I wanted to watch Herman's Cains speech withdrawing from the Presidential race, even though I knew what the "decisiion" had to be. As this blog stated, you simply cannot make as eak a respoinse as Cain did to the last accusations against him ("I am reassessing my campaign") and have any hope of remaining a viable candidate. As this blog has always said, that was Cain's greatest strength, but alos a weakness that might well pove fateal (as it has): Caun is not your usual politician, reacting to events the way an experiened politician woud. Cain's speech was fine, but the point of this article is that I deliberately watched the speech on FOX for the specific purpose of writing this article.
It was some of the most disgraceful "news" coverage I have ever seen on televison (saying a lot). Sure, CNN was probably just as bad (nad MSNBC is nothing but a leftist political actioin committee), but FOX has USED its image of being "different" to build an audience. I have accurately describe this as "CNN light", nad it is getting worse. Today was not even "CNN light", It was as if Fox had graduated from maarijuana to the hard stuff. CNN could not possibly have been worse. The peopleon Fox could barely choke out the wrod" alleged" with regard to the accusations against Herman Cain,. From beginning to end, they totally dismissed Herman Cain as a person of any credibility. One "guest" (without challenge) said that: "A wife in the Suoth, in thsese circumstances, i sgoing to expect here husband home every night". Turst me. Threre were WORSE things said, and the whole "theme" of the Fox coverage was that Herman Cain was dead as a candidate. Well, I said essentially that in this blog, but Focx was saying that Cain DESERVED to be dead as a candidate. I said it because Herman Cain had been unable to counter the "spin" of the media, as Cain himself said in his withdrawal slpeech. Fox virtually suggested that Cain SHOULD have "slunk away in the nigh", as they said most withdrawing politicians do, instead of holding a "trimuphful" rally.
Again, I can give you no better descripton of the disgraceful coveragfe--typical, by the way,m of Fox on Saturday, as I have previously noticed and commented upon--than that it ws wrothy of CNN at its very worst. I would not be surprised--not much anyway--that CNN covreage was MORE sumpathetic to Cain than that of Fox.
Cain was right: Today's politics has become a dirty, dirty game, and today's media has made it that way. As thois blog has correctly told you, the place whre you see the most negative ads--only dishonestly descrtibed as "news"--is in the MEDIA, rather than in paid political ads. It is the MEDIA that has turned lpoitical campaigning in America into a sordid, durty business, whre the focus is NOT on the "issues".
"Don't blame the messeange." "All we do is be a conduit for reporting charges made by others" CNN, right? Yes, CNN says that sort of thing all of the time (being The Liar Network". But that is EXACTLY what John Robers of Fox said today--a DEFENSE of the "media' being the main reaction of Fox to Cain's speech (pretty much dismissing it, as they had done before it was ever made). This, of course, is the classic refuge of MEDIA SCOUNDRELS. It is less true today than it ever wsa. Today's "journalist" has totally abandoned merely reporttng the facts, and Fo did NOT do that wtih regard to the accusations agains Herman Cain. One of the many LIES on Fox is that absurd lie: "We report, you decide". Give me a break. Fox, you are DISHONEST. That is why this blog no longer refers to your network by name, but only by this correct description: "the unfair and unbalanced network". This article is an exception, since I again granted myself an Obama-type waiver ni the interest of reader clarity. ("Unbalanced", by the way, continues to mean "insane", rather than a refernce to political imbalace, although there is that as wel, so long as you realize that Fox's supposed "neutral' ordinary "news" coverage is dominated by present-day, CNN-type, journalism school-type "journalism".)
Nope The people of Fox News are swine from the Devi's herd (again qutoing Arthur Conan Doyle, from "The Lost World").
Message to Foc News: You ARE "swine from the devil's her". Does that make it clear what I think of you--with few exceptions--or do I need to find another literary refernece to adequately express my contempt.
Did I mention that Foix reported the satement from Michele Bachhmann, after the Cain speech, as "just platitudes". "We report, you decide"???????????????????????????????? Is there any bigger LIE in the history of "journalism"? Oh, unfortunately, "jounalists" today tell lies jsut as big every single day--really every single hour these days. But none BIGGER.
Fox built its audience n the basis of not putting out the usual leftist junk put out by the mainstream media. In otehr words, Fox gained a reputation as being "conservative" in its approach. If that were ever true, it is no longer true. If you are a "conservative", you should feel USED. At most, Fox is now a "voice" for the REPUBLICAN ESTABLISHMENT. Fox is now an ENEMY of true conservatives. This is not hyuperbole. It is absolute truth. Sure, Fox will still present more conservatives than the mainstream media. But it has become a Big Lie (George Orwell style). Fox has USED "conservatives" to build itself, and now the 'journalists" on Fox belive tlhat they are free to be jsut like the journalists" of CNN (wanting the approval of those peopee who desise Fox, as I now do for the opposite reason). Fox stuck a knife in the back of Herman Cain, and continues to do that same thing for real conservatives at every opportunity. But the question Fox may have to consider is this: Is FOX on the dowhnill slide, after having reached its peak becaue of people who believed its propaganda about itslf? I think Fox has reached its zenith. That is why it should have had more compassion for Herman Cain. That same downhill slide has begun for Fox, and I don't think there is any saving it.
Specific message to John Robers: You, sir, are definitely a swine from the Devil's herd. Now this is not the first time I have said that about a "John Robers" (without having the Arthur Conann Doyle language available). I have previously said that about the "john Roberts" at CNN (some time ago--maybe all of the way back to 2008). Further, there is a "john Roberts" married to CNN "reporter" Kyra Phillips, who this blog has also had occasion to reference as one of the swine from the Devil's herd (before that specific phrase had been called to my attentiion). Is this the SAME John Robers? I don't know. It amy not be. If not, the name is obvisly fatal to being a good "journalist" (if such a thinkg exists).
Fox may well think that "criticism" like this just means I am watching, and that they are "succeeding". The mainstream media maintained that position, and look where they are. I am reducing my SURFING of Fox down to TWO MINUTES per day (maximum), so long as I don't see someting where I need to listen fu8rther for purposes of blog readers. However, as I previously said, you can now be assured that I will watch CNN much MORE than I watch Fox. That is not because CNN is better. That is because there is no reason to watch "CNN light" (and a dishoenst "CNN light" to boot), when I can watch the hard stuff on the real CNN. For blog material, CNN is better. For real "news' of interest to conservatives, Fox has become just as useless. I further make this pledge: "From the time the sun sets today, I will never watch another single second of Fox prime time programming, with the sole exception of speical events (debates, electin nights, and that sort of thing). No O'Reilly. No Hannity. No Van Susteren. For prime tiem my boycott is COMPLETE. I BEG you to follow my example.
P.S. No proofreading or spell checking (bad eyesight). My waiver has expired, and therefore Fox will hereafter again be known by its correct title: the unfair and unbalanced network. Future "waivers" will be harder, if not imossible, to get. I have said about as much as I want to say about Fox,under than name, and will be wtching it even less in any event. The "drity game" here is a cynical ratings game that all TV "news" organizations play, and which I think Fox is about to lsoe (although it may not be evident for awhile). Why should ANYONE watch "CNN light"? It is like lthe GOP wantng to be "Democrat light", or "Government Bribery Light". Who needs it?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment