Over 1000 waivers given to exempt groups from the fiasco of Obamacare!!

To be fair. I doubt anyone at the White house in recent years has ever listened to opera. Yet a few divas have been invited there too. And I dont mean Elton John.

 

I guess "ginned up" was part of the latest batch of lib talking points, huh?
None of this explains why Weiner would try to exempt his entire district from the clutches of Obamacare, does it? And the unions? They need waivers to explore the costs? Get real.

 

You could always sign-up for his mailing list lol

 

I suggested to my boss that he needs to cater to the libs so our company can be exempted from the clutches of Obamacare.

 

Your company is prejudice to liberals? Isnt that illegal for a banking institution? Is lib a code word for something else?

 

Let me say this again....Fox is always accused of being so biased but from this video Fox seems to be giving both sides equal time. If this video is indicative of Fox bias I would have to say such bias does not exist on Fox.

 

I think I have finally figured out why the Right is so stupid. Nobody, I mean nobody could watch that piece and even mildly entertain the idea that there was fair and balanced coverage. It starts out attacking Pelosi by citing waivers in her district and never compares them to any other district, gives Sarah Palin's response and John Boehner's response and nothing from Pelosi herself, and then goes to a former DNC person who makes a very convincing argument backed up by the Republican that got the waiver in the first place. Then they ask this former Bush official about the situation and I love what his first few sentences say.

BLAKEMAN: It doesn't matter if she exerted influence or not. She got a waiver. And it's absolutely the height of hypocrisy for politicians to be giving out these waivers to people when the rest of us are burned by this terrible law.

If it doesn't matter if influence was exerted, why is Pelosi being singled out and why is he saying that politicians are handing these waivers out? This guy just killed the story in one sentence and then he goes on a rant about the health care law. He never addressed the points made by the former DNC woman, he just went along with his talking points as if nothing else being said mattered. That is not fair and balanced by any stretch. If you're unable to pick this stuff apart sentence by sentence, you are easily fooled. Watch it again and if it helps write the words down and see if they make sense.

 

I guess "fair and balanced" means to you that they present your side of the story. Period. OK, you cannot name a conservative newsman from your media. try naming a show that presents both sides of the story like that. I will bet you cannot do that either.

 

Your being an ass. Let it go. You're like a little girl for Pete'sake. It's a TV show.

 

People still believe Fox is a neutral news source? How do you all breath through that sand? (laughs) I will say a percentage of the news, a very small percentage, is "fair and somewhat balanced"... but the overwhelming majority of it's news and commentary is focused on expressing the Republican point-of-view.

As for a more balanced network, CNN is probably the closest. IMO it leans slightly left, but conservative's views are expressed alongside that of liberal's. I'd say John King leans heavily right.

 

Interesting how Fox presents both sides and yet you consider it slanted. I will grant you most of the commentary is right, but that is commentary and not news. Still their commentary always presents 2 sides at least once on every show I have seen. I have never seen both sides presented on any other network and, to top that off, al lot of what they call news is really commentary - and none of it is for the right. If you do not believe me, see It’s Unanimous, FOX Was More Balanced Than MSNBC | Verum Serum

 

I didnt realize there were two sides of a torando. Or a fire. What a drip you are.

 

Yeah, I see where you're going with that. Looking at the news-side itself (and ignoring the commentary), I'd say the slant favors the conservative view-point. In order to see it you need to have a more neutral point-of-view.

Take John King (from CNN) for example: His show focuses heavily on the news and explores opinions about current topics (through commentary), but the subjects he chooses to air on his shows are not neutral. He overwhelmingly focuses on portraying Democrats in a negative way while ignoring anything that might damage the Republicans. That's why I consider his leanings to be heavily-right.

The same is true for FOX. If you are an extremist (right OR left), or even half-way tilted one way or the other, you will have a hard time understanding this lol

 

Well on the tornado issue there realy are 2 sides the inside and the outside, not sure about fire though

 

You seem to always be handing out assignments for the rest of us. I find that when I do provide what you have asked for, you simply ignore it and chug right along with your same unaltered point despite being wrong in the first place. I've just stopped accepting your assignments and by the sound of all the whining you have done lately, so has everyone else.

I think most people have no problem answering genuinely asked questions but you ask a question like a cougar sneaks up on its prey. When your pounce eventually comes and your prey simply and effortlessly steps to the side and avoids your attack, you stomp off in an entirely different direction having learned nothing from the failure of your best efforts. So given that, what is my or anyone else’s motivation to answer any question you ask? Maybe a decrease in the whining decimal level?

 

Whining? Care to read what you just wrote? BTW, your silence is all the answer I need (and knew before I asked).

 

Fantastic!! Silence works for me too.

 

Don't know what you guys saw but I saw a commentator in the middle of the screen, flanked by 1 lefty & 1 righty. Both had equal time to say their piece? What is so biased about that? What more could either side want?

 

If anyone says anything that moen disagrees with, it is biased against the left. They do not want anyone to propagate anything about the right.

 

Like Palin once said, She isn't going to appear on any networks that are biased against her. What you and she fail to recognize is that any network that is biased towards your opinions is still biased. I recognize both the Left's and the Right's biases from the less than flattering photos they choose to use to the subtitles they run under their stories. I think the people that are most unaware of the biases from either side are the ones most affected by the leanings of either side. You seem to buy into the Right wing stuff pretty hard.