Mortl 2011-02-12 07:35
Each media outlet has its own agenda which is pursued vigorously, but there are areas and issues that they slant in concert. The Israeli/Palesti nian problem is one, I will give you three guesses as to which way it's slanted. The first two don't count.There are also topics that never get coverage. When have you ever heard from the horses mouth so to speak why the revisionist historians question aspects of the holocaust story?
 
 
+25 # bandz 2011-02-12 08:28
Ralph Averill makes a very good point. Most of us who frequent RSN already know that FOX "News" is a propaganda, not a news source. What is needed is to convince those who don't already understand this fact. An "expose" that relies on an "unamed source" will not accomplish that. The former Fox "insider" needs to show some courage and tell his/her story openly. Fox uses unamed sources constantly. They can't be stopped by using the same tactics.
 
 
+14 # bandz 2011-02-12 09:19
I agree with Ralph Averill. Those of us who frequent RSN already know that Fox is a propaganda outlet, and NOT a news source. The problem is to persuade, or 'enlighten' others to this fact. It does little good to use an 'unnamed source'in an attempt to accomplish this. Fox is a major source of stories from 'unnamed sources'. What we need are NAMED 'insider' sources who have the courage to OPENLY disclose the truth about FOX.
- Bryce Babcock
 
 
+20 # Procyon_Lotor 2011-02-12 10:23
The formula is simple. Stupefy the viewing public with entertainment crafted to inspire greed and justify violence in assuaging it. Define as “adult" or "mature" entertainment that is rife with profanity, violence, sexuality and substance abuse, thus assuring that the young and impressionable are eager to view it and be so-defined. Meanwhile see to it that the "News" arm is filling viewers' heads with "conservative values” in order to keep them scared or angry enough to assure their votes come election time. Encourage assassination of the opposition by equating it with "Christian" or "patriotic" values. Ownership of an entertainment empire is a cunning choice for a plutocrat aspiring to megalomania.
 
 
+21 # wfalco 2011-02-12 10:52
Besides the obviousness of the propaganda tactic, they also appear to utilize control mechanisms that almost mimic a religious cult. In other words-you must think like us, you must toe the line, you must not speak to the outside world or tell them about the inner workings of our philosophy.
Scary stuff. I always respected the network news of my youth (60's and 70's).
As a young boy I knew little of Vietnam but because of Walter Cronkite and CBS I seemed to realize it was not a good thing-war.
That was because actual war footage was brought to our TV'S. It wasn't orchestrated like a big 10 part mini-series-mad e for TV movie. There weren't any "analysts" hired to cheer on our troops and to psyche us up about why it is so important and necessary to kill people.
 
 
+8 # dr.labwitch 2011-02-12 11:35
i have a problem with unnamed sources. if just one of the fox noise "insiders" would give their names they'd win my respect. as it is, they're saying nothing that can be absolutely verified. the stories are out there and i've no doubt fox noise is exactly what this person says, however, if i have no name to give the fox zombies i've already lost the argyment.
 
 
+13 # kimbav 2011-02-12 12:08
I can completely understand why the "insider" would chose to be unnamed Fox is the leading expert in character assassination, and perhaps this person would prefer not to have every mistake he's ever made, real or made-up, splashed over the entire nation. Sure, it would be great to have a group of former Fox employees with names, dates and substantiation, but the nature of the beast is to intimidate and ensure that anyone who speaks out is discredited or destroyed. This is how all tyrants win.
 
 
-4 # stonepig 2011-02-13 10:22
What is with you people wanting named sources? Do none of you have a clue about the rules ...remember Judy Miller? Fer cryin outloud people...why all the ...whhaaa, whining crap, like it would make a difference...ok ,fine , it's John Doe Smith. There, happy now???
 
 
+4 # OAKES 2011-02-12 13:17
FOX IN THE NOOSE...As legend would have it, a FOX is NOT a clever animal -it just runs down its prey relentlessly. Sound familiar?
 
 
+3 # Otto Schiff 2011-02-12 13:54
To Murdoch:

Go fox yourself:
 
 
+3 # tuandon 2011-02-12 14:28
This is a surprise to someone? Those people could put Josef Goebbels to shame.
 
 
+8 # Monty Gee 2011-02-12 14:58
The sources are unnamed because they've signed gagging agreements with Fox. It's right there in the report. Why accuse them of cowardice? Would you take on Fox legally after having violated a clear agreement>
 
 
+1 # stonepig 2011-02-13 10:23
Thank you Monty, finally someone read the article.
 
 
+1 # stonepig 2011-02-13 10:23
Thank you Monty
Thank you Monty
 
 
+8 # Tracy Haus 2011-02-12 17:35
When I was a kid news seemed so boring because they just told what was going on. Now it is like entertainment only, commentary only and opinion and fear based rhetoric. The old people really seem to eat it up and I notice those who watch FOX repeat the same verbiage they hear over and over. I ask them to give me the definition of socialism and I have yet to get a clear and accurate response so this proves to me they just repeat what they hear without checking anything out for themselves.
BTW- They were never conservatives.. they don't even know the meaning of that word.. they are actually, and this term is a new one, but they are actually
REGRESSION-ISTS
 
 
0 # othermother 2011-02-13 10:53
What are these old people who eat up Fox's droppings regressing to, Tracy?
 
 
-1 # Jim Rocket 2011-02-13 20:17
Feudalism???
 
 
-13 # KevinM 2011-02-12 22:42
See what you have to realize is this is ONLY a problem because its a conservative spin. The rest of the media has been inventing news whole cloth and spinning things to make liberals look as good as possible and thats OK. To dare make conservatives out to be other then mentally ill gun totting rednecks is a crime against decency.
 
 
+4 # stonepig 2011-02-13 10:31
Well, Kevin aka John Wayne...here's a little lesson. The gun toting is supported by..er..republi cans. The lack of health care is supported by ..er..republica ns. The wars currently were started by ..err..yup. The bashing and violence spewing has been done by ..err tea party er's err...Crazy spewing from the mouths of Beck, Hannity, Rush, Ann, Palin, etc, has all been vile spewing of violent rhetoric. The liberals and dems are sitting around with their thumbs up their.....es...
and the handful of intelligent journalistic truth telling has been far far and few. I am disappointed that RSN just filters blather again for us to yack about, so we just continue to battle with each other stupidly over the dumbest things. There are some seriously outspoken authors out there that even RSN won't publish likely.
Let's stop with the names, idealogs, hesaidshesaid, and get to the nitty gritty of the whole damn issue.
This country needs an enema and I'd rather see it done by US citizens rather than China or Pfizer.
 
 
+5 # Walker Rugino 2011-02-12 22:50
It’s not worth being Swift Boated for your effort,” a reference to how Fox News traditionally attacks journalists who write, or are perceived to have written, anything negative things about the channel.

Did none of the complainers who dismiss the "unnamed source" not give any consideration as to WHY someone would want to preserve their entire career against being "Swift-Boated"?
You can't even fight the liars with the truth, because they KNOW the truth, and patently have no respect for it.
 
 
+8 # billy bob 2011-02-13 10:13
"You can't even fight the liars with the truth, because they KNOW the truth, and patently have no respect for it."

-YES! I'VE BEEN TRYING TO TELL FELLOW LIBERALS THAT FOR YEARS AND HAVE NEVER PUT IT SO SUCCINCTLY.

It's like having an argument against someone who really doesn't care. This is honestly, not only a joke to members of fox, but to many of their listeners. They don't believe this stuff themselves. The reason they defend it fiercely, as though they did believe it, is that they are telling these lies for a reason that they DO take seriously - namely to prevent the truth from creating a society that they don't want to be a part of. You know what kind of society I'm talking about too: a multicultural one where everyone's values and opinions are respected equally. This CAN NEVER HAPPEN if good ol' conservative values are to be upheld. Their lies mask a need for their true intentions to be kept from EVER seeing the light of day.

cont.
 
 
+7 # billy bob 2011-02-13 10:15
cont.

I really don't think most of you are around a lot of conservatives. If you are, you've never been in a position of trust, where they can tell you their TRUE motivations and fears. The fact is that we DO live in a more vile nasty society than existed 50 years ago. People used to be more civil. As liberals, we are exposed to other opinions so much that we know it's a cultural phenomenon that goes across the board and across our entire nations, although there are places where it's not as obvious. Conservatives LIVE IN THOSE LESS OBVIOUS PLACES. They see the world in stark "them vs. us" terms. We are their hated enemy and always will be until we are exterminated. No amount of "reaching across the isle" or pandering to their demands will EVER change that. We represent to them EVERY reason that this nation has become so unbelievably rude, obnoxious and abrassive. They believe that our wish to allow people personal freedom is stifling the civilizing ability of Christianity, as they see it. This is why they have dark fantasies about the enemy abroad and the evil U.N. This is why they can stand there straight-faced and say they really AREN'T racists afterall. They don't see it as racism, because their hatred of minorities extends to ALL minorities, including religious, political, philosophical, etc.

cont.
 
 
+5 # billy bob 2011-02-13 10:16
cont.


It's a blanket of blame that covers ANYONE AND EVERYONE who isn't a conservative evangelical christian from a small town who has all of the same attitudes, hobbies, friends, lingual characteristics , and even mannerisms that they share. The left is suffering for not having a lot of modern day Will Rogers'. We can't get through to them because we aren't them. Most of us live in large cities, modern suburbs, or states where it's possible that all of your neighbors will come from completely different backgrounds and yet still have to come up with a way to get along. We live in parts of the country where people don't wave at strangers and where grown men don't greet each other with a simple "hi!" without fear of appearing gay. We live in a part of the country where we REALLY WERE exposed to a lot of unlawful and unadvisable activities in high school (like drug use, underage drinking, premarital sex, etc.) and somehow SURVIVED! It doesn't matter whether or not we, ourselves, participated in any of this. It doesn't matter whether or not we, ourselves are Muslims, or black, or speak Spanish, or drink latte, or get out a hacky sack during lunch. The fact is that we have friends and acquantances that DO things like that, and we don't care.

cont.
 
 
+2 # billy bob 2011-02-13 10:17
cont.

Many of them have actually never EVEN MET anyone who looked like, or acted like that, and they have no cultural context for understanding why anyone WOULD ever be like that or allow themselves to associate with those many other elements of American society. SMALL TOWNS ARE A GREAT PLACE TO HIDE. If you've ever spent much time in far-right small town America, you'd realize that that is EXACTLY why those small towns still exist. Very few people in small town ever want to leave. When they do, what's the VERY FIRST THING THEY EXPERIENCE about the outside world? An UNBELIEVABLY CROUDED AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC FILLED WITH UNBELIEVABLY RUDE ABBRASIVE DRIVERS. They never stop to realize that a huge percentage of that rudeness comes from OTHER far-right SUBURBAN conservatives who feel exactly the same way they do and use the suburbs as a way to pretend they live in a small town. If you start out without any positive experiences of other cultures - in fact no experiences AT ALL other than what fox news informs you about what you're missing, then if you're ever exposed to a large multi-cultural cosmopolitan city, at some point in the future, you retain that natural distrust of everyone living outside your own skin. You're surrounded by nothing but threats.

cont.
 
 
+1 # othermother 2011-02-13 11:01
Not everyone in small town America is civil to his neighbors and horrified at the vulgarity of modern life. And they don't all hide, either. Some use the internet to menace anyone who attempts to discuss public issues in a local forum.
 
 
-1 # billy bob 2011-02-13 19:57
You're right. That's why I believe that the sad truth about how far our sense of community and communal responsibility has gone down the drain is just more well hidden in small towns. It's a problem we all share, but that some people delude themselves into thinking has a simple cause and solution - usually involving ethnic, religious or philosophical purity.

Still, it's easy to trust your neighbor when you went to the same kindergarden. It's harder to cut him off and give him the finger from the safety of your car when you realize you both live two blocks from the grocery store and belong to the same church. It doesn't mean you don't want to do that, but you reserve those kinds of uncivilities for people you never met and hopefully can't track you down. Small towns are filled with incredibly friendly people, IF they already like you. They're also filled with people who unwittingly insult everyone around them once they leave the safety of the only part of the planet they know anything about. To an insider, small towns can be like Mayberry. To an outsider, that same small town can appear like Spahn Ranch. Big cities can seem friendly once you have an attitude that's accepting of strangers and once you learn to be comfortable in social situations that are basically out of your control. However, that's TERRIFYING to people from small towns.
 
 
0 # othermother 2011-02-13 11:07
@genierai and carolyn Murdoch is definitely playing the game for power, not peanuts. He has successfully intimidated the British governments, both Labour and Conservative, most lately in regard to phone-hacking. The ease with which he's bought up American media and the collapse of mid-sized independent newspapers of the last century encourage his megalomaniac ambitions.
 
 
0 # billy bob 2011-02-13 10:18
cont.

You start thinking that the solutions to all of our problems as a society involve TRUTHS WHICH CAN NEVER BE SPOKEN OUTLOUD. So, you start speaking in code. You start questioning other people's Americanism, and religion, and childhood, and habits, and so on in a way to make it sound like they are the threat you fear; when in reality, they are just a scapegoat for ALL OF YOUR FEARS, and it REALLY WOULDN'T MATTER WHICH DEMOCRAT WAS IN THE WHITE HOUSE. They ALL are the reason our country's in the mess it's in. It doesn't matter that President Clinton balanced the yearly budget (something all conservatives claim to care about). The fact is that he attended Oxford and atleast once INHALED, whether or not he chooses to admit it. It doesn't matter that President Obama didn't cause any of the crisis' he inherited from jr. bush. He looks different (it doesn't matter that he's black), he lived in a foreign country, he has knowledge of Islam (it doesn't matter that he personally is a Christian) and he admitted that he eats ARUGULA - WHAT THE HELL IS ARUGULA?!? Have any of you city slickers ever been to a grocery store in a small town?

cont.
 
 
+4 # billy bob 2011-02-13 10:19
cont.


It just so happens that I grew up in one of those small towns and have gone back and forth my entire life between extreme red and extreme blue parts of the country. I can tell you that if I hadn't gone back and forth, but had lived my entire life in a red area, I would be as conservative as the rest of them. Conservatives really KNOW ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about liberals and vice versa. The main thing conservatives don't get is that, even though our society has become NASTY and DISGUSTING over the past several decades, it's not because we aren't "conservative enough". In fact, their attitudes are contributing to the vile mixture and MAKING THINGS WORSE. What they are afraid of really has nothing to do with religion, or skin color, or political affiliation, but are BROAD SOCIAL TRENDS that really have more to do with pop culture, poor quality TV, American laziness and the fact that it's been too many years since the Great Depression and WWII, so people have forgotten what it's like to HAVE TO HELP EACH OTHER OUT. Our kids REALLY ARE getting stupider and ruder by the minute, BUT the conservative answer to the problem IGNORES THE ACTUAL CAUSE OF THE PROBLEM ALTOGETHER, and replaces it with an ignorant uneducated guess. This feeds RIGHT INTO THE HANDS OF FOX and people like limbaugh.

cont.
 
 
+2 # billy bob 2011-02-13 10:20
cont.


Their JOB is to manipulate these fears and frame them in such a way that conservativism will ALWAYS seem like the only answer to the problem. They tap into an audience that liberals have no knowledge of, because we don't realize how deep seated this thing is.

What liberals don't get, of course is that WE ARE THE ENEMY. Get that through your heads, and ALWAYS remember that in all of your dealings with conservatives. We are an obstacle in the way of their world view. WE are the reason they don't think torture is a bad idea. WE are the reason they defend people's right to politically assasinate those they disagree with. If liberals can, once and for all, learn that, then we can begin fighting conservatives on an equal playing field.

Sorry about the EXTREMELY LONG (even for me) rant. I've been wanting to write this out for months and Walker Rugino inspired me to blather on. This is why I complemented him for being succinct. As you can see, I don't have that ability.
 
 
+5 # othermother 2011-02-13 11:15
BB, why don't you do this as an article for GODOT instead of a string of rantlets? You could then revise for coherence. Too many points that might be interesting if developed get thrown away as asides.
 
 
+2 # billy bob 2011-02-13 13:53
You're right. I will.
 
 
+2 # stonepig 2011-02-13 10:12
OMG NO>>>FOX doesn't tell the truth as in fact finding and checking for honest journalism. I can hardly believe it. I thought all journalists had to tell the truth.
Just because the same buzz words show up in ABC, PBS, CBS, NBC, CNN, MSNBC...and Fox...just Fox is lying??? who are you kidding???
Is anyone paying attention and have you all forgotten history that quickly?
Ya, I know, we're the same crowd that cheered and supported Obusha too...
THEY ARE ALL in bed together, sucking the blood from our veins, stealing from our children, drowning out the wave of revolt with FBI searches, murdering millions with war, Rx drugs, guns, and suicide by stress or PTSD.
This is a nation of lost souls. So few, so extremely few, have the balls to stand up and fight. There just aren't enough really pissed off people to make the change before it's too late. We are a nation of wimps, we spend less time doing political actions than we do watching Idol. We are Rome.
 
 
+3 # Nurseinohio 2011-02-13 16:26
This is a reminder to us in our democracy that "propaganda" works. Remember learning about that in high school? It reigns in the USA.
 
 
+1 # Jean Louise 2011-02-15 08:32
Well, duh.
 
 
0 # eyepatch 2011-02-15 12:43
The issue here is Fox and every other News outlet owes it to the American people to be factual and accurate in
reporting "news" stories and when found
to be inaccurate they should quickly correct their inaccuracies because after all the "air waves" are leased from the Federal government and it is implicit that if you advertise your network as "fair and balanced" that you at least make an attempt to be that, else they should be made to use a disclaimer stating that items on their shows are opinion and not factually accurate.

Then people who watch Fox News will know that the "news" stories there are opinion and not facts! I believe if you are going to call yourself a "News" network then you should report the "news"
not fabricate it.
 
 
+3 # Todd Williams 2011-02-15 14:31
As a former newspaper/magaz ine writer, my take is this. CNN is very neutral, MSNBC is left leaning (particularly at night), and Fox is not a news channel at all. It is more like right wing talk show posing as a news channel. My take is based on nearly 40 years in the media business in one form or another. Take it for what it's worth. I know I won't turn on Fox crap for any reason.
 
 
0 # stephanie 2011-03-28 17:01
I totally agree with Todd. I am english and lived in new zealand for 27yrs. Fox news is not news but a comedy show and I watch it just to get my laugh fix for the day. I hate glenn becks rantings and Hannitys bullshit and particularly his 1950"s hairdo. Its all so right wing bollocks. Stephanie
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN