If You Ever Had Any Doubts About FOX!!!

This whole Shirley Sherrod incident should convince anyone with a brain that Fox has no business in the same sentence with real news media organizations. Fox has one agenda; being the voice of the whacko right wingers in this country. That's not news, it's political lobbying. The only thing that makes this whole story even worse is that anyone in the Obama Administration took Fox seriously. The real story here, and it is old news, is: FOX LIES!

 

So...the White House & the NAACP get their news from FOX too? Or did both get the same racist sense everyone else did before the spin doctors took hold of the matter?

 

Fox is the Huffington Post of TV News Channels but...were they the ones to break the (hack job) story or something? If so, did the other networks just run their story without checking anything? I have a hard time believing the other networks, the NAACP and the White House all got their news just from Fox.

 

They not only broke the false story, they beat it into the ground relentlessly all day. By the end of the day their story had changed to Obama throwing this poor woman under the bus. What I can't understand is why anyone in the Obama Administration cares what Fox reports. The rest of us know better than to take Fox seriously. More weak-kneed liberalism in my opinion. From what I heard it was the Ag chief that overreacted and fired her without even talking to her. Neither did the NAACP. They all have said that they are sorry except Fox of course.

 

I am not surprised they broke it and beat it into the ground. I am just surprised that the NAACP and the Administration took their word for it. Unless the other news agencies were reporting the same thing...

 

What this non-stop nonsense that has been coming from the extreme right wingers from day-1 proves is that they are rabbid crazy to prove racism by Obama in particular and by anyone in his administration whenever possible for only one reason. They feel that if they can find a racist person on the Left it will prove that their own racism is justified, which of course is complete and utter nonsense. Even if they did manage to find an actual racist Obama Administration person without the need to doctor up taped footage, it certainly wouldn't justify the racism that is part and parcel in their own ranks but that is their logic anyway. Thank God there is at least a handful sensible Republicans left out there that are willing to call this idiocy out and distance themselves from such piss-poor tactics. The low road seems to be the driveway for most residents of the GOP. This kind of crap from Brietbart is only hurting the Republicans chances in November. Now Michael Steele is accused of hiding a 7 million dollar deficit and his accuser is the GOP's own treasurer. Nice!

 

Fox originally generated the whole thing? I just can't believe that.

 

The lame street media has done this for years. Before Fox came along most all media outlets (ABC,CBS,NBC,CNN) were and still are poltical lobbiers for the left and democrats. Media Matters has perfected this sort of reporting. Rearranging words and taking things completely out of context is a key for their existence among left-wing talking pointers. PMSNBC practices these techniques regularly. Hell 60 Minutes invented the technique.

 

The old "They did it too" excuse (bullet point #356 as documented in RNC handbook, Chapter 4, "How to shift responsibility and blame when caught in common right wing smear tactics".

 

The TomClown handbook is much simpler. Every page is the same and only has one word written in big bold text.

DODGE

 

OK, heres what realy happened.

Andrew Brietbart was fed a video that was edited. He posted it because it looked like another racism in reverse case gone wild. Fox ran with it. Shame on fox......

What was in the background was NAACP had the whole tape nd allowed this to fester for a day. THEN, they released the tape in it's proper context..........THEY had the total tape, no networks, no news stations etc....

I say shame on you FOX for runing with a good looking story...Hannity, O'Rielly, Limbaugh, you are fool suckers......

There is only one person in the media who was the first to exonerate the woman....this is going to make the lefties sick......Glenn Beck. Debunk me, I dare ya.

I see Shirly Sherrod as a woman with courage and guts, a woman who was admitting her past mistakes and her effort to correct them. She was entirely villafied in this with no rhyme or reason.

I also see the Whitehouse jumping on a story, to worried about public relations and not woried about facts, very similar to the " Police acted Stupidly " coment by our POTUS.......They fired woman on hearsay.........

Can I be wrong anywhre? If I am . please correct me

 

On the point of racism it is prevelent no matter which side of the political divide you happen to sit on as for rigging story's Jth is quite correct it has gone on for years and still does again regardless of what the political slant of a paper/news channel is if they think it will up the ratings (even bad publicity is good) they will try to get away with it.
That is not condoning what happens simply stating that it happens

 

The "They did it to whatever degree so we can do it as much as we want" argument was dismissed years ago as a plausible excuse and its something even your parents probably taught you.

The point here is that the Fox watchers claim that Fox is fair and balanced but this incident with Sherrod proves exactly what a fallacy that notion really is. How is it even possible to be fair and balanced when you take a video tape from an already well-known con artist and do zero vetting, zero research, and zero fact checking but run the story over and over, make judgments, and come to conclusions based on what turned out to be a rather easy to identify cut-n-paste video? Has Fox realized and recanted it's previous stories? Of course not. They have simply shifted to indignation that anyone would railroad this poor woman without knowing the facts.

The fact is that Fox can't do anything about the Obama Administration's reactions, they can't do anything about the NAACP's reactions, but they can do something about their own part in this story and they choose not to.

I caught a snippet of Rachael Maddow last night and she played clips from Fox the day the story broke and then juxtaposed that with the same people talking about the story 24 hours later. You'd could only conclude that these were two different networks in parallel universes because the same people calling Sherrod a racist were now asking how anyone could have rushed to judgment. Are the people who regularly watch Fox that unaware of what they saw the previous day that Fox can unapologetically do this without any of their viewers noticing? Wow! At one of the quote, unquote lame stream media organizations heads would have rolled over such an incident but not at Fox. I'm sure they handed out bonuses.

 

To put this whole Shirley Sherrod episode in perspective. … it's about those who produce tape and transcripts versus those who make false accusations and bury stories. It's about facts versus frauds. Andrew Breitbart has produced endless film footage and videotape of government malfeasance in the past year. Andrew Breitbart has essentially done investigative journalism. The Daily Caller, Tucker Carlson's website, is producing real transcripts of e-mails by so-called journalists who are nothing more than apparatchiks. The Daily Caller is doing journalism. Sean Hannity had the Jeremiah Wright footage on Fox News long before anybody else did. That was journalism. We've had published leaked e-mails from phony scientists revealing the deep and widespread fraud that became known as ClimateGate. We have had real journalism exposing the fraud and the hoax that is global warming. None of these instances have yet to be covered by what we're all told is the media. The New Black Panther voter intimidation case, they don't even know about it. Those who do know about it suppress it.

It's just like when Laurence Tribe writes his magnum opus book and we find out he didn't write it, some assistant named Ron Klain wrote it. Then we find out Ron Klain didn't write it, he plagiarized it, and then that whole episode was reviewed by the dean at Harvard Law who said there's nothing here, nothing really went on and now she's going to be confirmed for the Supreme Court, that's Elena Kagan.

 

Stunning, just stunning that you can say this with a straight face. Taking an anecdotal story out of context and completely reversing the point of the anecdote and presenting it as the exact opposite of what was actually being said is as you say "investigative journalism"?????

In other words, if I were to give a talk on the dangers of going outside in a lightening storm and told an anecdote about a time when I was young when I had made a home made umbrella out of a metal rod with the intention of going out into the rain but soon realized that regardless of whether I was protected from rain drops I certainly was susceptible to lightening strikes. Then you got a video tape of my talk and cut out the preface and the conclusion THAT would be investigative journalism because it made me sound as if I was advocating for going out into the lightening storm and holding up a metal rod when I was advocating the exact opposite. Your idea of investigative journalism is just plain naive….Astoundingly naive in fact.

 

This race issue comes down to a fundamental difference in the way the Right and the Left view race relations. The Right sees any progress that blacks and other minorities make into the once sacred domain of white men as a zero sum gain. In other words, if minorities make any gains, it is at the expense of whites. For example, a black president is at the expense of a white person occupying that position.

The right has used the idea of the scary black man as a way to fear monger whites into voting Republican since forever. From Willie Horton to Reagan's idea of black welfare queens to Fox attacking Shirley Sherrod, Van Jones, Barrack Obama, Latinos, all in order to scare whites into believing that if minorities gain, they will lose. The message the GOP uses may have become more slick and subtle but essentially it hasn't change since George Wallace used the Civil Rights movement to scare southern whites into voting Republican. It's actually referred to as the Southern strategy.

The Left sees elevating minorities to equal status both socially and economically as a win-win that will make us a better stronger society. The Left isn’t threatened by the specter of the scary minority that the Right uses to scare whites and we never will be. If you examine your own attitudes, you’ll know which side of this fundamental difference you fall on. If you find the thought of working for a black man uncomfortable, you have probably bought into the scary black man message the Right has been selling for decades.

 

The Left sees elevating minorities to equal status both socially and economically as a win-win Theorticaly that is true but reality is somewhat different is it not? Look at how the Soviets treated there brother revolutionaries from africa at the Patrice Lumumba University, I believe the term used by the party for them was monkeys!! The other Soviet block members did not do much better in there dealings either, then if you realy want to examine racism simply have a look at China even under the communists regiem they still look at themselfs as superior to the rest of the planet LOL

 

Social and economic equivalency is not an unattainable goal. Especially in a democracy.

 

So let's assume, for a moment, To & Mo are right about FOX not being a viable news organization, that still doesn't explain why or how the White House & NAACP siezed on the issue & came to their conclusions, does it? Obviously, until the spin doctors got involved the speech was considered to be racist. (Did you notice all the "alrights" and other forms of agreement coming from the audience when Sherrod was detailing her racist actions toward the white farmer?)

 

"They did it too". yahnahnahayhnah.