It's way too early in the fucking morning to need a drink.

[kellinator]

Thanks to karnythia, I now know that Bill O'Reilly and Fox News repeatedly mislabeled Mark Foley a Democrat. Can't we file a class-action lawsuit to make them accurately label themselves Fox Propaganda?

Comments

[elizabethf.livejournal.com]

Thank you. This is exactly what I was going to point out.

[dwivian]

look out for the fencepost.

[kellinator.livejournal.com]

Why do you persist in baiting me? Have you not yet noticed that it doesn't work?

[dwivian]

What makes you think I'm baiting you? You might want to look at that closely -- I was, honestly, pointing out that you were tarring the Fox News newsreporting teams because the broadcast company wants to drive ratings by having an idiot do a show. Do you not see that these are two different groups?

Now, if you can show me why you feel it is fair game to blame both, I might change my opinion. I don't expect to, but I am always open to it.

[kellinator.livejournal.com]

*points you to what real journalist reannon says*

*ignores you, because you've used this game too many times before. Acting like an ass on the intarwub is so 2003. Why don't you take up knitting?*

[dwivian]

*points you to my reply on the difference between real journalism and what O'Reilly does, and how 'in-the-can' productions differ from the news*

::sigh::

If you think I'm being an ass, that's your perogative. I just was taking a little issue with the ACTUAL journalists at FNN getting slammed because of the hack that also gets air time there. Sheesh.

[kellinator.livejournal.com]

This is your modus operandi, and I should know, because I've seen it play out on LJ dozens of times over the years: pick a silly pedantic argument so you can show off your l33t debating skillz. I guess it makes you feel superior or something, because I know you don't actually care about most of the issues you expound upon. When someone calls you on your bullshit, you play the victim and say you were trying to start a debate and OMG why I am picking on you when you were just trying to enlighten everyone?

I'm not amused, I'm not impressed, and I'm not going to be used as a launching pad for your soapbox anymore. Take it somewhere else.

[dwivian]

It has nothing to do with impressing anyone. I would take this up with you if we were sitting one-on-one, with nobody there but us. It isn't about showing off any mad 1337 skillz, but about rational discovery of the truth. I *DO* care about that, passionately. The issue may not matter as much as the truth within it, I will freely admit.

In this case, I really don't care for Fox News at all, prefering the BBC. So... The slam on O'Reilly is fair. Slamming FNN for even broadcasting O'Reilly is equally fair. My argument is about the difference between Fox News (the legitimate journalists) and the hacks the network employs, and why it is wrong to tar both together.

Since the core of your post seemed to me to slam both together (was I in error? If so, I'll retract), it wasn't a pedantic point, but the basis of your position.

I don't want yes-men for my friends, but instead keep people near that will tell me when I'm wrong. Did I misunderstand the meaning of your post? I've seen several all at the same time, so I may have been biased towards an incorrect view by what others have written.

[kellinator.livejournal.com]

At this point it's got nothing to do with the damn post anymore. It's got everything to do with why I LiveJournal. I am not some great blogger. I am just a ranty, easily angered, easily distracted twentysomething who enjoys using LJ to keep up with friends and acquaintances on my work breaks. I do not use LJ as some great learn-all-about-the-universe thing. I do not have fucking time for that. I have expressed to you on numerous occasions that my LJ is not the proper place for showy debates, in large part because I do this for fun. I'm not under any illusions that I'm going to have any bright insights or that I'm going to have any influence on anyone whatsoever. You have ignored my request not to have pyrotechnical debates in my personal LJ numerous times. There are plenty of spots on the Internet which would welcome this type of discourse; why must you persist in staging it here?

[kellinator.livejournal.com]

You're both being disingenuous. Fox News has been happy for years to closely identify themselves with Bill O'Reilly and his silly No-Spin Zone. To suddenly claim that the two are unrelated is... pretty much what the Republicans are attempting to do with Foley right now.

[dwivian]

So you directly connect CNN and Larry King? They've done the same thing, after all.... And, yet, people are smart enough to see that Larry's positions are HIS, and not necessarily those of CNN. Why conflate FNN and O'Reilly?

They are related by business practice, and the decision to drive revenue by getting eyeballs onto their network. I'll grant that. But, I am not being disingenuous at all when I say that the Fox News news-team (source of "Fair and Balanced Reporting") has nothing to do with the commentary and pundit shows.

[kellinator.livejournal.com]

You know, I'm really sick of you using my journal to show off how clever you are. Go show off your verbal skills somewhere else, because I'm not impressed.

[kellinator.livejournal.com]

I never said a damn word about CNN or Larry King. Stop putting words in my mouth.

[dwivian]

Not putting words in your mouth -- I'm asking if those words would COME from you. It's an analogy, and it helps me understand your position better if you find it a useful one, or one in error.

[elizabethf.livejournal.com]

Conspiracy theories. I suppose the Republicans and Fox News were also behind the fact that the original source of your posted content, bradblog.com also made their very own typo when they listed the date of the screen shot as 6/03/06 originally.

This is ridiculous. He's a bad man that did a very bad thing and he should be punished for it, regardless of either his party affiliation OR his real stances on issues. Mark Foley's actions are no fault of anyone else (that includes the Republican Party) but Mark Foley.

[kellinator.livejournal.com]

Sorry, but I cannot abide reading your politics on a regular basis, and I've had quite enough of your political attacks in my journal, when I avoid making them in yours. I'm sure I'll see you around Atlanta.

[elizabethf.livejournal.com]

That's perfecftly fine with me, as your politics make me shake my head on a regular basis as well. But don't say that the Conservatives are the ones with closed minds...you get a little bit of intelligent backlash for something and you run with your tail between your legs because you can't deal with hearing any more of it. You would have been welcome to debate any of the points I make in my journal. *shrug*

[kellinator.livejournal.com]

There is no point to debating with you, because nothing I say will have any influence on you. As for you, Fox News posted erroneous information three times -- which an actual journalist has noted goes against everything the profession is supposed to uphold -- and somehow I'm running away from "intelligent backlash"? No, I'm going against MIND-NUMBINGLY STUPID. But you Republicans can always justify yourselves.

[elizabethf.livejournal.com]

See, that's not true. But you believe whatever makes you feel better, which is one of the cornerstones of the Liberal ideology.

And I am not a Republican. I don't vote party lines. So see, you just made a typo yourself. Shall we bash you for it?

[kellinator.livejournal.com]

No, you're not a Republican -- you just constantly scream about how Democrats are lazy whiners that take all your tax money and about how Reagan did more to make the world a better place than Jimmy Carter. Forgive me for using logic. If you and dwivian would like to go have a pedantic wank, you're welcome to it, but my journal is not the place for it.

[dwivian]

(psst... I think Carter may have been the best president of the 20th Century. Just a bit of trivia you might not have known. I think Reagan, on the other hand, by being the most senile president we've had, plunged the civil liberties, treasury, and world view of America into the toilet. Whee.)

[elizabethf.livejournal.com]

You put it out there in the first place. If you can't take the heat...

Don't lump me in with dwivian. Just because I agreed with something he said doesn't put me in his camp. I don't even personally like the guy. If a simple disagreement serves as an attack, then congratulations...you prove my point about the vast majority of Liberals.

[hotcoffeems.livejournal.com]

Kel, why don't you just ban this turkey? Seriously, this person is appallingly rude, and she's not even entertaining or original..."Blah blah blah...drivel drivel...ZOMG!1! Teh LIBERALS!!! Eww, you have liberal cooties! Tee hee, OMG! Shoes! Did I mention that I was raised by wolves, you stinky LIBERAL?" In what universe does this pass for "intelligent backlash", or anything that might happen to pass for even vaguely intelligent?

Just because there are fools out there doesn't mean you have to suffer them gladly. Or at all, sometimes. Like now.

[elizabethf.livejournal.com]

If this is your normal attitudem, you are so not worth the breath that you steal from the useful people of this world.

[hotcoffeems.livejournal.com]

O.K., how 'bout trying this attitude on for size, then?

You're a sorry-ass, butt-ugly, overbearingly stupid Friday turd at a Saturday market. Now shut your shrill piehole and go sit down somewhere. No one really wants to hear you pretend to be Dr. Laura or Ann Coulter or whatever it is you think you're doing; you don't even do it very well, and you just come off as rude trash. Probably for good reason, despite your pretensions otherwise.

Can I be you when I grow up? I've been practicing and everything: "OMG!1! Shoes! I like shoes! And...and...I hate liberals! ewww! Icky liberals! And...and...I look like the unnatural progeny of Grandpa Munster and a pug dog!"

Dude, that was really easy. Why, anyone could be you.