Conservative Attack Dog, Slams Fox News And Bush [Archive]

View Full Version : Conservative Attack Dog, Slams Fox News And Bush

suedanim

10-15-2009, 11:38 AM

Klayman's pov's and quotes are damning both of the Bush-Cheney admin and Fox News. Nice to know there are still a FEW honest conservatives out there willing to speak the truth. MOST are simply repeating the CRAAAAP, Limbaugh and Fox News feeds them each day like good little parrots.

Its interesting to me that each and every time a conservative voice, well known figures at that, like Scott McClellan and many others... against the Bush admin or Fox News... few... if any.. message board, blog or rightwing news site conservatives acknowledge it much or go..."hey wait a minute, I might need to rethink my position". Instead, they usually condemn each and every whistle-blower and continue to repeat the Fox and Limbaugh talking points. Klayman is dead on right about Fox and brainwashing.

Klayman takes particular aim at the "strange and petty tactics" of the network's chairman Roger Ailes. When he asked Ailes about his decision to hire Chris Cuomo, the current "Good Morning America" co-host, to do commentary, the Fox News executive replied: "If I'm going to put on some goddamned liberal, I might as well get the dumbest fuck I can find!"

And that is a perfect example of what we see at Fox. They put on loud, hyper aggressive and many ex-Bush and neocon or well known Republican commentators and always have 3-4 to ONE PATHETIC, UNKNOWN poser-liberal... who is roundly mocked and shouted down by the rest.. woohoo!! Kill the liberals!!

Has anybody ever HEARD of any of the people at Fox who are supposed to be their liberal... "experts"? I haven't. They are Fox puppets, hired to act as tokens. Thats it thats all.

Its nice to see that Roger Ailes being quoted and revealed for the repulsive human being he is.

lol... Fox is using a new ploy lately. While engaging in bigotry regularly, their commentators, Beck, Hannity, O'Reilly primarily call Obama and others... racists. To their arsenal, they've added Obama has a whole network, MSNBC, to tout him and find no faults in him or his policies. If you are regular viewer of MSNBC you know that is not true, with even liberal commentators lobbing heavy duty criticisms at both Obama and his admin or policies, Ed Schulz and Rachel Maddow being the most critical.

Fox actually is.. an extremely biased rightwing propaganda machine. Roger Ailes makes that crystal clear, so naysayers can now lay to rest arguments that Fox is fair or balanced. The way I see it though, rightwing talk radio and Fox combined have so dominated the desimmination of information for DECADES now of ideas and the way in which even factual news is reported, that some kind of answer, OTHER points of view, not necessarily liberal and reporting news that Fox refuses to cover, had to find a way to be put out there. MSNBC, CNN, PBS, HLN and the network news fill that gap.

Larry Klayman, Conservative Attack Dog, Slams Fox News And Bush (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/14/larry-klayman-conservativ_n_321080.html)

Both conservative Republicans and liberal Democrats can agree on one thing: When Larry Klayman calls, start sweating.

The fastest trigger finger in D.C. when it comes to filing legal briefs, the founder of Judicial Watch is best known for playing an instrumental role in fueling the Whitewater crisis that drowned President Clinton in multiple scandals.

But in the decade since the Lewinsky scandal, Klayman has outraged Republicans with his attacks on Bush administration and former Vice President Dick Cheney's secretive energy task force.

In his new subtly-titled book, "Whores: Why And How I Came To Fight The Establishment," Klayman details his career as a thorn in the side of the powerful.

Describing his decision to take on the case of Scott Tooley, a congressional aide convinced that he was on a terrorist watch list and that his phone was being wiretapped by the government, Klayman engages in the usual hyperbole:

"The Tooley case, which continues to this day, went directly to abuses of power--this time, by an administration that colored itself conservative but too often behaved as if the Constitution is an inconvenience to be sidestepped or even ignored.... Bush and Cheney did more to pave the way for Obama's push toward socialism than Marx, Lenin, Stalin and Mao Tse-tung could have ever dreamed or hoped for."

Klayman says that he met with Senator John McCain in 1997 to discuss allegations that the Clinton administration was illegally soliciting campaign contributions in exchange for seats on trade missions. Asked why the congressional hearings into the matter had ended in failure, McCain admitted that it was because both political parties had checkmated each other, telling Klayman: "Yes, my party is involved as well in the illegal fund raising. It's a disgrace."

Klayman reserves particular venom for former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, whom he targeted by filing complaints with the House Ethics Committee. When he ran into former GOP Congressman Bob Barr (R-Ga.) at a hearing and asked the conservative lawmaker what he thought about DeLay, Barr laughed: "He's a crook but he's our crook!"

Klayman proudly recalls the night the "vast right-wing conspiracy... was born." He and fellow conservatives -- including Paul Weyrich, Phyllis Schafly and the NRA's Wayne LaPierre -- met in a room near the Council for National Policy conference in Charleston, South Carolina in 1998. "We voted to remove the 42nd president of the United States by whatever legal and ethical means were necessary," he said.

But Klayman disparages Republicans who attacked Clinton for demonstrating a double standard when it came to the Bush administration. Calling the leaking of outed CIA agent Valerie Plame's name "indefensible," Klayman says of the GOP: "Their hypocritical silence was deafening. For both Democrats and Republicans, politics too often trumps national security and the best interests of the American people."

In an odd bit of convenient amnesia regarding his own role in stirring up Whitewater, Klayman knocks Republicans for pursuing Clinton scandals and ignoring the looming threat of Islamic terrorism. "Years later, it would become clear how damaging to the country this strategy was," he writes. "By leaving Bill Clinton in office, preoccupying him with a sex scandal and diverting attention away from the growing threat of bin Laden, Al Qaeda and terrorism in general, the Republican leadership laid the foundation for a serious cancer to grow -- one that ultimately metastasized into September 11, 2001."

Of course, Klayman's main criticism is that the House impeachment managers refused to widen the proceedings into Chinagate and other scandals and focused solely on Lewinsky: "While the House managers were patting themselves on the back for what they had done, or rather, for what their gutless Senate colleagues had not done, Osama bin Laden was hard at work and the nation was too preoccupied with a sex scandal to know who was really being screwed."

And Klayman reserves some of his harshest words for Fox News, expressing his increasing disappointment with the network, which "should really change its motto 'We report, you decide' to 'We brainwash, you decide.'"

He accuses Fox News and host Sean Hannity of not being straight with him by tricking his clients to coming on the air: "I came to perceive Hannity as a shallow and insincere Rush Limbaugh wannabe. In contrast, his television co-host, Alan Colmes, a Jewish liberal, was actually a mensch, even though I rarely agreed with him politically."

Klayman takes particular aim at the "strange and petty tactics" of the network's chairman Roger Ailes. When he asked Ailes about his decision to hire Chris Cuomo, the current "Good Morning America" co-host, to do commentary, the Fox News executive replied: "If I'm going to put on some goddamned liberal, I might as well get the dumbest fuck I can find!"

Klayman claims that Fox owner Rupert Murdoch "tried to kill the publication of this book" because of his criticism of the network.

Grizz

10-15-2009, 12:28 PM

Honestly, do you really think facts will convince loyal Fox viewers that they are being deliberately brainwashed?

suedanim

10-15-2009, 12:36 PM

Honestly, do you really think facts will convince loyal Fox viewers that they are being deliberately brainwashed?

No. I don't. I think the rightwing Fox viewer WANTS what Fox is selling. The are thrilled with the lies and distortions all done up with the utmost slick presentation and shit-talking pundits. For them its... "look at MY TEAM.. I'm with them". I don't believe truth seeking, finding accurate accounts of what is really going on in US current events or government or international news is why they even watch Fox. Instead, they need to know what the new spin buzzwords, phrases and explanations are for the purpose of demeaning opponents and defending their team. Fox provides all of that and I think its gotten far more organized and more vicious since Karl Rove went to work for them. Don't think for a minute Rove and Ailes don't have strategy meetings.

KSTornado

10-15-2009, 12:39 PM

Well, I've never actually seen O'Reilly call Obama a racist. Anyone got a link to that? Also, by using video and voice clips from people they accuse of being racist I think they prove that some are such as the Rev. Wright or even Jones. I do not however feel Obama is racist but the fact that this Presidency has been pushed into a racial issue by the left and that the right says that is racist in itself will always result in racial rhetoric showing itself.

Also, this person's statements really seem more subjected to Bush/Cheney than anything. When can we talk about this Presidency on what our CURRENT President is doing? I will also say this guy is a hypocrit for not calling out the far left liberal media that goes head to head with FOX that spits out many lies and hate rhetoric just as much as FOX sometimes does.

Hypocrocy will be the start of this country's dismay in the near future. Our country is heading towards another civil/revolutionary war and if the people of this great nation do not see that then ignorance must be bliss. The problem with it though is our government is to blame. Not the Republicans or Democrats but the whole lot of em.

gurutoo

10-15-2009, 01:11 PM

No. I don't. I think the rightwing Fox viewer WANTS what Fox is selling. The are thrilled with the lies and distortions all done up with the utmost slick presentation and shit-talking pundits. For them its... "look at MY TEAM.. I'm with them". I don't believe truth seeking, finding accurate accounts of what is really going on in US current events or government or international news is why they even watch Fox. Instead, they need to know what the new spin buzzwords, phrases and explanations are for the purpose of demeaning opponents and defending their team. Fox provides all of that and I think its gotten far more organized and more vicious since Karl Rove went to work for them. Don't think for a minute Rove and Ailes don't have strategy meetings.

I'm not so sure there is such a thing as a "loyal" Fox viewer. I believe Fox viewers watch Fox because they are sickened by the alternatives.

There's bad behavior on both sides Sue. So bad, partisanship is no longer an option for people who can think. Most people regardless of past political affiliation just want a larger measure of truth than they've been getting from either side of the aisle.

BoogyMan

10-15-2009, 01:15 PM

When those so intent on using the "burn-it-down" tactics start doing the same with their own pet network, MSNBC, there will be much more credibility upon which to make an argument about truth.

suedanim

10-15-2009, 01:54 PM

And what about Mr. Klayman's comments?? Forget mine.. at least for a minute and attack his. He's the rightwing expert saying these things..

Trish

10-15-2009, 02:09 PM

Grizz

10-15-2009, 02:12 PM

Also, this person's statements really seem more subjected to Bush/Cheney than anything. When can we talk about this Presidency on what our CURRENT President is doing? I will also say this guy is a hypocrit for not calling out the far left liberal media that goes head to head with FOX that spits out many lies and hate rhetoric just as much as FOX sometimes does.

The difference between Fox and just about every other media outlet is that Fox was established for the purpose of advancing a particular political agenda, facts be damned. Newsworthy items which may conflict with their agenda are either ignored or twisted totally out of shape. Check out Jon Stewart on Fox's coverage of the teabagger demonstration in DC and the gay rights march last week:

http://www.dailykostv.com/w/002250/

NIOSA

10-15-2009, 02:31 PM

What's happening is, or it seems to me, some in the media & their appendages (people that believe everybody but Fox) are volunteering to help Mark Lloyd achieve his dream, & that is to shut down everybody that isn't in this admins back pocket.
What happens when there's nothing out there but those that spew & further Obamas agenda?

NIOSA

10-15-2009, 02:32 PM

Osborn F. Enready

10-15-2009, 02:34 PM

Trish said:
Here is what I find interesting about this thread.

1) Klugman's comments regarding specifically Ailes and Hannity are projected onto every other person at FOX. Apparently, singling out specific individuals for specific criticisms is all that it takes for those criticisms to be applied like a blanket on everyone else!

2) The OP, and especially the bolded sections, are every bit as damning to the Democrats/liberals as they are to the Republicans/conservatives - but that is completely ignored as if they aren't part of the mix at all!

3) Since Klugman's opinions are being hailed as so "honest," I guess we can now take as fact that President Obama does indeed have a socialist agenda for the country!

Very, very interesting development indeed!

And WE HAVE A WINNER!... here madame, is your cigar!

KSTornado

10-15-2009, 02:37 PM

The difference between Fox and just about every other media outlet is that Fox was established for the purpose of advancing a particular political agenda, facts be damned. Newsworthy items which may conflict with their agenda are either ignored or twisted totally out of shape. Check out Jon Stewart on Fox's coverage of the teabagger demonstration in DC and the gay rights march last week:

http://www.dailykostv.com/w/002250/

So MSNBC is not the same? It is funny how ALL other major news outlets attack FOX constantly and now the WH is as well. FOX plays actual video, plays voice recordings of people who are in the President's circle and then talk about what is wrong with it. If other news agencies could do the same they would be more credible but they would rather report what FOX is doing. Hypocriacy at it's best and here we are in yet another thread talking about FOX.

BoogyMan

10-15-2009, 03:53 PM

Grizz

10-15-2009, 04:01 PM

I'm sure you have proof of that?

If you watched the Jon Stewart piece, it was amply demonstrated. Further, if you watched Fox while the teabag protests were in full swing, you would have also noted that Fox was one of the promoters or, at least, provided ample media coverage.

It is funny how ALL other major news outlets attack FOX constantly and now the WH is as well.

Oh, really? Can't say as I've noticed, but then again, I don't watch or listen to too many 'major news outlets' except for NPR and PBS.

FOX plays actual video, plays voice recordings of people who are in the President's circle and then talk about what is wrong with it.

:madlaugh: It's also rather amazing how often they seem to miss the full story by providing quotes out of context or follow-up.

Osborn F. Enready

10-15-2009, 04:04 PM

Grizz said:
If you watched the Jon Stewart piece, it was amply demonstrated. Further, if you watched Fox while the teabag protests were in full swing, you would have also noted that Fox was one of the promoters or, at least, provided ample media coverage.

You criticize Beck and Fox news overall... but watch comedy centrals left leaning comedian for news?

Sure...

Gracie

10-15-2009, 04:13 PM

Klayman's pov's and quotes are damning both of the Bush-Cheney admin and Fox News. Nice to know there are still a FEW honest conservatives out there willing to speak the truth. MOST are simply repeating the CRAAAAP, Limbaugh and Fox News feeds them each day like good little parrots.

Its interesting to me that each and every time a conservative voice, well known figures at that, like Scott McClellan and many others... against the Bush admin or Fox News... few... if any.. message board, blog or rightwing news site conservatives acknowledge it much or go..."hey wait a minute, I might need to rethink my position". Instead, they usually condemn each and every whistle-blower and continue to repeat the Fox and Limbaugh talking points. Klayman is dead on right about Fox and brainwashing.

And that is a perfect example of what we see at Fox. They put on loud, hyper aggressive and many ex-Bush and neocon or well known Republican commentators and always have 3-4 to ONE PATHETIC, UNKNOWN poser-liberal... who is roundly mocked and shouted down by the rest.. woohoo!! Kill the liberals!!

Has anybody ever HEARD of any of the people at Fox who are supposed to be their liberal... "experts"? I haven't. They are Fox puppets, hired to act as tokens. Thats it thats all.

Its nice to see that Roger Ailes being quoted and revealed for the repulsive human being he is.

lol... Fox is using a new ploy lately. While engaging in bigotry regularly, their commentators, Beck, Hannity, O'Reilly primarily call Obama and others... racists. To their arsenal, they've added Obama has a whole network, MSNBC, to tout him and find no faults in him or his policies. If you are regular viewer of MSNBC you know that is not true, with even liberal commentators lobbing heavy duty criticisms at both Obama and his admin or policies, Ed Schulz and Rachel Maddow being the most critical.

Fox actually is.. an extremely biased rightwing propaganda machine. Roger Ailes makes that crystal clear, so naysayers can now lay to rest arguments that Fox is fair or balanced. The way I see it though, rightwing talk radio and Fox combined have so dominated the desimmination of information for DECADES now of ideas and the way in which even factual news is reported, that some kind of answer, OTHER points of view, not necessarily liberal and reporting news that Fox refuses to cover, had to find a way to be put out there. MSNBC, CNN, PBS, HLN and the network news fill that gap.

Larry Klayman, Conservative Attack Dog, Slams Fox News And Bush (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/14/larry-klayman-conservativ_n_321080.html)

Both conservative Republicans and liberal Democrats can agree on one thing: When Larry Klayman calls, start sweating.

The fastest trigger finger in D.C. when it comes to filing legal briefs, the founder of Judicial Watch is best known for playing an instrumental role in fueling the Whitewater crisis that drowned President Clinton in multiple scandals.

But in the decade since the Lewinsky scandal, Klayman has outraged Republicans with his attacks on Bush administration and former Vice President Dick Cheney's secretive energy task force.

In his new subtly-titled book, "Whores: Why And How I Came To Fight The Establishment," Klayman details his career as a thorn in the side of the powerful.

Describing his decision to take on the case of Scott Tooley, a congressional aide convinced that he was on a terrorist watch list and that his phone was being wiretapped by the government, Klayman engages in the usual hyperbole:

"The Tooley case, which continues to this day, went directly to abuses of power--this time, by an administration that colored itself conservative but too often behaved as if the Constitution is an inconvenience to be sidestepped or even ignored.... Bush and Cheney did more to pave the way for Obama's push toward socialism than Marx, Lenin, Stalin and Mao Tse-tung could have ever dreamed or hoped for."

Klayman says that he met with Senator John McCain in 1997 to discuss allegations that the Clinton administration was illegally soliciting campaign contributions in exchange for seats on trade missions. Asked why the congressional hearings into the matter had ended in failure, McCain admitted that it was because both political parties had checkmated each other, telling Klayman: "Yes, my party is involved as well in the illegal fund raising. It's a disgrace."

Klayman reserves particular venom for former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, whom he targeted by filing complaints with the House Ethics Committee. When he ran into former GOP Congressman Bob Barr (R-Ga.) at a hearing and asked the conservative lawmaker what he thought about DeLay, Barr laughed: "He's a crook but he's our crook!"

Klayman proudly recalls the night the "vast right-wing conspiracy... was born." He and fellow conservatives -- including Paul Weyrich, Phyllis Schafly and the NRA's Wayne LaPierre -- met in a room near the Council for National Policy conference in Charleston, South Carolina in 1998. "We voted to remove the 42nd president of the United States by whatever legal and ethical means were necessary," he said.

But Klayman disparages Republicans who attacked Clinton for demonstrating a double standard when it came to the Bush administration. Calling the leaking of outed CIA agent Valerie Plame's name "indefensible," Klayman says of the GOP: "Their hypocritical silence was deafening. For both Democrats and Republicans, politics too often trumps national security and the best interests of the American people."

In an odd bit of convenient amnesia regarding his own role in stirring up Whitewater, Klayman knocks Republicans for pursuing Clinton scandals and ignoring the looming threat of Islamic terrorism. "Years later, it would become clear how damaging to the country this strategy was," he writes. "By leaving Bill Clinton in office, preoccupying him with a sex scandal and diverting attention away from the growing threat of bin Laden, Al Qaeda and terrorism in general, the Republican leadership laid the foundation for a serious cancer to grow -- one that ultimately metastasized into September 11, 2001."

Of course, Klayman's main criticism is that the House impeachment managers refused to widen the proceedings into Chinagate and other scandals and focused solely on Lewinsky: "While the House managers were patting themselves on the back for what they had done, or rather, for what their gutless Senate colleagues had not done, Osama bin Laden was hard at work and the nation was too preoccupied with a sex scandal to know who was really being screwed."

And Klayman reserves some of his harshest words for Fox News, expressing his increasing disappointment with the network, which "should really change its motto 'We report, you decide' to 'We brainwash, you decide.'"

He accuses Fox News and host Sean Hannity of not being straight with him by tricking his clients to coming on the air: "I came to perceive Hannity as a shallow and insincere Rush Limbaugh wannabe. In contrast, his television co-host, Alan Colmes, a Jewish liberal, was actually a mensch, even though I rarely agreed with him politically."

Klayman takes particular aim at the "strange and petty tactics" of the network's chairman Roger Ailes. When he asked Ailes about his decision to hire Chris Cuomo, the current "Good Morning America" co-host, to do commentary, the Fox News executive replied: "If I'm going to put on some goddamned liberal, I might as well get the dumbest fuck I can find!"

Klayman claims that Fox owner Rupert Murdoch "tried to kill the publication of this book" because of his criticism of the network.

This whole screed/article reminds me of why I don't watch Glen Beck. There may be an interesting point there somewhere, but wading through the theatrics and the hysterics to get there just is not worth it.

Gracie

10-15-2009, 04:19 PM

And WE HAVE A WINNER!... here madame, is your cigar!

Yes we do. Trish usually does come up a winner.

suedanim

10-15-2009, 04:51 PM

Here is what I find interesting about this thread.

1) Klugman's comments regarding specifically Ailes and Hannity are projected onto every other person at FOX. Apparently, singling out specific individuals for specific criticisms is all that it takes for those criticisms to be applied like a blanket on everyone else!

2) The OP, and especially the bolded sections, are every bit as damning to the Democrats/liberals as they are to the Republicans/conservatives - but that is completely ignored as if they aren't part of the mix at all!

3) Since Klugman's opinions are being hailed as so "honest," I guess we can now take as fact that President Obama does indeed have a socialist agenda for the country!

Very, very interesting development indeed!

You've made a fatal mistake in your argument.

The man you are referring to as "Klugman" ?.. his name is Klayman... Mr. Judicial Watch Klayman. Perhaps you thought he was liberal econonomist Paul Krugman?

The man in this article's name is Larry KLAYMAN. He is a conservative Republican.

Here...maybe this will help.

Larry Klayman is the founder and chief representative of the Klayman Law Firm, which is based out of Miami (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miami), Florida (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida) and Washington D.C. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_D.C.).
He is best known as the founder and former Chairman of Judicial Watch (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_Watch), a public interest and non-profit law firm, which attained notoriety through the initiation of 18 civil lawsuits against the Clinton Administration (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinton_Administration), and subsequently, an unsuccessful lawsuit against Vice-President Dick Cheney (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dick_Cheney) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_House)in order to obtain information about the (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_House) White House (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_House)'s energy task force (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_task_force).[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Klayman#cite_note-0)[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Klayman#cite_note-1)[3] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Klayman#cite_note-2)[4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Klayman#cite_note-3)[5] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Klayman#cite_note-4)

In September 2003, Klayman left the organization to run for the United States Senate (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate) from Florida. He lost in the Republican primary. In 2006 Klayman sued Judicial Watch and its president Tom Fitton (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Fitton) charging financial and other mismanagement issues which damaged Judicial Watch, the donors and Klayman.[6] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Klayman#cite_note-5)[7] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Klayman#cite_note-6) The lawsuit is ongoing.[8] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Klayman#cite_note-7)

[/URL]
[URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Klayman"]link (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Klayman#cite_note-7)
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Klayman#cite_note-7)

What he has done is become adversarial to Fox News, in general, Dick Cheney, the Bush admin, and claims... the BUSH ADMIN's socialism paved the way for what he claims is Obama's push to more socialism.

btw...every President and Congress has expanded socialism in the US, George Bush bigger and more rapidly than any other.

As a republican I expect him to be adversarial to Obama and his admin. But here he displays open contempt for those on the right most rightwingers hold in high esteem.

If you'll reread the article...carefully you'll see what the article ie Mr. Klayman actually says.

suedanim

10-15-2009, 04:53 PM

And WE HAVE A WINNER!... here madame, is your cigar!

:madlaugh: :drool:

Dick Tuck

10-15-2009, 06:08 PM

brien

10-15-2009, 06:22 PM

Dick Tuck

10-15-2009, 06:43 PM

Another FNC bash fest This is a weekly occurance around here lately. As if the other networks don't have a political agenda and lie as well. Oh, that's right they don't lie, they merely "mis-speak". ROTFLMA

I find a sense of irony that a Richard Mellon Scaife/Olin funded right wing attack dog has gone after Fox.

Trish

10-15-2009, 07:10 PM

You've made a fatal mistake in your argument.

The man you are referring to as "Klugman" ?.. his name is Klayman... Mr. Judicial Watch Klayman. Perhaps you thought he was liberal econonomist Paul Krugman?

The man in this article's name is Larry KLAYMAN. He is a conservative Republican.

Here...maybe this will help.

What he has done is become adversarial to Fox News, in general, Dick Cheney, the Bush admin, and claims... the BUSH ADMIN's socialism paved the way for what he claims is Obama's push to more socialism.

btw...every President and Congress has expanded socialism in the US, George Bush bigger and more rapidly than any other.

As a republican I expect him to be adversarial to Obama and his admin. But here he displays open contempt for those on the right most rightwingers hold in high esteem.

If you'll reread the article...carefully you'll see what the article ie Mr. Klayman actually says.

:shock: Oh no!!!! I made a typographical error!!! The horror! I typed Klugman instead of Klayman and that invalidates the points raised in my post! :madlaugh:

Jeez...if we're going to go down the road of using typos to determine which posts raise valid points, then there are going to be very few posters qualified to ever offer an opinion about anything. So, by all means - let's start grading the validity of posts based on typographical, spelling, and grammatical errors. Hell, I'm willing to offer myself up as a contender in that race! How about you, Sue? Are YOUR posts up to being grading on typographical, spelling, or grammatical correctness to determine content validity?

I read the article. My points stand as stated despite the typographical error.

You claimed KLAYMAN's opinion to be honest. KLAYMAN believes that Bush/Cheney laid the foundation for Obama's socialistic agenda. If KLAYMAN is so astute, so accurate, so on target in his opinions as to Fox, Bush/Cheney, then his take on Obama should also be viewed with as much confidence, yes? All that bolded text you were so diligent to provide certainly details KLAYMAN's opinions on Bush/Cheney/Fox. But it also includes his opinions on Dems/liberals and clearly shows that KLAYMAN has a long list of "whores" with whom he has issues.

But of course, your argument is really that KlAYMAN is only honest in his opinions regarding Republicans/conservatives and is biased in his opinions of Democrats/liberals, especially the #1 Democrat, Obama. So KLAYMAN's honesty is only selectively so!

brien

10-15-2009, 07:16 PM

I find a sense of irony that a Richard Mellon Scaife/Olin funded right wing attack dog has gone after Fox.

It may be, but it likely doesn't matter one bit to FNC, as their ratings keep increasing the more they are attacked by some people, the WH, or the other jealous cable networks that covet their ratings. It is an interesting study indeed.

Trish

10-15-2009, 07:16 PM

It's Klayman, not Klugman. Perhaps you ought to do some reading on Larry Klayman's attacks on Clinton (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_Watch), and learn that he's been financed by Richard Mellon Scaife.

Yes, so it is. I plead guilty to a typing error, something I'm sure you've never been guilty of, right?

KSTornado

10-15-2009, 08:16 PM

I'm still trying to find the CHANGE that Obama promised if Bush layed the course for socialism. Wouldn't the oposite be capitalism if he really wanted change if Bush paved the way for socialism?

Seriously, Bush had done FAR less socialist aspects in his 8 years than Obama has in his first 9 months. Bush did not try to socialize health care. He did do a stimulous package which many conservatives who are not in Washington disagreed with but that is about the only real socialist thing Bush ever did except for the Patriot Act.

Conservative KST - 10

hypocrits - -5

Dick Tuck

10-15-2009, 08:23 PM

It may be, but it likely doesn't matter one bit to FNC, as their ratings keep increasing the more they are attacked by some people, the WH, or the other jealous cable networks that covet their ratings. It is an interesting study indeed.

Of course they have good ratings. It's the only way the alienated fringe can hear the news they want to hear. Too bad it's invertly correlated to winning at the ballot box. As FOX becomes more shrill and full of crap, the happier their base viewers become, and the more they drive real conservatives and moderates away from the corporate populist right wing radicals.

Dick Tuck

10-15-2009, 08:24 PM

KSTornado

10-15-2009, 08:25 PM

Obama saved the capitalist system that Bush tried to destroy.

How so? By taking over the auto industry? By taking over the financial system even more? By trying to socialize health care? How can anything that Obama has done be considered capitalism?

brien

10-15-2009, 08:27 PM

Of course they have good ratings. It's the only way the alienated fringe can hear the news they want to hear. Too bad it's invertly correlated to winning at the ballot box. As FOX becomes more shrill and full of crap, the happier their base viewers become, and the more they drive real conservatives and moderates away from the corporate populist right wing radicals.

The fringe????? Millions of viewers are the fringe??? Absurd...It is documented that FNC has Dems, Repubs and Independents in it viewer ratings Sell that bullshit somewhere else DT, we are all stocked up here...ROTFLMAO

Grizz

10-15-2009, 08:30 PM

Bush did not try to socialize health care.

OK, I'll agree there. Medicare Part D was little more than granting billions to drug companies and insurance companies. You could hardly call that socialism. Then again, what Obama and the Dems are doing isn't socialism either because in order to do that, they'd have to nationalize health care, something that was never even proposed.

Uh... you really don't know what socialism is, do you?

Dick Tuck

10-15-2009, 08:34 PM

The fringe????? Millions of viewers are the fringe??? Absurd...It is documented that FNC has Dems, Repubs and Independents in it viewer ratings Sell that bullshit somewhere else DT, we are all stocked up here...ROTFLMAO

Yep. Millions of viewers are the fringe. We have over 330 million inhabitants in our country, yet FOX viewership is about 1% of that.

Jaaaman

10-15-2009, 08:35 PM

Yep. Millions of viewers are the fringe. We have over 330 million inhabitants in our country, yet FOX viewership is about 1% of that.

'Fringe'... LOL. You are so full of it Dick. :rolleyes:

KSTornado

10-15-2009, 08:38 PM

OK, I'll agree there. Medicare Part D was little more than granting billions to drug companies and insurance companies. You could hardly call that socialism. Then again, what Obama and the Dems are doing isn't socialism either because in order to do that, they'd have to nationalize health care, something that was never even proposed.

Uh... you really don't know what socialism is, do you?

Yes I do know what socialism is. Please explain to me how the current Health Reform introduced along with Nancy Pelosi's comments today about a Public Option and how it will effect business and the future of the private industry (basically turning our health care in to the Canadian system) does not constitute a social agenda?

brien

10-16-2009, 05:54 PM

Yep. Millions of viewers are the fringe. We have over 330 million inhabitants in our country, yet FOX viewership is about 1% of that.

You are ridiculous in your hate. Where you see political opposition, millions of others see a legitimate pov that is respectable as any other on the network media. Your marginalization of a viewership that contains millions of people from all sectors of the economy, and all walks of life, inluding all political persuasions, is laughable and a play right of the the old marginalize the legitmate opposition by calling them radicals book. As if a network news corp could be the political opposition for any party. Furthermore, you compare the viewership to the entire population of the US, as if all 330 million people watch TV on a regular basis. Would you compare the viewership of any other cable news network to the entire population of the US? Better not b/c you won't like what you see. You should be embarrassed by this statement to think that anyone of any intelligence would lend it credence. LOL.

FNC has the majority of TV viewers in all of cable TV. That is a statistic that is meaningful, not comparing them to the entire population of the US. Did you count the unborn too? What a ridiculous claim. LOL

Some people can't handle a legitimate opposing point of view from their own and this is why they hate FNC. They can't handle any legitimate criticizing of their own politics b/c they think they have all of the answers and everyone else with a different opinion is just wrong. No tolerance for any other pov, interesting.... They practice the very intolerance they pretend to uphold in their politics. Such fraudulence is only exceeded by its elitism.

These people exemplify the epitome of intolerance, self importance, and a narrowminded partisan attitude that can't even begin to consider that there are people that may have a better solution than their own political pov, or have a different opinion than them, or are different in the ideology of their politics, which indeeed may be a legitimate argument that may sometimes trump their own. People of this radical political persuasion are what's wrong with this country today, not the millions of Fox news viewership who by virtue of their consideration of a legitimate news source over cable TV, are smeared as the "fringe"..

And you have the temerity to call Fox viewership the "fringe". I yi yi, look again, and look more closely in your fairytale mirror, and you will see the real fringe.

Mirror, mirror, on the wall....LOL