Bill O’Reilly’s lame excuses for FOX Noise covering Iraq less than MSNBC and CNN

[jetdawgg]

http://static.crooksandliars.com/2007/06/tof_iraqcoverage4.jpghttp://static.crooksandliars.com/2007/06/tof-iraqcoverage2.jpg
A new study came out by Project for Excellence in Journalism—which showed that FOX News covered (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070611/ap_en_ot/ap_on_tv_fox_s_war_3) the Iraq war far less than either CNN or MSNBC during the first quarter of ‘07. Wow, I was shocked, I tell you, but Bill O’Reilly (http://www.foxnews.com/oreilly/)had a very reasonable excuse: The author hates FOX News. Damn lefty…That’s all his audience needs to know. Ahhh..the old attack the messenger trick. What a cunning fellow Mr Factor can be at times. It doesn’t matter about the facts presented in the study after all–why bother refuting those pesky details? O’Reilly thinks that covering bombings is just a drag anyway. Why would he feel the need to show the horrors of war? It’s just war…And FOX has better rating so-ha! I say, ha!

http://static.crooksandliars.com/mediaimages/video_wmv_icon.gif Download (http://www.crooksandliars.com/Media/Download/18330/1/TOF-Fox-nocover-Iraq.wmv) (297) | Play (http://javascript<b></b>:playerPopUp('http://www.crooksandliars.com/Media/Play/18330/1/TOF-Fox-nocover-Iraq.wmv/','340','300')) (286) Download (http://www.crooksandliars.com/Media/Download/18330/2/TOF-Fox-nocover-Iraq.mov) (189) | Play (http://javascript<b></b>:playerPopUp('http://www.crooksandliars.com/Media/Play/18330/2/TOF-Fox-nocover-Iraq.mov/','340','300')) (176)
Fox spent half as much time covering the Iraq war than MSNBC during the first three months of the year, and considerably less than CNN, according to the Project for Excellence in Journalism.
The difference was more stark during daytime news hours than in prime-time opinion shows. The Iraq war occupied 20 percent of CNN’s daytime news hole and 18 percent of MSNBC’s. On Fox, the war was talked about only 6 percent of the time…read on (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070611/ap_en_ot/ap_on_tv_fox_s_war_3)

Here’s the report…. (http://www.journalism.org/node/5719)

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/06/13/bill-oreillys-lame-excuses-for-fox-news-covering-iraq-less-than-msnbc-and-cnn/

[erased]

Hm... this could be part of why, according to studies, Fox News viewers are less educated and more opinionated (although wrong more often) about current events than viewers of CNN, MSNBC, and The Daily Show.

[jetdawgg]

Hm... this could be part of why, according to studies, Fox News viewers are less educated and more opinionated (although wrong more often) about current events than viewers of CNN, MSNBC, and The Daily Show.

I call them "Sheeple". FOX Noise Channel viewers get a lot of name calling talking points but little else.

[yellowwing]

The Daily Show, Jon Stewart Rocks! :banana: He's got more meat to say than Wolf Blitzer.

[jetdawgg]

The Daily Show, Jon Stewart Rocks! :banana: He's got more meat to say than Wolf Blitzer.

Michael, Wolf Blitzer is a half step ahead, ok a full step ahead of Bill O.

[yellowwing]

I don't like Wolf's Situation Room covering developing stories as they are happening on prime time. Most of the crap he presents as drama turns out to be nothing.

'Mysterious white powder found in the Capitol! Is it anthrax?" No, it was only drywall dust some schmuck didn't sweep up after remodeling. :thumbdown

[jetdawgg]

I don't like Wolf's Situation Room covering developing stories as they are happening on prime time. Most of the crap he presents as drama turns out to be nothing.

'Mysterious white powder found in the Capitol! Is it anthrax?" No, it was only drywall dust some schmuck didn't sweep up after remodeling. :thumbdown

Just another sensationalist. Lou Dobbs is starting to hit harder. I think he sees the writing on the wall.

CNN is not liberal. Ron Paul had a difficult time getting to speak even though he has won both debates and handed Rudy G his shorts in the first one.:D

[FistFu68]

:evilgrin: WHY IS AL SHARPTON,A SPECIAL GUEST;ON FOX NEW'S EVERY WEEK?:evilgrin:

[yellowwing]

LOL, do you think those types can refuse any microphone in front of their mug? Look how long it took for Cindy Shehan to wake up and smell the bullcrap! :D

[jetdawgg]

:evilgrin: WHY IS AL SHARPTON,A SPECIAL GUEST;ON FOX NEW'S EVERY WEEK?:evilgrin:

FOX Noise like to present a "Fair and Balanced' view of the news.....:D

[yellowwing]

Psycho Sharpton on one side and Adam's-Apple Ann on the other, yeah I guess that is fair and balanced! My mistake. :D

[greensideout]

Think about it jetdawgg, if a person can read and think they will not need the talking heads on Fox, CNN or any other lull ya to sleep TV news.

[jetdawgg]

http://bp1.blogger.com/_9qHzlJ2hzJ8/RmyjYQDmZjI/AAAAAAAAA3M/Vn5dvxIy2-s/s400/Breaksomeeggs.jpg
Bill O's message to the war torn folks of Iraq. Imagine it is not important when a bomb goes off in Iraq. It just involves a Marine or Soldier, or an Iraqi civilian.

Only Marine families are hurt when their sons and daughters are injured or worse. It's not important to him:mad:

[003XXMarineDAD]

Well at least fox can not be accused of this.
http://i171.photobucket.com/albums/u295/dparris/2fef4175.jpg

[erased]

They most-certainly can. What is more costly for the US: Losing thousands of lives and billions of (borrowed from china) dollars in a pointless occupation of a sand pit, or speaking out against such a thing? The true defeat of the US will come when the countries we're alienating with our policies decide they've had enough.

[003XXMarineDAD]

I have talked to my son that has been over there and is heading back in a few months. He still thinks it is worth doing and winning.
I just wish the Dems felt that way about the winning part.
But they have done this.

http://i171.photobucket.com/albums/u295/dparris/DSC00092.jpg


The grand party of surrender.

http://i171.photobucket.com/albums/u295/dparris/reid-pelosi-surrender.jpg

[erased]

Wow, shouldn't that unwashed hippy freak get a damn job?!

Support our troops: http://www.ivaw.org/

[003XXMarineDAD]

Sorry to upset you and jet but I will and always be proud to stand out there with signs that tell the truth.
Even if it upsets the likes of you.
By the way I do respect you for your service , just not your veiw point.

[HOLM]

Jet... bill O has been anti war for a long tiome now.. What Gives...


He just won't boldly say it because he claims to be fair and balanced... Please..


If it was not for his work on the Jessica's law stuff I would happily join your bashing...

[HOLM]

They most-certainly can. What is more costly for the US: Losing thousands of lives and billions of (borrowed from china) dollars in a pointless occupation of a sand pit, or speaking out against such a thing? The true defeat of the US will come when the countries we're alienating with our policies decide they've had enough.

Do you want another history Lesson?


I can pull left winger quotes from 1944 that sound exactly like the statement you just made... I can even throw the "china" stuff in the mix if you would like..

First I'll throw this softball

remember the Patton speaches.. My grandfather heard a couple of them in person.. They all started like this...


"Men, this stuff that some sources sling around about America wanting out of this war, not wanting to fight, is a crock of bull****. Americans love to fight, traditionally. All real Americans love the sting and clash of battle



Now seriously... Do ya need someone to tell you just who the fuk it was that was opposing the war with the damned NAZI's ?

[erased]

I respect your right to disagree, the problem is that the sign being held in the picture is not really the truth. If I remember correctly, it was a republican that pulled us out of vietnam. (If I'm wrong there, I'm sorry) Many people are drawing tons of parallels between Vietnam and Iraq. The main problem I have with the statement in the sign is this: Leaving Iraq would be far from a surrender, it would be more of a "rethinking" of the War on Terror. The WoT can not be won any more than the War on Drugs. The latter of which created a huge black market for drugs and put drug lords into power. Also, the sign makes broad statements about a large popluation of US citizens which I personally don't like. It'd be similar to me standing around with a sign that says, "Republicans are all stupid". If I'm wrong about one person in that statement, I'm wrong period.

[003XXMarineDAD]

yes it was a Republican President , but a Democrat control congress that cut the funding that caused that.
History will repeat again and we learned nothing from it.
It solved nothing but allowed the killling feild of the camorue rouge in Cambodia.
It also left a stigma on our military that they had lost the war. But it never was the military that lost it but the politicans just like now that are afraid to win.

[erased]

The negative stigma is unfortunate, but I'd rather have a bad stigma than lose 3500 more brothers and sisters. Especially when the end result will be the same whether we pull out now or in 20 years.

[003XXMarineDAD]

We should have pulled out after Rommel whup us at the kasierne pass and come home.
Then have quit after Wake Island and come home to.
Wars a not a clean thing but once you are in it you had better be willing to win. Or your losses after that will be.

[HOLM]

yes it was a Republican President , but a Democrat control congress that cut the funding that caused that.
History will repeat again and we learned nothing from it.
It solved nothing but allowed the killling feild of the camorue rouge in Cambodia.
It also left a stigma on our military that they had lost the war. But it never was the military that lost it but the politicans just like now that are afraid to win.


The "anti war " nominee got his but kicked in that election with the Republican that ended that war...

[HOLM]

The negative stigma is unfortunate, but I'd rather have a bad stigma than lose 3500 more brothers and sisters. Especially when the end result will be the same whether we pull out now or in 20 years.

Do you have a crystal ball?


Ya know the future...


Like he just mentioned about rommel... Do we need to go over revolutionary or Civil War history just to name a few more...?

[erased]

@Dad: There are staggering differences between the World Wars and Iraq. If you can tell me why we went into Iraq in the first place (I'll even accept the Gulf War), you get bonus points.

@holm: You can draw all the links to democrats from all time periods you like, the point is, they're irrelevent. What about the moderate republicans and centrists who want us out?

Also, how is our fighting in Iraq making America safer? A great percentage of our military is, in one way or another, tied up in Iraq, but I'm pretty sure there are people who dislike America all over the world. What can we accomplish by sitting in Iraq and waiting for them to come to us?

[003XXMarineDAD]

I know what you are wanting but NO BLOOD FOR OIL is one I not give you.
When this first started in 2003 I was standing on a corner under a gas sign that had $1.57 on it. So I would have thought if that was the case I would be now paying $1.45 .
So if we did it for oil how come DAMN IT I pay $3.25 now.
:devious:

[erased]

Honestly, that's not my angle here.

Seriously though, the gas prices... holy crap. I drive a Trans Am, dammit.

However, it could very well be for the oil as well. The Iraqi government (with our influence, no doubt) agreed to 30 year leases (to foreign oil companies) on the country's oil at great bargains. We won't see price decreases, but the oil companies will continue to see record profits off our backs.

[OLE SARG]

I would just like to know what countries we are alienating!!!! Are you talking about the vacationing ****heads in the u n???????? Do you like paying for these idiot's vacations and parking tickets?????? There is just too much of this PC **** - get real!!!!!!!

SEMPER FI,

[HOLM]

@Dad: There are staggering differences between the World Wars and Iraq. If you can tell me why we went into Iraq in the first place (I'll even accept the Gulf War), you get bonus points.

@holm: You can draw all the links to democrats from all time periods you like, the point is, they're irrelevent. What about the moderate republicans and centrists who want us out?



Ok I have to field both of these because it is simply in my nature and the two are damn near the same question...

First you are in a world war... Radical Muslims have highjacked a religion and are now on a world wide jihad...

Iraq is simply just one of the battles... Forget the Gulf War... We should have ended this deal then.. ya want to know why we are in Iraq.. Ask Clinton He will tell ya...


How many damn times do I have to go over this?

http://www.fas.org/news/iraq/1998/11/01/981101-in.htm



SUMMARY:

(REVISED AS OF 10/05/98 -- Passed House, amended)
Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 - Declares that it should be the policy of the United States to seek to remove the Saddam Hussein regime from power in Iraq and to replace it with a democratic government.






Statement by thePpresident
Today I am signing into law H.R. 4655, the "Iraq Liberation Act of
1998." This Act makes clear that it is the sense of the Congress that
the United States should support those elements of the Iraqi opposition
that advocate a very different future for Iraq than the bitter reality
of internal repression and external aggression that the current regime
in Baghdad now offers.
Let me be clear on what the U.S. objectives are:
The United States wants Iraq to rejoin the family of nations as a
freedom-loving and law-abiding member. This is in our interest and that
of our allies within the region.
The United States favors an Iraq that offers its people freedom
at home. I categorically reject arguments that this is unattainable
due to Iraq's history or its ethnic or sectarian make-up. Iraqis
deserve and desire freedom like everyone else.
The United States looks forward to a democratically supported
regime that would permit us to enter into a dialogue leading to the
reintegration of Iraq into normal international life.





</pre>

[greensideout]

Radical Muslims have highjacked a religion and are now on a world wide jihad...





</pre>



Naw, what is going on now IS THE RELIGION of Islam. Read their book.

[003XXMarineDAD]

Naw, what is going on now IS THE RELIGION of Islam. Read their book.<!-- / message -->

We all had better pray we win this war or we had all better learn how to pray to the east five times day, and our women had better like walking behind the men wearing a burka.
For myself I have a hard time knelling down , five times a day would destroy my knees.
:D

[erased]

Ok, then why did Clinton and his Congress decide we had to go into Iraq? You're reposting information that doesn't answer the question. If it does, I'm sorry, it's 3am.

Heh, read their book? You ever read the OT? The koran (sp?) and bible are based on the same book. Frankly, I'm more afraid of the lunatics that are hijacking christianity ( http://www.godhatesamerica.com ) than I am of some sheep herder in Iraq.

[HOLM]

Ok, then why did Clinton and his Congress decide we had to go into Iraq? You're reposting information that doesn't answer the question. If it does, I'm sorry, it's 3am.

Heh, read their book? You ever read the OT? The koran (sp?) and bible are based on the same book. Frankly, I'm more afraid of the lunatics that are hijacking christianity ( http://www.godhatesamerica.com ) than I am of some sheep herder in Iraq.

HAHAHAHHA... CLinton Policy made the war inevitable.. That bill was not written in some dark secret room...

It was public.. and very much so.. I will try and see if I can find the Kuwaiti press stories from 1998 about that bill.. It shaped our policy in the area... Saddam knew what was coming.. Right after that bill Saddam threw all the weapons inspectors out.. Every seems to forget why Saddam did that.. Well I just showed you why... Clinton basiscally declared war on his ass...



Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 - Declares that it should be the policy of the United States to seek to remove the Saddam Hussein regime from power in Iraq and to replace it with a democratic government


What exactly do you think.... "replace with democratic government" means huh?


Then in the winter off 1998 Clinton launched this huge bombimg effort... the trouble was that there were supposed to be ground forces on the ground and ready to help... The trouble was that Saddam had already rounded these boys up and killed them or locked them in prisons.. ya remember this story don't you..




Iraqi president frees all prisoners, except 'spies'

<!-- date --> <script language="JavaScript" type="text/javascript"> <!-- host = new String(location.hostname); host = host.toLowerCase(); if ( host.indexOf("europe.cnn.com") != -1 ) { document.write('<span class="cnnStoryTime">Sunday, October 20, 2002 Posted: 2253 GMT
<\/span>'); } else if ( host.indexOf("asia.cnn.com") != -1 ) { document.write('<span class="cnnStoryTime">Monday, October 21, 2002 Posted: 6:53 AM HKT (2253 GMT)
<\/span>'); } else { document.write('<span class="cnnStoryTime">Sunday, October 20, 2002 Posted: 6:53 PM EDT (2253 GMT)
<\/span>'); } //--> </script>Sunday, October 20, 2002 Posted: 6:53 PM EDT (2253 GMT)
<!-- /date -->
<!--startclickprintexclude--> <table align="right" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" height="71" width="1"><tbody><tr><td align="right">
</td></tr><tr><td>
</td></tr><tr><td align="right"> <table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="230"> <tbody><tr> <td>http://i.cnn.net/cnn/images/1.gif </td><td><table bgcolor="#336699" border="0" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0" width="220"> <tbody><tr> <td><table bgcolor="#ffffff" border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="216"> <tbody><tr> <td><table bgcolor="#e7e7e7" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="204"> <tbody><tr bgcolor="#336699"> <td>

</td></tr> <tr> <td>
</td></tr> </tbody></table> </td></tr> </tbody></table> </td></tr> </tbody></table> </td></tr> <tr> <td colspan="2" height="10">http://i.cnn.net/cnn/images/1.gif </td></tr> </tbody></table> </td></tr></tbody></table> <!--endclickprintexclude--> BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- Iraqi President Saddam Hussein ordered Sunday that all prisoners be released, including non-Iraqi Arabs, with the exception of those accused of spying for the United States or Israel.





Now you tell me just who these "spies" were...


I 'll give you one guess... and you can bet your ass that those "spies" also knew a great deal about the IRAQ LIBERATION ACT OF 1998...





LOL... I have had a couple run in's with the phelp's boys.. There are the same as AQ in my book.. They if they gave me a reason to where I could legally shoot them I would be all over it...



Yes.. erased.... Jerry Falwell was more Dangerous than Saddam...





http://i5.tinypic.com/6h2l24j.jpg

[Sgt Leprechaun]

OK.....

First, the 'radical' christians are far less worriesome than the vast majority of Islamiscists, who have no problem condoning the mass terrorism of their fellows. I don't see Billy Graham lining up to support Westboro baptist or David Koresh. Christian loonies tend to just take out their own little kults with them 'when they go', as opposed to Islamoloonies, who would like to take out entire countries, starting with the United States.

As far as 'why' we went to war in the first place, the first reason was WMD's. We've been over this. Was the Intel flawed? Sure. But we have 20/20 hindsight in that now. Even Saddams GENERAL's, and those in the Fedayeen, believed he had WMD. The intel chatter (not the crap from Niger/Plame etc etc) proved all of that (i.e., internal chatter between the Iraqi's themselves, who kept wondering when Saddam was going to cut the WMD's and Chem/Bio weapons loose...) just confirmed it.

If this really was a 'war for oil', I'm sure not seeing it at my gas pumps.

IF Bush I had finished the job, instead of cheesing it, we wouldnt' be here now. Perhaps it would have went south in a hurry, perhaps not. We'll never know, again a case of hindsight, but also a case of a President who was too worried about 'public opinion' (remember the crying about the 'highway of death' etc etc?) than finishing the job.

You want to protest the war, after having served? Fine. I disagree with your protest, and I also think you do no great service to your 'comrades in arms' who are still there, and are going there eventually. Matter of fact, I think your protest borders on sedition, but that is just my opinion. I believe that it can be done respectfully and while getting your point across. Stage managed horsedroppings like I've seen from some of the 'groups' are just done to garner attention. And, lastly, who is funding you? Do you know where your money is coming from for these protests? Is it all 'grass roots'? I bet not.

[jetdawgg]

Radical Christians, blowing up abortion clinics near you:usmc:

[Sgt Leprechaun]

And how many have been blown up lately? Say, within the past, oh, five years or so?

BTW, I'm 'pro choice', so I'm not a fan of anyone blowing up clinics.

HOW many casualties have occurred from all clinic bombings in the last 30 years??????

I'd venture to say more Americans have died from bee-stings or mountain lion attacks than clinic bombings.

[jetdawgg]

Radicals are radicals. Anyone hurt by a radical is too much.

http://reddit.com/info/qlwq/comments

Terrorists who are not in the news (Christians)

[Sgt Leprechaun]

So, using that logic, ALF, ELF, and whatnot also fall into the agenda, as does militant Islam?

I'll buy off on it if you are going that route.

Still, I don't see mass amounts of Christians demonstrating and burning down buildings whenever someone 'defames' (that would be, I guess, Blasphemy) God, Jesus, or the Holy Spirit.

Like this fine fellow:

http://www.actioninengland.gb.com/muslim_atrocities/Behead.jpg

[jetdawgg]

Still, I don't see mass amounts of Christians demonstrating and burning down buildings whenever someone 'defames' (that would be, I guess, Blasphemy) God, Jesus, or the Holy Spirit.

The right wing controlled media does not allow it to be seen

http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u17/jetdawgg/Sheeple20Watch20Fox20News.jpg

[OLE SARG]

Right wing media -------------- WHERE??????????????????????????

You must be living in fairyland!!!!

SEMPER FI,

[Sgt Leprechaun]

The right wing controlled media does not allow it to be seen

http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u17/jetdawgg/Sheeple20Watch20Fox20News.jpg



HAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHA!

I have no doubt that one was a joke...:scared: :thumbup:

[jetdawgg]

http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u17/jetdawgg/Pied_Piper_Leading_Sheeple.jpg

Right Wing media and those that view it.....Like the Pied Piper......

[Sgt Leprechaun]

OOOMMMMMMM.....OhhhMMMMMMMM.....OOOHMMMMMM......

"Tell me what to think, o great god of Mainstream media....and in humble supplication to Katie Couric and her minions, I present this:

http://www.therefrigerator.net/food/images/tapioca.gif

Which is what my brain now is after repeated viewing....

I thank you, and await your worshipful command, Oh Great and Mighty one!"

[erased]

Ok, here we go:

@Holm: So, saddam tossed the weapons inspectors after we declared war on him, but then we used that as an excuse to whoop his ass... sounds fair.

"They if they gave me a reason to where I could legally shoot them I would be all over it..." Agreed 100%.

As for who is more dangerous: People underestimate the power of knowledge. That being said, I think both men were douche bags, however, Saddam had neither the intent nor the ability to attack the US. Also, I never mentioned Falwell, it may have been a vaild comparision if Saddam were a radical muslim, but he wasn't.

@Sgt Lep: " As far as 'why' we went to war in the first place, the first reason was WMD's."

Of course we knew he had them. We sold them to him before, during and after his attack on the Kurds. We were just hoping he had some left so we could justify attacking him.

Still, not every Muslim agrees with the idiot with the sign. Writing them all off as "terrorists in waiting" is a wholly invalid argument.

[Sgt Leprechaun]

Noted, I said it was the 'first' reason. His sponsorment of terrorism in general was certainly a valid 2nd reason, but not the main one.

And, again, it wasn't a 'hope' he had them. We (the royal we, here) fully believed, as did everyone else with any kinda credibility at the time, (including his own army, milita, etc etc) that he DID have em. I agree, now, in hindsight, the intell was faulty, but the idea the 'books were cooked' 100 percent is just as fallacious an arguement.

As far as the loony with the sign, I'm sure that by a simple search, I can find far more mooslum loonies with signs, and those of their faith, nodding in agreement with it, or tacitly supporting it, than I can going the opposite direction.

The appropriate quote, from another board, is:

"Every Haji is just one religious ceremony away from becoming a terrorist"

[jetdawgg]

http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u17/jetdawgg/democracybomberzu1.jpg

I thought that it was to bring democracy to the region?

[Sgt Leprechaun]

That was a distant third, I'd say, when we realized that the first one was a 'no go', and the second was accomplished.

It'll do, but in the long run, we kinda (IMO) need to realize that to most of the Arabs (using that as a general term, not to describe one sect or another) democracy is kinda stupid and probably has little to offer them, since they are still primarily a tribal culture.

A noble goal, to be sure....but....well, I guess time will tell.

[jetdawgg]

Western powers support democracy only with those they like