Unspinning the faux news/infotainment cycle (Page 3): I just noticed that myself, so I guess I was right the first time. :-D :D.

LAPhil Loc: Los Angeles, CA

Slingblade68 wrote:

Apology accepted and confirmed. I recognized that it was not necessarily directed at me. However, you were "spot on" with your summation. It was an error on my part. Carry on my friend.

I just noticed that myself, so I guess I was right the first time. :-D :D.

Slingblade68 Loc: Charleston SC

Roger that,

Coos Bay Tom Loc: coos bay oregon

emarine wrote:

You must be new to America... or you have a very s... (show quote)

:thumbup: :thumbup:

LAPhil Loc: Los Angeles, CA

Slingblade68 wrote:

Roger that,

Slingblade, seriously, this is something that seems to afflict a lot of people here. If you could click on the "Quote Reply" button before you post then we would all know who you're talking to. Thanks.

emarine

Slingblade68 wrote:

Again you are proving my point. I never suggested ... (show quote)

I find it ironic how conveniently you skip over the Bush's when referencing lying Presidents... You choose to speculate over the few in Benghazi and ignore the thousands lost and wounded in Iraq...Selective memory on a epic scale... Is it the fact you voted for Bush twice and were totally duped... your entire argument is pathetically transparent to anyone who can think for themselves.

AuntiE Loc: 45th Least Free State

emarine wrote:

So you have been with us for a while... good...you... (show quote)

I think the point is the topic is about beliefs bout the current President. It seems whenever a possible prevarication by the current President is mentioned a segment of posters must rush back to cite Bush's prevarications. Staying on topic, which is President Obama, would be more useful. Perhaps no one has noticed. Bush is no longer in office.

BoJester

Perhap you didn't notice this topic was about the faux spin and lies.

But then the faux, fat limblow and teapartyconservative tactic is deflection and distortion when they can't face facts

AuntiE wrote:

I think the point is the topic is about beliefs bout the current President. It seems whenever a possible prevarication by the current President is mentioned a segment of posters must rush back to cite Bush's prevarications. Staying on topic, which is President Obama, would be more useful. Perhaps no one has noticed. Bush is no longer in office.

Slingblade68 Loc: Charleston SC

emarine wrote:

I find it ironic how conveniently you skip over the Bush's when referencing lying Presidents... You choose to speculate over the few in Benghazi and ignore the thousands lost and wounded in Iraq...Selective memory on a epic scale... Is it the fact you voted for Bush twice and were totally duped... your entire argument is pathetically transparent to anyone who can think for themselves.

I didn't "Skip over" the Bush years. I simply was affording you with the facts. Did the Bush presidents look the American people in the eye and categorically lie to them. I recognize, moreover, have a heavy heart for every American who has sacrificed his life for any reason. Going all the way back to our Own revolutionary war . Moreover Our Civil war. I am not minimizing any human loss. Unfortunately collateral damage is all part of defending freedom. Even if it's not our own.

I never "Speculated " over Benghazi. I reviewed all the pertinent information provided . Including the hearings on same. Read the transcripts from both the select committee and those that were actually there. How objective and unbiased that information was is relative. I am not privy to everything. No man is. I read all that is available, watch the hearings etc. and reach a logical unbiased conclusion. I didn't agree with Bushes reaction to 911 with the "Home land Security" action. In fact there are a number of issues I have with every president . Men are fallible.

I do have a problem when the Constitution is circumvented . Not only for political gain,moreover for an unrealistic ideology. We all would enjoy living in a utopian , euphoric state. Unfortunately, That is a Fantasy. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

I am not here to discuss Bush, Nixon, Clinton or any-other previous President. I simply provided them as examples. This particular segment of this site is dedicated for the (Occasionally) objective overview of Our current Ruler. That is the Ball you must keep your eye on. I am not here to debate past Presidents by playing the Deny then Blame game. Ask yourself one pertinent question. Are you better off today, than you were five years ago.

LAPhil Loc: Los Angeles, CA

Slingblade68 wrote:

I didn't "Skip over" the Bush years. I s... (show quote)

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

BoJester

The original post was about the way the fools at faux spin the news to suit their own narrative, especially about the current president.

Slingblade68 wrote:

I didn't "Skip over" the Bush years. I s... (show quote)

LAPhil Loc: Los Angeles, CA

BoJester wrote:

The original post was about the way the fools at faux spin the news to suit their own narrative, especially about the current president.

Yes, Bo, we get it. Do you even watch Fox News? If you do, why, since you have such a low opinion of it?

Liberty Tree

LAPhil wrote:

Yes, Bo, we get it. Do you even watch Fox News? If you do, why, since you have such a low opinion of it?

He has no opinion of his own. He just repeats DNC talking points.

jackmcgr1

You still didn't ANSWER MY QUESTION!

AuntiE Loc: 45th Least Free State

BoJester wrote:

Perhap you didn't notice this topic was about the faux spin and lies.

But then the faux, fat limblow and teapartyconservative tactic is deflection and distortion when they can't face facts

I did read the link. I am aware of the topic; however, it was Fox News in reference to the current President. I would say both sides are excellent at "deflection and distortion". For every I accuracy Fox issues, it is likely MSNBC has Don the same. Are you unable to understand each has an agenda. The same is applicable to print media and internet news media.

Slingblade68 Loc: Charleston SC

BoJester wrote:

The original post was about the way the fools at faux spin the news to suit their own narrative, especially about the current president.

Acknowledged and recognized. However, You have CNN,ABC,CBS,NPR, MSNBC, Huffington Post, New York Times, Wall Street journal, Newsweek, Mother Jones, the list is a veritable smorgasbord of Biased information. Shall I continue ? Or would enjoy me affording you the hundreds of fettered publications professing the the Anointed One's rhetoric.

Fox news may lean a bit to the right. However, they are not telling Americans "What to think" they are simply providing "The rest of the story". There job is to entertain and inform. Mark Styne, Michele Malkin, Marl levin, Plato, Madison, Jefferson all exemplify the other side of our political landscape. It's your "Free will" that is the determining factor as to what you conclude as the truth.

My motto is "Don't tell me... Show me" Dana Perino was the press secretary for GW. She said in an interview that she never spoke "Out of School" on any issue unless she had conclusive, quantitative,qualitative, empirical, evidence to back up same. In short , she refused to answers questions that she didn't have an answer too. She never, went out and blatantly misrepresented the facts. Or even the facts as she knew them. Why? Because she has integrity. I respect her, not only for her resolve . Moreover , because she doesn't follow party lines . Simply for that sake.

If you want to compare and contrast Fox news and all the other competing News organizations.. Let's have a rational debate on their collective contributions to an Unbiased media.
Can you please look up some of Chris Mathews quotes .. You might be surprised ..