Monday, June 23, 2008

Why Is Fox News Protecting Obama?

Why Is Fox News Protecting Obama?

That's what I would like to know! It is so eerie to see that channel change the way that it has. Has Obamanation mania reached this former "fair and balanced" cable news channel as well? Seems like it to me!

My comment there:

Great article and comments - at least most of the comments were really good. The commenter who mocked Laura Ingraham for “wearing her religion on her sleeve” and so obviously had disdain for those who wrote so excellently about their Christian viewpoint and worldview - here’s a polite warning - don’t visit my blog! The rest of you may, in fact, like it.

Now to the subject at hand.

This article caught my attention precisely because I wanted answers to that same question!

Something has drastically changed at Fox News.

When E.D. Hill had her show dropped from the schedule (was she also fired?) just because she questioned whether or not the fist bump that Barack and Michele did after a campaign speech could, perhaps, be similar to a terrorist type of action, I knew that the namby-pamby Barack Obambi kid gloves were now officially on at Fox.

Hill’s comment could have just been laughed off. Why so sensitive? Why punish her so harshly?

Why the removal of the flag pins from their lapels? Our fight against Islamo-fascist terrorism is not over! If they were forced to do this because the bosses at Fox thought it might show favoritism towards John McCain...GIVE ME A FREAKIN’ BREAK!! It shows PATRIOTISM TOWARDS OUR NATION AND SUPPORT FOR OUR TROOPS FIGHTING FOR OUR FREEDOM IN HARMS WAY!

After reading this article and the comments, I can’t help but wonder if George Soros is secretly working behind the scenes at Fox. He’s got every other news outlet bought...doesn’t he?

I have switched to watching local news reports. I also now listen to Talk Radio and read blogs instead of viewing the Fox shows that I used to watch. Fox has officially lost my once loyal viewership.


I was wondering...who made them start drinking the Obama Kool-Aid? I did go back and read some of the comments a second time and noticed this very interesting tidbit of information from "Ann":

Al-Waleed, A Saudi Arabian prince, has major stocks in NewsCorp which owns Fox. Now it doesn’t take a brain surgeon to figure that one out.

Fox's Saudi Prince

Murdoch is just looking to make money on both ends of the political spectrum.

One of the first things in a communist takeover: Control the media and all communications

That certainly explains it.


Wake up people and smell the rotten stench of communism and jihadism...combined!

HT's: Accuracy in Media

FrontPage Magazine


Matt W. said...

You are so right. While I tend toward Fox News because it is marginally better than CNN, which is a little better than MSNBC, which is, of course, the worst, I have always had some skepticism about them, and have never really seen them as totally fair and balanced, just better than the rest. Unfortunately our local news tends to be almost as bad as the majors, though they do give enough facts on local stories to help you be able to make thier own call.

Murdock doesn't surprise me, I think it has all been about what will make him the most money from the start. It ended up causing him to create a fairly good news network at the begining, but there's never been any question that it was about the money, and, let's face it, he's really not a conservative guy.

As far as Laura Ingram, I can't see them forcing her away from her Conservative priciples, or scaring her away from being honest about Obama. I don't think she would even if they fired her.

Of course, then you have O'Reilly, who everyone insists on calling a big conservative, when he's not. A person would have to be pretty liberal to call O'Rielly a conservative, he's a middle of the road guy if ever there was one.

I too listen to talk radio and explore articles online, instead of trusting what Fox, or anyone else for that matter, tries to feed me.

Anonymous said...

It is about running a business. If you were to look at their website, a good section of it is "entertainment" and "pop-tarts" which is kind of like the gossip column you would find in People Magazine and it doesn't even belong in world news.

If you actually got 2% of the population to not buy a newspaper for two days from a boycott, the Newspapers would stand up and listen. It is the same reason why Fox News wouldn't want to turn away business by alienating Democrats, Liberals or anyone else that would watch.

Christinewjc said...

Talk Radio, the internet in general and blogs in particular are WAY AHEAD of cable and network news.

Sean Hannity broke the Rev. Wright story A FULL YEAR before the media got wind of it!

I don't trust the MSM anymore - not even Fox News. With a Saudi "prince" (ugh!!!) calling the shots, no wonder the flag pins and "fair and balanced" news has disappeared!

I have noticed that both O'Reilly and Hannity share more of their views on the radio than on T.V. They obviously have more freedom in that venue.

Speaking of freedom, Hannity had been arguing with a caller about the socialistic ideas of the left vs. the rewards and freedom of capitalism. He asked the caller if she remembers what Mel Gibson screamed in the movie Braveheart just before he was executed. The caller didn't remember. The answer?


It is THE most important issue of our time!

I think that the left in this country believes that Marxist, cradle to grave entitlements would be a better way of life rather than our current Democratic Republic economy that utilizes capitalism. They are polar opposites...just like the choice between Obama and McCain will be in this election!