Oops…
FNC seems to be having trouble making up its mind about what Joe Lieberman is…
Joe Lieberman; Democratic Senator?
Or, Joseph Lieberman; Independent Senator?
I guess the graphics department needs to flush those old lower thirds…
January 30, 2007
27 Comments »
TrackBack: http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/01/30/flip-flop/trackback/
RSS feed for comments on this post.
just like a politician..cant make up its mind. talk about flip floppin.
Comment by Big Dave — January 30, 2007 @ 2:30 pm
I thought it was odd they labeled him as a democrat the other day. IMO, they might as well label him a republican.
Comment by Terance — January 30, 2007 @ 2:35 pm
As I’ve said before… I’ve seen someone fired at FNC for graphic mistake… that didn’t even make it to air! I know they take things like this very seriously.
Comment by ImNotBlue — January 30, 2007 @ 2:38 pm
#3 Who are you trying to kid? FNC taking anything RNC talking points seriously is a joke. If they really took graphics that serious, then why would Mark Foley have been mislabeled a Democrat not once, BUT TWICE in the run up to the election. Then again, “some people” have said that it was deliberate. If what you say is true and FNC is very serious about this type of thing, then it had to be intentional right?
Comment by Shaun — January 30, 2007 @ 3:09 pm
should be ‘anything but RNC talking points…’
Comment by Shaun — January 30, 2007 @ 3:11 pm
Shaun.. I’m sure there’s room for you at “ThinkProgress”… go be stupid there.
Comment by ImNotBlue — January 30, 2007 @ 3:26 pm
The following is still my favorite Fox banner. Of course based on this banner alone one shouldn’t doubt the intentions of Fox producers in getting their graphics right.
Example
Comment by elmonica — January 30, 2007 @ 3:45 pm
El-that was on Hannity & Colmes. That’s an opinion show. Do we need to go into all the odd CNN graphic “mistakes” of the past year or so? There have been several, and most were ant-Bush.
Comment by bigred — January 30, 2007 @ 4:37 pm
Oh, like that “X” over Cheney’s face?
Comment by eddiebear — January 30, 2007 @ 4:57 pm
I’m not blue who give you the authority to decide who can post on this blog. Instead of adressing the issue that shaun raised you choose to hide under infantile insults and had the audacity to try to redirect him to another site.
Comment by Sam — January 30, 2007 @ 5:17 pm
As a CT resident I can tell you that Lieberman labels himself an Independent Democrat……So both graphics have merit ;-)
Comment by Wenchie — January 30, 2007 @ 6:17 pm
ImNotBlue,
Shaun bringing up the FNC mislabeling of the sexual predator Mark Foley as “D” doesn’t make him stupid. It makes someone in FNC’s graphic dept. stupid. I mean, twice? Intentional or not, the “D” gave the left a point of argument with regards to FNC having a bias against Democrats.
What’s with telling Shaun to go to ThinkProgress instead of addressing his query? According to your logic, I guess you should be over at FreeRepublic instead of here?
Comment by STP — January 30, 2007 @ 6:58 pm
My comment to Shaun, is in reference to his comment to me. And for those who didn’t read, I’ll say it again.
I’ve actually seen someone at FNC fired for a graphic mistake, less important than this. They had forgotten to type in the date and source on a full screen graphic, leaving the template to say: “Enter Date Here” and “Enter Source Here” This was caught before the show went to air, and so frustrated was graphic department guy (VP of Graphics? Whatever, not important) that he angrily said to the producer “That’s it, he’s done.” And then marched upstairs to fire the guy.
Shaun’s comment that “FNC taking anything RNC talking points seriously is a joke.” has no place in a forum like this where we are not supposed to be giving hyper-partisan political statements, rather more educated insight into the major cable news outlets. Shaun seems to want to spout nonsensical, far left shouting points, instead of intelligent discussion. There’s a place for that on the web, and those people are entitled to their shouting… but this isn’t the place for it.
Comment by ImNotBlue — January 30, 2007 @ 11:11 pm
Information in the lower thirds doesn’t have anything to do with the graphics people. In general, the Associate Producer puts the lower third in. Ideally, the Line Producer and/or Senior Producer will check it, but sometimes mistakes happen.
Despite what you think about Fox’s bias, they do take mistakes like that seriously - especially sloppy, preventable mistakes (misspellings, party affiliation, etc).
Comment by Joey Joe Joe — January 31, 2007 @ 2:09 am
C’mon I’m not blue. Isn’t this blog (the comment section at least)the same place where we see people slander certain TV stations and tv personalities, please dont try to blend reality to suit your argument. A quick glance through the ICN archives will show you that there have been numerous less than intelligent arguments made here on ICN’s comment section (both from the left and the right) so to somehow pretend otherwise is intillectually dishonest. Besides when did calling somone stupid become an intelligent way to argue.
Comment by Sam — January 31, 2007 @ 3:49 am
*bend
Comment by Sam — January 31, 2007 @ 3:50 am
No Sam… this blog shouldn’t be a hot spot for slander. It becomes that at times because some people cannot divest their own personal political beliefs, from information about cable news. Comments that are purely political rhetoric, rather than actual insight into anything television related have no place here.
Comment by ImNotBlue — January 31, 2007 @ 11:35 am
“some people cannot divest their own personal political beliefs, from information about cable news. Comments that are purely political rhetoric, rather than actual insight into anything television related have no place here.”
Some people being people who say things like this?
Regarding Ford’s funeral: “I’m sure Dobbs could have suggested he [Ford’s body] get dumped behind a McDonalds, and KO wouldn’t have complained.”
You do recognize that purely political rhetorical shot directed at KO, don’t you? You should since it’s your comment. Not exactly something that adds intellect or insight and has no place in a forum like this according to your own reasoning. From what I’ve read here on numerous instances, it’s very clear you don’t like KO. Fine. But when you took a thoughtful opinion piece by Spud and used it to take an ridiculously nasty shot at KO, your comment became nothing more than the very thing that you say doesn’t belong here.
Now I don’t care what your personal politics are or that you too make some partisan posts here. But please don’t advise a poster to go somewhere else because you think he/she is being stupid or tell others to stop being so partisan in their remarks.
Comment by STP — January 31, 2007 @ 8:17 pm
STP, please. My comment was not politically motivated… rather a shot at Olbermann’s overwhelming bias that colors everything he says and does. If it’s negative for the republicans, or if it’s done by the liberals, it’s great and makes the cut. Anything that may contradict his world view meets the cutting room floor, and dare not be spoken. Watch his show… you’ll see.
No, I don’t like KO. But not because he’s a liberal or a democrat. That’s fine… we need a strong democratic party to keep the republicans from getting lazy, and visa versa. However, he is irresponsible, and throws about opinion as fact… confusing and misrepresenting the truth for his own political bias. Especially under the guise of a “news man” and “this generations Edward R Murrow,” he is a worthy target, and I make no apologies for attacking him.
Comment by ImNotBlue — January 31, 2007 @ 10:43 pm
STP- FURTHERMORE, I did a little checking to see the article you quoted. Other people can see it here:
http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/01/04/opinion-tone-deaf/#comments
Apparently you missed the part of the opinion peace where Spud said, “I’m surprised this didn’t get a WPITW medal.” Looks like the topic of Olbermann had already been brought up… and I was responding to that comment.
If you’re going to quote me, please don’t purposely distort things to fit your argument… we don’t have to fight for ratings on this website… we should be better than that.
Comment by ImNotBlue — January 31, 2007 @ 10:50 pm
Please i’m not blue your stepping on your own toe- first you say this is absolutley no place for political rhetoric, slander and negativity, however on the same hand you try to defend your own negative and caustic comments towards “keith Dobberman” (as someone of the “enlightened” people here at ICN refer to him as) and msnbc, stating that because you think his show is bias and geared towards one side, that justifies your negativity. word to “INB” there are others out there who feel same sentiments towards fnc, so what makes you right and them stupid, besides when did calling someone stupid become a reasonable and intelligent way to argue. You say that shaun saying that FNC spouts right wing talking points is stupid and hyper- partisan, but when people make statements about MSNBC spouting left wing talking points, you dont seem to mind- i guess in your world only one type of critique is reasonable and insightful, everything else is just stupid. Who died and made you the purveyor of what is reasonable, what is intelligent and what is politically appropriate to be posted here.
You are yet to even address the foley point shaun made- but i guess to bring up the Foley point is also hyperpartisan and stupid in your eyes.
Comment by Sam — February 1, 2007 @ 1:02 am
Okay… let me respond one by one.
“you try to defend your own negative and caustic comments towards “keith Dobberman” (as someone of the “enlightened” people here at ICN refer to him as) and msnbc…” Did I call him that? No. So don’t lump me in with other people you’re mad at. I don’t change people’s names to make a juvenile joke like that. It’s dumb when it’s “Dobbermann” (and don’t make much sense), and it’s dumb when it’s “FAUX News” or “O’Rally”.
“so what makes you right and them stupid” The difference is evidence. If someone lays out an legitimate example of bias, than how could it be stupid. Pointing to a graphic mistake, and then saying “FNC taking anything RNC [sic] talking points seriously is a joke.” is ignorant, and has no factual backing or justification. Show me an RNC note that they’ve used… show me some communications… show me something that wasn’t written on a blue blog. It is a stupid thing to say, and anyone who has watched FNC knows it’s not true.
And where did I say MSNBC was taking the democrats talking points? But even if they do, and FNC takes the republicans… it’s not the network who does so, it’s the hosts. The difference on FNC is that they bring on people to debate the points with them, from both sides of the isle. And this is the real crux of the problem FNCers have with MSNBCers… FNC debates a point, MSNBC presents a point.
But I digress… as for my not addressing the Foley thing… I didn’t think it needed to be said… but I guess it does. No, it was a mistake… a bad mistake, but a mistake nonetheless. Prove to me that it wasn’t a mistake… that someone got a memo that said, “Call him a democrat… maybe nobody will noticed” and then we’ll talk. Why would a news station that (admittedly) already has credibility issues make such an obvious blunder on purpose… it would be giving ammunition to the haters, and how could that be helpful? FNC didn’t get to number 1 by being stupid, that’s for sure.
Bottom line, and then I’m tired about talking about this, and repeating myself over and over again. I have no problem with MSNBC going left… just so long as they present themselves as BEING left, or bring in the right to debate their opinions. That’s only fair. Saying nonsense, and then getting upset when someone calls it out as being nonsense, is your fault, not mine. AND LASTLY, and because it is the header of the blog post, FNC made a graphical mistake. Ever have a typo? It happens. Not everything is a conspiracy. Move on.
Comment by ImNotBlue — February 1, 2007 @ 11:32 am
I’mNotBlue,
I absolutely did see Spud’s mention of TWPITW so don’t try to play that “you’re distorting my comment” game with me. You could have just said that if Dobbs were a republican, KO would have awarded it to him and stopped at that. Point made. But you continued on to add an ugly accusation directed at KO. KO wouldn’t want Ford’s body treated disrespectfully and you know that yet you made the snide comment anyway.
And just what did “dump Ford’s body behind a McD’s and KO wouldn’t complain” do for adding intellect or insight here? Nothing, that’s what. For you to be telling others to keep it intellectual, insightful, non-negative and non-partisan is the pot calling the kettle black. You’ve made comments here that show you’re not above doing exactly what you tell others to stop doing. While you tell others to quit being redundant with their anti-FNC remarks, you’re out there making negative KO and MSNBC posts over and over again. I don’t see you ridiculing those who make repetitive posts that are negative towards KO and MSNBC. Do you ignore their redundancies because they are expressing the same sentiments as you? You declare others’ opinions stupid yet yours and those who think like you escape the stupid label. I don’t see other posters here telling you which of your posts are acceptable but you seem to think it’s okay for you to dictate to others what they should or shouldn’t be posting. In my opinion, that’s bogus.
With regards to your saying that your comment was not politically motivated…no doubt you’ll deny it but I think your negative comments directed at KO are based on your own political bias and you’re attempting to mask it by saying it’s simply criticism for “KO’s overwhelming bias” and because he “is irresponsible and throws out opinion as fact”. Sorry but I’m not buying it. If it’s really those kind of things that motivate you, where’s your regular postings of criticism directed at O’Reilly or Hannity? They too have overwhelming biases, make irresponsible remarks and throw out opinion as fact. They too have inconsistencies and engage in spin. That’s what most commentator types do and it’s part of what either draws or repulses listeners. Because you don’t take pot shots at O’Reilly the way you do at KO, many of your comments have a distinct partisan ring to them. And I don’t think there’s anything wrong with that. I daresay most here are not ashamed to have a partisan bias. It’s the pretending that there’s no personal partisanship in your KO remarks that doesn’t sit well with me.
Please don’t assume I haven’t seen KO’s show. I’ve seen it and, while I think his show has a liberal bias, it doesn’t bother me because I haven’t heard him make the claim that his show is fair and balanced with regards to his commentary or his guests. His show is coverage of the top 5 news stories of the day mixed with commentary, opinion, humor and other silliness. His show is what it is and it seems to have found an audience with liberals and independents who like his humorous approach and the way he boldly takes on those on the other side of the issues. You don’t have to apologize for attacking KO. It just that it seems silly to attack someone for being biased when the object of your attack makes no claims of being fair and balanced. Hasn’t he even said he prefers to not have opposing views on his show?
One last thing, you are demanding that you be shown proof that FNC gets it’s talking points from the RNC. Several days ago you said “MSNBC seems to be instructing their employees to bash FOX at any opportunity”. How do you know this? Is there a company memo that you have a copy of in which the honchos at MSNBC tell their hosts to bash FNC? Or is it more your own personal conclusion?
Comment by STP — February 2, 2007 @ 2:15 am
Ugh… this is getting so tiresome. I’m going to try to do this quickly, because it’s getting really boring to say the same thing over and over again.
“You could have just said that if Dobbs were a republican…” Next time I decide to use an example to make my point, I’ll be sure to ask what your example would be… clearly it’s much better.
“While you tell others to quit being redundant…” I was referring to a comment in the post. If you want to talk about other posts I’ve made, or will make, respond to them there. People who are redundant say the exact same thing over and over again (”FNC isn’t journalism, they’re not journalists” “They get RNC talking points” blah blah blah), my comments reflect the topic at hand specifically, even if the point is the same.
“If it’s really those kind of things that motivate you, where’s your regular postings of criticism directed at O’Reilly or Hannity?” They have opposite points of view on their show to debate them. KO doesn’t. He says the idea of it makes him want to throw up (that’s a quote). If you have an opinion, great. If you spout it as fact, not opinion, bad. If you don’t have anyone to challenge your opinion, than you’re just a preacher.
“I haven’t heard him make the claim that his show is fair and balanced…” Well, here’s what KO says about himself:
“‘A lot of my personal world view is unmistakably sympathetic to things in a liberal play book,’ he said, ‘but honest to God, I have been called a reactionary by some on the far left, a liberal by some on the far right and I’m insulted by both terms. My point of view is about delivering information and context. It has nothing to do with a political point of view.’”
He’s also been quoted saying that he doesn’t vote, because he feels like he shouldn’t root for someone, or a party. And has pretty consistently denied having any personal bias towards one party or another. If you don’t believe me, Google it… it’s not tough.
“How do you know this? …Or is it more your own personal conclusion?” Yup… personal conclusion. That’s kinda why I said “MSNBC SEEMS to be…” Not that “MSNBC IS…” Duh.
Are we done with this now?
Comment by ImNotBlue — February 2, 2007 @ 1:33 pm
I never said your example of “if Dobbs were a republican” wasn’t good. It was a valid point. It was your insinuation that KO wouldn’t care how the body was treated which I had a problem with. You’re free to say it but it was a nasty and untrue thing to say. I notice you didn’t comment on that though. But, hey, since it’s KO, anything goes in your book? Not only did you not comment on that, you didn’t comment on the fact that many of your own remarks don’t meet the very expectations you set for others’ posts to meet. Don’t want to admit to your own negativity or lack of insight and intellect? Okay but your lack of acknowledgement is very telling. With you I guess it’s that old chestnut of “do as I say, not as I do”.
You have a habit of saying over and over again that SOMEONE ELSE’S comments are redundant. Yet you always think your repetitive comments against KO and MSNBC are relevant. Well, at least the posters here now know that the relevancy of their posts are determined by you. If they don’t make the cut, you belittle them or even tell them to leave. Just to make sure we all understand now, your repetitve negative comments = valid; repetitive negative comments from those you disagree with = invalid. LOL!
Wow, talk about missing the point. Even though O’Reilly and Hannity entertain opposing points of view on their TV shows, they still spin, throw out opinion as facts and make irresponsible comments (some of which have been really outrageous). And just because they allow opposing views, it shouldn’t keep fair-minded people from calling them out when they make these kind of remarks. Especially when their comments are being discussed here on a blog such as this. That fact that you don’t criticize pundits like O’Reilly for some of his out of line remarks reflects your personal political bias. And I guess since you didn’t deny the partisan accusation, the cat is now out of the bag. Nothing wrong with that. And, yes, I know KO doesn’t like opposing views. Did you not notice that I said so in my post?
Despite his admitting to being sympathetic to things in the liberal playbook, I have no doubt KO believes he is delivering information and context just like Hannity more than likely believes he too is delivering information and context despite his being staunchly conservative. But the info and context comment does not necessarily mean he believes he is being fair and balanced. He knows he isn’t; the lack of opposing points of view is proof of this and apparently he doesn’t think it’s something his type of show needs.
Yes, I know he has said he doesn’t vote and why. If it makes KO feel better not to vote and not to claim allegiance to a particular party because of what he does for a living, so be it. I don’t buy that he’s not a liberal just like I don’t buy that O’Reilly is an independent. With regards to it having nothing to do with a political point of view, I read where he feels he’s coming from an American point of view. Not sure I believe that there’s no political point of view involved but I do understand that he definitely believes he’s standing up as an American when he speaks out. Who knows, maybe his denying that he has a politcal point of view is just to piss off his critics? Maybe the more the opposition moans and pitches fits about about him, the more curious people will tune in to check his show out? I know several people who now watch him on a pretty regular basis from reading about him at Newsbusters. He’s like every other political host out there who knows controversary and outspoken frankness gets one noticed.
Whew, that’s good to hear you realize it’s only your personal conclusion. For a minute there, I thought you were attempting to get the rest of the readers here to believe it was true and that you yourself even thought it was a fact.
Comment by STP — February 2, 2007 @ 5:43 pm
I cannot believe how you’ve continued to post. I hope you’re getting some paid for this… stupidity of this magnitude deserves reimbursement. I guess I’ll respond to the nonsense, knowing full well that as soon as I give you a response, you’ll change the topic to something else unrelated, pull my quotes out of context, and make up some more facts to back up your “theories” as you have done time and time again.
“You’re free to say it but it was a nasty and untrue thing to say.” How or why is it untrue? Why is what I said any nastier than what anyone has said? Why do you pick on me for this, instead of all the liberal posters? BIAS ALERT… your slip is showing.
“Not only did you not comment on that,” Sorry, I tried to pick out the important things to respond to. Excuse me if some of your ramblings are so unfounded that I don’t even both to waste my time with them.
“Don’t want to admit to your own negativity or lack of insight and intellect?” Okay, from now on I’ll be all rosy. “KO is great at telling everyone how bad republicans are, and making up stories to fit his bias. He’s excellent at lying and leaving out information so that he always looks correct. Yippee yahoo and peanut butter too.” As for the last part, maybe it’s not a lack… maybe you just don’t understand. But I’ll try to - speak - slower - for - you.
“Yet you always think your repetitive comments against KO and MSNBC are relevant.” Let’s try this repetitive little comment. I make comments in reference to the topic at hand. If it’s about KO, O’Reilly responding to MSNBC, or anything like that… then KO gets mentioned. And the topic at hand is related to the comment about KO, not a generic “he sucks” like the FOX haters… but it relative to the topic at hand. You’d know that if you actually read everything, and not just what you want to see.
“If they don’t make the cut, you belittle them or even tell them to leave.” I have told one person to leave… and it was because their comment had NOTHING to do with reality, all to do with partisan bias, and added nothing to the discussion. That is the only time I’ll say something. Did you read the comment by Big Dave’s yesterday:
“Live in fear…Live in fear…Live in fear. That’s what bush with a little bit of help from fnc want you to do everyday of your life. Hmm..and Ailes makes it sound like CNN Head Jim Walton had something to do with this. I don’t think so…stop drinking that kool-aid.”
Comment by Big Dave — February 2, 2007
http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/02/02/ailes-on-boston-cartoon-network-pr-stunt/#comments
So what was the topic at hand? Can you tell? It was how Roger Alies said “Turner Broadcasting Chairman Phil Kent and CNN President Jim Walton, Ailes said, are “not the kind of guys who would do this. They’re very classy guys.” About the Boston thing. IT WASN’T EVEN A NEGATIVE STORY! WHERE YOU THEN? HUH? WHERE WAS THE “You’re not nice :(” BS FOR DAYS AND DAYS? And you dare to call ME a hypocrite! Pathetic!
“Wow, talk about missing the point. Even though O’Reilly and Hannity entertain opposing points of view on their TV shows, they still spin, throw out opinion as facts and make irresponsible comments” Yeah, I missed the point. Right. What you miss, is that while yes they spin, they have someone on the show to COUNTER the spin. They don’t just get away with saying whatever they want, they have opposition who holds their feet to the fire. The closest KO gets to having someone check his work, is when the run a spell checker before the print the scripts.
“And just because they allow opposing views, it shouldn’t keep fair-minded people from calling them out when they make these kind of remarks.” Sure they should be called out for it?! Who said they shouldn’t?! Are you just inventing things to get all worked up about now?
“And I guess since you didn’t deny the partisan accusation, the cat is now out of the bag.” Yeah, you figured me out. I’m a super partisan. In fact, I’m King of the Republicans. Captain of the Conservatives. Ruler of the Right Wing. It’s just a shame that I have to travel down here to dumbass village every now and then. No, I’m not a partisan. I’ve expressed that in other posts. And if you hadn’t noticed… I don’t post for everything. You didn’t post in response to what Big Dave said above… are you a super partisan too? I’ll criticize O’Reilly when I disagree with something he’s doing. I already said his attacking NBC and other news outlets is starting to get old… but perhaps you conveniently didn’t read that one.
“…just like Hannity more than likely believes he too is delivering information and context despite his being staunchly conservative.” WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG. This shows just how out of touch you really are. Hannity is a proud conservative, and refers to himself that way all the time. Listen to the radio show, it’s in the bumps. Google his name… his website comes up as “Hannity.com - Official site of syndicated conservative talk show host, and co-host of Fox News Channel’s Hannity and Colmes.” And you do think he believes he’s giving a conservative point of view? You can’t just make up stuff that’s so easily proved false!
“…the lack of opposing points of view is proof of this and apparently he doesn’t think it’s something his type of show needs.” Actually, when KO was confronted with the fact that he doesn’t have opposing view points last year, and only interviews democrats, he denied it saying that most of his people were independent journalists. Of course he didn’t count people from HuffPo as liberals… or well known FORMER republicans as liberals… So show me a quote, a transcript, an interview where he says he’s not fair. Where he says he’s a liberal who only shows one point of view. Prove me wrong with actual evidence… not your own theories.
“Who knows, maybe his denying that he has a political point of view is just to piss off his critics?” Are you suggesting that he’s lying to gain ratings… and that this is okay? Have you really gotten to that point in your ridiculous defense that it’s okay to knowingly lie to the public, under the guise of a newsman, to gain ratings. Wow… do you work for KO? Because with logic like that, I’m sure he’d be happy to scoop you up.
“Whew, that’s good to hear you realize it’s only your personal conclusion. For a minute there, I thought you were attempting to get the rest of the readers here to believe it was true and that you yourself even thought it was a fact.” Great job. You took what I said in reference to your question, and made up a new context for it. You’re excellent. The blue bloggers must be really proud. They have taught you well. If only everyone here had as little of a clue as you do, you might get away with it.
Comment by ImNotBlue — February 3, 2007 @ 8:42 pm
ImNotBlue,
Ah, more astounding hypocrisy from ImNotBlue. You can’t believe how I’ve continued to post yet here YOU are AGAIN posting on this? LOL! And, there YOU go AGAIN accusing another poster, me, of stupidty. You just keep making my point over and over. I can see that you’ve learned well from your hero, O’Reilly. If executed cleverly enough, diversion tactics can be used to take the heat off one’s self but I think most informed people are onto that little trick by now. Unfortunately for you, your attempt was nothing if not predictable and falsely based. Nice try though. And, no, I’m not getting paid.
You, honest to God, really think it’s true that KO wouldn’t complain if Ford’s body were to be dumped behind a McD’s?! I do think what you said about KO was a nasty thing to say but I didn’t say it was nastier than anything anyone else here has said so please quit putting words in my mouth. So my saying that you engage in “do as I say, not as I do” behavior at this blog are unfounded ramblings? Why am I not surprised you would say that? LOL! I suppose it is easier for you to simply label my pointing out your duplicitous conduct as ramblings and continue to ignore the hypocrisy of what you do here. Fine, call my posts to you ramblings if it makes you feel better about your actions but you cannot truthfully say my points are unfounded. There’s plenty of evidence to the contrary.
I can’t believe that you still don’t get why I’m “picking” on you. Trying to play the victim card? I’m sorry but that’s not going to fly. I’ve already made it clear but if you need me to explain it one more time I will. I know how much you just love repetitive comments (well, you do when it’s YOU who are making them).
The reason why I’m “picking” on you and not on all the liberals posters like you’d prefer is because they aren’t making the demands of others here that you make. You’ve made a point of tellling OTHERS here to quit making stupid, biased and redundant posts; you say you want them to make intelligent, insightful, positive posts about cable TV. I noticed that the posters you say this to are people whom you disagree with politically; not people who share your own political viewpoint. This is also proof of your conservative bias which you deny having. I used your KO/McD’s comment (which I did not take out of context) to show that you TOO make posts that can be considered just as stupid and biased as anyone else’s. I also pointed out that you TOO make redundant and biased posts despite your demand for others to stop it. You know very well that I’m confronting you on this because you told Shaun (above) to go elsewhere and be stupid. It’s hypocritical of you to tell others what they should and shouldn’t be posting when YOU don’t show the same restraint with regards to your own posts. Who died and made you the arbitrator of which posts are worthy of being here? Sorry if you don’t like it that I dare point out that your behavior here can be just as bad as those you excoriate. But it’s obvious you don’t follow your own rules and, therefore, probably shouldn’t be telling others how to post. It’s a pretty simple concept, ImNotBlue.
And, yes, my bias is showing. I will freely admit I’m biased against hypocrites who do tell others to quit making the same kind of posts that they themselves make. I must say your bias (even though you claim you don’t have one) is showing too especially when you asked why I’m not picking on all the liberal posters too. Why didn’t you ask why I’m not picking on all the conservative posters too? It’s clear you see yourself in a you vs. liberal posters situation here at this blog.
Wow, you really don’t get it do you?. I’m not saying for you to be all rosy about KO. Nor am I saying everything you post has to be intellectual, insightful or even relevant. But you tell others to post in ways that you won’t even comply with yourself. I don’t know if you really don’t see that what you’re doing is hypocritical or if you’re being purposely obtuse. Either way, it doesn’t reflect well on you.
Whether you think Shaun’s viewpoint deals with reality is not the point. He feels his viewpoint has reality and validity to it. The point is it wasn’t your place to tell him to leave. BigDave’s comment ties into the other comments about why Boston went so insane & the media getting a hold of the story. Obviously BigDave feels that too much was made of the possible terrorism angle on this Boston story. The media probably had people getting scared and he feels that FNC, part of the media, aids Bush in making us fearful. The thing is that I haven’t seen BigDave going around telling other people to quit being negative or telling people that they should only be adding insightful comments. It’s you who does that and that’s what makes you a hypocrite.
With regards to O’Reilly and Hannity, all along I have been talking about comments made HERE on this blog not whether their shows have opposing guests. I’m very relieved to see you agree that the outrageous remarks, spin and opinion stated as fact type of remarks that O’Reilly makes should be called out. You say you’ll comment when he does something you disagree with. O’Reilly has said his fair share of things that are spin, outrageous and false but I haven’t seen your remarks calling him out on it. So I’m to believe you haven’t disagreed with anything he’s said? Now that very telling. I saw your comment about O’Reilly’s attacks on NBC are “getting old”. Is that the strongest example you’ve got of your O’Reilly criticism? That’s pretty weak as far as criticism goes. Heck, probably half the board feels that way whether they are conservative, liberal or independent. Yeah, I know you say you’re non-partisan but many of your posts and comments to me show otherwise. Dumbass village? Another fine example of your supposed non-partisanship. Since I don’t make many posts here, I only respond to Spud’s articles or someone else’s comments when it strikes me to. Typically it’s something I read, saw on TV or a discussion I had with someone that ties into what I read here that motivates me to respond. BigDave’s comment didn’t strike me as something I needed to respond to.
How am I wrong in saying that Hannity more than likely believes he too is delivering information and context (despite his being staunchly conservative as opposed to being a liberal like KO)? I say more than likely because I’ve never heard him state those exact words but I listen to Hannity enough to know the guy is proud to be a conservative and espouses those views regularly. Obviously he believes (as I do) he’s giving his audience information and context from a conservative viewpoint! I think you completely misunderstood that paragraph.
I haven’t heard KO say that most of the journalists on his show are independent so I can only take your word for that statement. If you have a link to it, I’d enjoying reading it. But, if it’s true, I say that I’m not surprised he would say that just like he says he’s not a liberal (which I disagree with). He’s already said he doesn’t care for the political labels. Maybe their take on a particular issue fits in well with the angle he wants to take on a said issue.
Just like I said I’ve never heard him make the claim that his show IS fair and balanced, I also have not heard him say that it is NOT fair and balanced. Keep in mind, when I’ve used the 2 words fair and balanced here, I’m using them in the way FNC uses them…as having opposing views presented within the same show. With evidence such as his comment that “part of my deal with the network is that I don’t have to have debates” and since he doesn’t have opposing views on by his own request, basic logical reasoning is that he is not fair and balanced in the FNC context to which I’m referrring. That is what I based my conclusion on when I said that I think “he knows he isn’t” [fair and balanced]. If you asked him whether he’s fair and balanced in the way FNC uses the words, I can’t help but think he’d agree he isn’t because he doesn’t follow FNC’s philosophy (on fair and balanced). He has his own beliefs in which he says “the idea that balance is always fair is absolutely false”. He feels no need to have an opposing view on his show because he thinks “having both sides politically debating a point adds nothing to the political discourse”. Like I said in my last post, I think that he sees himself as speaking out as an American who is not happy with the way some things are going. Maybe he sees himself, his comments and discussions as being fair and balanced responses to the actions and words of Bush and the GOP? I guess you’d have to ask him that to know for sure.
I said “who knows, maybe…”. It was just speculation on my part as to why he doesn’t call himself a liberal when asked (despite my thinking that he is one). It wouldn’t be the first time a talking head has said something they know is not true in order to antogonize their critics or gain attention in order to help the buzz about their show. I never said I thought it was okay to lie in order to gain ratings so don’t spin it that way. I’m saying it happens. Just ask O’Reilly. Like KO, I don’t think O’Reilly is telling the truth about his politics. O’Reilly has claimed he’s an independent despite his own voter registration card showing where he clearly checked the republican box back in ‘94. When confronted about this in 2000 by a New York Daily News reporter, he played dumb and said he “didn’t even know I was registered as a Republican”. Sorry but I’m not buying it. He very smartly realized when starting his opinion show back in ‘96, that he would carry more weight with his audience if he was seen as independent of political parties. I think his stating he was an independent was a calculated lie on his part to help him with his audience. And knock it off with the “ridiculous defense” stuff. I’m not defending KO. I repeated things he himself has said about his political viewpoint but I’ve also said I don’t believe him when he says he not a liberal. Maybe this logic you are referring to would work better with O’Reilly?
Oh, come on now, you know you would have loved it if other readers had bought into your conclusion that “MSNBC seems to be instructing their employees to bash FOX at any opportunity”. And nevermind that you probably believe your statement is true despite your not being able to prove it. You’re just ticked off that I called you on it. What I inadvertantly left out when I first mentioned your MSNBC claim is that you also stated that Tucker and Scarborough are KO’s minions. OMG! Like Tucker and Scarborough are such weak persons that they would follow KO’s orders?! That KO would even tell them what to do on their respective shows?! Hate to break your delusional little bubble, InNotBlue, but O’Reilly made false statements about conservatives at MSNBC and Scaborough and Tucker probably had strong feelings of their own. I seriously doubt they needed KO to tell them to call out O’Reilly on what he said.
Sorry to disappoint you but I haven’t been trained by any blue blogs. I know it would make things easier for you if you could just think that everyone who criticizes your hypocritical behavior here must be the spawn of some “evil” blue blog. And why do you only mention blue blogs? Maybe I learned how to post from the regulars at the red blogs? But that would never occur to you what with your conservative bias. After reading your posts, one thing is apparent if
nothing else and that is that you certainly have no business calling me or anyone else clueless. After all, you’re the one who’s a partisan hypocrite in full-blown denial.
Comment by STP — February 9, 2007 @ 12:24 pm