Whoops, nope, we were wrong. Fox still has no integrity whatsover. - Page 3 - New England Patriots Forums

***patsfan13*** · 02-19-2007, 09:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PressCoverage

[COLOR="DarkGreen"]Hume: Murtha Is Senile, Doesn’t Have ‘The Foggiest Awareness’ Of What’s Going On In The World »

Now, to offer a bit of perspective here, let's consider that Brit Hume(orless) is, in fact, Fox's MAIN NEWS ANCHOR. To put it another way, he is their 6 o'clock guy, responsible for bringing the NEWS to America in the main news time slot. He then wears an overtly different hat on Sunday mornings for the network, when he becomes a viscous mouthpiece for nasty right wing agenda.

Does anyone remember Tom Brokaw, Peter Jennngs, or Sam Donaldson chiming in with geopolitical opinion for their respective networks every single week?

This is why Fox News is the most transparent, unapologetic embarrassment to real TV news journalism that we've ever witnessed. And old ladies in Oklahoma and evangelicals in Texas, and good ole' boy lawmakers in Mississippi eat it up.

The Propoganda network has played, and continues to play, a HUGE role in this illegal act of aggression against a sovereign nation and war profiteering on an unimaginable scale. If these were the days of Rome, they'd all be thrown off the Tarpeian Rock for high crimes against the Republic. Rupert Murdoch first and foremost.

Hume was filling his role as a panel commentator on a Fox News Sunday where his role is to offer OPINIONS not as a news host during a news broadcast.

Hopefully that is too hard for you to understand.

IS murtha above criticism because you agree with his views?

***DarrylS*** · 02-19-2007, 10:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by scout

I think that someone who fought in Vietnam has more credibility then someone who evaded that tour. Look back at all the evidence in which Bush talks about war, the power of the presidency, being a war time president, asking his cabinet members for an excuse to invade Iraq, cherry picking evidence to go to war, etc, etc. Now, please explain to me what is so outrageous about a Vietnam vet with two Purple Hearts arguing to end the worst policy decision in United States history. What is ridiculous is comparing what he is doing to what Bush has done.

Bingo!!, you won't get a response to this as it does not fit into the patterned talking points response offered, all of the people who support this blindly Hannity, Limbaugh, GWB, Cheney and most of their minions have never had boots on the ground, and this whole thing is viewed as some type of video game.

***patsfan13*** · 02-19-2007, 10:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by scout

I think that someone who fought in Vietnam has more credibility then someone who evaded that tour. Look back at all the evidence in which Bush talks about war, the power of the presidency, being a war time president, asking his cabinet members for an excuse to invade Iraq, cherry picking evidence to go to war, etc, etc. Now, please explain to me what is so outrageous about a Vietnam vet with two Purple Hearts arguing to end the worst policy decision in United States history. What is ridiculous is comparing what he is doing to what Bush has done.

Murtha was a reservist, Bush was a reservist Murtha's unit got called to active duty Bush's did not. BFD.

Pujo · 02-19-2007, 10:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by patsfan13

Murtha was a reservist, Bush was a reservist Murtha's unit got called to active duty Bush's did not. BFD.

Bush was a Texas Air National Guard reservist, Murtha was a Marine Corp reservist. Are you surprised why one of their units were called up while the other wasn't?

***patsfan13*** · 02-19-2007, 10:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pujo

Bush was a Texas Air National Guard reservist, Murtha was a Marine Corp reservist. Are you surprised why one of their units were called up while the other wasn't?

I served during that era. USAFR is state based, many were called up. So IMO it was a matter of chance whether you got called up or not.

The Utah ANG used to train and serve at Hill AFB where I was located.

Pujo · 02-19-2007, 10:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by patsfan13

I served during that era. USAFR is state based, many were called up. So IMO it was a matter of chance whether you got called up or not.

The Utah ANG used to train and serve at Hill AFB where I was located.

I'm sure that no matter how you look at it, a larger percentage of Marine Corp Reserve units were activated, opposed to Air National Guard units. There's a reason GW was in the "safer" unit, and I bet it had to do with his dad.

***Harry Boy*** · 02-19-2007, 10:36 AM

Murtha is a big slobbering bag of wind, Liberals like him because he is a "Bush Hater".

The liberal left wing has PBS, CBS, NBC, ABC, NY Times and College Professors.

The conservative right wing has "The Fox".

Fogbuster · 02-19-2007, 10:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GJAJ15

You've proven my point, and on and on and on and on and on and on and on.. goodness is this tiring.

You said you wanted "fair and balanced"; I gave it to you: this is NOT about a "b-job", it's about the fact that one president lied to a grand jury (Clinton), and now another president is being *accused* of lying -- without any findings by a grand jury investigation, by the way, just a lot of drum-beating for what can only be described as purely partisan vindictive purposes. Being accused by people on the street is NOT the same as being found guilty of lying to a Grand Jury, which Clinton was.

Bush has NOT been found guilty by any body of law, has not even gotten close to facing a grand jury, for that matter.

And -- it should be pointed out -- Speaker Pelosi has said she sees no constructive purpose in pursuing any findings of guilt or innocence regarding any "lying" by Bush, et al, because it is NOT in the national interest. We should at least heed her wisdom on this point, if nothing else.

Let us find a way to bring peace in the Middle East, so the killing of all people will stop. And so the U.S. military can return to the U.S. as soon as possible. But even that, it should be pointed out, is not necessarily needed due to the precedent of keeping in troops in South Korea for the past 53 years, as well as in places like Germany, Okinawa, and so forth. U.S. troops abroad have been a solid deterrent for renewed hostilities.

//

Fogbuster · 02-19-2007, 10:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pujo

That's a red herring. Nobody's talking about banning Fox. Fox has the right to say whatever they want, and I have the right to say that I don't like it. Nobody's taking it beyond that.

Well, then, what do you call: "Fox is an extension of the White House." ???

If that isn't bear baiting, I don't know what is!!

Anyhow, the conservative side now has a grand total of *one* network that will not parrot the same old same old. Whoopee dee.

//

Pujo · 02-19-2007, 10:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fogbuster

Well, then, what do you call: "Fox is an extension of the White House." ???

That has nothing to do with restricting Fox's right to say whatever they want. It's just that Fox's reporting consists of putting out White House press releases.