Right Wing TV - FOX Fair and Balanced????? Bwa ha ha

[dapper]

I have to admit it, yesterday when I got home from work, I tuned into Fox. From time to time I do this just to keep myself on my toes, see how other people are thinking.

One show was showing the results of "idiot liberal awards". Every show was harping on Rosie O'Donnell. Let me first say that I dislike Rosie O'. I've never liked her brand of humor or her exagerrated NY accent. (I'm from New Yawk, ya know what i mean?) In the 80's, almost every guy who was not a nerd or dead head was a "Guido" but Rosie never got out of the 80's. HOWEVER... Rosie did say Building 7. Hannity went off on her stating that the families of people who died in BUILDING 7.... wait a second, did anyone die in building 7? Building 7 is the building that came down at like 4 or 5pm. and there is no conspiracy as far as I know as, didn't the owner of the building report that it was taken down because it was unsafe? Why is there such an uproar? Even O'LieLee was harping on Rosie!

On Hannity & Combes they were bashing Gore, atleast Hannity was. Towards the end Hannity couldn't get enough of saying how he was an "Exaggerator"

I thought it was amazing how all these "Fair and Balanced" shows were just bashing the Liberals/Democrats... how is that "Fair and Balanced". And I forgot what O'Reily says at the end of his show but when he said it, I had to laugh. I probably laughed so hard that I forgot what he actually said.

I know the last time I watched Fox, it didn't harp on Liberals/Democrats as much as they did last night. I wonder if this is going to be their trend. I mean, it really wasn't NEWS they were reporting but spinning all the old stories of the past few weeks. There was maybe a 2 minute mention of AG Gonzalez but that was about it.

Getting back to MSNBC. I was kind of taken aback that Scarborough and Matthews had also jumped on the Rosie band wagon, bashing her for basically saying that Tower 7 was brought down by explosives. I mean, maybe I'm wrong but from what I understand, it was demo'ed because the structure had become unsafe?! Right? Wrong?

Dapper

[ClusterFreak]

1. Yes...Building 7 was "pulled".

"Pulled" being the term used by demolitionists when a building is imploded by dynamite charges. Real Estate developer Larry Silverstein (who owned or managed Building 7...something like that...you'd have to look it up) admitted in a video taped interview that that is what was done...and yes you're right, for safety reasons. I do wish Rosie would check her facts before popping off...although I am inclined to applaud her willingness to call out the right wing and the corporate media on any number of issues.

[dapper]

3. and I was starting to wonder if I was going nuts....

Retorical question but why then all the uproad about Rosies comments?!

The building was pulled.

Due to the fact that, obviously the press does not know this, it did house some very important Government departments and there was no real investigation into any of this.... of course people would be skeptical or have questions or come to their own conclusions.

and I appologize for not spell checking my original post... in case I made any errors. :-)

Dapper

[keopeli]

2. You are correct about Bldg 7. Rosie implied a larger deception

Actually, a larger deception is implicit in the facts of the collapses, from what we know about it.

Don't be surprised by Scarborough and Matthews. I've become convinced that these two are windbags who never do an ounce of research. If they did, they would have to retract a number of the slams against Rosie.

Rosie's main point was that the fires in the WTC towers were not hot enough to melt steel. This is a proven fact. Fires in the open air can become as hot as 800C, but steel doesn't melt until about 1500C. When you consider the facts, it's impossible to believe the official account of 9/11.

As much as you dislike Rosie, she tells the truth and she has morals. The reason MSNBC went for her as well is because she called out the corporate ownership of all media in the US. She threw down the gauntlet with that one.

Thanks for watching Faux for me. I haven't the stomach for it.

Peace

[dapper]

4. Rosie

I mean, despite that I don't really like her, I felt inclined to defend her on this one.

Dapper

[sallyseven]

5. Matthews and Scarborough are both republican

women haters. Look how matthews goes after Hillary. makes me sick. Scarborough is just a jerk.

[keopeli]

6. Matthews and Scarborough are both unenlightened and self-agrandising.

I don't watch either program deliberately except illuminating clips like this one.

Matthews sat on the Santa Monica Pier and shamelessly praised the Mission Accomplished Stage-Op while denigrating detractors without examining the obvious scenario unfolding around him. He's so consumed with his own life that he fails to report on what else is going on in the world.

Scarborough is a Republican Conservative hard core. I don't blame conservatives for their beliefs, but I expect them to be reasoned and defensible. (Hating women, or anyone, would be well outside that line.) He has no problem with giving an uninformed opinion. His lack of research and hyperbole gives away his dependence on outside sources for his charisma, rather than pursuing his own reasoning. By doing this, he takes on qualities of Nancy Grace to hype his rhetoric without researching his own analysis. Hence, he is hit and miss - and when he misses, it's a doozy!

I will give Scarborough qualified kudos to recognizing some of the failures of the 94 Republic Revolution. Having experienced it himself, he seems to be capable of rational thought. Why he doesn't display that reason in his TV show is a mystery.

Peace

[dapper]

7. Scarb...

I have to admit, generally I think he is fair on the issues, more fair and balanced than Fox. My wife hates Chris Matthews as she feels he interupts everyone when they are talking.

Did I mention Tucker? ugh!

I appreciate an opposing view but I was pretty amazed at my day of watching the right wing propoganda.


Dapper

[Vulture]

8. Ouch

"Rosie's main point was that the fires in the WTC towers were not hot enough to melt steel. This is a proven fact. Fires in the open air can become as hot as 800C, but steel doesn't melt until about 1500C. When you consider the facts, it's impossible to believe the official account of 9/11."


Not to put too fine a point on this, but as anyone with a materials science background can tell you this assertion is grossly misleading. Please, please do not pursue this line of reasoning, as it is really embarrassing and damages the credibility of the left. A very rudimentary background in materials science (most engineers are required to take this much when I was in) would give one enough knowledge to know that this is a bullshit argument. Assuming the steel load bearing members were not substantially shielded (and by all accounts they were not), serious structural problem should have been expected under the circumstances.

[keopeli]

10. Well, I appreciate your criticism and, as a layman, will yield until I study some more.

I've read a fair amount about this effect on both sides and can admit feeling emboldened by the prospects of the idea. The question is why these issues have never been adequately addressed. I'll look for some more detailed evidence.

Still, the number of bizarre omissions and unexplained phenomena coupled with the Bush administrations proclivity for tailoring the public message to fit their desires makes skepticism more relevant. I'm glad Rosie is talking. I hope she follows through and brings experts on the View to discuss the physics.

Peace

[Ninja Jordan]

9. Notice how the media tries to destroy any public figure who uncovers 911 truth.