Fop Network Loves Attack Politics
Find a Conversation
| Thu, 10-16-2008 - 11:09pm |
"It's FOX "News" Channel vs. The Middle Class
by Jed L
Thu Oct 16, 2008 at 10:03:56 PM EDT
Now that FNC has reinvented itself as the "24-hour ACORN and Ayers" network, it's more obvious than ever that they don't give a damn about the pocketbook issues facing middle-class Americans.
Based on a search of closed caption data gathered since Sunday, FNC has has mentioned the GOP's favorite issues (ACORN and Ayers) nearly thirty percent more frequently than they mentioned the GOP's least favorite issues, the economy and the middle class.
The numbers are staggering:
Combined, FNC has mentioned "ACORN" or "Ayers" 1,231 times
Compare that to 963 references to "economy" or "middle class"
FNC's propaganda puts it out way out on a limb. Combined, MSNBC and CNN have made 798 references to ACORN or Ayers. Remember, that's both networks, combined.
Put another way, FNC has mentioned ACORN or Ayers 50% more often than both of its competitors put together."
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/10/16/185021/72/626/632959
I have a question. Why does Fox insist on keeping its idiotic "Fair and Balanced" tag line? Is it like getting a trademark - you need to call something it's not to get a trademark. You can't get a trademark on the word car for a type of car, but you sure as heck can get one (if it's still available) on the name "car" as a brand name for a line of cabinets.

Pages
I'm just curious where in this country people are able to vote without showing any form of documentation that they are in fact the person listed on the voter registration card. I can understand outrage about voter fraud, something that involves actual people being able to cast votes fraudulently. But voter registration fraud? Anytime there are people hired to canvas anywhere there is the potential for those people to take it upon themselves to falsify applications that they turn in be it a voter registration drive, credit card applications, etc. I'm more concerned about legitimate voters whose ballots will be mysteriously lost or unreadable or all the other voter machine errors that are going to come into play come November 4th.
>>> I'm just curious where in this country people are able to vote without showing any form of documentation that they are in fact the person listed on the voter registration card.
I live in California, and I have never been asked for ID when I voted. There are only 7 states that require photo ID, and an additional 17 that simply require ID, which can easily be faked.
http://www.ncsl.org/programs/legismgt/elect/taskfc/voteridreq.htm
>>> I can understand outrage about voter fraud, something that involves actual people being able to cast votes fraudulently. But voter registration fraud?
By my count, 26 states don't require any ID and 7 require ID that is so easily faked that they might as well join the other 26. What's to prevent someone who's registered 50 times under 50 names from casting 50 votes? Apparently there are 200,000 such shady registrations in Ohio alone...Bush won by 500 or so.
>>> Anytime there are people hired to canvas anywhere there is the potential for those people to take it upon themselves to falsify applications that they turn in be it a voter registration drive, credit card applications, etc.
True, but if you're aware of that eventuality, would you really hire convicts guilty of identity theft to drum up those registrations? Kinda gives one pause, doesn't it?
>>> I'm more concerned about legitimate voters whose ballots will be mysteriously lost or unreadable or all the other voter machine errors that are going to come into play come November 4th.
I'll leave the worrying about imaginary future crimes to you... I'll worry about the crimes that have already been committed.
"True, I think I pretty much proved my case. Nighty night friend."
Good morning! Rise and shine! I still can't believe you are standing by this bold McCain-like statement you made so assertively:
"The fundamentals of the economy were sound a few weeks ago."
Now that you have had a good night's sleep, just checking whether you still think our decline into the deepest economic crisis since the Great Depression started less than a few weeks ago.
Because it seems pretty obvious to me that the last 8 years under Republican rule might just have had a little something to do with it. Bush and McCain deregulated us into this crisis.
Phil Gramm, McCain's chief economic advisor, until he recently called us a nation of whiners in a mental recession that is, was the one who tore down the regulations from the Great Depression era whose purpose was to prevent another one like this.
McCain said until a few weeks ago that he always deregulates.
And last Spring McCain said the solution to the brewing troubles then was more deregulation.
Anyway, sometimes the morning is a good time to reassess. Seriously, we could use a good person like you on the side of middle class. Think about it friend.
Just because you keep saying this:
<>Phil Gramm, McCain's chief economic advisor, until he recently called us a nation of whiners in a mental recession that is, was the one who tore down the regulations from the Great Depression era whose purpose was to prevent another one like this.
McCain said until a few weeks ago that he always deregulates.
And last Spring McCain said the solution to the brewing troubles then was more deregulation. <>
doesn't make it true.
<>The MoveOn.org Political Action ad blames a banking deregulation bill sponsored by former Sen. Phil Gramm, a friend and one-time adviser to McCain's campaign. It claims the bill "stripped safeguards that would have protected us."
That claim is bunk. When we contacted MoveOn.org spokesman Trevor Fitzgibbons to ask just what "safeguards" the ad was talking about, he came up with not one single example. The only support offered for the ad's claim is one line in one newspaper article that reported the bill "is now being blamed" for the crisis, without saying who is doing the blaming or on what grounds.
"Actually, deregulated banks were not the major culprits in the current debacle."
Yeah right. Look at Citibank. It's a train wreck. They've written off about as much as their market cap. Chuck Prince, their former CEO, said we're not sitting down until the music stops when it came to their involvement in the sub-prime mess. Wamu - gone. Indymac - gone. Wachovia - bought out at almost nothing.
Why do you think this happened, because they were "not the major culprits in the current debacle"? I don't think so. Only a few steered clear of the mess.
So now that we've brushed aside the distractions again, let's refocus on the huge white elephant in front of our faces. Here it is again for you:
Bush, McCain and the Republicans deregulated us into this mess over the past 8 years. Who was in charge? They were. Who led the charge on all the deregulation? They did.
Keep denying it.
>>> Good morning! Rise and shine! I still can't believe you are standing by this bold McCain-like statement you made so assertively: "The fundamentals of the economy were sound a few weeks ago."
I know...but then you were swayed by "hope and change." ; )
>>> Now that you have had a good night's sleep, just checking whether you still think our decline into the deepest economic crisis since the Great Depression started less than a few weeks ago.
Well, yes AND no... the "decline," as you may have noticed, was quite abrupt, and I've yet to hear a credible economist say that they "saw it coming"...hence the panic. The "decline" was instigated by the sub-prime lending policies that were devised and defended by the Democrat party. Prior to the banking and housing collapse, the FUNDAMENTALS of the economy...employment, trade, inflation, lending, production...were all very solid, as McCain had said.
>>> Because it seems pretty obvious to me that the last 8 years under Republican rule might just have had a little something to do with it. Bush and McCain deregulated us into this crisis.
First, I'll take a moment to point out that it was Bush and McCain SPECIFICALLY who tried to introduce regulation over Fannie and Freddie that might have avoided this "crisis"...and they were blocked by the Democrats. I'll also point out that the Dems have had control of Congress and the Banking and Financing Committees in particular for the past two years, so this "failure," conceived and protected by Dems for years, happened on THEIR watch...with highlights being Dodd and Obama receiving the most money from Freddie/Fannie, Dodd getting "sweetheard" deals from Countrywide, a lender he was supposed to be regulating, and Franklin Raines, who made $90 MILLION in SIX YEARS screwing the system and the people of America, is an Obama advisor.
Having pointed out the FACTS...I'd appreciate it if you'd now tell me exactly what the Bush administration did...not propaganda or generalities...that brought about this economic downturn.
>>> Phil Gramm, McCain's chief economic advisor, until he recently called us a nation of whiners in a mental recession that is, was the one who tore down the regulations from the Great Depression era whose purpose was to prevent another one like this.
Well...only if you read the Democrat's comic book version of history. It's true, it was Gramm who proposed SOME deregulation with the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act...which, if you read, sounds perfectly reasonable, but I'll leave that interpretation to you...and it was Bill Clinton who signed it into law. And while the Dems originally opposed the bill, they were more than eager to jump on board once protections for the Community Reinvestment Act were strengthened. You might remember that many economists consider the Community Reinvestment Act to be a prime contributor to the current "crisis" because, as Ron Paul said..."[CRA} forced banks to lend to people who normally would be rejected as bad credit risks."
And Bill Clinton, on Oct 5, 2008 said..."I don't see that signing that bill had anything to do with the current crisis. Indeed, one of the things that has helped stabilize the current situation as much as it has is the purchase of Merrill Lynch by Bank of America, which was much smoother than it would have been if I hadn't signed that bill ... On the Glass-Steagall thing, like I said, if you could demonstrate to me that it was a mistake, I'd be glad to look at the evidence."
>>> McCain said until a few weeks ago that he always deregulates.
McCain is a strong proponent of the free market, as opposed to the socialism endorsed by Obama. However, it was McCain (and Bush two years earlier) who foresaw the danger and were proposing regulation on Fannie and Freddie while the Democrats rallied to opposed them.
"Mr. President, this week Fannie Mae's regulator reported that the company's quarterly reports of profit growth over the past few years were "illusions deliberately and systematically created" by the company's senior management, which resulted in a $10.6 billion accounting scandal.
The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight's report goes on to say that Fannie Mae employees deliberately and intentionally manipulated financial reports to hit earnings targets in order to trigger bonuses for senior executives. In the case of Franklin Raines, Fannie Mae's former chief executive officer, OFHEO's report shows that over half of Mr. Raines' compensation for the 6 years through 2003 was directly tied to meeting earnings targets. The report of financial misconduct at Fannie Mae echoes the deeply troubling $5 billion profit restatement at Freddie Mac.
The OFHEO report also states that Fannie Mae used its political power to lobby Congress in an effort to interfere with the regulator's examination of the company's accounting problems. This report comes some weeks after Freddie Mac paid a record $3.8 million fine in a settlement with the Federal Election Commission and restated lobbying disclosure reports from 2004 to 2005. These are entities that have demonstrated over and over again that they are deeply in need of reform.
For years I have been concerned about the regulatory structure that governs Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac--known as Government-sponsored entities or GSEs--and the sheer magnitude of these companies and the role they play in the housing market. OFHEO's report this week does nothing to ease these concerns. In fact, the report does quite the contrary. OFHEO's report solidifies my view that the GSEs need to be reformed without delay.
I join as a cosponsor of the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005, S. 190, to underscore my support for quick passage of GSE regulatory reform legislation. If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as a whole.
I urge my colleagues to support swift action on this GSE reform legislation.
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/record.xpd?id=109-s20060525-16&bill=s109-190#sMonofilemx003Ammx002Fmmx002Fmmx002Fmhomemx002Fmgovtrackmx002Fmdatamx
002Fmusmx002Fm109mx002Fmcrmx002Fms20060525-16.xmlElementm0m0m0m
>>> Anyway, sometimes the morning is a good time to reassess. Seriously, we could use a good person like you on the side of middle class. Think about it friend.
And indeed I am...which is why I oppose Obama's Marxist philosophies that will put the screws to business, kill jobs, drive companies overseas, damage the economy and hurt the American people. These are simply the facts...I hope you'll do some real research with open eyes and see who it is that you're supporting.
Pages