Jump to content
Slate Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate Marble
Slate Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate Marble
Sign in to follow this  
TypeO

MSNBC makes FOX truly look "fair and Balanced"

Recommended Posts

And let's keep in mind, Norah O'Donnell is chief Washington, D.C. correspondent for MSNBC.

And this clip is her acting in her capacity as a reporter, not some opinion-based show like O'Reilly, Beck, etc.

Watch and listen how she goes after a random teenager in line at Sara Palin's book-signing.

You'd think she was arguing her side of an issue against Karl Rove, such is her intensity as she grills this girl, asking her about Palin's position on the bailout, after getting research written on a note before she starts the interview, and later asking her what policies of Palin's does she like, "What policies specifically?"

To the girl's credit, she hung in there pretty well being put on the spot considering she didn't have the benefit of a research team back at the network office like Norah.

Instead of just reporting, she is trying to make a point.

Again, this is the biggest problem I have with the media.

If it was Olbermann or Rachel Maddow out there, it wouldn't be much of an issue.

They have opinion-based shows.

But she was supposedly reporting, when in fact she had a very specific agenda.

And notice the title of the video - MediaMatters giddily relishes the fact Norah "stumps" a Palin supporter, conveniently omitting any mention of the girl's age.

Since Norah was trying so hard to expose Palin supporters as not being aware of the issues, she should probably appreciate Howard Stern's prank on Obama voters in Harlem...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And let's keep in mind, Norah O'Donnell is chief Washington, D.C. correspondent for MSNBC.

She turns from the child after she spoke using specifics, then pulls the mic away from the gentleman while he was speaking with specifics, and states the people who feel a connection to Sarah Palin cannot be specific about why they feel that way. A "reporter" with an overt political bias can be so insulting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would love to have seen Ms. O'Donnell or anyone else in the MSM confront an Obama supporter like that during the 2008 election with uncomfortable facts about their candidate, along the lines "would you still support him if you knew he had the most liberal voting record in the Senate?" I certainly can't remember any MSMer confronting an Obama supporter in such a way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you're being a little over-dramatic over this, surely she should have been more neutral when posing the questions, but c'mon I've seen worse. But yeah I guess journalism is getting a bit biased in America and that should be worrying.

As for the other video, I think it's interesting, they were agreeing with certain policies because they thought those were Obama policies. But I guess that works both ways you know, I'm sure many people disagree with Obama and Democrats just because they aren't white, republicans or whatever and are convinced that socialism is coming, it's ridiculous, it's like politics is only about making an impression instead of discussing the policies without judging were it's coming from.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I could care less about this, but allow me to use this thread to make a political prediction. Sarah Palin will never get the Republican nomination, but that won't stop her from campaigning. I believe she will run in 2012 on a third party ticket which will split the Republican party. This will allow the Democrats to run Elmer Fudd if they choose, and still keep the Presidency.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you're being a little over-dramatic over this, surely she should have been more neutral when posing the questions, but c'mon I've seen worse.

So unless it's the absolute worst you've ever seen, it isn't a legitimate concern?

This is the exact sentiment that sensationalism and desensitization thrives on.

Instead of having a set tolerance for a particular thing, the tolerance level increases with each subsequent more excessive instance.

For instance, first we're shocked when there's a school shooting.

Then Columbine comes along, and there's a whole new paradigm for school violence.

So when there's another shooting, if it doesn't surpass the new shock threshold, we're merely sad there was a shooting, but it wasn't the worst we've seen.

And this is the very sentiment the media is counting on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I could care less about this, but allow me to use this thread to make a political prediction. Sarah Palin will never get the Republican nomination, but that won't stop her from campaigning. I believe she will run in 2012 on a third party ticket which will split the Republican party. This will allow the Democrats to run Elmer Fudd if they choose, and still keep the Presidency.

She's gone on record, like much of the jerkoffs at Fox News, that she's "more conservative than Republican."

And that's why they fail. :rolleyes:

Keep pushing the Moderates out. They hold the keys to the Party. :P

I caught round 1 of her interview with O'Reilly last night. I got what I expected. O'Reilly did ask a few good questions, but by in large, it was a safe interview with no real tangiable information. I realize tonight's part will deal with policy so I'm sure she'll continue to prove me right; she's an idiot and makes the Republicans look more like baffoons than they do themselves.

Edited by bigstickbonzo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this thread an attempt to circumvent this faux-pas? This is MUCH BETTER 'news'.Fox News again accused of airing misleading videopalin-blog-pd.jpgThu Nov 19, 3:36 pm ETFor the second time in just over a week, Fox News is coming under fire for misusing old news footage. The latest flap is leading some people to charge that the cable news network is intentionally misleading its audience, while Fox claims a "production error." Wednesday's incident occurred when Fox News host Gregg Jarrett mentioned that a Sarah Palin appearance and book signing in Grand Rapids, Michigan had a massive turnout. As footage rolled of a smiling and waving Palin amidst a throng of fans, Jarrett noted that the former Republican vice-presidential candidate is "continuing to draw huge crowds while she's promoting her brand-new book,'' adding that the images being shown were "some of the pictures just coming in to us.... The lines earlier had formed this morning."However, the video used in the segment was from a 2008 McCain/Palin campaign rally. In response to the minor uproar that arose after clips of Jarrett's report hit the Internet, Fox senior vice-president of news Michael Clemente issued an initial statement saying, "This was a production error in which the copy editor changed a script and didn't alert the control room to update the video."On Thursday afternoon, Fox News issued an on-air apology delivered by host Jane Skinner:more:http://news.yahoo.com/s/ynews/ynews_ts988

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MSNBC is the Obama network. Honestly all of the major networks suck. Fox is owning MSNBC and CNN by over 2-1 in ratings Combine CNN and MSNBC together and you can't beat Fox's ratings. That just shows how bad the other two networks are right now, not how good Fox is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I could care less about this, but allow me to use this thread to make a political prediction. Sarah Palin will never get the Republican nomination, but that won't stop her from campaigning. I believe she will run in 2012 on a third party ticket which will split the Republican party. This will allow the Democrats to run Elmer Fudd if they choose, and still keep the Presidency.

You could be right, but I think the republican and democrat parties are pretty much irrelevant anyway. It'll come down to who wins the congressional seats. I think we'll see the democrats lose a ton of those seats because they are being beat up more than Obama is right now. The republicans basically ran a democrat as their candidate last time and they probably will go the same way this time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All media outlets are manipulating liars...They trade in 2 things..Anger and FEAR...which blinds people to the true nature of things

So none of this should suprise anybody...It's all about creating divisions

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So unless it's the absolute worst you've ever seen, it isn't a legitimate concern?

This is the exact sentiment that sensationalism and desensitization thrives on.

Instead of having a set tolerance for a particular thing, the tolerance level increases with each subsequent more excessive instance.

For instance, first we're shocked when there's a school shooting.

Then Columbine comes along, and there's a whole new paradigm for school violence.

So when there's another shooting, if it doesn't surpass the new shock threshold, we're merely sad there was a shooting, but it wasn't the worst we've seen.

And this is the very sentiment the media is counting on.

You either didn't read my whole post or you misinterpreted it, either way I was merely pointing that by reading the previous posts it sounded like she punched the girl or something, you know what I mean, and then I said, I believe at the end, something about being concerned with biased journalism.

I'm condemning the thing too I just think that just because msnbc and fox do it doesn't make it ok, it's not a competition, like winning the contest for the news channel that is more political biased.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All media outlets are manipulating liars...They trade in 2 things..Anger and FEAR...which blinds people to the true nature of things

So none of this should suprise anybody...It's all about creating divisions

I think that's the same with politicians also. It's not like the politicians have said one thing that is true about their healthcare bill. There will be less choice and no competition after this bill passes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that's the same with politicians also. It's not like the politicians have said one thing that is true about their healthcare bill. There will be less choice and no competition after this bill passes.

And you want competition for health? I mean its health right? I only care about the best medical care possible I don't care about who delivers it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MSNBC is the Obama network. Honestly all of the major networks suck. Fox is owning MSNBC and CNN by over 2-1 in ratings Combine CNN and MSNBC together and you can't beat Fox's ratings. That just shows how bad the other two networks are right now, not how good Fox is.

Fox is having a surge right now, because of Obama's comments about it. But you're making a false comparison of CNN and MSNBC. CNN is about as neutral as it's possible to be, now Lou Dobbs is gone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And you want competition for health? I mean its health right? I only care about the best medical care possible I don't care about who delivers it.

I think the problem with healthcare is there are too many restrictions on it from the government right now. Getting more government involvement is going to make healthcare tougher to get for people that can't get it not easier to get. What will happen is that people will get healthcare for certain things but then they won't get certain types of healthcare. Like you can't check for certain cancers or heart diseases till you are a certain age just to save money. So more people will end up getting diseases because they fall through the cracks and won't get healthcare paid for because they figure they are better off dying than paying for their healthcare. It'll just end up being a big mess like it is in Canada and in Great Britain right now. Healthcare is tearing up those 2 countries right now just like it is here. Only here there's 300 million people instead of about 10 million people. In the end the government won't be able to create enough money to support the healthcare system it wants to take over.

The best way to fix healthcare is to cap the law suits against doctors and to allow healthcare to be used across state lines. You know use capitalism to make it cheaper. That's what has made America work for about 230 years.

Edited by NickZepp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fox is having a surge right now, because of Obama's comments about it. But you're making a false comparison of CNN and MSNBC. CNN is about as neutral as it's possible to be, now Lou Dobbs is gone.

Foxnews' ratings have been going up for a long, long time. In fact they started going up around late 2006 or so and have not really even been closed in ratings since around this time. The ratings for Fox haven't really changed since the Obama war on them started. But they haven't really gone down either. MSNBC and CNN just don't really do as good a job as FoxNews does and don't really pay attention to the real news at all. They just promote their own rhetoric and kiss up to the communist ideas that have been going through politics the last decade. The only good thing that FN does is that it is capitalist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the problem with healthcare is there are too many restrictions on it from the government right now. Getting more government involvement is going to make healthcare tougher to get for people that can't get it not easier to get. What will happen is that people will get healthcare for certain things but then they won't get certain types of healthcare. Like you can't check for certain cancers or heart diseases till you are a certain age just to save money. So more people will end up getting diseases because they fall through the cracks and won't get healthcare paid for because they figure they are better off dying than paying for their healthcare. It'll just end up being a big mess like it is in Canada and in Great Britain right now. Healthcare is tearing up those 2 countries right now just like it is here. Only here there's 300 million people instead of about 10 million people. In the end the government won't be able to create enough money to support the healthcare system it wants to take over.

The best way to fix healthcare is to cap the law suits against doctors and to allow healthcare to be used across state lines. You know use capitalism to make it cheaper. That's what has made America work for about 230 years.

I don't know about other countries but in my country everyone has health insurance, I was actually a bit shocked to know that it wasn't like that in America, I look at it as a development, the more developed countries in the world work like that. It works for us and many others across the globe, of course the insurance doesn't cover everything, I'm not really sure about what covers and whatnot but I know it doesn't cover for plastic surgery for example (obviously).

The way I see it is: It's a big and profound change, and Americans probably are worried that they're way of life will be forever changed, like you're loosing something typically American. I get the American culture and history and way of thinking, or at least I like to think so, so you're all having this big discussion and finding every possible flaw about something that is the best and decent and humane thing to do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Without competition there is no incentive to improve service or adhere to any standards other than the law requires, and when the overriding concerns behind those standards the law requires are costs and profits for insurance & pharm companies...

No doctors, insurance or drugs for me, I'll play the hand I was dealt before anyone makes a dime off my suffering

Are you kidding? Health is not a business it's a basic need. And if doctors are paid (which they always are) they will do their job the possible way they can. And if they wanna make more money there's always private clinics and hospitals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wasn't talking about doctors, they, for the most part are honourable people trying to make a difference. Insurance and drug companies are profit hungry scum who are very willing to use their influence(money) to enact legislation for their benefit, not yours

Sorry, yeah I agree with that about the drug companies, but isn't that the case already?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, yeah I agree with that about the drug companies, but isn't that the case already?

Drugs will just escalate higher and higher because there's going to be less competitions with them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Drugs will just escalate higher and higher because there's going to be less competitions with them.

Ok, obviously I'm no expert in this subject, but aren't we just talking about health care? I just don't see the connection between wanting every US citizen covered with basic health care and drug companies expanding their profit and other stuff like that. I guess I have to pay more attention to this and read more about it, maybe?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, obviously I'm no expert in this subject, but aren't we just talking about health care? I just don't see the connection between wanting every US citizen covered with basic health care and drug companies expanding their profit and other stuff like that. I guess I have to pay more attention to this and read more about it, maybe?

Drugs are used in healthcare, what's going to happen is that people are not going to get treated because it'll be too expensive to treat someone for something and they are going to be seen as not worth that treatment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Drugs are used in healthcare, what's going to happen is that people are not going to get treated because it'll be too expensive to treat someone for something and they are going to be seen as not worth that treatment.

But that's exactly what public and universal(is this term right?) health care aims to solve. With public health care everyone is worth the treatment. Now the price of the drugs, there will still be competition amongst the drug companies, therefore keeping the price low, honestly I don't see where's the problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...