Originally Posted by Rob Henderson

BTW, the certificate of live birth is accepted as an official documentation of birth in Hawaii.

Ugh. I had hoped you were smarter than to believe that Obama has gotten away with being an illegal immigrant this far into the United States government.

I'm curious, Hokie, did you do any research on GWB when or before he was elected president?

As I said before, I'm not a birther and I question WHY the state of Hawaii has not released a copy of the original certificate. It will do no good for the country now if he is in fact determined to be ineligible. BTW I hope this does not happen as his replacement is a bigger idiot than Quayle ever was.

Do you admit that it is Obama in the video? Does he not refer to the country of his birth as Kenya? Just asking here, but I wonder why he was never called on the carpet to explain. I would be happy with a statement saying "I misspoke". He has been completely evasive about this. Again I ask WHY?

edit: To the Mods. Apologies about the double post.

Yes Rob I did research on GWB. I'm glad I voted for him because if Algore had been elected we would be worse off than we are today. Given the complete lack of choice, I chose the lesser of 2 evils.

I think we're going off topic now but going back to the thread's topic, yeah Fox news is extremely biased to the point where it has become the publicity agency for conservative and ultra conservative movements in the United States.

As for other networks and their ethics (or lack thereof) I think is another topic.

FOX NEWS isnt a news agency, its a propaganda arm of the far right-wing. Which is fine, they are entitled to say what they want. BUT if I were the FCC I would force FOX NEWS to drop the "NEWS" from its name, perhaps just call it FOX or whatever they want as long as NEWS is not anywhere in the title.

Why? False advertising. A "NEWS" program is a program that merely reports the facts as they are and lets the public decide. Shows like NBC Nightly NEWS and ABC News. A journalist is entitled to have a view or an opinion which is fine as long as its states that its opinion journalism (like MSNBC) and not actual journalism. MSNBC is liberal, but they dont call themselves MSNBC NEWS, only MSNBC. Their most liberal programs like Countdown and Rachel Maddow also do NOT portray themselves as being non-partisan sources of information.

Its abit like Protor and Gambles Frozen Orange Juice scandal a few decades ago. You might recall that 20 years ago P+G was calling its frozen concentrated orange juice as "fresh" orange juice. Only trouble is the definition of "fresh" does not include the words "frozen" and" "concentrated". A program that regularly relied on bias, misleading, and sometimes totally false information cannot call itself a "news" program.

mmarsh, I disagree. I think that a majority of the information reported on both the cable channel and the website is news. It is the opinion shows like Oreilley and Hannity that you are assuming represents the entire network. I usually watch the first 15 minutes of the Today show, for news every morning before work and no one was happier than I that Katie Couric left the show. I think that news should come from multiple sources and if you swallow the rhetoric from a single source, you will tend to be biased.

Originally Posted by HokieMSG

mmarsh, I disagree. I think that a majority of the information reported on both the cable channel and the website is news. It is the opinion shows like Oreilley and Hannity that you are assuming represents the entire network. I usually watch the first 15 minutes of the Today show, for news every morning before work and no one was happier than I that Katie Couric left the show. I think that news should come from multiple sources and if you swallow the rhetoric from a single source, you will tend to be biased.

Would you consider then Father Coughlins newspaper "Social Justice" to be actual News Source? FOX NEWS is alot like "Social Justice", its rabble rouser that unfairly blames the countries problems on government policies that it happens to oppose and uses various minorities as scapegoats for it.

If we call that a "News Show" then so is the National Inquirer.

And its not Just Hannity and O'Reilly. Its ALL their network shows. Like Beck, Meghan Kelly, Greta van Sustran, Neil Cavuto, to name a few. And now they have actual GOP presidential candidates like Huckabee and Palin doing "news" shows. And in once case Tony Snow actually going to work for the GOP. Not to mention the recent million dollar donation it made to the RNC. That is simply not News, thats GOP-TV. No true journalist worth his salt (people like the late, great, Walter Cronkite, who said exactly the same thing before he passed away) would consider FOX a News Organization. Its entertainment, which again is fine as long as its labelled as such, which FOX refuses to do.

MSNBC is mostly liberal, but it doesnt try and pretend to be something its not.
Only FOX does this. For example: Joe Scarbourough, former Conservative Republican House Representative from Florida. His show (on liberal MSNBC, just going to show how completely bias FOX is for not hiring any liberals!) is called "Scarbourough Country". Its NOT called "MSNBC News with Morning Joe". Its an right-wing opinon show thats doesn't pretend to be a News program. Although I disagree with Scarbourough, I have no problem with what he does.

If you go to the FOX company website it says FOX NEWS, Fair and Balanced. Its neither Fair nor Balanced nor actual news.

Actually we say the same about NBC, CBS, ABC , CNN, MSNBC. They are all Lib biased. They might not be blantant, sometimes they are. Somertimes they slip little negative words into a comment that would ghave positive little words if it had been about a Lib. a positive spin on the 5% unemployment when clinton seeked reelection & negative spin on Bush's 5% when he ran for reelection. Amazing how Libs whine about the only channel they don't controll vs all the ones they do. Just drives em nuts not having every one. What network did Steponopolis to to directly from the White House?

mmarsh, I guess we will have to agree to disagree.

Originally Posted by George

Actually we say the same about NBC, CBS, ABC , CNN, MSNBC. They are all Lib biased. They might not be blantant, sometimes they are. Somertimes they slip little negative words into a comment that would ghave positive little words if it had been about a Lib. a positive spin on the 5% unemployment when clinton seeked reelection & negative spin on Bush's 5% when he ran for reelection. Amazing how Libs whine about the only channel they don't controll vs all the ones they do. Just drives em nuts not having every one. What network did Steponopolis to to directly from the White House?

I don't see how any conservative could bash Clinton's presidency. It seems like the only words I hear out of the right's mouths nowadays are "federal deficit spending." Well, Clinton had a surplus. But he wasn't a Republican, so he had to be a terrible president.

And you wonder why Democrats aren't listening to your pathetic attempts at "bipartisanship." HAH! That's rich!

Originally Posted by Rob Henderson

I don't see how any conservative could bash Clinton's presidency. It seems like the only words I hear out of the right's mouths nowadays are "federal deficit spending." Well, Clinton had a surplus. But he wasn't a Republican, so he had to be a terrible president.

And you wonder why Democrats aren't listening to your pathetic attempts at "bipartisanship." HAH! That's rich!

Rob, You seem to forget that Clinton
1. Lied under oath
2. Created Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and then directed them to make the loans that got the country into the current economic crisis
3. Had Bin Laden in his sights but was too busy watching a golf tournament to make the decision to take him out.

I just wish you would apply the same standards to both sides of the aisle.

Originally Posted by HokieMSG

Rob, You seem to forget that Clinton
1. Lied under oath
2. Created Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and then directed them to make the loans that got the country into the current economic crisis
3. Had Bin Laden in his sights but was too busy watching a golf tournament to make the decision to take him out.

I just wish you would apply the same standards to both sides of the aisle.

1. Quite honestly, I wouldn't have cared if George W Bush lied under oath if he was a half way decent president/man/homosapien. People LIE every day. If you haven't come to terms with that, you're more naïve than I am.

2. Because he has the ability to predict the future. The market was good, there was no reason for them to NOT make those loans. While this is a rather severe case, this is still just the ebb and flow of an economic market.

3. I'd rather take NO action than take the WRONG action. Seeing as how the WRONG action (invading the wrong FRIGGIN' COUNTRY) has led to the unnecessary deaths of COUNTLESS men and women both in the United States military and the militaries of those FEW countries who decided the US was worth at least ATTEMPTING to help.

I wish the other side of the aisle would give me something to praise. I wait with bated breath for the day when I can say, "He/She's got that right." about a conservative. I fear I will die before that day comes.