Fox News for Stupid People

As a rule I don’t watch Fox News because every time I do, I get insulted. I get insulted because every time, they insult my intelligence by some sort of propaganda track to mislead me.

Last night I was waiting in line at a restaurant and they had Fox News on. Fox played a nice clip of Obama criticizing Palin for “Being for it before she was against it” on the infamous “Bridge to Nowhere”. After the clip a Fox News commentator had the last word. Was that last word the results of researching the truth of what Obama said? Was it the insightful analysis from the commentator on the substance of the issue? Did they quote a rebuttal from McCain?. No. They dismissed Obama’s channenge BECAUSE some Democratic web site in Alaska supposedly conceded that Palin was against the bridge.

So Fox News thinks I’m stupid enough to accept a report on an unnamed web site that said something not quoted as the authority that Obama was wrong. Only a stupid person would fall for such misdirection.

The fact of the matter is that Obama was telling the truth. Visit factcheck.org if you’re smart.

About Kevin

Just an old guy with opinions that I like to bounce off other people.
This entry was posted in Bad Commerce, Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

15 Responses to Fox News for Stupid People

  1. TRUTH says:

    And the SAD thing is, EVERY OTHER Network has been on the Obama Bandwagon for the last 24 months, CHEERING and DRIVING him on and on. But let one, just ONE Network say something against the CHosen ONE, and OM MY GOD!!! They are a Terrible Network. Unless a News Network is on the OBAWAGON they are viewed from the left as cynical, extreme rightest, haters and many other chosen words. Is it honestly expected every network sings Obamas Praise?

    FACTCHECK.Org is an ok website, but Sir, they are NOT the answer to the world. Funny how every thing to do with Obama is in his favor in Factcheck. See, Factcheck in MY opinion is what FoxNews is in Yours.

  2. Kevin says:

    FactCheck is not 100% pro Obama:

    The Republicans did more deceptive advertising, so they got more attention from FactCheck. You might try looking up some stuff from your book on there.

    FoxNews is to the right, MSNBC is to the left and the other’s spread out with CNN somewhere in the middle. But if Obama is inspiring, smart and energetic, while McCain is angry and negative–which makes better television?

  3. TRUTH says:

    CNN somewhere in the MIDDLE?!?!?! WOW!!! If CNN is in the middle its the Middle of a very large group of Radical Leftists. PLEASE!!

    How about Charlie Gibson and Katey Coric? When either of them spoke with Obama they may as well been blowing in his ear whispering sweet nothings. But when they spoke with Sarah Palin it was like a German Inquisition.

    I couldn’t agree with you more about Obama being the inspiring speaker. That is not secret. Its stated by many his great orator skills are what won the election for him. Never mind his lack of doing the job.

    But back on the original subject, FOX fox Stupid People, well then I’m a freaking Idiot, because they are the ONLY network I could stand to watch, the last three months especially. They were not hesitant to point out any POSSIBLE negative issues with Obama, unlike every other network. And it is because of that Liberals hate Fox, so have to claim they are stupid. Yet they wouldn’t hesitate to point out negatives of McCain and Palin both. Sorry Kevin, they aren’t stupid, they are just right of center enough to STILL Report the News, good or bad, of the left or right. You just don’t like hearing bad things of the left.

  4. TRUTH says:

    Well, I clicked on those links. Those are all about things his Campaign SAID or DID. Big Deal, both sides did stupid stuff in campaigning. It makes Factcheck.org look good to post that, and say something against the OBAMA campaign, when it really is NOTHING negative about Obama himself.

    People pick sides, NEWSPAPERS pick candidates, Fackcheck.org PROBABLY didn’t vote McCain.

  5. TRUTH says:

    [ Just My Theory ]

    Looking back, I have made the following assumption.

    Last year Gas prices went up to around $4.00 a gallon, only a few months before the Nov. election.
    …..making the current Republican cabinet in office appear to many being at fault.

    Nearer election it started dipping back down, giving different people different reasons to believe as to WHY. Some said it had nothing to do with Republicans, some said it was in anticipation of BHO’s election. Nobody Knew why, it was just all talk. But still, a bad image loomed over the party in office.

    Then after Nov 4th gas prices continued to dip, NOW making BHO appear to many as an even more positive thing, people actually thinking “WOW he hasn’t even taken office and great things are happening”.
    ….again, the current people in office appearing as incompetent.

    When all along, educated people know where most the gas increases were coming from. Wall Street. Gas was being bought and sold by rich tycoons for personnel profit. But WHY at the these particular dates in time did they choose to make these financial decisions? This is where my theory comes in.

    A smart democratic politician influenced these people to make the dealings at the times they did, which made the current office appear like it was them that was causing us to have to pay so much at the pumps. Then it was the same people that allowed the prices to go back down, making it appear that the newly elected office was going to be a great thing for our country.

    This is all purely speculation, but I believe it entirely possible a small group of politicians took the steps to make it happen which in turn aided the turnout of the Nov. 4th election. Which would go to show they don’t give two cents about us, not about the country, but only about themselves and influencing who gets into office. Conspiracy Theory? Sure thing. Call a spade a spade, but not one I’ll be spreading around. Just my opinion I wanted to share with you.

    • Kevin says:

      News reports say oil prices dropped in response to a sharp decrease in demand due to the growing worldwide recession. The increases were triggered by weather-related damage to refining capacity and instability in oil producing regions of the world. It would seem to me that the Republican administration had more ways of influencing oil prices than Democrats.

      The usual place to look for price fluctuations is with the fundamental factors of the markets, and not secret political machinations.

  6. Truth says:

    That did not come from a ‘polotical machination’, as I said, that was MY Idea. Now if you choose to title me that, so be it. I was merely making an observation.

    SO WHAT the News said it happened one way or another. Are they the reporters of FACTs without Question?

    Do you disagree with me that Wall Street has influences on oil prices? I hardly know anything about that industry, but I know that is a large part of the oil increases. When they say a barrel of oil is $120 up $10 from the day before, that isn’t because Saudi raised it $10. It is the traders that bought it for $110 and turned around and sold it for $120 to make themselves money as with any other market item. And the idea it could be influenced by politicians, as far fetched as it might sound, is not without merit. It isn’t as if I’m saying we attacked our own country in 911.

    You can take a look at current oil prices on my geocities website. I have had this tracking for about 8 months. Hmmm..I don’t want to post the address here, let me find your email and I’ll send it there.

    Anyways, the whole idea is just mine, NOT one I read but just a wild idea I had and think “it is possible”.

    • Kevin says:

      I think you misunderstood my comment. The “political machination” refers to “politics manipulating oil prices”, not to your thought process or the source of your thesis.

      Certainly financial speculators have a lot to do with oil prices, but they are influenced by the fundamentals and what they think is going to happen. In general when there is uncertainty as to future oil supplies the price goes up or there is a refinery fire or a natural disaster.

  7. TRUTH says:

    I’ve not followed the events for a few weeks. Not since I got banned from one site for calling out Plains Radio for allowing an idiot to work/talk on it. Then the guy that banned me ends up passing the torch.

    Looking into conspriacy.org last couple days is almost weird to see it still so active …. on THE SAME! subjects. I have not changed my feelings on my concerns I’ll admit. I just got sick of none of it being looked at seriously by the legal system. Regardless what YOUR beliefs are, enough people were asking things be looked at and taken into consideration so judgment could properly be passed. You’ll say it already was. Which is probably where we differ the most. And even if it were, cases could’ve been heard and THEN the prior answers be referenced, like in other court cases when a lawyer will say “in case Smith -vs- California….” for example.

    None of the cases were even given that much respect, which sure seems like a logical step. It just leads me to believe they “Could NOT” hear the case, for fear of the outcome. If it should happen to turn out against the defendant, WOW would there be an outbreak of radicals and idiots. Again, that is MY OPINION, nothing more.

    HOpe your doing well. I’m about to drive north 12 hrs to a funeral. Uggg.
    RR

    • Kevin says:

      I think the main entertainment on the other blog is the latest “crazy Orly Taitz thing of the day”. Most recently, she came up with this person called Barakat Osama and somehow started connecting dots…

      There is one tidbit you might be interested in. There was a partial ruling in Hollister v. Bary Soetoro (aka Barack Hussein Obama…). The judge called the suit “frivolous” but there is still to be some kind of proceeding in “open court”.

      The other blog is down due to some kind of network problem.

    • Kevin says:

      Traffic at OTC has almost doubled the past week, averaging over 500 visits a day (excluding search engines). Go figger.

      Maybe I understand some of it. Now that it’s an established blog, there are more links to it, and that drives up the Google rankings. I try to keep up with the news, and people searching for things in the news come to the site. What amazes me most is the interest in the search terms “obama lizard people”.

  8. TRUTH says:

    Lizard People? LOL!! Ummmm…NO Comment.

  9. TRUTH says:

    Heard this one the other day. Obama criticized the Fox Network for being biased, not presenting enough minority shows, on either blacks or Hispanics. The following day Fox came out admitting Mr. Obama was indeed correct and they would do their best to correct their deficiency. Starting the first full week in July, two nights a week, they plan to air new episodes followed by reruns of Americas Most Wanted. :-)

  10. The Real Truth says:

    Yeah Fox news is biased. It’s the perfect network for racist rednecks.

  11. TRUTH says:

    Racist Rednecks…now thats FUNNY, I don’t care who ya is!

    Racism labeling is a funny thing in the United States. I think its high time Americans recognize the word for the meaning it should be, “when a person of one race(A) demeans a person of another race(B) because of the race the person(B) is. ” It is JUST AS MUCH RACISM when a Black person tries to demean a White person or Any other race. One thing is for sure, They do it a hell of a lot more. I’m against any racism, no matter what your skin color is. I’m just sick of the overlooking the worst racists.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>