November 2 has come and gone, and the Outfoxed gals are not happy.

After the election returns came rolling in, things got moody over at the newshounds (another fine product of the Outfoxed mob). Don’t cross these hounds, they’ll snap back.

The ever-creative deborah came up with a scoop about the Fox News website:

Looking beyond the top stories, there was an interesting new article in the health a category. It focused on debunking the danger of industrial pollution on our health. The medical article by Jennifer Warner cited a new study, that turned out to be from 1999 to 2002, suggesting that mercury contamination in women was not a problem, claiming that only 6% of women had problem levels of mercury.The article stated that only shark, mackeral and swordfish were contaminated.

Oddly enough, deborah didn’t include a link to the article. If she had, people would have seen that this was actually a reprint of a report from the highly respected website WebMD. And the study was issued by the Centers for Disease Control. But what do they know? Deborah has a much more reliable source:

This article seriously conflicts with the studies published in Crimes Against Nature by Robert Kennedy Jr....According to Fox, none of that is a problem.

Yes, pay no attention to what the CDC is reporting, because the last word on the subject is what that renowned physician and microbiologist Bobby Kennedy says! We informed deborah:

• J$: It's not according to Fox. It's according to WebMD, which is the source of this article. And the stats are from the CDC. So I guess they're all in it together.
• NH: The stats are from the CDC from 1999 to 2002. Web MD called it new statistics which means that Fox pulled an old story to prove a point or Web MD is publishing old stats.Either they are both in it together or Web MD is publishing discredited information. Fox should know better because it is total garbage which can be refuted by any environmental scientist. Fox has Web MD all over their "new health site" and they are all hand picked to prove their point and I'm sure many are very old. You are never welcome on my posts JD and you are once again wrong.
• J$: I am sorry but you are mistaken. WebMD did not call it new statistics. It is a new study that was reported in the Nov. 5 issue of the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, based on the CDC statistics, the dates for which are given. So it is not an old story, since it references a report published just yesterday. I guess these people are in on it too. These silly people also thought a new study from the CDC was worthy of reporting. I guess they didn't realize it was "total garbage". After all, why listen to the latest report from the CDC when Robert Kennedy wrote a book!
• NH: This is press release from The Environmental Working Group from Nov 5 refuting the claims from the FDA and Web MD about Mercury contamination.

But this press release has nothing to do with the new report from the CDC. And is it from November 5? It appears deborah lied about that too--the report bears a copyright date of 2001.

• I will say clearly that yes the FDA and Fox are all in on it.

Break out the tin-foil hats.

Deborah’s colleague, nancy, is out on a few limbs of her own:

Scott Rutter (an "embed" with the attacking coalition force) reported by videophone from outside Fallujah....it spared viewers from watching Rutter read his report -- although it was perfectly clear that he was reading text prepared by the US military.

Yes, in the middle of an intense battle, the troops take time out to write reporters’ stories for them. This little tail-wagger has obviously never ventured very far from her dog house. Nancy continues:

At 11:08am (ET), [Brigitte] Quinn interviewed Jeff Zeleny (Chicago Tribune) & Viveca Nocak (TIME) about whether Bush intends to appoint Clarence Thomas as Chief Justice to replace Rehnquist....Quinn switched to a little Arlen Specter-bashing [comment: a staple on Fox over the past few days, which is now treating Specter as a traitor].

We asked the embarrassing question:

• What did Quinn say that bashed Specter?

But nancy has at least a modicum of smarts. Rather than replying with ancient, irrelevant studies or unsupported conspiracy theories, she adopted the Nixon approach. Stonewall. Don’t answer. Probably the best tactic available to her, given what the transcript shows:

QUINN: What do you make of the fact that Arlen Specter made some remarks about this last week, and that he’s likely to obviously get a very powerful post in the Senate when it comes to determining who ultimately gets through the Senate?

That was it? That was the Specter-bashing? It must be, it’s the only question Quinn asked that had anything to do with Arlen Specter. No wonder nancy didn’t answer our inquiry.

Finally, we have miss Melanie. She has titled her post “Quintessential Fox News (Radio)”, so she must have heard something over the airwaves that roused her ire. Yes? No.

Thursday evening, a handful of students at Boulder High School in Boulder, Colorado were granted permission to stay overnight in the school library to continue a protest they'd begun earlier in the day....Here is an article describing what happened from today's (November 6, 2004) Boulder Daily Camera...Here is one of the paragraphs contained in the article: James Vacca, the Boulder High teacher who had been an adviser to the protesting students, sat in the adjoining office, assuring someone from Fox News Radio that the students were not puppets of his or anyone else's left-wing agenda. COMMENT: If these kids had staged a protest to raise money for returning war veterans they probably would have been given a full-blown, live segment all to themselves on Fox News radio. However, even when questioning issues relevant to all Americans, they're reduced to being "puppets" of someone else's "left-wing agenda." Quintessential Fox.

We couldn’t resist:

• J$: So now you are reduced to criticizing radio news segments that you haven't even heard? Another newshound classic.
• NH: You appear to have missed the point of the post. Isn't about what was said on Fox News radio, it's about what was said to the Boulder High School teacher by the Fox booker on the telephone. (2) Do you see anywhere in the post where it says anything about whether I did or did not listen to Fox News Radio? No. How you jumped to that conclusion based on what's contained in the post is beyond me.
• J$: Really? The line was tapped? Funny how the article in question contains not one word of what the "Fox booker" was saying on the telephone, or even that it was a Fox booker. So if the point of this article was what this "booker" said to the teacher, who was this booker and what did (s)he say?
• (From a poster claiming to be “Scarlet”): Perhaps you can enlighten us and tell us your version of the story.
• J$: I don't have a version of the story. I didn't hear the Fox News Radio segment in question, so it's hard to have an opinion about it. It's certainly beyond my ability to know whether or not the students were "reduced to being puppets" on a radio broadcast I have not heard, but apparently melanie's psychic powers are such that she can render such an opinion without even having heard what was broadcast. Great technique for criticism, saves a lot of time, no need to hear the segment, just condemn it based on a third-hand report paraphrasing a single phrase from one side of a telephone call. It's nice to know the election hasn't changed newshounds "standards".
• (Scarlet): She was very honest in saying that this was an article on what happened there. She leaves it up to us to discern what we want to take from it.
• J$: How does melanie know they've been "reduced to being puppets" on a radio segment? Has she heard it? Let's have a transcript. Who was the host? Alan Colmes? Is he the one who reduced them to being puppets of a left-wing agenda? Puh-leeze.
• (Scarlet): The 'left wing agenda' came from the article. I will, however, grant that Melanie did say 'Quintessential Fox' under her 'Comment' part of the post. Comment being her opinion. After reporting and watching Fox for so long she does have a background in order to form this opinion as you have to form your opinion.
• J$: Well, she doesn't really have an opinion of how Fox radio handled this story--you can't have an opinion about something you haven't seen/heard/read. What she has is an opinion of her opinion. In terms of meaningful criticism, that rates to about the square root of zero. But at least it generated some posts!
• NH: (Melanie is back): JD, your comments are starting to be so off topic that I will delete them if they continue. The post isn't about the radio show, which seems obvious to me, and which I said more than two hours ago in a comment made to your first comment. ANYTHING I say in an area clearly delineated as comment is my opinion. Once you start picking apart opinions you're out of line. And again, the post isn't about what was said on the radio, and again, I will delete any of your comments which continue along that line.
• J$: Then why is it titled "Quintessential Fox News (Radio)"???

Like we said, these hounds are altogether too crabby. Maybe it’s time for distemper shots.