Seems like a pretty straightforward report to me. Good for Fox! I’m glad they could take the time away from the pressing issues of Alec Baldwin’s angry phone call and Rosie leaving The View.

Left by JC Shakespeare on April 27th, 2007 at 10:41 am

1st - Hillary
2nd - Biden

Edwards and Obama would be busy asking France for advice while we were going up in flames.

They all support partial birth abortion, absolutely indefensible as far as I’m concerned.

Left by dianne on April 27th, 2007 at 10:50 am

Well, if we’re going to choose the next President of the United States based on their personal grooming habits it might be interesting to find out how much the other candidates pay to hire a barber to come to where ever they are to cut their hair. (Probably a barber you trust, and isn’t secretly in the opposing party willing to make you look like Alfalfa.)

Of course no other campaign is going to say how much they spend on barbers but we do know that George Bush paid $275 each time to do his make up to Glenda Facemire, head make-up artist for Austin City Limits.

In any case this is just the polite way of doing to John Edwards what Ann Coulter at least had the nerve to say out loud: accuse him of being a ‘faggot’.

No wonder we have the worst President in 70 years- we deserve it.

Left by Preston on April 27th, 2007 at 11:12 am

I see where CNN also reported on Edward’s expensive wigsnaps.

And so did MSNBC.

And CBS News.

And Yahoo News.

I guess they were all insinuating that Edwards is a Silk Pony too. Or is that just FAUXX News, while the others are merely reporting the facts?

Left by Robbie on April 27th, 2007 at 11:26 am

I did detect some bias in the Fox report. The report describes Edwards father as ‘a textile worker’.

Edwards himself often talks about his Dad ‘working at the mill’.

What Edwards and the left wing Fox reporter don’t tell you is that Edwards Dad was manager of the mill. He was the highest paid person in the town, and the boss of everyone in his sight.

Edwards has been a little prince all his worthless life.

Left by Jim Howard on April 27th, 2007 at 11:28 am

Is it true that everyone of them copped to owning a handgun?

Left by kma on April 27th, 2007 at 12:17 pm

Preston - I know Edwards is your man, but he isn’t going to get the nomination, so who do you think demonstrated the kind of leadership your party is looking for?

KMA - Not true at all. As I recall, only 3 had owned guns, and nothing was said about handguns.

Left by dianne on April 27th, 2007 at 12:20 pm

Dianne-

I’m open to any of the major candidates. I would like to be swayed by Richardson- he certainly has the best resume of the candidates- but I don’t know enough about his style and substance to say now. I also lean away from Clinton- I think she has a stance on the issues to the right of the others yet is perceived by many voters to be to the far left- the worst of both worlds.

But honestly, I’m in no rush to make up my mind. I guess it would be advantageous to the candidate I eventually choose if I’d send some cash their way but he will have to wait.

Left by Preston on April 27th, 2007 at 1:36 pm

I see where CNN also reported on Edward’s expensive wigsnaps.

Robbie- You seem to be under the impression that liberals believe that CNN and its ilk do a good job of reporting the news.

The ‘liberal’ media emasculated Gore for wearing beige and Kerry for windsurfing. There’s nothing new here.

(Of course, if Gore was attacked for being ‘uncomfortable’ and being ‘prepackaged’. Kerry would have been attacked as a phony if he was doing a ‘down-home’ hobby; he was attacked as elitist for doing the hobbies he liked. We have a Maureen Dowd-ified press corps that is only concerned with the horserace and the trivialities of perception: which they proceed to invent.

They are all fake issues meant to entertain television viewers while the real issues of the conditions of our lives are ignored. To hell with all of them.)

Left by Preston on April 27th, 2007 at 1:50 pm

I hate to say this…….But I agree with Preston. “To hell with all of them”!

This may never happen again!!

Left by Ski on April 27th, 2007 at 5:51 pm

It almost seems comical that you would need to point to a single instance where FOX news actually reported news with some sembelance of professional journalism. Very few sources of unbiased news exist and the notion that there is a “liberal media” is a myth propgated by conservative strategists who have admitted as such. They referred to it in the early days as “baiting the refs.” The fact remains that mainstream media in this country is first and foremost corporate media and in the end their allegiences lie with a conservative agenda. FOX news is just less unabashed about promoting their ideology. That is fine with me, they are a business and play to a distinctive market. What I as “one of those liberals” resent is when FOX commentary is repeated by their followers as indisputable fact. Liberal or conservative we should always be careful to distinguish between commentary and solid journalism.

Left by Chris on April 28th, 2007 at 12:29 pm

Liberal or conservative we should always be careful to distinguish between commentary and solid journalism.

Chris — I agree wholeheartedly with that statement.

And I also believe that most of what passes for “news” today — Hardball, Countdown, The Factor, Hannity and Colmes, Glenn Beck, etc. — is more info-tainment in the form of Op-eds than it is actual news reporting.

Do you really believe that Ted Turner is a conservative?

Left by Robbie on April 28th, 2007 at 6:21 pm

Robbie-

1st- It’s not like wall-to-wall op-eds and ‘infotainment’ lack the power to persuade.
2nd- CNN is owned by Time Warner.
3rd- Publicly owned corporations have an economic incentive to produce news that appeals to a wealthy demographic (to say nothing of the economic incentive of complex multinationals to favor their other corporate interests)

Left by Preston on April 28th, 2007 at 11:02 pm

Clearly, Hannity, Chris Matthews, Lou Dobbs etc. wear their politics on their sleeves. Of course they have the power to persuade…so what? They’re entertainment programs, same as the View, same as Oprah who also have the power to persuade.

Left by dianne on April 29th, 2007 at 8:39 am

Of course they have the power to persuade…so what?

The ’so what’ is that each of these men (with the exception of Dobbs, I believe) rely on the broadcast of their programs through publicly owned radio and tv bandwidths. These bandwidths were entrusted to broadcasters to act in the ‘public benefit’ of the American people- not the Republican benefit or the Conservative benefit or the Jackass benefit to which they are apparently committed instead.

I’m perfectedly willing to agree that broadcasters of Oprah and children’s cartoons that are merely vehicles for selling cereal are also acting with disregard to the public benefit but Hannity, O’reilly, Limbaugh, Savage, and the others who daily vilify 50% of our population are the most eggregious offenders.

Left by Preston on April 29th, 2007 at 2:23 pm

Oh for Pete’s sake. Air America failed and all the liberals can do is bash conservative stations. Everybody has access to the public airwaves. Get something decent on the air and maybe there’ll be an audience.

Left by dianne on April 29th, 2007 at 4:56 pm

Dianne-

The airwaves aren’t for the benefit for the Americans who advertisers are most eager to cater to- the airwaves are for all Americans.

By your principle we should just auction off the Presidency next year.

Left by Preston on April 29th, 2007 at 6:56 pm

So Edwards spent $400 on a haircut. I thought conservatives were all for capitalism. Shouldn’t he be allowed to spend money on whatever he wants?

Oh, I forgot. Rich people aren’t allowd to care about anybody. God forbid.

And yeah, what an asshole he is to give jobs to people who need them. That fascist fuck.

Left by John Jarzemsky on April 30th, 2007 at 4:54 am

the airwaves are for all Americans

Yep. And the only thing prohibiting liberals from acquring equal time on talk radio is an audience.

And when Liberals have tried their hand at it (Air America) there hasn’t been an audience. Why should advertisers be forced or expected to pay for time on the air where nobody is listening?

George Will has a good article on the “Fairness Doctrine” (which is anything but):

By trying to again empower the government to regulate broadcasting, illiberals reveal their lack of confidence in their ability to compete in the marketplace of ideas, and their disdain for consumer sovereignty—and hence for the public.

Yep.

In 1973, Supreme Court justice and liberal icon William Douglas said: “The Fairness Doctrine has no place in our First Amendment regime. It puts the head of the camel inside the tent and enables administration after administration to toy with TV and radio.” The Reagan administration scrapped the doctrine because of its chilling effect on controversial speech, and because the scarcity rationale was becoming absurd.

Yep.

Left by Robbie on April 30th, 2007 at 9:44 am

There are 3 radio stations in my location with conservative programming. There are also 3 npr stations in my area with extremely liberal programming. So, I never understand the whining by the left.

Left by kma on April 30th, 2007 at 11:29 am

Lord. Sure, NPR and conservative talk radio are just flipsides of the same coin… Except I don’t remember when Limbaugh invited liberals to speak as each NPR news program does as a matter of course.

Robbie- It’s not a matter of ‘not being confident’ in liberal ideas. Liberal ideas are supported by the poor and middle class. The poor and middle class have less say about television programming- it’s not complicated.

Left by Preston on April 30th, 2007 at 6:23 pm

Robbie-
You also don’t address my other points… Do children simply prefer watching programs with cereal tie-ins or is the idea pushed by advertisers? If a market-based media does not efficiently serve the needs of children why should I believe that it is adequately serving voters?

To be clear, I don’t believe that the solution is to get rid of children’s cartoons or even Rush Limbaugh but the structural bias should be recognized.

Left by Preston on April 30th, 2007 at 6:53 pm