Hemm LinesAttacks on Gallagher, Hume, and more. Who let the dogs out, and who told
The Lie of the Week? With J$P Video!
It's that time again: more pickings from the Fox haters' grapevine,
where the grapes are always sour, and lurking nearby are the newshounds (another
fine product of the Outfoxed cabal). We begin with Donna, last week's honoree
for The Lie of the Week. This time, the anti-Fox terrier is damning FNC for interviewing Bill Kristol about
the Iraq
war:
Another unfair and unbalanced report from Fox. One side only. The "rule" that all interviews must be conducted in pairs is one that only gets trotted out by Fox haters, and it's very selectively applied. What about this interview that took place roughly an hour earlier:  What did Donna have to say about this "unfair and unbalanced report" that presented "one side only"? Nothing! It's the "invisible man" technique all over again--leave out when a Democrat appears and then complain about "bias". Speaking of Donna, we're keeping an eye on her since she made our list of 2006's Top Ten Lies. You will recall she chastised Fox because they use "Dems" in onscreen banners, and that's a "derogatory term". What will Donna say when she realizes that, just three days ago, one of her own crew of biased bassets called Democrats "Dems"? Which newspup used this atrocious, insulting word? The answer: it was Donna. Oops. We don't know what to make of this. In a post time-stamped Saturday at 2:34 pm, Deborah cites a litany of horrors involving Trace Gallagher's "FOX promo at 2:47 PM" regarding the day's antiwar protests. Good try, but FNC went into a commercial break at 2:46, and Gallagher wasn't involved. Our tivo shows Mr Gallagher did do a promo: at 2:32 pm, and it never mentioned the protests. This must be one of those alternate universe deals. And no doubt there is some parallel plane of existence where this tirade from newsmutt Janie makes sense: Brit Hume Trashes Democrats for Giving General Petraeus an "Up or Down Vote" During last night's (1/25) Special Report, "journalist" Brit Hume opened the second half of his "All Star Panel" on the escalation of the war in Iraq by trashing Democrats on the Senate Armed Services Committee for voting to send the nomination of General David Petraeus to the Senate floor for a full vote... This sounds pretty severe. We could tell you what he said, but it's better to see it, so you can enjoy Hume's "exasperated tone" as he "trashed" the Dems [QuickTime video]: Warning: if you didn't catch where Mr Hume "attacked" and "trashed" Democrats, watching a second time will not help. And nothing can help Donna (yes, her again), who's off on a tear about Bill Hemmer, Valerie Plame, and whatnot: Fox Guest Still Questioning Whether Valerie Plame Was Covert Well, no. In fact, the attorney never said "covert"; he said "covered" (as in "covered under the statute"). Just a misheard word? Then why didn't Donna correct it when it was brought to her attention? Hemmer said that Libby had a lot on his mind with Al Qaeda and the war and all... Imputation: when a Fox reporter quotes somebody else, leave that out--let people believe he was being biased by stating his own opinion. Hemmer was quite clear that he was relaying what Libby claimed, and asking if this was a fair defense. But wait, there's more: McMahon said why he (Libby) would lie about it if she really wasn't covert doesn't make any sense, either. An elegant bit of fabrication. Besides changing "covered" to "covert" again, Donna tries to make it sound like McMahon was taking Libby's side. In fact, his words were quite the opposite: he said Libby's argument "doesn't seem to be a defense". We record, you decide [Quicktime Video]: So our deceitful doggie substitutes words, doctors Hemmer's lines, and misrepresents McMahon's careful analysis. It's a trifecta of trickery, enough to award Donna, for the second week in a row, The Lie of the Week. posted: Sun - January 28, 2007 at 08:19 PM j$p send Tom I notice how you deliberately unavoid naming numbers. How many Democrats were given solo interviews that day? Obviously only one, if there had been more you would have posted them. There were at least a half dozen solo Republican interviews. Care to count them tonight on Gibson's, O'Reilly's and Hannity and Idiot's show? Probably not, I would guess. You're all talk. January 29, 2007, 4:54:46 PM EST – Like – Reply Tom Oh, look, ten minutes in, two conservatives, actually put together in a SINGLE segment, and no Dems. What a surprise. January 29, 2007, 5:14:32 PM EST – Like – Reply johnny dollar > How many Democrats were given solo interviews that day? Obviously only one Obviously you're wrong again. But keep playing. January 29, 2007, 6:35:46 PM EST – Like – Reply Tom Did you count the conservatives/liberals on Gibson's show? I did. Doesn't look good for the Fair and Balanced network so far. Conservatives with their own shows who punt for the GOP: Cavuto Gibson Hume O'Reilly Hannity (On Sundays) Kasich Gigot Liberals with their own shows who punt for the Dems: None Liberals/Conservatives who have shows that rarely/never discuss politics and do not voice their opinion on politics: Sustren Oliver North Oh yes, Fox absolutely has one liberal with her own program. And that's how they like it, paying a liberal to keep her mouth shut about her own opinion. That's why the other four hosts before her (Cavuto, Gibson, Hume, O'Reilly) (Smith simply does quick news bits) all have opinion segments (Talking points, Common Sense, My Word, Grapevine) whereas Sustren has nothing. January 29, 2007, 6:57:54 PM EST – Like – Reply OverHere Who's Sustren? January 29, 2007, 8:17:14 PM EST – Like – Reply Tom Susteren. Typo. Don't see an edit button. January 29, 2007, 8:19:14 PM EST – Like – Reply Fox Fan Whoopty doo Tom, one show from one day PROVES that FNC is right wing. Let us know when you have something relevant to say. Feel free to post stats (preferably true ones) of the rest of the shows. O'Reilly often has two democrats on with no conservatives for lengthy interviews. What a flaming liberal, huh? January 29, 2007, 8:23:37 PM EST – Like – Reply johnny dollar It's always helpful to change the subject when it's time to defend the lies of the newshounds. You can't really defend the indefensible, after all. January 29, 2007, 8:41:25 PM EST – Like – Reply OverHere Oh you mean Greta VAN Susteren. Here's a clue, if you can actually get someone's name right it makes it seem like maybe you tune in every now and then and have a basis for your comments, rather than just parroting what someone else says. January 29, 2007, 8:56:24 PM EST – Like – Reply Ira Gee, I didn't know that the Grapevine was an opinion segment. January 29, 2007, 11:17:12 PM EST – Like – Reply Tom LOL. That's it? That was your response? Pointing out a typo and using that to brush off my argument? Christ you people are pathetic. You don't even believe your own bs at this point. You are completely unable to refute the point that there are 3 conservative shows on the weekend (Soon to be 4, with the addition of Half Hour News-Hour) and 4 on the weekdays, and no liberal programs. Susteren has never made a partisan statement in the entirety of her career. She barely ever gives her opinion on even the court cases her program discusses. All of her guests do the talking. No political opinion is put out there, no opinion segment at all. Conservatives: 7 shows Liberals: 0 shows Fox News is right-wing propaganda. January 30, 2007, 11:38:30 AM EST – Like – Reply OverHere Yes you're right Tom, how silly of me to not see the error of my ways. Liberals *NEVER* appear on FNC. Wesley Clark, Terry McAuliffe, Kirsten Powers, Bob Beckel, Susan Estrich, Geraldine Ferraro--not one of them EVER appears on FNC. I must have imagined them. And Tom, seriously-- "Van" is not Greta's middle name. January 30, 2007, 1:12:19 PM EST – Like – Reply Fox Fan Why even bother with this miscreant? He can't post anything that's on topic (the topic being NH pathologically lying about FNC anchors/hosts). He has permanent "invisible man" syndrome; it's a partisanly selective mental disorder that creates illusions of grandeur and paranoia brought on by fringe political party brainwashing. Tom is null and void in the world of logic. January 30, 2007, 7:33:57 PM EST – Like – Reply Ira OverHere: And don't forget Dennis Kucinich, who appears on Cavuto's show at least once per week. Charlie Rangel (on right now with O'Reilly) is also all over the Fox shows. And Neil appears to have a new special friend in new Missouri Democratic Senator Claire McKaskel. January 30, 2007, 8:06:47 PM EST – Like – Reply OverHere You're absolutely right Ira, how could I forget them! January 30, 2007, 8:15:07 PM EST – Like – Reply Tom Oh look at that. Hannity & Colmes having a fair and balanced debate between two anti-global warming "experts". I have yet to see a single expert or scientist brought onto Fox News who defended the "global warming is manmade" side of the argument. Not a single one. Flat out propaganda. January 30, 2007, 9:17:22 PM EST – Like – Reply Tom "Yes you're right Tom, how silly of me to not see the error of my ways. Liberals *NEVER* appear on FNC. Wesley Clark, Terry McAuliffe, Kirsten Powers, Bob Beckel, Susan Estrich, Geraldine Ferraro--not one of them EVER appears on FNC. I must have imagined them." Yeah, so I guess because Tucker Carlson and Joe Scarborough appear on MSNBC that means MSNBC is fair and balanced, right? Susan Estrich writes a column for the Fox News WEBISTE, she almost never appears on Fox News. Kirsten Powers and Bob Beckel are the only real regulars on Fox News. And what do you know, Powers is a conservative, anti-abortion, etc... Wow, Fox News once in a while will feature a Democrat! That makes them real fair and balanced! It doesn't matter that 70%+ of their guests are right-wingers, and all of their politically opinionated hosts. Nope, those facts don't matter, ladies and gentleman, because Bob Beckel comes on once in a while. Christ, pathetic. January 30, 2007, 9:24:41 PM EST – Like – Reply johnny dollar Nobody who argued man-made global warming? I would point out the guy from Center for American Progress who was on just this afternoon, but then I'd be conceding to your diversionary crap, so I won't. Why don't you address the newsliars and their fabrications? What's worse? Giving more time to one side than the other (according to you), or flat-out lying about what is broadcast on Fox? Why do you condemn one and defend the other? January 30, 2007, 9:25:51 PM EST – Like – Reply Tom "I would point out the guy from Center for American Progress who was on this afternoon," You would, but then I'd laugh you out of the debate by pointing out the 10+ Republicans. Are you still too scared to do an actual test by simply sitting down and counting up the guests on both sides for a few hours? I've been challenging to you to this for a while. You're still too much of a moral coward to accept. You prefer to scream "FOX IS FAIR, THEY TELL THE TRUTH" from a distance. Keep living in that 30% Republican bubble of yours (The 30% representing the idiots that still take Bush seriously). Most Americans oppose Bush, his policies, his conservatism and don't take idiots at Fox seriously. Don't mistake high ratings for general popularity when conservatives have a network to rally behind and liberals do not. As long as you refuse to accept that challenge, you have no room to talk about the fairness of Fox News, because you're still too gutless to actually put it to the test. January 30, 2007, 9:29:28 PM EST – Like – Reply johnny dollar You seem to have a reading comprehension problem. This post is not about the fairness of Fox News. This post is about the latest LIES from the Fox haters. Gee, I wonder who is too gutless to discuss that? January 30, 2007, 9:36:40 PM EST – Like – Reply Tom "Why do you condemn one and defend the other?" I don't read newshounds, nor did I read your screed against them. If you can find a statement somewhere on this thread where I even mentioned newshounds, let me know. You won't, because you're flat-out lying. I'm uninterested in blog flame wars. You're unable to challenge media matters. You can attack newshounds all you want. You're like Brit Hume cherrypicking comments on DU about conspiracy theories concerning the 2004 tsunami while ignoring Freepers who said the "Muslims got what they deserved. 250,000 less Jidahis". You can't debunk the fact that 70%+ of Fox News guests are conservative. You can't debunk the fact that Gibson, Cavuto, Hume and O'Reilly are opinionated conservatives, and so are Hannity (weekend show), Gigot and Kasich (and the new upcoming conservative Daily Show). You cant' debunk the fact that on-screen text going into Fox News political segments are transparently biased "Are liberals silencing conservatives? Is global warming a hoax? Have Democrats declared war on America? Why does the Left hate America?" Those are all actual on screen texts that have been featured at some point, by the way. All you can essentially due is whine that someone at Newshounds didn't dot an "i" or didn't cross that "T". Or complain about user comments left on their blog. That's fairly pathetic. No, I'm sure, in your little world, a woman like Greta Van Susteren, who never discusses her personal politics on her show, is somehow a raging liberal that presents a balance against John Gibson, O'Reilly or any of the other conservatives. January 30, 2007, 9:43:42 PM EST – Like – Reply johnny dollar That's Tom. Off-topic, irrelevant, and Proud Of It! January 30, 2007, 9:46:13 PM EST – Like – Reply Guest Oh, I forgot one, by that little GOP weasel Cavuto. "Will Democrats Crush the Economy If They Control Congress?" Haha, my favorite. January 30, 2007, 9:47:44 PM EST – Like – Reply Tom "irrelevant" LOL. Well, you're not exactly going to start a thread giving a general discussion of Fox News bias, now are you? Because you'd lose pretty fast. It's pretty amusing at this point that your broken-down defense of Fox has deteriorated merely into "I would have lost the argument, but good thing for me you posted in the wrong thread." Classic. January 30, 2007, 9:49:09 PM EST – Like – Reply johnny dollar You can spout off as much as you want. You don't need me. Just go back to your listing of the guests on Hannity & Colmes. Start where you left off. Heh. January 30, 2007, 9:59:56 PM EST – Like – Reply Guest Still too afraid to accept my challenge. Here's an idea, watch Susteren tonight and point out a single statement that indicates liberalism. January 30, 2007, 10:06:55 PM EST – Like – Reply Fox Fan Talk about challenge. 'Anonymous' posts 11 minutes after H&C is over and well after J$ challenges him/her to reveal all the guests on H&C (which would quickly negate the all-conservative argument). Sounds easy, but it's quite difficult for Tom and 'Anonymous' to tell the truth. January 30, 2007, 10:29:39 PM EST – Like – Reply Guest "Talk about challenge. 'Anonymous' posts 11 minutes after H&C is over and well after J$ challenges him/her to reveal all the guests on H&C" He refused to accept the challenge and so he challenged me after H&C was over. From what I counted it was 3 conservatives and 2 liberals at the time, I stopped watching roughly halfway and caught a movie. Are you willing to not act like a coward tonight and count up the guests and not challenge me to it until after the show is over? I certainly am. Apparently your readers are too gutless to actually count them up while the show is going on, and prefer to make challenges AFTER it is over. January 31, 2007, 8:48:45 AM EST – Like – Reply Guest Still waiting for a rebuttal to the fact that H&C only features global warming skeptics. Haven't seen a single scientist/expert with a differing view. Fox is one-sided trash. January 31, 2007, 1:51:42 PM EST – Like – Reply OverHere How did this become about Hannity & Colmes and global warming? And what goes on during ONE show speaks for the entire network? Olbermann never even has conservatives on his show, so that must make MSNBC one-sided trash too. January 31, 2007, 3:06:57 PM EST – Like – Reply Tom "And what goes on during ONE show speaks for the entire network? Olbermann never even has conservatives on his show, so that must make MSNBC one-sided trash too." 1.) No, what goes on everyone show. Hence I pointed out that 70% of Fox News guests are conservative. 2.) Another common Fox News cool-aid drinking tactic, claim that its essentially ok for Fox News to be biased because another outlet is supposedly biased. I don't care about MSNBC. This discussion isn't about MSNBC, it's about Fox. Whenever someone can't defend Fox News, their first tactic is to say, "Yeah, well, look at the NYT/MSNBC/CNN!" Yeah, that's great. CNN could be run by flaming communists. But at the end of the day, even if it is, Fox News is still biased, and the fact that the rest of the media may or may not be biased HAS NO EFFECT ON FOX. Any discussion of the Fox News Channel's bias (or lack of bias) is to made in a BUBBLE. You can't wag your finger at MSNBC when we're talking about Fox. When you do, it's obvious the reason is that you can't win the argument, you essentially concede that Fox is biased, and attack some other organization that isn't a part of the conversation, thinking you can win that argument. Since I don't care about MSNBC, I'm not interested. Want to have a discussion about MSNBC bias? Start up another cliche "MSNBC HATES AMERICA" blog to rant on. January 31, 2007, 8:06:44 PM EST – Like – Reply OverHere Way to go Tom, revealing that you are, in fact, Anonymous. As if we had any doubts. And where did I say it was OK for one network to be biased if others were? Where did I "concded" anything? I merely made a comparison based on your statement and fixation on Hannity & Colmes and global warming. But I see you once again avoided my primary question. It's been really fun trying to make sense of your argument, and also trying to figure out HOW it relates to the original post, however I have more important things to do now, so you'll just have to revert to talking to yourself. You seem to do that pretty well though, so I know you won't be lonely. January 31, 2007, 8:15:54 PM EST – Like – Reply OverHere Grrr "concede" January 31, 2007, 8:16:47 PM EST – Like – Reply Fox Fan "This discussion isn't about MSNBC, it's about Fox." That's where you are wrong on every post, Tom. You WANT the discussion to be about Fox, but it's actually about the NH's lying about Fox. People like you suck up NH distortions and lies every day not just from that site, but others like MM, TP, Kos, etc. Lies that claim that Fox News is biased, when the fact is that Fox is moderate, a station that shows both sides. To MM, TP, Kos, and NH the overwhelmingly left-wing MSM is centrist and the one station that has balance is extreme. Consider perspective, grasshopper. We all know what your political score is Tom, you don't have to prove it over and over. Stop complaining about the one source of news that shows both sides, not just what MM, TP, Kos, NH, and MSM democrats want you to hear. January 31, 2007, 8:32:08 PM EST – Like – Reply Tom Your response didn't refute a single point I made. Hence, you lose the argument. I make points, you make broad statements. You lose, it's as simple as that. "Fox News is fair and presents both sides" doesn't prove anything. "Fox News' guests list is as follows... Fox News gives liberals their own programs at this time..." would prove something. But, of course, you can't make that argument, so you don't. You ignore facts and merely repeat over and over "Fox is fair". No proof, no backup. I just thought I'd chyme in here and get a good laugh. I just saw O'Reilly kissing up to Ann Coulter. Coulter claimed "Newt Gingrich should get a show on Fox News." LoL. Republicans are even't pretending that Fox isn't their propaganda outlet anymore. O'Reilly response was golden, "We can give anyone their show on here because we're fair and balanced". LOL. Republican Congressman John Kasich, right-wing radio talk show host Sean Hannity and Republican Paul Gigot all have their own shows. Republicans. Conservatives. Outspoken. No outspoken liberals. Got a rebuttal to that? Doubt it. January 31, 2007, 8:48:45 PM EST – Like – Reply Fox Fan ------------------------ "I just thought I'd chyme in here and get a good laugh. I just saw O'Reilly kissing up to Ann Coulter. Coulter claimed "Newt Gingrich should get a show on Fox News."" ------------------------ Uh, O'Reilly said tonight that John Kerry should have a weekly show on Fox News. More of that invisible man syndrome, Tom? There is a reason that I "didn't refute" (read: ignored) your "points". It's because you never stay on topic. Refute the subject of this thread, that NHs lie to smear republicans and you have an argument. If you want to prove Fox is right wing and not centrist, why don't you post the democrat vs republican exposure on O'Reilly (the highest rated host on cable news) tonight? He let the protesters have their say and all he said was "Here I am." That in response to Hanoi Jane's comment "O'Reilly doesn't exist." ------------------------ "No outspoken liberals. Got a rebuttal to that? Doubt it." ------------------------ See O'Reilly tonight for examples, Tom. January 31, 2007, 9:59:24 PM EST – Like – Reply Tom "Uh, O'Reilly said tonight that John Kerry should have a weekly show on Fox News. More of that invisible man syndrome, Tom?" No, he didn't. O'Reilly said "Kerry should come on here" and do an interview. Not have his own weekly show. "See O'Reilly tonight for examples, Tom." Watched. Didn't see any liberals with their own shows. Saw a fanatical right-winger with his own show. "Refute the subject of this thread, that NHs lie to smear republicans and you have an argument." No, I don't care about Newshounds. So I will not refute the thread. I haven't even read Johnny Dollar's pathetic screeds. He's too desperate to refute Media Matters. I don't care about NHs. Refute the fact that no outspoken liberals have their own shows on Fox. O'Reilly, Hume, Cavuto, Gibson, Gigot, Hannity and Kasich are outspoken conservatives and have their own shows. Ann Coulter's statement that Gingrich should get his own show is pretty revealing. It's becoming basic knowledge in Republican cliques that Fox is just a media whore for the GOP. February 1, 2007, 6:53:41 AM EST – Like – Reply Tom "If you want to prove Fox is right wing and not centrist, why don't you post the democrat vs republican exposure on O'Reilly (the highest rated host on cable news) tonight? He let the protesters have their say and all he said was "Here I am." That in response to Hanoi Jane's comment "O'Reilly doesn't exist."" Notice how you made this statement after the show was over and after Johnny Dollar refused to participate? I was asleep by ten o'clock. Here's an idea, we can do this again tomorrow night. But something tells me that, like last night, you'll be too much of a coward to accept, and then challenge me after the fact, again. O'Reilly and H&C, care to count up the guests tonight? Doubt it. Also, got a rebuttal for the fact that there are no outspoken liberals with their own programs on Fox? Doubt that one too. February 1, 2007, 6:55:48 AM EST – Like – Reply Fox Fan What is your deal with not wanting to wait until a show is over to evaluate it? It's the same thing as betting on a race and then saying you're only betting on who wins halfway through it because it fits your needs better. You also just revealed that you're not interested in staying on topic at all, and are here only to change the subject at every chance. Good job making yourself 100% irrelevant. February 1, 2007, 7:00:20 AM EST – Like – Reply OverHere Tom, even though you don't care about Newshounds, the post on which you are commenting is ABOUT the Newshounds. So, unless you want to pay for Johnny's blog, you can't tell him what to put on it. If it's so important to you that someone count up all the guests on FNC shows then you go ahead and start your own blog to do just that. Of course you keep going between ranting about the guests, then ranting about who has their own show on FNC. So, which is it--the guests or the host? Personally, I'd love to see how it shakes out over a whole day, but I have a freelance job that requires me to be watching other TV at night. If you truly care so deeply about who has their own show, and who appears, then put your nose to the grindstone and start your own site. Methinks you'd rather just spout irrelevant, off-topic, inane crap on someone else's blog though. February 1, 2007, 8:53:06 AM EST – Like – Reply Guest "Of course you keep going between ranting about the guests, then ranting about who has their own show on FNC. So, which is it--the guests or the host? Personally, I'd love to see how it shakes out over a whole day, but I have a freelance job that requires me to be watching other TV at night." It's both, obviously. 79% of Fox News political guests are Republicans/Conservatives. And all of their hosts who have their own shows and express political opinions are Republicans/Conservatives. Rebuttal? Don't see one coming anytime soon. Johnny Dollar's blog is set up to defend Fox News. If he can't do it, he shouldn't bother creating a blog. He's yet to offer any real rebuttal to the fact that there are lopsidedly more right-wingers as guests and right-wingers as hosts. February 1, 2007, 11:39:51 AM EST – Like – Reply johnny dollar There is no need to rebut made-up, doctored statistics. But I'm sure that's what "anonymous" (heh) wants to distract from the subject matter of the post. February 1, 2007, 12:53:46 PM EST – Like – Reply Tom LOL. This is just pathetic. Fox News is AGAIN repeating Hannity's America, and is simply replacing Hannity & Colmes with Hannity's conservative propaganda. At least they're not making any bones about being right-wing demagogues anymore. Pure propaganda. February 2, 2007, 9:04:24 PM EST – Like – Reply |
Quick Links
About johnnydollar.us
This site includes J$P posts from 2004-2007. For current posts please direct your attention to johnnydollar.us.
Contact Us
j$p categories
Search J$P
Archives
|
