• Facebook
  • Twitter
DustyMills On February - 9 - 2011

What a journalist coo it is to land an interview with the president of the US, to be able to sit down and interview the president must be equivalent to being the guest of honor at a State dinner.

Fox News was given this plum assignment to air on Super Bowl Sunday, surely one of the most watched football games of the year. Now, one would think that if given this prime time event, Fox would do it’s homework….they would be deliberate and wise when choosing the reporter who would conduct the interview. But, instead of being clever and careful when deciding on the interviewer, Fox went with their usual mindless decision of choosing a man who, in no uncertain terms, could be called anything other than a bombastic ignoramus.

Bill O’Reilly has been around for many years…..I remember him from the days when he hosted a half hour entertainment show…..that was before he found his true calling of radical rightwinger who is prone to rants, fabrications & conservative nonsense. This man made a sham out of his prime 15 minutes alone with the president, choosing to come across as a ego maniac who has the status to be offensive & discourteous to the leader of our nation.

O’Reilly’s interview with the president says much about the Fox network in general, besides their poor judgement in choosing O’Reilly to conduct what should have been an opportunity to discuss with the president the many problems we face in our country. If a person was being honest, they would have to admit that Fox News is no more about the news than any other entertainment show on TV today. To say they stretch the truth, or present distortions as fact, is well known. That this entire network is completely comprised of republican conservatives, is astounding. That so many people believe what these hosts say, is testiment to the failure of the educational system in this country.

Should anyone wish to do something for their country, find a person a day that watches and believes the Fox drivel and convince them that they are wasting good brain cells in their effort to be informed…..or, as the case probably is, a way to vent your problems of the day by throwing things at the TV in total frustration at those who choose to deliberately distort events of the day.

237 Responses so far.

Click here to leave a comment
  1. AdLib says:

    Arianna on Bill Maher last night:

    1. HP is not a Progressive or political blog, 95% of articles are not on politics.

    2. Arianna is not a Progressive, she is a centrist and doesn’t think that many issues are right or left.

    3. She attacked Obama and said he doesn’t get it, he worked on HCR when he should have been working on jobs.

    4. She said she may vote for a Republican in the 2012 elections.

    As Edward G. Robinson said in The Ten Commandments, “Myah, where’s your Messiah now?”

    BTW Maher was such a brown nosing lapdog to her, it was pretty embarrassing to watch.

    • KQuark says:

      You would think knowledge of this would doom HP but they have their hooks into people for understandably social reasons.

    • PlatoSunTsu says:

      Arianna is the modern definition of a “Sellout”, both literally
      ( via AOL) and ideologically ( flip,flop,flip so far…).
      She is slowly coming to resemble a new creature henceforth to be referred to as:
      Arianna Orly Taitzington 😉

      • jdmn17 says:

        It does make some sense since so many of her posts were about right leaning people. Even though many of them were somewhat unflattering they never the less kept those names in the news. The comment moderation might well have been her way of diminishing the impact of the story and maybe even allowed her to use it to her own advantage, oh well, gone is gone. I’m not surprised she is considering switching parties. I think she was a Hilary supporter and when she lost, AH decided to take out her disappointment the old fashioned way. Her comment regarding HCR and jobs was ridiculous. POTUS had no power with the senate locked down. How he could have ever gotten a jobs bill through is simply an impossibility as even a rube like me can tell. The republicans wanted no part of any success for this President. They should be ashamed at the way they betrayed the American people

      • KQuark says:

        😆 the resemblance of the two is not lost on me either.

    • TruthWins says:

      Now wonder even the thought of her makes me utterly sick.

    • BigDogMom says:

      Well if she says she’s a centrist, than why was she bashing Obama 6 mos. ago for being one also? She should have no problem with him and should be praising him… 😕

      • TruthWins says:

        She’s now preparing to vote Republican in 2012. So being centrist is now a stage in that, 3 months from now she may call Obama a leftwing radical.

  2. BigDogMom says:

    Khirad posts:

    “Sometimes I play the game of: how long can I last through watching Beck’s show.

    It’s sort of akin those people who will dare another to drink disgusting kitchen table concoctions.

    Afterward, I feel the same nausea and sick coming up in my throat.
    My record is about twenty minutes, though I’ve watched longer recently as he’s unraveled over Egypt.”

    Gawd, your like my husband, he does the same thing…last night he had it on to see what he was going to say about Mubarak stepping down, I lasted only 10 min., had to leave the room…

    Edit: I tried to do the block quotes thingy, but it didn’t work…maybe I should read the f’en manual!

  3. Haruko Haruhara says:

    As far as I’m concerned, anyone can post anywhere they want. I like posting on multiple sites. And if people want to poof their HP accounts, that’s up to them, and if they want to stay, that’s up to them. Personally, I find it an exasperating site with the moderation and the willfully ignorant trolls.

    I’ve seen people on HP “unfanned” and even attacked — sometimes quite viciously — behind their backs simply for the sin of posting on certain sites. I am not making that up.

    There’s been an exodus there because of the AOL thing, the exasperation with the moderation, and because of the out-of-control cliques (which hopefully are finally being broken up). I don’t begrudge anyone who stays there, or who posts anywhere. I don’t feel the need to control others.

    I still go back from time to time because I miss some of the people. No other reason.

    • Khirad says:

      I think they’re just being douchenozzles.

      I really don’t begrudge anyone deciding for themselves where to and where not to post, but that is some major asshattery.

      Arianna’s not your girlfriend, peeps.

      [I threw up a little in my mouth at that]

    • KQuark says:

      Believe me most members here surf and/or post elsewhere and we have never discouraged any member from doing so. A main theme here is freedom of expression and diversity. You cannot promote either if you “punish” people for surfing and blogging on the sites they like.

      So you need not feel like you have to explain yourself here.

      BTW love your avatar. I’m an Anime fan as well.

      • Haruko Haruhara says:

        You go to deviantART.com, there’s a million drawings of Haruko. Many of them are quite clever, but some of them are kinda sick.

        I just “avert my eyes” from those. 😀

        PS — and the thing about “punishing” and attacking people because of where they choose to post … grrrr, it still makes me really angry.

    • Buddy McCue says:

      I’ll go and read “Is Right-Wing Talk Dying,” but before doing that, I have to say that I think that it’s too much to hope for. Right-Wing talk seems pretty entrenched from where I stand.

      Maybe it’s because where I’m standing is in the State of Georgia, here in the deep South. I know plenty of people who call Rush Limbaugh’s show “the news.”

      I’ll read that article, and I thank you for providing a link to it, but I’m going to be hard to convince.

      • Khirad says:

        Oh no, I’m with you on that.

        But, we can hope, right?

        But, I do hope Beck at least has marginalized himself even more.

        I’ve heard others say that they stopped listening to Hannity after he put down Egyptian protesters and shilled for Mubarak.

        • AlphaBitch says:

          I heard from my dinner guest last night (a former news producer for CBS and a former director at TNN) who is now a communications professor. He said Becky has lost 39% of his viewing audience, and he feels he is on the short list to be canned. One can only hope.

          BTW: The conversation started when I shared Patsy’s “Mock the Dummy” video find with him.

          • escribacat says:

            I hope that’s true, AB. It would be so wonderful if Beck got sent packing. They could replace him with Ed the Talking Horse and have a better quality of programming.

            • AlphaBitch says:

              Ok for some snark: Isn’t Becky Glenn the Talking ASS?

              I trust my source, Ecat. Let’s hope his source was as reliable.

        • Buddy McCue says:

          There’s always hope.

          I didn’t know that Hannity supported Mubarack, but I’m not surprised. I’m glad you heard people say they stopped listening for that reason.

          That’s a good thing. I’ve heard Sean Hannity before, and he’s just awful.

    • ErnestineBass says:

      Is Right-Wing Talk Dying?

      One can only hope.

  4. david p canada says:


    Some long-timers over at Huffington are really dissing the people who left there and are posting here and other sites.

    The posting here is vastly superior to the high-school drivel that most (I said most, not all) seem to prefer over there.

    • AdLib says:

      David, it is disappointing but it is not unusual human behavior. They have a sense of being abandoned, even though their reason is telling them that the people who left did so out of principle and it is in no way a reflection on them.

      When people do things that are not reasonable, they are usually driven by blond emotion.

      Why would anyone feel they were “locked” into only blogging here or there? Why couldn’t such people expand the variety of their experiences? They could, of course.

      I am a bit surprised at those who in effect are acting as if they have to show loyalty to a corporation first and their friends second. It is a form of provincialism that bewilders me.

      So only true friends choose to live in their neighborhood and just because friends choose to move to a neighborhood they are now traitors?

      And there are those who send messages over here as if trying to sneak out something across the Iron Curtain. It is kind of silly, there is no iron curtain, it takes no more time or effort to come to The Planet and visit friends here than it does to go to HP and visit friends there.

      It is very unProgressive behavior. After all, we all remember who famously quoted, “You’re either with us, or against us” and adopting the philosophy of a radical Republican is hardly sensible.

      PS: I tried to click the thumbs up for your comment but clicked the thumbs down by mistake, will correct that mistake shortly!

      • ErnestineBass says:

        “Loyalty to a corporation first and their friends second” is precisely why my forays into HPWorld will now be few and far between.
        Rumours of this unholy AOL/HP alliance have been circulating in the business community for months, but every time I posted a comment regarding the possibility of a merger (prior to its announcement), it “mysteriously” disappeared into the e-ether (along with any comment questioning the “wisdom” of Obama’s latest inner circle picks).
        I predict an uptick in “White House CoS Warns Social Security On Brink of Collapse”-themed articles in the weeks to come because, despite Arriana’s claims to the contrary, she’s no longer in charge of editorial decisions at the HP -- Pete Peterson and the AOL board is.

        • scrambledegg says:

          Hey Ernestine, Hopalong here. I decided a new site (for me) calls for a new name. Even if Arriana thinks she can have editorial independence, she’s wrong. Like CNN left Ted Turner in the dustbin of media history, AOL is likely to leave Arriana with her money, but not so much her voice. Well, all things pass. See ya round kiddo. PS, You can call me anything, but don’t call me late for dinner.

        • AdLib says:

          Excellent points and very revealing.

          There seems to be a deep denial in some people at HP, as if they just ignore that AOL owns and controls HP.

          It’s very simple, who owns HP? As owners have ultimate control, who has final say on content at HP?

          AOL, a conservative corporation with Peterson on its board.

          This, some are willingly covering their eyes to the reality that HP is now a wholly owned subsidy of the AOL company, not any Progressive entity.

          I actually think it’s going to be very tough on those who have difficulty with change, HP is being absorbed into AOL and will be flooded with the hateful comments of RW extremists that call AOL home.

          What HP was is over yet many don’t want it to be so they just operate in denial…but reality, in the form of conservative articles and a sea of trolls will drive the point home to them soon I think.

          BTW, so nice to have you at The Planet, EB!

      • Chernynkaya says:

        I confess to getting caught up in the emotion from the other end: I feel slightly angry at those who defend HP. I wouldn’t be angry if those who are there simply want to be able to comment, and who know the nature of the site and yet say to themselves, “Well, it is a busy site and I really like their software with its ease of use. And besides, it IS still where there are a lot of readers.”

        What annoys me is the denial. I am impatient with people who delude themselves and think it is a Progressive and honest place. I still post there--although rarely now. I am not judging anyone who posts there for whatever reason, as long as they have some intellectual honesty about it.

        But those who feel they must defend their posting by claiming that nothing has changed, and that Ariana is a decent and credible pundit--I have no use for them. To me, that is the same willful ignorance exhibited by many on the Right who insist Fox is Fair and Balanced. At least have the guts to simply say, “It’s fun.” or “I like the nasty back-and-forth. I like to bait the trolls.” or I still have friends here I enjoy posting with.” None of that upsets me. And no, there is no reason to be on ONLY one site.

        • AdLib says:

          Indeed, it would be hypocritical for anyone here to criticize others for choosing to blog at HP, either one believes in Freedom of Expression or they don’t.

          I am pleased to see that this is a one way street, the negative emotions of some (a minority I’d bet) aimed at their “friends” because they exercise free will is not returned.

          As to the subset that are not honest with themselves, I hear you and that is a very different thing. Being hostile and blinding oneself to the truth out of insecurity, are not traits most Progressives aspire to.

          As you say, those who blog there for any reason are as justified as those who blog here or anywhere else. However, those that feel the need to justify it by being dishonest and spiteful do not make themselves immune to legitimate criticism.

      • TruthWins says:

        AdLib, I was quite sure you think along those lines. Glad that you confirmed it.

      • Chernynkaya says:

        AdLib--you have mail. 😉

      • Khirad says:

        My favorite typo of the week!

        “blond emotion”

        • PatsyT says:

          “Blond Emotion” I resemble that remark/typo Hhmmph!

        • AdLib says:

          Just for you, I’ll leave it uncorrected!

        • BigDogMom says:

          Funny thing is, we are so used to not having the ability to edit our posts over at HP, that you get used to reading posts with typos, know what the word should have been, accept it and move on.

          Unless the post is so riddled with typos and you have no idea what the heck the poster is trying to say, that will be the only time I would reply with a, “WTF?”

          • Khirad says:

            I’m remembering that!

            You’re not even wrong!

            I can’t tell WHAT you are!

          • Buddy McCue says:

            Sometimes a post is worse than just riddled with typos.

            The worst ones are so jumbled that they have become unintelligible, and the only meaning that comes through is the intention to be insulting.

            I saw a very good description of such a post: to say that “That’s not right -- that’s not even wrong.” The RationalWiki page explains: “the phrase implies that not only is someone not making a valid point in a discussion, but they don’t even seem to understand the nature of the discussion itself, or the things that need to be understood in order to participate.”

          • Khirad says:

            Yeah, I’m not a spelling Nazi, we all do it when we’re typing so fast and furiously, but there are some that have real deficiencies in the spelling and grammar department -- and thus almost always deficiencies in logic and all around basic cognitive skills.

            Unless your dyslexic or something, on HP, it’s usually a bottom feeder troll.

            And, I’m especially embarrassed when the offender is from the left…

            Though invariably, it is usually not.

            • Haruko Haruhara says:

              I just feel like, “have some self-respect and proof your post and use spellcheck.”

              I mean some of the posts are in third-grade English or worse. I don’t like being a grammar Nazi, but it really is a issue of self-respect in my book. How do you expect anyone to take you seriously if you write gibberish?

            • Khirad says:

              BDM: I was thinking that as well as I wrote it!

            • Khirad says:

              Exactly, HH.

              That’s mostly when I do it.

              And, those posts are very common from them.

              You’d think they’d be more careful when writing something like that and opening themselves up to such an easy retort.

            • BigDogMom says:

              Aren’t you just glad that here we can type “Nazi” and not have encode the word so that it would get by the Mods?

              [email protected]

              How many friggen variations did we all have for words and we all just accepted it!

            • Khirad says:

              There’s this one troll that I be arguing with furiously and If I happen to write there instead of they’re or your instead of you’re they’ll claim, in their power as high school teacher that I’m stupid and don’t know the difference.

              Of course, this was on a Pakistani flood page where they couldn’t bring themselves to sympathize with those affected and I’d chewed them out over being a stone-cold bigot.

              So yeah, it’s fun to annoy trolls with sometimes, but being on the other side is really annoying as well. I started shooting back and criticizing their improper use of ellipses!

            • Haruko Haruhara says:

              I’ll correct some troll’s spelling or grammar if they go on a rant about how stupid liberals are. 😀

            • escribacat says:

              Khirad, I only correct someone’s spelling or grammar when I want to annoy the poster! Hehe.

          • ErnestineBass says:

            LOL Those were the posts that usually elicited my canned response…
            “Bang your helmet against the wall…you’re breaking up.”

        • bito says:

          Sorry, AdLib, but I got a chuckle out of that one too.

    • jdmn17 says:

      I went there today to post to a friend from there about this site. She and two other high fanners were talking to each other about how they were staying because of all their friends. I am not surprised they are dissing the departed. It sounds like my memories of High School when someone leaves a clique then you really know how the remaining members felt about them. Yawn, for me I’m much happier with the dialog here.

      • david p canada says:

        When you’re provoked long enough, you start posting shit that you don’t even believe, just to try to even the score.

        (speaking only for myself, of course)

        • FerraKnows says:

          So David, are you going to “come-out” over at huffy puffy? If so, when? I’d like to witness the fallout.


        • Khirad says:

          I’m liking you a lot more on here, I must admit.

          And, I can understand that.

        • Chernynkaya says:

          David, I found myself sometimes defending a position I didn’t really feel passionately about. For example, if someone was bashing Obama about his deal on the tax cuts for the rich--which I opposed--I sometimes took the other position, but not to be argumentative. It was that there was no place for nuance or any shades of gray. I would argue FOR the deal because I really do see the pluses and minuses, and get impatient with the “throw the baby out with the bath water” mentality. The tax deal was a perfect example of that. Again, I was opposed. But to declare that that was the final straw--well, that just seemed ridiculous to me. So I would argue against the black/white position. Huffington forces people to take sides because of the built-in opposition to any subtlety. It’s the nature of posting there.

        • jdmn17 says:

          David, I agree with your self assessment. I noted many times your measured responses some times gave way to less than gracious comments. I had the same problem and was often less gracious. Here I can just be me. Very freeing.

          • david p canada says:

            Thanks for noticing.

            Often when I was subject to abusive responses I didn’t take them seriously because I knew the poster was far more intelligent than the comment would lead you to believe.

            Hey, if you don’t lose it now and then, you’re probably not human. The key is recognizing a failure (like I had to do on many occasions), apologize, and move on.

        • BigDogMom says:

          Sometimes I became a very nasty person over there, so much so, that I couldn’t believe that it was “me” posting that shit…that’s why I had to leave last year and take a break from it all.

          • Khirad says:

            Yup, it turns you into a different person. One that will lash out at people for making an honest point, because you thought they were taking a shot at you. That’s not a person I like.

            • jdmn17 says:

              I can’t tell you how many times I would write something and have someone write back and call me a troll and I should go back to Fox News. I would be astonished and write them back and ask them what it was I wrote that gave them that impression. They never answered but I found I was trying to be so clear, or sarcastic and sly to avoid the mods I couldn’t get my points out clearly. I haven’t posted anything here YET that has people writing me back and asking WTF. I say YET because I sometimes write distracted and then I can even outsmart myself

          • KB723 says:

            BDM, I too was feeling the same way. It seemed like the only time I was having Fun there was during the holiday season.. Everyone was soo much more nice to one another and soo much closer to the ground. I thought after the first of the year to just not go there anylonger. I am soo glad that I bumped into SueInCA, who gave me a bit of info, I registered here maybe two minutes after she told me about the Planet.

          • jdmn17 says:

            I actually think they wanted that. Instead of helping us find ourselves unified I think it paid for them to drive the wedges deeper.

            Show me the money.

            • TruthWins says:

              Exactly, that was very much a concerted effort. (More of my thoughts about Huff on Off Topic in a lengthy comment in case you’re interested.)

            • ErnestineBass says:

              Controversy sells, dear.

          • escribacat says:

            I’m guilty of the same, BDM.

        • Haruko Haruhara says:

          With all due respect David, I would never post something that isn’t true to what I really believe.

    • Khirad says:

      Well they can kiss my ass, as I’ve been doing both for a long time.

      With everyone here now, what need is there to go back?

      And to each their own. I don’t care if they’ve stayed.

      That’s what’s different, I guess. I’m capable of more than cliquish behavior and puerile snark.

      • david p canada says:

        I echo your opinion.

        It’s refreshing to spend time with people who can put more than two words together to make a sentence.

        Even though I may often not agree with the content of the sentence.

        • jdmn17 says:

          But that’s the power of dialog, neither of us have to agree but in disagreeing their is knowledge and even wisdom. Every time I read a post from someone who presents an alternate view it changes me however slightly. I don’t necessarily change positions but I am more accepting of someone else’s reasons for having theirs. That in an of itself is very powerful and oddly even unifying.

      • KB723 says:

        Khirad, Good Morning, Well Said…

    • BigDogMom says:

      I saw that last night before I came here, that’s too bad that that is happening, but am not surprised. To me, the ones that are left there are there for the social aspect of it. You probably have noticed that they are the ones who have their little clique of friends. With lots of inside jokes, who bash anyone that dares to poke their nose in, whether they are right or left leaning.

      Over the last year or so the posts became just “one liners”, serious discussion was a thing of the past, as you stated “drival”. That’s when I started coming here, was never one to be part of a clique.

      • AdLib says:

        Well put BDM. Those who clearly continue to act with a clique mentality have been doing so along the way and are part of the problem with HP.

        The “Us and Them” philosophy with people of the same sensibilities is for high school cheerleaders, not for enlightened adults.

        HP is the only place for such people to continue their childhood mindsets. Those who feel free to blog here, at HP or wherever they wish are likely bewildered by such emotional soap operas.

        Notice how the reverse is not evidenced here? I have not seen a single comment at The Planet insulting or attacking anyone who chooses to stay at HP. Many here still blog over there and some of our friends have chosen to stay there.

        They are still our friends, just because we like chocolate ice cream and they like strawberry, they are not insulting or spurning us.

        Oh well, so be it. Such people wouldn’t fit in well at The Planet because cliques, group thought and provincialism are not permitted here.

        This is the neighborhood bar for any and all adults in the neighborhood to drop on in and have friendly conversations and arguments. We act here as if we are all part of the same community that are friends at HP, DailyKos, etc. are part of.

        A house divided and all that.

      • jdmn17 says:

        I had to go to one-liners there because I grew tired of writing my tripe and having it go to moderation and never getting past the censors. So what good is that for learning? I’ve learned more here in a week than the time I spent at HP. Granted I was only there a tad over two years but still, more knowledge in a week?

        To each their own

        • escribacat says:

          JD, agreed. I never write thoughtful posts over yonder. It just gets scrubbed! I generally only post quips over there.

          • TruthWins says:

            Not true, escribacat, you wrote very thoughtful posts. Why else would I have fanned you?!? But over time all of us got fed up with the constant scrubbing and resorted to one or two-liners.

            • jdmn17 says:

              I agree with that. I think there are a lot of people here who I fanned because of their thoughtful words. Hell, I even fanned David P. That was the old days though. The last few months when the mods went wild I noted the posts went quieter and shorter and it was disappointing. Then the last weekend, when people were kicked off and they posted several inflammatory stories really started me wondering. Then Monday came and the whole site shut down. I left and came here to behold the words that had been missing for months from some of my favorite people.

      • Khirad says:

        And as we’ve discussed, HP promoted that back and forth one-liner stuff by pending anything longer than a tweet.

        • Haruko Haruhara says:


          I found myself copying everything to notepad if it was a long post, then tweaking it over and over to avoid all the “buzz words,” (like “cow.”)


        • ErnestineBass says:

          Ummm…Arianna doesn’t fancy herself the “Queen of New Media” fer nuthin’, Khirad.
          I, for one, refuse to indulge her fantasy, or to support a site now owned by a company (AOL) that boasts Pete Peterson as a board member.
          I did notice that HP made NO MENTION last night of the latest go-round in Teathuglical budget cut proposals…they’ve upped the ante yesterday from $35 billion to $65 billion. That strikes me as a “sin of omission” on HP’s part. Not that I’m at all surprised.

          • TruthWins says:

            That’s especially interesting as something like two or three days earlier there was for a full day a large Obama article, accusing him that he would scrap heating for the poorer people.

        • BigDogMom says:

          I always loved to read Hume, Abby, Coboltblue, yours and other oldtimer’s posts way back when, I learned so much, and the writing was exellent…

        • jdmn17 says:

          When they started pending one word responses you just knew it was going south

      • KB723 says:

        BDM, I find that you are quite correct.

    • KB723 says:

      david p… Those may be the folks that have not been Kicked Out yet?

  5. Dbos says:

    Fox is ruining America as we know it.Fox is methodically propagandizing the minds of the fearfull the intelligence challenged and the people who are saying haven’t you noticed he’s a negro. Net work fear mongering, lies and fabrication anything to get to their objective, government by the upper class.

    • KQuark says:

      Don’t know if they run America, yet.

      But they are an constant mouth piece for Republicans which is a far bigger advantage than Democrats have. As a propaganda tool Faux News is far more dangerous to democracy than unbridled corporate money because they are on 24/7 and still seen by too many as a real news source. Unlike corporate money that goes to ads where people expect them to be partisan.

    • david p canada says:

      I don’t know about all that.

      Fox presents the Conservative side of most issues and represents the opinions of tens of millions of Americans. The variance of opinions is a good indicator of the health of a democracy.

      Like them or not, they are an invaluable part of the structure of discourse in the US and other countries.

      Debate them, don’t defame them.

      • PatsyT says:

        When do the folks at Fox offer themselves up for a “fair and balanced” Debate?
        Rachel Maddow is game.
        I bet Ed would like to get into it.
        Chris Mathews is ready.
        Lawerence O’Donnel would welcome the chance.

      • FerraKnows says:

        I don’t know about all that, either.

        If I’m not mistaken, Fox News sued for the right to lie (and won). From the very beginning of the President’s run for office, that organization has promulgated (and thus, stockpiled) an inventory of lies never seen before in the history of political discourse. Empirical data provides the evidence behind my claim, some examples to wit:

        “A terrorist fist bump?”
        “He’s a Muslim,”
        “She hates America.”
        “He hates white people.”
        “He’s a marxist.”
        “He’s a racist”

        Ad infinitum, ad nuseum.

        As a student of argument, I know red herring when I see it. I also know that one cannot rationally debate red herring, especially when the antagonist will not shut up so one can respond. Fox News knows this too, as evidence in their 24 hour assembly-line production of lies.

        Your words that we “debate them, don’t defame them” will find a better fit at the doorsteps of Fox--because it is clear that they prefer defamation over debate.

        • david p canada says:

          When it comes to Beck quotes, I agree with you. But Beck is similar to a WWE entertainer, where reality is suspended for the sake of drawing intense emotion from the audience.

          For that reason, I do not judge MSNBC purely on the antics of the bombastic Ed Schultz.

        • escribacat says:

          Excellent examples, Ferra. They were big on the “death panels” bandwagon too, I’m sure.

      • ErnestineBass says:

        David, there is simply no “debating” a person who lacks both the intellectual curiousity and basic deductive reasoning skills required to first seek out the facts of a matter, and then process them into a reasoned, coherent argument.
        Attempting to engage someone in “debate” who’s “sphere of knowledge” is based solely on propaganda is a fool’s errand, and generally detrimental to ones blood pressure.

      • PocketWatch says:


        First of all, to say Fox ‘represents’ the Conservative side is debatable. I would be more likely to say that Fox is the propaganda arm of the conservative side, framing issues in such a way as to make debate or facts irrelevent.

        Propaganda is unhealthy. Factual coverage of issues, and real debate versus screaming talking heads, corrections in misstatements, those things are healthy, and are not generally any part of Fox.

        How can anyone take Fox seriously when one of their on screen personalities denies outright and with a straight face that they ever use Nazi comparisons, and, within hours, dozens of examples are aired and another personality THAT SAME NIGHT does it again?

        And that is one example.

        They are not invaluable, they are cancer of the brain for this country. In other countries, I have been told, Fox is viewed as satire and comedy, and no one imagines anyone takes them the least bit seriously. If they thought people here did, the impression is people here are pretty gullible.

        • Dbos says:

          Pockets liked your post ; I am here and HP there are lots of people I love to read here only now, back and forth is ok be reading you guys and commenting.

        • FerraKnows says:

          So true Pocket. It’s like saying Michele Bachmann represents the conservative side. I don’t know what she represents, but it certainly ain’t of this world.

        • KB723 says:

          PW, Good Morning. I finally had time to read your article. I am hoping you may find time to read my reply. I was asking a favor of you.

        • david p canada says:

          So, if you had the power, would you eradicate this “cancer” from the airwaves?

          I appreciate both side’s opinions, even when they seem to be a touch extreme.

          • jdmn17 says:

            I come from the world of data manipulation. Market analysis. There is an old term, Spurious Correlation. MSM does that as well as anyone, Fox simply does it better than most. I always chuckle at some of their “Facts” and how they use them to lead a line of thinking. I had a VP of marketing who once had me develop a model for adding 40 sales reps to our current stable of 12. I did it using some outrageous data points. The VP loved it, presented it and everyone was happy except the CFO who was also a stat wonk. He took me out to lunch, congratulated me on my work and then told me he would be watching me closely. Gulp!

            • FerraKnows says:

              That’s too funny jdmn!! You know why he told you that don’t you? Because he knows that there are three types of lies:

              Damn Lies
              And, Statistics

          • PocketWatch says:

            I would require opinion based on facts, not made-up stuff. Watch carefully… every time they use the phrase “some say…” Who is that ‘some?’ Could be the guys in the break room.

            I can make up anything using that technique, and have absolutely nothing to back it up.

            That is Fox…

            I have no problem with anyone or whatever their political stances are, but I have BIG problems with fact free reporting or opinions based on nothing.

            That’s not opinion, that’s fantasy.

            • Khirad says:

              Funny, ’cause that stuff is frowned upon by even Wikipedia:


            • david p canada says:

              Some say Pluto is a planet, some say not.

              The line between fact and opinion has always been fuzzy, but these days it seems even more so.

            • BigDogMom says:

              Actually David, PW said:

              “I would require opinion based on facts, not made-up stuff.”

              That is very different from what you posted:

              “But when you say “require” a person to opine a certain opinion…”

              I see apples and bananna’s here with that statement.

              To me PW is asking for opinions based on facts, not a person basing their opinion on nothing other than hearsay and inuendo, nor is he stating that he is “requiring” opinions to be a certain way…

            • bito says:

              PW, a story containing many facts does not make it factual. I gave the example yesterday about Beck using the fact that more people are eating bologna sandwiches this year combined with the fact that the Dow Jones average is up this year. Both facts. Is it your conclusion that eating bologna sandwiches good for the stock market?

              “Kennedy’s secretary was named Lincoln, Lincoln’s secretary was named Kennedy. Thus they were both assassinated. But then that’s just my opinion. 😉

            • PocketWatch says:

              Maybe you read that wrong, or I miscommunicated. I would require that facts be used to formulate an opinion. I really don’t care what the resulting opinion is.

            • david p canada says:

              That’s your opinion and you’re entitled to it.

              But when you say “require” a person to opine a certain opinion, it smacks of heavy-handedness.

              Simply refute with facts. That’ll fix ’em.

      • escribacat says:

        I would respect Fox if they resisted the urge to propagandize stories. There is a difference between a viewpoint and propaganda. I used to watch Fox years ago but couldn’t stand the obvious manipulation of information and news to comply with what to me is a far-right viewpoint.

        And Bill O’Reilly was simply rude to the president. I found that interview incredibly offensive because of his shabby manners.

        • david p canada says:

          Good comment.

          However, ironic as it seems, Fox and MSNBC need each other desperately. If you don’t add fuel to the fire it goes out.

          In my year at PuffyPost, every Liberal mocked the trolls but every time the trolls disappeared, the thread disappeared.

          How many times in a day does MSNBC mention Fox?

          • KB723 says:

            david p. I agree with what you are saying. We do not live in a black and white reality, more of a grayscale, if you will…

            By the way Good Morning.

          • escribacat says:

            David, I agree that the evening MSNBC broadcast is in direct response to the FOX news line-up — especially Keith. Ed, Lawrence, Keith and Rachel are all clearly slanted to the left viewpoint. I can’t stand to watch Ed because he’s just a big loudmouthed whiner. We on both sides are guilty of demonizing the opposition — and you’re right, I think it adds a lot of energy to the debate and it’s extremely difficult to resist. I have to admit I never watch Fox except when I see clips from KO or someone like that. I just can’t stand it! But one I dislike the most is Rush Limbaugh. I think he’s a real creep with serious emotional problems.

            • Khirad says:

              Sometimes I play the game of: how long can I last through watching Beck’s show.

              It’s sort of akin those people who will dare another to drink disgusting kitchen table concoctions.

              Afterward, I feel the same nausea and sick coming up in my throat.

              My record is about twenty minutes, though I’ve watched longer recently as he’s unraveled over Egypt.

              And yes, that is nice to hear David say that.

              There’s conservatives, and then there’s the Rush-wingers.

            • kesmarn says:

              David, thank you. So heartening to hear a conservative say that about Limbaugh.

            • david p canada says:

              I couldn’t agree with you more regarding Limbaugh.

              Any relevant commentary he has is overwhelmed by his hate of almost everything and everyone that stands in his way.

              I have tried to listen to his show but never lasted more than a half hour.

      • SueInCa says:

        The problem with debating them is they never learn. If they made the slightest attempt at the full honest truth, there might be a modicom of respect there, but they don’t. Murdoch makes no secret of it nor does Ailes in the programming they present and the orders they give to their employees.

        • david p canada says:

          I have heard Bill O’Reilly praise President Obama on many occasions. Hannity, not so much.

          But, unlike many Conservatives, I actually believe Rachel Maddow is a moderate. Ed Schultz, not so much.

          KO seemed to be bi-polar.

          • jdmn17 says:

            Want to take a guess at GBeck? Be curious how a conservative views him. Personally I think he has some mental health issues. But that’s my jaded thoughts

          • SueInCa says:

            David I used to like Bill O’Reilly but it seems to me he has become angrier. I mean there was always that temper lurking underneath as YouTube videos will attest to, but he has definitely gone over the top way too many times. He reminds me of the stern father of my youth(not mine) who would broker no “individual opinion” in his household. It was never soothing to go into that house. Probably why we were always at mine. I grew up in a household where everyone had an opinion and no one was allowed to belittle others for their opinion. You could debate all you wanted, but we were taught to respect others opinions. Bill does not do that, he belittles others about their opinions.

          • escribacat says:

            I agree that Rachel and Lawrence are very level headed and resist the hyperbole and demonization.

  6. Plutocrats really suck says:

    Fox would be nothing without its considerable audience, they want to hear it. It reinforces their beliefs. Any rational person, right or left of the political spectrum can watch Glen Beck for about 30 seconds and conclude he is either full of it or delusional.

    That is unless you want to believe the president hates white people or he is a secret Marxist Muslim, or it makes sense to you that Acorn, Code Pink and Sorros are all involved in a plot to overthrow the Republic. I mean, how else could he have gotten elected, right?

    That is the scary thought to me, that fox news is a reflection of its audience.

  7. ProfessorDuh says:

    And note this. No surprise, but nice to have confirmation that they are purely lying propagandists.

  8. ProfessorDuh says:

    This is about telling lies concerning matters of objective fact – the deliberate crafting of partisan propaganda to be slipped into the public debate under the cover of a profession that is supposed to impartially uncover, verify and report the truth.
    For example, which political party a politician belongs to isn’t a matter of opinion. It’s a fact Fox News lies about.
    Fox News suddenly identified disgraced Republican Gov. Mark Sanford of South Carolina as a Democrat on the very day he admitted his philandering.
    A coincidence? But Fox News also suddenly changed Congressman Mark Foley’s party affiliation from Republican to Democratic the very moment it was inescapably confirmed that Foley was sexually soliciting teenage male pages in Congress.

  9. SnapShots says:

    Interviewing with O’Reilly is useless. He doesn’t wait for people to answer his questions and he interrupts before people can express complete thoughts. There is no informational exchange. No information period, just opinions on pop politics. He’s worthless.

    • ProfessorDuh says:

      Meant to vote thumbs up on this.

    • PlatoSunTsu says:

      He literally bullies the “guests” he doesn’t agree with, he’s been known to physically intimidate them and or verbally scream at them, it’s really quite telling that so many watch this clown.
      He is the epitome of the 900lb. gorilla.

    • Peabody II says:

      “He’s worthless.”

      Worse. He even gives “worthless” people a bad reputation.

    • AdLib says:

      True SnapShots (and welcome to The Planet!).

      There is no there, there with such types. It’s all just a playground game with the Fox News types, how can they beat you or deny you the win. Lie, slander, whatever it takes.

  10. Peabody II says:

    Hi Dusty!

    I’m compelled to violate a strict personal rule: Never correct someone else’s spelling on blogs/comments. God knows, I make enough spelling errors of my own — especially when commenting, and I certainly don’t want to be a pest, because I like it here.

    However, I think that the word “coo” in your opening line is actually spelled “coup” — as in “coup d’etat”. If “coup” sounds like a type of car to you, the car style is actually spelled “coupe”. (And of course, what chickens live in is a “coop”. 😉 )

    I only violate my rule because I like PlanetPOV, and “old farts” like me tend to (unjustly) not take articles/blogs seriously when they contain this kind of misspelling. I wouldn’t want PlanetPOV to lose any potential members over it.

    My apologies…

    • DustyMills says:

      Hey Peabody…..no problem, your right of course about “coo”, forgive me will you,for the occasional mistake as I do try to proofread my writing…..Dusty

      • PocketWatch says:


        I have gone back over my own articles multiple times and corrected grammar, mispellings, added or deleted words or phrases, and corrected all sorts of mistakes.

        I love the ability to edit stuff here!


      • Peabody II says:

        I understand. Proof-reading is a damper to creativity.

        Thanks for understanding. When it comes to language, I’m a little OCD (my father was a word enthusiast). I rarely do this — but for some reason, this time it was an itch I just had to scratch! Don’t know why.

        I’ll behave now!

  11. Redemption Song II says:

    Dusty, I agree that Fox News isn’t (a legitimate news organization--it’s pretty much a blatant propaganda machine). However, more than, “Why Billo?” I’m wondering, “Why Fox?” Fox clearly isn’t the only game in town…that is, why do you suppose Pres. Obama did not choose another network/program?

  12. Thefoxislaur says:

    To me the most interesting development at fox news is the number of conservative pundits that are piling on glenn beck. When Bill Kristol is dissing him its bad news. To me, beck is far worse than O’Reilly.

  13. david p canada says:

    Fox News, MSNBC, and much of talk radio have caused more Americans to hate each other than the Civil War.

    Reason and civil dialogue are needed instead of fanatical loyalty to Liberal and Conservative labels.

    • jdmn17 says:

      I think on both sides of the fence it tends to endorse or encourage anger, resentment and a willingness to abandon objective disagreements into shouting matches. Many times on HP I would start to comment and find myself getting dragged further and further into anger and my own snarks. Then I would step back and chill. Kilgore talked me off the wall one night when I was getting sorta ballistic at the mean snarks. So when I came here and saw the rules for civility I tested the water and found it just fine. I’ve only seen two even mildly mean words directed at people and a couple that were backhanded slaps directed at people -- save the ones who do things to deserve it = some Fox News people etc. What has happened since is there are a couple of truly conservative people here who actually post thoughtful commentary and it’s given us a nice give and take without the half handed snips you know all too well from the other place (I’m doing better about not mentioning it out loud). The last few days there I implored the people tearing into POTUS regarding Egypt and on other issues to simply offer their ideas for a solution. I never heard one response and finally realized they were there simply to make people angry and increase the clicks on stories and pad their responses. So we can experience reason and dialog here. I guess that’s all I was trying to say

      • AdLib says:

        The 1% who are controlling more of this nation each day know that if the 99% came together, they’d be in big trouble.

        So it is a simple and cynical game, divide the public, turn them against each other, make everything a conflict of social and political values and the 99% will fight among themselves while the 1% steals more of their democracy and wealth from right under their noses.

        There are some things that Progressives and Conservatives will never agree on and if that is all we focus on, in addition to playing this game of who can be the last one to diss the other, we have no power.

        If instead we stipulate that each side has views that aren’t compatible and instead try coming together on the things we do agree on, such as returning our democracy to the people, we too could be celebrating in the streets one day over a great victory.

        • bito says:

          AdLib, there you go exaggerating again, it’s 2% not 1% and we only have 98% not 99%. C’mon, I’ve told you 3 billion times about exaggerating. 😉

      • bito says:

        Yes jdmn17, some did bring their habits from HP over here, and some of them barely saw the light of day before they were taken down. Ideas and opinions can be discussed, agreed with and disagreed with without personal remarks. Everyone here is their own moderator, and as Kalima said “Please remove your muddy shoes before coming into the Planet’s home”, now your home to treat with respect.

        • Khirad says:

          It bugged me, because we were clear that this place is different, but they just wanted to carry it over here.

          It bugs me more in that I like some of them over there, and wish they could have moderated themselves.

          I feel sorry that maybe they just didn’t understand that snark is for there, and discussion is for here.

          That’s the way I’ve always played it.

        • jdmn17 says:

          I saw the respect the first day I was here and believe me I was pissed as all get out. But I took a deep breath and just went for it. We actually have conversations here. What a concept, and I don’t have to post knowing I’m going to get hammered. In fact several of my last posts at HP lead off with “I know I’m going to get hammered but”. I don’t have to do that now. Never saw the need to call names, even though I did so a few times myself. It takes a lot to provoke me, less than a lot at HP. So I’m glad I came and am sticking around

    • audadvnc says:

      Very true. I can no longer talk to some associates that I used to consider friends. Such is the social breakdown brought about by self-serving men.

      • jdmn17 says:

        I worked with an evangelical christian man and as much as I admired him and respected his work ethic I got to where his walking in the room just made me ill. He would immediately launch into his religious beliefs and how wrong mine were and from there I could just feel myself shrink away. Thankfully he was a bit of an idiot. The owner was/is Jewish and as liberal as he was he didn’t take kindly to this guy going off one day on a rant about the Jewish conspiracy that was taking over the country. He’d heard a sermon about it in church and was really going on and on. I saw our owner give me one of THOSE looks. I shrugged and two days later we got the announcement he’d moved on to the dreaded “other opportunities”.

        • Khirad says:

          Well, fortunate your boss was Jewish, rather than the type that might tolerate such talk or not see it as toxic as it is.

          I don’t quite feel ill with my hyperchristian relatives, but it gets real tense at times and I always feel on guard and forced to hold my tongue.

          It starts to gnaw at the stomach lining. They will always be the last to see the discomfort they bring to others, ’cause they’re ‘high’ on God.

          • jdmn17 says:

            My sister and brother in law are super christians. I tend to ignore them and get a laugh out of some of their foibles. Ten years ago there was a huge wind storm up in the woods where they had a cabin, they had just picked up their new Nissan SUV and were going on and on about how they were simplifying their lives by selling their Mercedes. When the winds were done blowing there were trees down everywhere but the Pathfinder had been spared. They went on and on about how god had spared them damage to it as though it was some sort of message from god they were on the right path. That afternoon he moved the SUV because he was worried about it being damaged while we cut away downed trees. About thirty minutes later we heard a crack and turned to watch as a huge pine tree came down and crushed it.

            I didn’t say it but I sure thought to ask him what message god was sending him with that.

            High on god indeed.

    • funksands says:

      Very true. Cable new in general is a vast wasteland of wasted potential.

Leave your Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Back to top
PlanetPOV Tweets
Ongoing Stories