rawstory.com — MSNBC's Rachel Maddow has some advice for the White House about reacting to conservative media stories: "Believing conservative spin about what's so wrong with you and then giving into that spin, is not an effective defense. In fact, it makes it worse."
Jul 21, 2010 View in Crawl 4
ralphdraw3Jul 21, 2010
Rachel Maddow Show: Shirley Sherrod resigns/ Fox News fabricates -
msnbc.msn.com — July 20: Rachel Maddow looks at the full context of Shirley Sherrod's comments and points out the spinelessness of the White House in buying into yet another Fox News/Breitbart smear job and how, like feeding a dog from the table, handing heads to the right wing only encourages the use of dishonest ...
http://digg.com/politics/R_Maddow_Show_Shirley_Sherrod_resigns_Fox_News_fabricates
craftyguyJul 22, 2010
craftyguy to Obama: Do what's f**king right for this country and don't listen to any of those assclowns.
arschgaudiJul 22, 2010
You're kidding, right?
jdenzerJul 22, 2010
@arschgaudi
So you think the Administration should have rushed to judgment, based on a edited video from Breitbart?
jgzmanJul 22, 2010
word for word, the best advice for any president.
brad3378Jul 22, 2010
@Jdenzer
Rushing to judgment is how wars get started.
Thankfully our current president has a good head on his shoulders.
eraptorJul 22, 2010
If any case ever illustrated the need to reinstate the Fairness Doctrine, it would be the Sherrod case. Unless we eliminate deceptive, biased and ill conceived propaganda from U.S. media coverage, we're going to continue witnessing miscarriages of justice and a perversion of the public discourse on national public policy.
It's no accident that the Republican party eliminated the Fairness Doctrine during Ronald Reagan's term. It's time to reverse yet another impediment to common sense governing.
While some conservatives complain that this amounts to censorship, they fail to recognize that it applies to liberal media outlets as much as to conservative media or that our collective intellect is elevated by OBJECTIVE, TRUTHFUL information.
SaladProblemsJul 23, 2010
As long as they don't strike down net neutrality I don't think the fairness doctrine makes sense anymore. There's enough choices now for people to gravitate to news which validates their world-view.
eraptorJul 25, 2010
@SaladProblems,
I'm in agreement with you on the value of net neutrality.
However, the internet doesn't come close to counteracting the influential power of deceptive propaganda. The reasons are simple...a large portion of the American population either has insufficient computer skills, an inability to access the web or simply avoids computers altogether. As a result, they're unable to receive information from any media source other than their favored magazine, news paper, talk radio or TV.
As an example, take another look at the people who were screaming their heads off during the healthcare town hall meetings, Tea Party rallies, etc., then consider their collective computer skills. Did they appear to be fully informed of the proposed healthcare reform legislation and its effect on their lives? The shrill cries of impending Death Panels didn't strike me as rational, fully informed conclusions, yet there was ample access to the legislative proposals on the internet.
orlandogeekJul 23, 2010
I'm no fan of FOX or any of these morons who make it their business of lying but I have some serious Constitutional concerns (re: free speech). I thought for a time a possibly better solution would be to give the FCC the power to fine any broadcaster or station that knowingly reports something that turns out to be false.
These people & companies are supposed to be journalists (that goes for all cable news networks not just FOX) and if they aren't doing their due diligence to verify a story before they run with it and get people all fired up about an issue, then they are in the wrong.
Of course, with the rise of the Internet and the citizen journalist and blogs and YouTube, where do you draw the line on what constitutes broadcast media to enforce this rule? It's just a very messy issue that is probably better left alone legislatively.
itwasonlyajokeJul 23, 2010
Fox news? You do know that Glenn Beck actually defended Sherrod :P
SaladProblemsJul 23, 2010
After he already same the same s**t everyone else said about her.
rrouseJul 21, 2010
The NAACP is more at fault then the White House. They should be fighting for Shirley's rights just because he's a woman of color and is entitled to a defense. Everybody is innocent in this country until proven guilty. I only can hope that they both learned their lesson and stopped taking FOX news like it's the real news.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
dalhectarJul 22, 2010
NAACP should have known from the jump the video from Fox News was doctored (it was their event after all) and defended her... Not just because she was "a woman of color".
Or they could have chose to be silent and not step waist deep into a partisan fight with right wingers, but they crossed that line when going after the racism of the Tea Party and probably felt forced to make a rash and dumb statement they had to recant later.
It doesn't advance any position of the NAACP to say there are racist elements within the Tea Party. Either way you are preaching to the choir or proselytizing in the student commons, no one will be persuaded.
tyhoJul 22, 2010
This administration is a joke, they are running scared, that's why they jumped without looking.
Same thing as the Cambridge cop issue, but of course, his polling is terrible these days so he wanted to not appear racist again.
The guy ran the hell out of that campaign, but when it came time to end rhetoric and begin leadership, all he does is fall flat on his face. To Progressives he never goes FAR enough instituting their "change" legislation.
To Conservatives, he is what we thought he would be before the election, a radical, far-left, true-believer. We just didn't imagine he would be this inept as well.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
rrouseJul 22, 2010
My theory is that Democrats are more passive by nature like grassing animals, horses and cows, for example. Where as Republican or Conservatives are more like predictors, dogs or wolfs, for example. They hunt in packs and know to go for the throat. The Republicans are in their natural element attacking when they are out of power. The Democrats would prefer to not have to defend themselves from the wild dogs and wolfs, they just want to life and let live and they will sacrifice a few of their kind for the sake and safety of the herd. This just my theory. I think the Democrats need to be far more aggressive but it's not really their nature. And, the Republicans don't really want to govern. They just want all the riches for themselves and like to follow a strong leader.
tyhoJul 22, 2010
I think you have it quite backwards there, but I hope you're right asserting Democrats just want to live in peace.
In my experience, it's always Liberals marching for some cause, Liberals upset and disgusted with the mainstream, Liberals trying to change the country and the Constitution from historical standards.
For instance you think Conservatives wanted to get off the couch and mobilize all over California to defeat a redefinition of marriage in the state? I can tell you I did not.
I think if you examine most issues you will see Republicans are usually trying to preserve traditional thinking, or trying to return to it, like in the case of abortion.
I think you will find, by far, Liberals are much more likely to be upset and angry about the country at any point in time, and thus, more likely to march and protest and form activist groups.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
s73v3rJul 22, 2010
That's the problem. Republicans trying to preserve "Traditional Thinking," even when said thinking is completely wrong and goes against their supposed "Small Government" ideals. They shouldn't have mobilized to defeat an equality of rights in the state. If they really cared about Small Government, then they should have let it be.
13point1Jul 22, 2010
Still defending the white cop who arrested an elderly black man for trespassing in his own home? How classy, conservative scum.
gehlmJul 21, 2010
I miss Walter Cronkite. Most diggers have probably never seen an unbiased broadcast journalist.
Beck/Fox and Maddow/MSNBC disgust me.
apothekariJul 22, 2010
Maddow/Olbermann/MSNBC...
I really hate it when people equivalate them to Beck /Breitbart/Limbaugh/Savage/Hannity ect.
Maddow and Olbermann do NOT just make up s**t the way those guys do.
Olbermann and Maddow may make a mistake now and then but they will go on the air and admit it and correct it.
They have both done it multiple times.
And they are reasoned intelligent folks who can make a cohesive argument that will hold up to scrutiny.
I am not saying they don't lean left, even far left, they do.
But they are honest about it and don't make up s**t and spread false information the way Rush and company do.
Don't play the pussy ass CNN game of never taking any side and always being in the center {Cronkite certainly DID NOT}.
There is sometimes a definite "Shut the f**k up you goddamn liar" side and you should f**king say so when there is.
swieckiJul 22, 2010
Keep in mind that Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh are entertainers and are NOT to be seen as new reporters.
keithlolbermannJul 22, 2010
Maddow is somewhat decent, but Olbermann is the ultimate propagandist. He certainly deserves to be lumped into the same category as Limbaugh/Savage/Hannity, if not in a category all his own.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
entroperJul 22, 2010
I enjoyed Olbermann's coverage during the 2008 election season. It seems like when he has a lot of good stuff to cover, he does it well. When he doesn't, he descends into hackery. Maddow, though, has taken her show much further than the usual talking head shtick. She's done some really good stuff this year.
apothekariJul 22, 2010
@swiecki
they serve the exact same function, the lines have blurred and thus the distinction in the minds of most folks is a moot one.
Again don't fall for that s**t, they are all folks with a tv show and thus mass media. Rush and Beck use that same "Aww shucks, I'm just an entertainer.." bulls**t to hide behind so they can say ever more hateful inaccurate s**t and get away with it, and it works perfectly, see?
@KiethLolbermann
Kieth stood up WHEN IT COUNTED and was among the very first to call out Bush and co. He busts Obama's balls every night, you'd know that if you tuned in yourself and stopped playing the bulls**t eq game. Or you are a corporate/wingnut/schill disguised as a common digger. either way there is always hope you'll stop believing the horse doody.
gehlmJul 22, 2010
@apothekari "He busts Obama's balls every night"
Thank you for exemplifying my point. That is *not* reporting the news, its propaganda. Cohesive argumentation is *not* unbiased journalism.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
keithlolbermannJul 22, 2010
@apothekari
I'd ask for some Kool-Aid, but I see you drank it all already.
iptunnellJul 22, 2010
What planet do you live on?? Madcow and Olberhack, "journalists"?? Man, you are brainwashed! They're both completely partisan hacks!
malexJul 22, 2010
I can tell iptunnell is being objective and serious, by the way he has juvenile derogatory nicknames for people with opinions he dislikes.
stefankahunaJul 22, 2010
And don't forget the generous use of punctuation.
charmm01Jul 22, 2010
Beck has facts. If you have truly watched him, you would know this. He 'quotes' every single person that he will talk about. You have not watched Beck if you did not know this. He uses 'their own words' against them. Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
nainsellJul 22, 2010
Journalism doesn't have to be unbiased, gehlm. If the facts prove that one party is acting irresponsibly, it is journalism to report it and call them out.
God, f**king morons. I swear, they're everywhere.
sausageguyJul 22, 2010
there is no left in america. there is only right and far right
orlandogeekJul 23, 2010
@apothekari - While I agree with your statement almost completely, I have to agree with @sausageguy there is no real "left" in this country. That fact doesn't diminish your well written comment however. The only time I think Olbermann goes a bit off the deep end is in relation to Limbaugh or Beck. I've seen 2 or 3 times in the past 2 years where he's taken something they did out of context during one of his Worst Persons segment. Though realistically 2-3 times in a 2 year span is almost a perfect record when compared to Limbaugh & Beck.
methdwman3Jul 22, 2010
Of course they lie on MSNBC; check out their coverage of the Arizona Immigration law.
orlandogeekJul 23, 2010
Care to provide proof of actual lies, or are you just referring to things that you, in your opinion, believe are lies?
methdwman3Jul 22, 2010
The Administration had no problem signing into law health care reform that was bashed to no end by the conservative media, but when they f**k up, it's going to be because the conservative media pressured them? LOL!
It's the f**king president people - if he is going to bow down to pressure from any media outlet, that IS HIS PROBLEM!
supermosesJul 22, 2010
Then why did they ask Sherrod to resign, if it wasn't due to conservative media pressure?
thatsmyaiboJul 22, 2010
No excuse. Why should he have given into conservative media? He is as spineless as anyone else. He used to try and stand up to Fox News and now you're telling me he gives in to it?
Nice spin.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
supermosesJul 22, 2010
I'm not saying he should have given into conservative media. Of course he shouldn't have when they constantly mislead. I'm saying he DID give in and you can't deny that.
swieckiJul 22, 2010
Partisans call for more partisanship.
No news here.
dcherryholmesJul 22, 2010
Pernicious lies have to be answered, publicly. Doing that isn't "calling for" more partisanship.
kaiosamaJul 22, 2010
Actually there is news here considering the sherrod affair was part of a bigger campaign by the right-wing media to smear the President himself as a racist.
fredfredricksonJul 22, 2010
Calling for the government to look at the whole story before making any rash decisions is not calling for partisanship.
skywiseJul 22, 2010
Rush Limbaugh to Bush - Don't give in to Liberal Spin.
"Believing liberal spin about what's so wrong with you and then giving into that spin, is not an effective defense. In fact, it makes it worse."
But he did anyway.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
spinningheadJul 22, 2010
Yeah, but he considered "Iraq has no WMDs" to be "liberal spin".
skywiseJul 22, 2010
So did Clinton.
basalcellbosskJul 22, 2010
Clinton didn't invade Iraq and kill hundreds of thousands of innocent people.
spinningheadJul 22, 2010
You mean back in the 1990s when Iraq actually had WMDs?
skywiseJul 22, 2010
Both Bill and Hillary (in 2002 on the Senate defense committee so she had access to the military reports) agreed that Iraq had WMDs and that Hussein was a threat to the country.
And let's not forget that Bill cruise bombed Iraq and increased sanctions so that tens of thousands of children were dying there from starvation.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
spinningheadJul 22, 2010
Yes, I remember the left speaking out against the bombings and sanctions. For the record, however, Bill was never foolish enough to invade and occupy. Even Bush I and Cheney wrote an article for Time about how disastrous it would be.
cakecakecake2Jul 22, 2010
ignore him. skywise is just a pathetic shill. whenever there is a story about something indefensible on the right he'll pop in to try and change the subject with some false equivalency to someone on the left.
http://digg.com/politics/The_End_of_Andrew_Breitbart_s_Credibility?t=33952385#c33954484
http://digg.com/travel_places/Gunman_Drives_to_SF_Armed_to_the_Teeth_Hunting_for_Liberals?t=33929405#c33944439
Closed AccountJul 22, 2010
The real problem here is that people take stories coming from the fascists seriously. THAT is the real issue here. The story should just have been ignored in the first place.
Anyone who gives credit to this Breitbart clown and/or FOX news are imbeciles.
dangercollieJul 22, 2010
It got picked up by Fox News without any fact checking. How many times does that have to happen before the White House catches on?
This time I do hold the administration responsible. Breitbart committed fraud on the Acorn story and the White House doesn't have time to fact check his latest story? Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. Maddow is exactly right. Getting duped by right wing media just makes it worse.
mantiskungfuJul 22, 2010
This advise coming from the spinmister herself. Rachel MadHoe!
Closed AccountJul 23, 2010
EarlOfLade ladies and gentleman! Liberal douche bag calling Fox news "facist", what a surprise.
Why dont you go buy more drugs or make fun of religious beliefs that are not your own?
u2canfailJul 23, 2010
It seems the spin is going again. It was the head of the Department of Agriculture who fired the nice lady, it was not Obama. He was briefed. I am sure he had a few other things on his plate, and trusted his Dept. Head. I have been a boss and done that myself. You place someone in charge and expect them to get facts and make decisions.
MS. Sherrod should sue Breitbart for deflamation of character. He edited her into a person she is not. The woman is fabulous!
keithlolbermannJul 22, 2010
The White House has claimed several times that Fox News "isn't real news," yet they got duped by them?
analogassassinJul 22, 2010
Bwahahahahaha!
dinotJul 22, 2010
So you're saying that it would be perfectly fine if they just ignored Fox News completely?
Good to hear.
skywiseJul 22, 2010
That's what Rachel Maddow is saying...
apothekariJul 22, 2010
Sadly, tis true.
arfikeJul 22, 2010
It is false. Tom Vilsack, Secretary of Agriculture fired Sherrod from her job in the USDA. This was not a decision made by Obama, who I believe you are quoting to (correctly) say that Fox News, "isn't real news."
Man, there's group-think even here on Digg. Sad to see.
ddrskataJul 22, 2010
Fox has an interesting position of power. They may lie and distort constantly, but they have a base that believes every word they say without question. If the administration ignores Fox completely, they have to deal with public outcry over issues that don't actually exist. If they pay attention to Fox, they have to deal with public outcry when Fox turns out to be wrong as usual. Fox has the power to be endlessly antagonistic to the Obama administration and come out on top basically every time.
13point1Jul 22, 2010
Perhaps the White House understands the hold that Fixed "News" has on people - one that can cause people to murder law-abiding doctors and ACLU workers just for holding different political opinions. They don't have to be honest or ethical to be powerful.
keithlolbermannJul 22, 2010
Just got frontpaged. Let the Diggeral cleansing COMMENCE!
fifteenstepperJul 22, 2010
Is...is that a pun on "liberal"??
matt11952Jul 22, 2010
What does this post even mean? "Diggeral?" Come on dude.
bookantJul 22, 2010
Actually, I Dugg it. I'm capable of criticizing a politician of my party whom I generally support when they f**k up. Because I'm not a lock-step marching "dittohead" incapable of independent thought, ie a conservative.
rotfoxJul 22, 2010
Somebody is defending a innocent person!! They must be liberal!
BLASPHEMY!
Closed AccountJul 22, 2010
I apologize in advance for being way more intelligent than you.
keithlolbermannJul 23, 2010
Unless you're also clinically gifted, I highly doubt this.
tdogg241Jul 22, 2010
"Diggeral" just makes me think of Adderall, which you're clearly not taking.
keithlolbermannJul 23, 2010
Are you making fun of me for NOT having ADD/ADHD?
orlandogeekJul 23, 2010
You do know that intelligent, rational people will see s**t like "diggeral" and all the other Palin-esque nonsense words
keithlolbermannJul 23, 2010
You know the Magic suck ass?
orlandogeekJul 23, 2010
Wouldn't know. Don't give a s**t about basketball. Nice job of refuting the rationality and logic of my points, by the way.
keithlolbermannJul 23, 2010
Nice job of crying, by the way.
jack416Jul 23, 2010
Keith, you just got ur ass whupped.
keithlolbermannJul 23, 2010
Ohh, look! Another Diggeral who thinks I got "owned."
You worthless Diggerals didn't own s**t. I said these comments would be cleansed once this hit the frontpage, and that's exactly what happened.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
orlandogeekJul 23, 2010
Let's see. I made a salient point about you talking nonsense and you followed it up with more nonsense. Yeah. Inclined to agree with Jack here, since that's the logical course of action.
keithlolbermannJul 24, 2010
Whatever, Knightro.
orlandogeekJul 24, 2010
What gives you the impression that I give a s**t about UCF either? Why do you assume that just because I'm in Florida that I'm a fan? Still haven't seen any valid opinions on the original topic coming from you. I'm going to just go ahead and accept that that's because you don't have any. Thanks for proving me correct.
keithlolbermannJul 24, 2010
Golden Knights. Lulz.
orlandogeekJul 24, 2010
Are you mentally retarded? Seriously? You go from assuming I'm a UCF fan, then when I refute that nonsense now you think I'm an alumnus? BTW ROFLMaddow weren't you already banned once?
bgthebrainJul 22, 2010
Yes Mr. President. This is all Fox News and somehow George Bush's fault.
realeskimopimpJul 22, 2010
Keep knockin down those strawmen.
rotfoxJul 22, 2010
I don't think any rational person would blame George Bush for this... but as a "news organisation" I'd like to think that Faux News would fact check.
I guess fact checking doesn't get you the rating that sensationalist news organisation needs though....
xack10Jul 23, 2010
Itd be like The Onion fact checking
imallvol7Jul 22, 2010
Maddow is a moron. She loves to hear herself yell.
redcrow1973Jul 22, 2010Submitter
Have you even ever WATCHED Maddow? She never yells. You seem to be parroting conservative tweeters' comments on Keith Olbermann.
Get your personalities straight, troll.
Since you clearly don't know much about Rachel Maddow, you're clearly not qualified to comment on her intelligence. By the way, she has a PhD in Political Science from Oxford. Did you graduated high school?
And yes, Keith Olbermann does like to hear himself yell. And so do I. It's good to see someone else getting their ire up over the bulls**t that Fux News and their minions perpetrate.
imallvol7Jul 22, 2010
I sure did. Did you "graduated" high school? It's real easy for you to think she's brilliant when she agrees with you. She's just as much a sensationalist as anyone on Fox News. But MSNBC is your version of Fox News so your not going to see it. Both stations are BS. I stand by my statement. Cable news isn't news.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
rotfoxJul 22, 2010
Troller's gonna troll.
IllBeBackJul 22, 2010
"It's real easy for"
It's really* easy for
"so your not going to see it"
so you're* not going to see it
See how easy that is to do?
13point1Jul 22, 2010
Liberal pundit yelling: OMG what's wrong with you?!
Glenn Beck crying: OMG he's a real American who loves his country!
boombyeJul 22, 2010
Honestly you come across as a troll, her reaction on her face after Olbermann's show is like "Oh god, I have to come on after this idiot?"
Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
falconearJul 23, 2010
I've never even heard Maddow raise her voice. I think she's the coolest customer on cable news.
karmashockJul 22, 2010
Leftist hardliner is hardline... how is this a story?
Would it be a story if Rush Limbaugh told republicans to keep to their message?
Boring.
malexJul 22, 2010
I don't think you actually read the story.
rotfoxJul 22, 2010
This is what I hate, everyone cares about a "hard hitting story" right up until it's "finished." Nobody cares about the aftermath, nobody cares.
I.e. The BP spill. It's capped so nobody cares about it anymore. Yet what are they doing now. There is still a s**t tonne of oil left from the mess. Nobody knows how long the cap will last or how much oil is still leaking (the cap doesn't contain it fully). But it's not on anyones radar anymore.
Sensationalist news sucks.
frostbytJul 22, 2010
Give them an inch and they take a mile and never want to use it or let anyone use it for less then a premium. Then once we all can afford the price to use this mile the price goes up again for "economy" reasons. No one can get ahead and the rich stay rich and the poor stay poor. It's a way to keep the working class to busy to busy to better themselves so they stay right where they are....working.
Closed AccountJul 22, 2010
What?
No, seriously.
What?
awintersJul 22, 2010
The White House has to take their lumps for this. You are the White House! FOX News is a biased opinion channel and EVERYONE knows it.
To let your fear of them make you make such a hasty decision based on a short clip from an online source that 1) has been known to cut and splice clips inaccurately 2) the owner has openly and repeatedly vowed to play dirty tricks to get at the left.
Obama could find the cure for cancer and FOX News and Breitbart will find a way to make it a bad thing. To spend one second worried about them is a waste of the Administration's time.
analogassassinJul 22, 2010
Obama's too worried about his image and he knows that a large portion of the country is right-leaning. So yeah, an image-conscious president is going to be vulnerable to this kind of thing.... again and again ..... bwahahahahah!Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
thetxiJul 22, 2010
If Obama cures cancer, the right wing talking point would be about how he just cost Pfizer and the rest of the pharmaceutical industry hundreds/thousands of R&D jobs.
iptunnellJul 22, 2010
Obama had better find the cure for cancer, because that's the only thing that MIGHT overshadow his train wreck of a presidency. He's a disaster!Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
thetxiJul 22, 2010
I would rather have the train wreck we have now than the disaster of the previous 8 years (although most of that seems to be chugging right along as well).
And I would much rather have this train wreck than the potential cataclysm of McCain/Palin.
iptunnellJul 22, 2010
Spoken like a true brainwashed dem, trying to compare and ACTUAL president to one that "might have been". Sorry, dude, but in the real world, you don't get to compare reality to something that doesn't exist.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
stefankahunaJul 22, 2010
Didn't he say "I would rather have the train wreck we have now than the disaster of the previous 8 years"
I'm no rocket scientist, but sounds to me like he might be referring to the very real Bush/Cheney disaster?
Yeah, that was real! Unbelievable, isn't it?
iptunnellJul 22, 2010
Apparently, you can't read.
OK, let's suppose for a moment you COULD read. Even if he said "Bush/Cheney",they're child's play compared to the Obama/Biden train wreck.
Someone recently made a good point to me about a person being drunk at a party and acting like a fool... they only remember your foolishness until someone more drunk and more foolish comes along. Thus, I give you... Obama/Biden.
So, yes, you're right. You are noooo rocket scientist.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
13point1Jul 22, 2010
I'm pleased that you think your disgusting, right-wing version of "America" is being destroyed. The farther away we travel from the conservative vision for America (liberty for all... white, Christian, male landowners), the better off we are as a society. If you don't like it, build yourself a time machine and go back to the United States before women were recognized as equals to men, before slaves were freed - the time you lust for.
iptunnellJul 22, 2010
Huh? What does that have to do with anything I said, or even implied? You liberals are a bunch of racist hate mongers! Good luck with that.
13point1Jul 22, 2010
And you conservatives are a bunch of lying, immoral reactionaries.
Hey, this is fun!
linuxpersonJul 22, 2010
"FOX News is a biased opinion channel and EVERYONE knows it. "
All major news outlets fall into the same category. I see no reason to single out Fox News.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
awintersJul 22, 2010
That is true, but that is the only station Obama obsseses over. He needs to forget about them and just do his damn job.
nainsellJul 22, 2010
It's valid to single out Fox News because while MSNBC is clearly left-leaning, it doesn't blatantly make s**t up just to promote its agenda, and their news and political opinion segments are much better separated than Fox's.
batonryeJul 23, 2010
Government makes a drug that cures cancer only in BLACK PEOPLE! D:
ghengiskhan1Jul 22, 2010
This is sound advice for any politician of any party and/or ideology because if youre a politician you should never let anything interfere with your singular goal of acquiring more power. If youre a politician, you should not pay attention to what people say about your or your ideas and beliefs. If youre a poltician, you should keep your eyes focused on that which you do best: run for election and acquire more power. Nothing else matters. You are a creature that must be true to yourself just like the scorpion on the frogs back. As a politician, your best tools are lying, cheating, stealing, confusing and obfuscating the truth. Stick to what you best and you will be just fine. Generations of politicians before you have built vast empires on these sound political principles.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
jhw539Jul 22, 2010
"Generations of politicians before you have built vast empires on these sound political principles."
Yes, and 200 years of politicians elected by the people before you have built America. America did not become the most prosperous free nation mankind has ever seen in spite of the government formed by the founding fathers, but because of it. Our government sucks, but it is the best in the world. Whether you're happy that the very popular Bill Clinton quietly left power while in some nations he could be entrenched for life by his slick PR, or happy that Bush/Cheney left power while in some nations they could be entrenched for life by corporate support, America's government system is pretty damn good. Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
ghengiskhan1Jul 22, 2010
It sounds like you have faith in yourself ("the people" if you will) and not a lot of faith in government. That is good.
peppermintpigJul 22, 2010
"America did not become the most prosperous free nation mankind has ever seen in spite of the government formed by the founding fathers, but because of it."
If by in spite of you mean having some restraint, then yes, restraint from using power did slow the growth of government way back then... but there have been abuses of power even since Washington. However they cannot take credit for the prosperity which was created by those who produced value.
jhw539Jul 22, 2010
"If by in spite of you mean having some restraint, then yes, restraint from using power did slow the growth of government way back then... "
It is the same government now as then. OK, with a few tweaks (women can vote, black kids go to school with white kids, and other 'expansions of government).
Government isn't "them" or "it". In the US, it is the majority. Anyone meeting the bare constitutional requirements can be elected, usually without even being on the ballot. And even jaw dropping results are accepted (paging Alvin Greene...).
You aren't railing at "the government" you are railing at the majority of Americans who, appallingly, "they" don't seem to agree with you on everything.
Closed AccountJul 22, 2010
"Yeah Obama, don't believe the conservative spin, just trust our liberal spin here at MSNBC"
I'm sick of all this political hackery in cable news.
megadan76Jul 22, 2010
Liberal spin? From what I've seen, outside looking in, there seems to be the normal media, then the right-spin Fox news. The only left spin news I'm aware of is online publications like the HuffPost or daily kos.
It's probably different because Americans have a very shifted view to the right of right v. left, but to the rest of the world MSNBC is a center organization.
representdlvJul 22, 2010
Oh how naive and ignorant you are. It's actually adorable that you think MSNBC is a center organization. C'mon.
megadan76Jul 22, 2010
@representDLV I'm assuming you're in America? Trust me, to the outside world, everything is skewed with you guys. The Canadian Conservative party would probably be centerists to you; the UK Liberal Democrats would probably be extreme left commies! Hahaha.
Also I don't really give a s**t about MSNBC, I'm sure I've never spent more than a few minutes watching or reading their reporting. But they're certainly no more to the left than any standard news organization.
lawhogs567Jul 22, 2010
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZdTk4InmA4
Nope, no liberal spine.
gh0st037Jul 22, 2010
@megadan76
The UK is not like the US, nor is the UK representative of the "outside world". Your political stances and policies don't reflect that of the US, so how can you affirmatively state that one organization is "center" and the other is "right-spin"? Who defines "standard news organizations"? The US has never been like the rest of the world and we all might be better off for it. Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
orlandogeekJul 23, 2010
@gh0st037 - Political Science is fairly standardized. Maybe you should take a course in it? There is no left in the USA when the stances and ideologies are applied to the standard that the rest of the world is compared to.
bookantJul 22, 2010
False equivalency is false. MSNBC leans liberal in its *commentary.* There's nothing wrong with that, straight news organizations have always taken a position when editorializing. FOX entirely eliminates the line between commentary and straight news coverage.
jkmyoungJul 22, 2010
You have to admit, when MSNBC criticizes Obama, he has usually done something wrong.
13point1Jul 22, 2010
Would you care to provide us with an example of Rachel Maddow being dishonest on her show?
orlandogeekJul 23, 2010
Don't hold your breath waiting for a response to that, friend. I've been watching both Olbermann and Maddow for around 2 years and every time they make a mistake they've stated it on the next show and actually apologized for their mistake. You know it. I know it. Others will never accept this reality.
Closed AccountJul 22, 2010
From Olbermann to O'Reilly, Cable "news" is a joke. I can understand talk radio shock jocks acting like this but so-called anchors spewing political talking points and views is not "news". Get this crap off cable "news" and back onto AM radio.
peppermintpigJul 22, 2010
The BBC does have its own spin on things, though.
errdayimhustlinJul 22, 2010
BBC is no beacon of truth. If anything, internet bloggers are the real force in journalism.
jiggawattJul 22, 2010
"internet bloggers are the real force in journalism"
No I'm pretty sure you missed the point of this whole story. Internet Bloggers are why this false story exists.
atarioJul 23, 2010
Fox "News" is billed as a news network. MSNBC is not.
skews13Jul 22, 2010
Don't worry Rach, the little boy who cried wolf won't bring the villagers running anymore. That sound you here are the people at all of the rightwing smear regimes on radio, and tv, reworking their formats, and deleting emails, and files at a furious rate.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
chriskzooJul 22, 2010
Too late - he already did...and looks worse.
enotswhatJul 22, 2010
well first democrats need to learn to grow a some balls.
thetxiJul 22, 2010
I have never seen a political group with so much power (White House and both chambers of Congress in vast majorities) be so completely incompetent at getting done what they were elected to do.
Even all of the big things they have voted on and passed (barely) are so watered down and compromised on it barely resembles anything liberal/progressive at all.
linuxpersonJul 22, 2010
Not to mention all the major bills that have been passed by the Democratically controlled Congress since 2006 were written almost entirely by corporate lobbyist.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
cebulskiJul 22, 2010
She should be apologized to and begged to take her job back.
Closed AccountJul 22, 2010
http://www.etoshoes.com/
http://www.etoshoes.com target="_blank">Etoshoes.com</a>
http://www.etoshoes.com/Nike-Basketball-Shoes/ target="_blank">Nike Basketball shoes</a>
http://www.etoshoes.com/Nike-Air-Force-One-Shoes/ target="_blank">Nike Air Force One</a>
http://www.etoshoes.com/Nike-Air-Yeezy-Shoes/ target="_blank">Air Yeezy</a>
http://www.etoshoes.com/Nike-Dunk-SB-shoes/ target="_blank">Dunk SB</a>
http://www.etoshoes.com/Nike-Air-Jordan-Shoes/ " target="_blank">Air Jordan</a>
http://www.etoshoes.com/Nike-Shox-Shoes/ target="_blank">Nike Shox</a>
http://www.etoshoes.com/Nike-Air-Max-Shoes/ target="_blank">Air Max</a>Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
entroperJul 22, 2010
People are surprised that Andrew Breitbart's site posted edited videos out of context? Really? No one learned anything after ACORN?
Closed AccountJul 22, 2010
Most of the people that believed ACORN was evil never heard the other side of it, because they only watch Fox. They've been convinced that Fox is the one true news station. It's like a religion.
iptunnellJul 22, 2010
ACORN is a glorified labor union, and we all know that labor unions are a virus to our economy now. I don't need anyone to tell me that, I can see it in their Mission Statement.
Apply some logic to your thoughts, it makes life easier.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
malexJul 22, 2010
Even if you were right, would that justify the deliberate dishonesty and slander that we saw in the edited tapes?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but you appear to be advocating an "ends justify the means" philosophy. You believe that liberal organizations are bad for America, so anything that counteracts or confuses their influence, even if that includes blatantly lying to the American public, is morally justified. Am I correct?
iptunnellJul 22, 2010
We can debate "dishonesty and slander" all day long, you still won't put the kool-aid down. No sense arguing with the brainwashed.
stefankahunaJul 22, 2010
I love how we "all know" that the labor unions are the virus. Of course!
That's why we're in this mess! It was all labor unions and black people buying houses they couldn't afford. /s
malexJul 22, 2010
You might be right, iptunnell, but seeing as I'm the only one trying to have an honest dialogue, you're not right in the way that you think.
caramba421Jul 22, 2010
Yeah...those f**king viruses. I always wanted to work a Saturday anyway!
iptunnellJul 23, 2010
malex, I apologize if I took your comment the wrong way. I'm always up for an intelligent debate, but I'm used to the average digg liberals such as Stefan and karamba. They don't apply logic to thought, obviously. Nobody in their right mind defends labor unions after 1980.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
malexJul 25, 2010
Apology accepted. Now, would you care to answer the question?
elbowgeekJul 22, 2010
Neither did we learn from World War I, World War II, the Vietnam War, et-cetera, et-cetera, et-cetera.... No, humans don't learn squat from their own mass stupidities, whether we're talking about mass-murder/suicide orgies or silly things like the topic at hand.
kingcamJul 22, 2010
So wait... now we should have stayed out of WW2? You know, I may not be old enough to remember but there was a time when to be on the left you practically had to swear fascists your mortal enemies; I imagine it was sort of like in StarWars. I long to go back to the days when the liberals still thought there was something worth actually fighting for. I do agree that WWI and Vietnam were mostly a waste.
jnismeJul 22, 2010
Wonder if there will be another "Beer Summit" so The White House can apologize for rushing to judgment....again...after they keep telling us not to rush to judgment. Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
thetxiJul 22, 2010
They didn't rush to judgment.
They rushed in an attempt to save their ass.
And in doing so they screwed themselves even worse.
jnismeJul 22, 2010
If they rushed in an attempt to save their ass, then didn't they rush to judgment?
phaedrynJul 22, 2010
This post isn't about the article, it's about the post from etoshoes a couple posts up...
I love when these spammers post in highly politically charged topics, because no matter how divisive the topic or how much we are at each others throats, EVERYONE buries them.
See? We can find common ground! lol...
vegetablelambJul 22, 2010
and why is almost always spam for selling shoes and nothing else?
johnrebJul 22, 2010
Didn't anyone ever tell you the myth about shoe sizes?
Closed AccountJul 22, 2010
The right wing is trying to destroy this country because they can't control it. By right wing I don't mean the average person who identifies themselves as conservative or registered republican. They are just the pawns being manipulated and told what to think and how to act in this charade.
peppermintpigJul 22, 2010
Yeah, only the conservatives could come up with stupid ideas and promote them through government..
These childish games should end. The left and the right are fighting to control a power they have no right to.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
kingcamJul 22, 2010
Last I saw when the left actually gets power they try and make the country better, like Social Security, or civil rights. Problem is that Democrats expanded so much political capital passing the Voting Rights Act that now they are only ever in power for long enough to fix all the s**t the right wing was able to do in their exile. For instance, Clinton spent most of his time in office trying to get the government coffers back into the black. Too bad as soon as he was out the door.... well, you know what happened.
iptunnellJul 22, 2010
Right. And the lefties aren't being brainwashed by Madcow and Olberhack, I suppose. If you want to play that game, let's tally it up by how much control the left has over the media vs. the right. That would be 99% to 1%.
So, who's being manipulated again?Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
ventg4funJul 22, 2010
Uhhh....No....Faux news has the highest ratings of any other cable network, as do the talk right wing talk radio loser networks. You fundamentalists just worship them and eat that sh*t up like the supersize mcd's fries you're all so fond of.
It seems that somebody never learned how to see the forest through the trees....
iptunnellJul 22, 2010
True, they have the highest ratings of any SINGLE network. Use your brain, I'll bet if you think real hard you can do the 5th grade math and find out your argument is built on a bowl of jello.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Closed AccountJul 22, 2010
Reality has a liberal bias.
Closed AccountJul 22, 2010
The phrase "Reality has a liberal bias" was coined by a comedian...Hint for socialistjesus, he was only joking. :D
Closed AccountJul 22, 2010
It's ok I'm only trying to get a rise out of iptunnel, which is not hard to do ;)
iptunnellJul 22, 2010
You might stand a chance if you had anything either original or factual to say, socialist. That just makes you generic - just the run-of-the-mill brainwashed liberal.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Closed AccountJul 22, 2010
Hahaha! See?
skittlesusaJul 23, 2010
Tell that to Greece.
They are getting a hefty dose of reality right now and I can promise you, it ain't liberal.
jkmyoungJul 22, 2010
Ridiculous. The problem is that both sides have painted the other as 'destroying the country', so they consider any method to regain control as fair game, as long as they gain control.
Closed AccountJul 22, 2010
You're right and you make the exact point I was trying to get across, but I think the conservatives have pushed it much further. They are trying to make life harder on average Americans to make them desperate and fuel blind hate and rage in order to push their agenda. I just haven't seen anything near as bad from the liberal side.
iptunnellJul 22, 2010
No news is void of bias these days, but you're smoking crack if you think the liberal media is is using a softer approach. Liberals basically own media in the US, yet they continue to fuel the race issue (among other things) as if they're being attacked by a super power. It's simply a ridiculous notion to state that they're not trying to push their agenda and somehow repair/cover up Obama's trashed image.
falconearJul 23, 2010
Hey, if SocialistJesus got in a fight with Supply Side Jesus, who would win?
Closed AccountJul 22, 2010
Everything about this story disappointed me. The fact that Fox news has this much power to influence the Obama administration and the fact that the Obama administration didn't dig into the story a little more before reacting so quickly.
wkrausmannJul 23, 2010
Fox News doesn't have any influence at all.
The clip of Sherrod was released in the media AFTER Sherrod resigned.
oboshoeJul 22, 2010
There is a whole bunch of blame to go around here.
Breitbart published fraudent stuff. Fox repeated it. Then Obama's team acted on it.
Breitbart is a fool and so is fox, but who is the greater fool? The fool or the fool who follows him?
thetxiJul 22, 2010
As I said on a post from another article, leave it to the current Administration (and those whose sole duty is to try and crush him) to snag defeat from the jaws of victory.
Breitbart was absolutely NAILED in the middle of a massive lie and smear job, and somehow it can still get used as an attack against Obama.
"Oh we got caught in a lie, but you BELIEVED IT!"
griberalJul 22, 2010
Fox News didn't run the video until after the White House had forced Shirley to resign. How did Fox News influence Obama into firing Shirley? Hell, Glen Beck actually defended Ms. Sherrod, something you think the White House would have done instead of throwing her overboard. Obama is in so far over his head that he makes George Bush look like Abraham Lincoln.
Closed AccountJul 22, 2010
OMG!
More misled, misinformed idiots!
The 'White House' didn't force anything. That was made clear yesterday. Sherrod was asked to resign by her superior and that's where it started and ended.
OMG! Witch hunt! Witch hunt! OMG! Obama called her personally and fired her!
This is why America is such a s**thole.
Nobody bothers to get the facts before flapping their uneducated, uninformed lips.
griberalJul 23, 2010
The facts that I'm going by are the ones that Ms. Sherrod put out. I'm not believing anything this incompetent White House puts out. Obama and the White House are trying to cover their asses because they've been caught showing that they make decisions based on what Fox News is going to do. I stand by the statement that Obama makes Bush look like Abraham Lincoln.
Since you want facts, here are the facts that were giving by the person that was fired:
"They asked me to resign, and, in fact, they harassed me as I was driving back to the state office from West Point, Georgia yesterday," Sherrod told CNN. "I had at least three calls telling me the White House wanted me to resign…and the last one asked me to pull over to the side of the road and do it."
Sherrod said the final call came from Cheryl Cook, an undersecretary at the Department of Agriculture. Sherrod said White House officials wanted her to quit immediately because the controversy was "going to be on Glenn Beck tonight."
BTW, Glenn Beck did not run the clip on his show that night, and in FACT he supported Ms. Sherrod and said that the White House and the NAACP had rushed to judgement. He also did this before the complete transcript of her speech was released.
triskozko2Jul 22, 2010
FTA
"The Obama administration had asked for the resignation of USDA official Shirley Sherrod after a heavily edited video surfaced Monday on Andrew Breitbart's Big Government website"
They fired her because of Breitbart's lies. Fox News just continued and channeled the lie. You're arguing against yourself.
griberalJul 23, 2010
FTA
"What is not really interesting about this whole situation is that Fox News is doing this," said Maddow on Tuesday. "This is what Fox News does. This is how they are different from other news organizations. This is why the White House argued months ago that Fox should be treated as a media organization, but not as a normal news organization, because they don’t treat news the way a normal news organization treats news."
What did Fox News do? They ran the clip after the White House fired Ms. Sherrod. You would expect that if the White House had fired her that they had done due process. So, how is Fox News reporting the story after the White House has pretty much confirmed it by firing Ms. Sherrod not professional? The White House got caught showing that they make decisions based on how it will play on Fox News. The outrage should be at the White House for making decisions based on a news association that they say is irrelevant.
dayal911Jul 22, 2010
Yeah.. bulls**t. I'm tallying this one up to liberal spin.
Obama passed the health insurance bill despite getting only 3 republican votes total, and despite all the attacks from conservative media.
He's willing to move forward with his agenda despite conservative attacks, and suddenly he cares so much about the conservative's opinion on some obscure member of his administration?
Please. Tell the truth for once, Maddow.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
iptunnellJul 22, 2010
Don't hold your breath on that one.
linuxpersonJul 22, 2010
You should have told me a little so
iptunnellJul 22, 2010
Whoa! There he goes, his tiny little Obamabot brain just exploded. Johnny 5, come back!!
ndoroxJul 22, 2010
I've yet to see anyone point out the last time Maddow willingly lied about a news story. She's liberal for sure, but her facts are always right on, as far as I've seen.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
iptunnellJul 22, 2010
Madcow doesn't use facts, therefore, they can never be wrong. She bases all of her "news" purely on opinion. If you can't see that, you need to have your head examined.
dayal911Jul 23, 2010
The different iptunnell is that we believe states have the right to set such mandates. The federal government does not.
That's the difference. You can't tell the difference between state laws and federal laws?
thetxiJul 22, 2010
Obama and the Dems in congress compromised the s**t out of that bill to the point where it looked as if it had been ripped from the pages of the 1996 Republican playbook, and it still managed to get only 3 Republican votes.
The Dems gave everything imaginable to the Republicans and still got a big NO in return. And since the Democratic caucus is so fractured among conservatives/centrists/liberals it was impossible to band them all together as a single 59/60 member voting bloc and give a return "f**k off" to the Republicans and pass something that Democrats would have really wanted.
Trying to make it seem as if the Dems just forced through some liberals fantasy of a health care bill despite cries of protest from Republicans is being dishonest.
dayal911Jul 22, 2010
LOL.
THat's brilliant. They NEEDED to compromise so they could get the Republican votes to pass. No Republicans voted for it, but it passes the house anyways. Gotta love the stupidity of your post.
Here's why they made compromises. It wasn't for the Republicans. It was for the Democrats on the fringe. The compromises had nothing to do with Republicans. As you can see, no republican in the house voted for it, and it passed anyways.
You, sir, are an idiot.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
thetxiJul 22, 2010
"Here's why they made compromises. It wasn't for the Republicans. It was for the Democrats on the fringe. The compromises had nothing to do with Republicans."
So basically you are just reiterating what I said. They had to compromise to try and get conservatives on board (conservative democrats, and let us not forget all the attempts at getting Snowe and Collins and Grassley on board as well) because there isn't one big mythical democratic voting bloc.
And despite those compromises towards conservatives, no republicans stood up to vote for it. Conservative democrats for the most part finally got on board, but the republicans (conservatives as well) never did because even when they get what they want in a bill, their job is to still oppose it because that is what they are banking on politically.
Again, thanks for confirming exactly what I said.
dayal911Jul 22, 2010
Snowe, Collins, and Grassley are not conservatives. Being Republican does not mean you are conservative.
And no, the democrats they needed are NOT conservatives. There might be some overlap about Gay marriage and other SOCIAL issues, but that's it.
"They had to compromise to try and get conservatives"
That's not what you said at all. You said Republicans, not conservatives.
"The Dems gave everything imaginable to the Republicans"
Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
iptunnellJul 22, 2010
TXI, lay off the ganja. You can't process even a single rational thought.
dayal911Jul 22, 2010
TXI has been owned to the point where he can only digg opposing comments down.
jinnrikkiJul 22, 2010
Obama passed a health care bill that could have been written by Republicans. The only reason they bitched about it is because their base expects them to. Try and keep up.
dayal911Jul 22, 2010
Then why did no Republicans in the house vote for it?
iptunnellJul 22, 2010
"Obama passed a health care bill that could have been written by Republicans."
What are you smoking??? You must have an IV of Obama BS hooked up to you!Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
nevariusJul 22, 2010
Considering the basic idea came from McCain in 93 or 96, and then later made into state law by Mitt Romney.
Both btw were in the last 'Republican Party presidential primaries' and one became the Republicans choice to run as President. (Just in case you were not paying attention)
errdayimhustlinJul 22, 2010
Unbiased journalism is a liberal myth from what I can tell. MSNBC is pure propaganda at this point, just as Fox News was during the neocon coup of the early 2000's. Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
thetxiJul 22, 2010
What do you mean "just as Fox News WAS"?
Are you implying that Fox News isn't still pure propoganda?
errdayimhustlinJul 22, 2010
It seems to have toned down a little, but as I said I don't believe in "unbiased journalism."
timurdJul 22, 2010
I feel so bad for Ms. Sherrod. She tried to keep race and politics out of her work and gets thrown under the bus for it by Fox. They really should be ashamed of themselves for ruining her career in order to get cheap political points.
five35Jul 22, 2010
Thrown under the bus by Fox? I don't think so. She was thrown under the bus by the Obama administration.
thetxiJul 22, 2010
She got rolled over by a whole convoy of buses.
johnnysoftwareJul 23, 2010
Uh, no. Fox News for now at least is allowed a certain large share of US media markets. However, that is just contingent on their Australian owner (he has dual citizenship) maintaining his US citizenship. If his extra citizenship is stripped, he becomes simply an Australian citizen and must divest a lot of his US media holdings.
But that is aside from the point that supposedly he is a US citizen and she is a person working hard for the US public, hard honest work. So yes, by that measure Fox News through her under the bus. If that is not the case, then go back and read paragraph one.
ocyrisJul 22, 2010
She's probably going to sue the hell out of the government and get a couple million. Rightly so IMO.
eh123Jul 22, 2010
If Obama is so smart, why does he keep getting duped by FoxNews?
christmaspooJul 22, 2010
Because somehow he thinks that using common sense logic and explaining the details of his agenda will persuade them. He's naive, the right doesn't want anything but power and they don't give a s**t about the American people. They want to protect their corporate interests and the American elite.
In the end Fox News sets the agenda for the GOP.
thetxiJul 22, 2010
Obama is smart. He is also politically smart.
But this was an instance of Obama (and more likely his entire political team around him) being so skittish and trying to be "ahead of the curve" on political issues that they tried to be proactive and ended up shooting themselves in the foot.
One of those times where they out-thought themselves.
arfikeJul 22, 2010
But I thought Barack Obama was Superman!! He was supposed to balance the budget, deplete the national debt, bust the recession and bring our troops home in his first month as President!! What happened!? We've been duped with empty promises of "hope" and "change"!!
Where's my job, Obama??
/s
oboshoeJul 22, 2010
One of the favorite comebacks here on Digg is "Stop watching Fox news"
Maybe somebody should mention this to the administration as well.
jfitz369Jul 22, 2010
Get a Clue to Maddow, these people are on the same team. It's a game. They are friends. Stop giving into the illusion that they are different. It's all crap. We need a government reboot. Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
linuxpersonJul 22, 2010
"Stop giving into the illusion that they are different."
That is apparently her sole talent and how she earns a living.
danbarkerJul 22, 2010
She's a stupid bitch.
aenemacanalJul 22, 2010
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rachel_Maddow
dude, she was a recipient of a rhodes scholarship. i'd say she's pretty f**king smart.
christmaspooJul 22, 2010
Don't be afraid of the truth, just stick your head in the sad as you normally do.
Ignorance is bliss, remember?
arschgaudiJul 22, 2010
If only Obama had been as quick to act with regards to the Gulf Oil incident.
arfikeJul 22, 2010
I know! Because he coulda used his super-breath to freeze the gulf, lift the whole this up on his shoulders while BP fixed the leak with cranes at the sea floor. And then he would set the gulf back down, problem solved. You f**king moron.
five35Jul 22, 2010
MSNBC? Bwahahahaa!!!
iptunnellJul 22, 2010
"This is why the White House argued months ago that Fox should be treated as a media organization, but not as a normal news organization, because they don’t treat news the way a normal news organization treats news." - Madcow
What, she thinks SHE'S news? Madcow and Olberhack do nothing but damage the integrity of the journalistic community, yet The White House recognizes them as "news". Complete partisan hacks.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
bookantJul 22, 2010
Those of us who don't see the world through FOX colored glasses understand the difference between editorials and straight news coverage. If you'd like to share some examples of this "liberal bias" you're so convinced of *in the straight new coverage* of MSNBC, please feel free.
iptunnellJul 22, 2010
First of all, I don't watch Fox, but keep telling yourself whatever you want.
Secondly, you need ME to give you examples? Are you really THAT brainwashed that you can't see it for yourself?Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
bookantJul 22, 2010
I don't watch TV news, of any kind, I'm a reader. But let's list the evidence I have to work with:
(A) None of the conservatives constantly complaining about "liberal" MSNBC ever give so much as one single example of said bias that isn't from a commentary rather than a straight news report.
(B) Conservatives have a well-documented decade+ history of 'crying wolf' by accusing anything that isn't right wing propaganda of 'liberal bias.'
(C) Conservatives in general, particularly FOX "News" viewers continually demonstrate that they don't have a *concept* (let alone the ability to recognize it in specific cases) of the difference between those two things (editorial vs straight news).
In absence of any other evidence to back up your claims I have no choice but to conclude that the MSNBC case is just like all the hundreds of others - bulls**t claims of "liberal bias" from the right directed at any media outlet that refuses to uncriticially report demonstrably false talking points from the right.
iptunnellJul 22, 2010
Well, if you had bothered to consume all "information" in this article, you would have seen the attached video clip of Madcow and been able to draw your own conclusion (just like I did). "Straight news" is almost non-existent, and it CERTAINLY isn't coming from Olberhack/Madcow.
So, the "evidence you have to work with" isn't evidence after all. Might want to inform yourself first before you speak up next time so you don't look like such an idiot.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
bookantJul 22, 2010
"Well, if you had bothered to consume all "information" in this article, you would have seen the attached video clip of Madcow and been able to draw your own conclusion (just like I did)."
Maddow is a commentator. Which just brings us back to my original point - you have not one example of this alleged liberal bias that doesn't come from commentary.
"CERTAINLY isn't coming from Olberhack/Madcow."
That was point, dolt. It isn't *supposed* to be coming from Olbermann or Maddow. They're commentators. Not straight new reporters. See again my original point about you (and FOX viewers) not knowing the difference. (This is, of course, because on FOX there *is* no difference.) You've just nicely demonstrated that I was 100% correct in that assessment. And, as an added bonus, your use of cutsie little nicknames - the exact same ones every other FOX drone uses - you've also proven yourself to be an idiot and a sheep.
iptunnellJul 22, 2010
Flip/flop, flip/flop... That's not at all what you said, but play the Obama flip/flop game if you like. Furthermore, how would you know what Madcow and Olberhack are, you said you don't watch TV.
Stings a bit, doesn't it.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
bookantJul 22, 2010
I'm sorry, ip, my bad. I've obviously been talking way over your head, I'll try to bring it down to your level:
Hey, ipfunny, your a poopy head. and stop drinking all the kool-aid.
Better?
supermosesJul 22, 2010
What party are they partisan hacks for? In this clip, Maddow is criticizing the Democrats.
iptunnellJul 22, 2010
You watched it and THAT'S what you took away from it? Dude, you've got to lay off the kool-aid!
vegetablelambJul 22, 2010
"Madcow and Olberhack"
Jesus Christ what are you 12 years old? Son, no one will take you seriously if you keep up with shenanigans like that.
glassagateJul 23, 2010
Fox News isn't new. Stewart pointed that out long ago. It more like a money
laundering setup, but instead of dirty money, it's dirty news.
smargJul 22, 2010
No one listens to you, Rachel. You and Olbermann's numbers are in the toilet compared to Fox News.
Shoo, fly.
malexJul 22, 2010
How does this in anyway reflect on the validity or lack thereof of anything said in the actual article?
smargJul 22, 2010
Fewer viewers=lower credibility rating=low validity.
Live + Same Day Cable News Daily Ratings for July 20, 2010
P2+ Total Day
FNC – 1,172,000 viewers
CNN – 414,000 viewers
MSNBC – 403,000 viewers
CNBC – 154,000 viewers
HLN – 316,000 viewers
P2+ Prime Time
FNC – 2,296,000 viewers
CNN – 548,000 viewers
MSNBC –856,000 viewers
CNBC – 139,000 viewers
HLN – 516,000 viewers
http://tvbythenumbers.com/category/ratings/cable-newsComment is buried, click here to see the rest.
malexJul 22, 2010
"Fewer viewers=lower credibility rating=low validity."
This is the most blatant logical fallacy I've read all day.
redcrow1973Jul 22, 2010Submitter
I keep hearing you Fuxheads talking about MSNBCs numbers. It's getting old. You need a new schtick.
You're wrong, by the way. I listen to Rachel. I love Olbermann. I watch them both.
smargJul 22, 2010
You have a right to listen to whomever you want.
My point is, look at the numbers. Seems that there are more good people than misguided people.
glassagateJul 23, 2010
@ Smarg
Fox News has more viewers? So what? Sure, when you make s**t up, and use
nothing but scare tactics, of course you're going to get more viewers.
aforsbergJul 22, 2010
Sanity is not statistical.
scrotiemcboogerJul 22, 2010
Only reason fox has good numbers is because there are alot of stupid people in America that can't think for themselves.
smargJul 22, 2010
Nyaah nyah.
foxifiednutbarJul 22, 2010
The problem with Maddow/Olbermann/MSNBC... is that they are there to make you think you still have a choice. They are hired to propagate that there is still Democratic process...
Obama and Bush simularities are staggering if you care to look. Like, plan for the draw down of forces in Iraq is almost identical to Bush’s plan. How we treat War on Terror detainees, Patriot act, Drug War, FISA, education policy, and abstinence.
ALL THE SAME!
I'm waiting for a valid argument but I have yet to see one.
Amerika has become a state in which large corporates rule and choice at general elections is limited to a choice of two parties who are really just two wings of the same party both of which are ultimately controlled by corporations. The two party system is merely in place to give an illusion of choice.
It is now more than obvious that the enemy we face is not some bearded extremist hiding out in a cave, but our own home grown traitors and criminals posing as our representatives in Washington, D.C. and the propagandist networks who support their financiers.
A corprotocracy doesn't have anything to do with the benefit of the citizens and taxpayers. That's certainly what the populations are told, but that isn't what it is.
James Madison wasn't deluded in what he was doing.
linuxpersonJul 22, 2010
And the ignorant masses that so often comment on digg are stereotypical political hacks that buy into the illusion.
jkmyoungJul 22, 2010
"The people are people; the leaders are lizards."
"But why don't they elect a person? Why do they just keep electing lizards?"
"Because if you don't vote for a lizard, then the wrong lizard will get in!"
mzx639Jul 22, 2010
Sherrod is worthless, and should not have been reinstated! Just because she said she has learned from her mistakes means she's not a racist?? Haha, yeah right! I'd like to see what she has done for the past 24 years. Just because someone say sorry, doesn't forgive their actions!!Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
kornbred79Jul 22, 2010
Have you actually watch the entire speech, or are you still judging based on a 2:30 segment taken out of context?
redcrow1973Jul 22, 2010Submitter
The whole point of her story was to promote racial unity. That pretty much means she's not a racist, troll.
By the way, the white farmer she was telling the story about...he forgives her actions. In fact, he's gone on record as calling her a close friend.
So what's up YOUR ass?
msles59130Jul 22, 2010
His brain apparently.
jimlowJul 22, 2010
tl;dr don't feed the trolls Obama.
jinnrikkiJul 22, 2010
Great, the flying monkeys from red state have arrived.
warlok480Jul 22, 2010
Obama didn't 'give in to conservative spin' -- the White House did its typical M.O. -- at the hint of a controversy, they threw someone under the bus before all facts were in. In a 'normal' set of circumstances, there would have been an internal investigation which might have taken months and the person in question quietly reprimanded (if that even, since her actions took place BEFORE she was hired by the government)
But Obama did whats become his typical M.O. -- as soon as something might become a potentialy damaging news story, and before all the facts are in...just toss someone under the bus or to the wolves. If you can credit Obama for any one thing, its that instead of 'coverups' in his administration, you get hung out to dry: guilty, innocent, or just in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Oh and like Obama really needs 'advice' from his cheerleader Rachel Maddow...the blatant extreme left bias of these so called 'journalists' who have sold thier souls for approval and access is disgusting, its no wonder it takes "Rolling Stone" and "The National Enquirer" to break the stories of the year. Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
kornbred79Jul 22, 2010
I fully admit that the administration royal bungled this situation, but, in their defense, they did quickly own up to the mistake, apologize for their mistakes, and look to rectify the situation with Sherrod.
I would much rather have an administration that is willing to admit to their imperfections than one that would rather lie, deny and coverup.
jdenzerJul 22, 2010
Breitbart is actually making the accusation that CNN interviewed a fake farmer from the story. This guy has to be clinically insane.
ventg4funJul 22, 2010
I can' believe how many racist, biased nimrods we still have in this country in the year 2010! I hope Sherrod sues the living SH*T out of Faux news, bretibart, AND the usda, and lightens there bank accounts a little.
linuxpersonJul 22, 2010
Rachael Maddow is the leftist version of Bill O'Reilly.
redcrow1973Jul 22, 2010Submitter
Rachel Maddow actually BELIEVES what she's saying, as opposed to Billo the Clown who's actually admitted that he's just playing a character.
linuxpersonJul 22, 2010
"Rachel Maddow actually BELIEVES what she's saying"
Of course she does, that's how she makes a living.
" as opposed to Billo the Clown who's actually admitted that he's just playing a character."
Citation?Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
arfikeJul 22, 2010
Well, she more than believes it. She can support what she says without immature the grandstanding that you see from pundits of another political variety.
jkmyoungJul 22, 2010
Bill O'Reilly is actually decent, articulate and well-reasoned most of the time, and shouldn't be automatically lumped in with the rest, just because he's on Fox. He's even been called 'the voice of sanity at Fox News' by John Stewart.
rotfoxJul 22, 2010
The real journalists of Fox news might find it better to be on a real news network.
spuddufferJul 23, 2010
Bill O'Reilly is the rightist version of Adolf Hitler.
redcrow1973Jul 22, 2010Submitter
Not true. MSNBC doesn't edit video to remove applause. MSNBC doesn't report on one event but use video from another. MSNBC doesn't repeat Breitbar's lies without vetting the story.
Rachel Maddow actually BELIEVES what she's saying, as opposed to Billo the Clown who's actually admitted that he's just playing a character. She's no sensationalist.
redcrow1973Jul 22, 2010Submitter
And yeah, I have a degree - but I'm no Rachel Maddow.
u2canfailJul 23, 2010
Removing applause to you is somehow equal to editing comments out to a totally untruthful account of a speech? FUNNY
davidhierJul 23, 2010
That argument always cracked me up. It's like they're implying people should be pressured by what others thought of the speech.
consterxnationJul 22, 2010
Isn't it a little late for that?