Fox, an overt agenda driven tool of the wealthy

[noonereal]

I posted this in another thread and some got upset, my apologies.
I do believe this to be true though.
Do you disagree?
I have yet to hear any "NEWS" on Fox that is not critical of any socially responsible program. Have you?
The wealthy do not need these programs to lead a comfortable life, the poor and unfortunate do. I know many think that they are self sufficient but unless you are rich, that likely is not true.

[Grumpy]

I dont like any of em but I am curious as to which you think is "fair" or fairer

[cabinover]

And the CNBC and MSNBCs of the world are pure as the driven snow right? They all are driven by money, it just comes from different places.

Now that you mention it I don't recall, including NPR, any news channels that don't almost have an orgasm whenever some new social program is announced.

Notice I didn't say socially responsible? I don't believe they are responsible for much beyond removing money from my house and putting it in someone else's.

How long can we play the poor and unfortunate class card to steal money via taxes? Until the workers can't stomach anymore and revolt. I don't expect to see the poor and unfortunate on my side of that battle. They're gonna be right behind the politicians that give them their handout.

[noonereal]

Originally Posted by Grumpy

I dont like any of em but I am curious as to which you think is "fair" or fairer

fair, can't think of any, fairer any of them

The major networks seem to be the best in their "news" casts, It is also hard to find fault in people like Charlie Rose.
Lou Dobbs just hates everyone.
I think we have become so partisan that their are only a handful of programs that honestly report news and events.
oberman maddow beck schultz hannity o'reilly are just tools to be avoided

[noonereal]

Originally Posted by cabinover

Not my belief.

When was this? Why is this? (I never listen to NPR.)

.

We are one sociaty, we need to do what is best for that sociaty first, the individual comes second
That being said, it seems to me we are rich enough to redistribute the gross excess.

Why have you such disdain for the poor and unfortunate? I am guessing it is because you think it there own fault that they are poor and unfortunate, correct?

[merrylander]

I used to watch Dobbs and for a little while he seemed plausible, then he started bringing in his three "best minds in Politics" yesh sure, Larry, Curly and Moe. Dobbs is busy shilling his books to the fringe.

The other "news" broadcasts beat every event to death, usually trivial crap that affects our lives not a whit.

About the closest thing to reality is Jim Lehrer but there are times when some of the "experts" he calls in leave me shaking my head. I really believe some one from Moody's or Standard & Poor on financial matters, sure. Are not these the smae folks who gave derivatives two and three star ratings?

[Twodogs]

I like O'Reilly, does that mean I'm rich? Woohoo!

[noonereal]

Originally Posted by Twodogs

I like O'Reilly, does that mean I'm rich? Woohoo!

I would think that this means you feel you would benefit from making the rich richer, not that you are rich. This is a popular belief, I am not one who subscribes to that school of thought. No surprise there huh?

[Twodogs]

I think you may be confusing rich with having a job and working hard.

[noonereal]

Originally Posted by Twodogs

I think you may be confusing rich with having a job and working hard.

No not at all.

On a side bar, I have found working hard is relative and is no indicator of success, wealth or happiness.