In my opinion, Fox News Channel has reached Dante's Fifth Level (Anger) in their descent to Journalistic Hell. For months, they have been diligent in digging toward this tier by ignoring anything that begins to look like 'journalistic objectivity' or 'journalistic integrity'. Instead, 24/7, they shriek how horrible Trump is, how terrible a president he will be. Never mind that they have no way of knowing what kind of president he will be since he's never held public office. Instead, their matra is 'We'll ignore that and don't bother us with the facts, they're unimportant'.
Fox, as a 'news' outlet, has the obligation to be objective - not
biased. Trump, on the other hand, has no such obligation. He is just
being Trump and he has every right to be Trump. Smart or stupid, good or bad, on point and fact or not - he has just as much right to be who he is as any other individual. Although, given that he is running for the highest office in the land, he does have an obligation to stop being stupid, start being smart, and be presidential in demeanor.
Fox, as a news organization, has a responsibility to remain objective, to report and let viewers decide. If
they are going to slant things as they see fit, regardless of the facts,
they are no longer a news organization. They are an opinion organization and the 'PRESS' credentials can be flushed. It has gotten so bad that Fox News has openly become the television equivalent to the old Soviet news outlet Pravda. They are nothing more than a propaganda outlet for the #NeverTrump campaign.
Look at who they talk to: Rich Lowry of the National Review which put out an entire edition dedicated to #NeverTrump blathering. George Will - also of the National Review and another card carrying member of the #NeverTrump group. Bill Kristol of The Weekly Standard and another Washington Insider who Trump scares the pants off. Karl Rove, a worn out political advisor with a white board. He's the one who brought us George Bush II who brought us the economic melt-down that just won't go away.
When Fox does fumigate its hallways and allow one of Trump's supporters in, they are so snotty, so rude and obviously in pain to allow that person to speak, it's palpable in my living room. It's disgusting.
Fox's tagline should be changed to 'Unfair and Biased', which is observable fact, or they should change their name entirely to Pravda-USA.
Twenty-five years or so ago, CNN was the network 'everyone' watched. It was the first 24-hour news outlet. At first we watched because we didn't have a choice. If we wanted to know what was going on in the world, CNN was the only choice but we still, at the time, adopted from others that CNN stood for
'Clinton News
Network'. It was all Clinton, all positive, all the time - and
it left us feeling cheated. We saw it as nothing more than a propaganda
mouthpiece for the Clinton administration. No matter what Billy-Jeff
did, CNN would ignore or parse the truth until the truth became
unrecognizable.
Then Fox News appeared. It became available on our cable service and as soon as we could, we switched. We were tired of the ridiculous leftist bias and, for the past decade and more, it seemed to be the better choice. They didn't have an obvious bias. They did try to show both sides of the picture and then let the viewer decide.
That, however, has changed and the change is accelerating - sliding into a terminal downward spiral. They'll probably just leap right over Levels Six (Heresy) and Seven (Violence) and settle in at home at Level Eight - Treachery. When I do pause to see what's happening on Fox, there are strong whiffs of sulfur from that Level already.
In the past few years, chinks began to appear at Fox. Little things, like their coverage of breaking news events. We found ourselves glued to CNN because their reporting was broader, more incisive and, overall, better. When disaster struck, Choice No. 1 became CNN. Oh, yeah, we would flip back once in a while, but the majority of our viewing during times of crisis was kept to CNN. We still didn't watch regularly because they still had that heavy leftward tilt.
This election cycle, though, the tilt has gone wildly in the other direction over on Fox. They have such a hate thing going against Trump - almost across the talking-head spectrum - that they have become not just biased, but have made it perfectly clear that they are a major contributor to the #NeverTrump campaign. Perhaps not in dollars, but in free media time, and it's disgraceful.
The list of #NeverTrump campaigners is long: Megyn Kelly, Charles Krauthammer, Chris Wallace, Bill O'Reilly, Brett Baier, David Asman, Karl Rove and many others. Because of their open and flagrant opposition to one political candidate over the other, they have lost any journalistic qualities they might have once had.
Aside from that, they report fluff over substance. Case in point: This morning I turned on the news. It happened that the station was CNN. They were showing a Pentagon debriefing in which a couple of DoD types were talking about the killing of a top leader of ISIS. That is pertinent news - it's top of the stack for most people around the world because what are we all talking about when it comes to world affairs? ISIS. From that, CNN switched to reports about raids and arrests in Belgium. They showed video of one suspect being shot and taken into custody.
Curious, I flipped over to Fox to see what they were reporting and... Laughably, embarrassing to Roger Ailes and his Fox News organization, they were talking about some human interest story somewhere in middle America. Then they started talking about a new iPhone gizmo.
Really? A news outlet that has feeds to major breaking news around the world chooses to show and bloviate about cops shoveling snow (good for them, it's a good deed but not potentially of international import) and a new iPhone doodad. Fox has lost it for me - zero credibility across the board - although I will still watch Fox Business News over CNBC because they, at least have a brain and know where it's kept.
My leaving Fox is primarily because their bias / hatred of Donald Trump is so flagrant. Almost across the board there is absolutely nothing like 'fair and balanced' in their reporting on him. There are exceptions, but they are very few and very far between.
Sean Hannity is one. He does an excellent job of keeping it fair and balanced. My problem with him, though, is that he has a litany of ills that he repeats like the Catechism or a priest's penance after confession. Turning on his show I can count on at least ten minutes every night going through that litany as he ticks them off on his fingers. It's a waste of time after the third iteration and annoying after the fifth.
Lou Dobbs is another. I love that man - he's got a great sense of humor, he's quick and he's smart. When someone says something stupid or questionable, he's not going to give it pass - he'll ask for more or clarification or outright challenge the statement. He's also up to talking in a balanced fashion about the GOP candidates - and I appreciate that.
Neil Cavuto is pure smart / funny. I love him, too (although the constant 'thank you very, very much' gets to be very, very annoying). He's another who keeps it real, who doesn't openly take sides in this match.
Among these three I don't know who is supporting whom in this race - although I have my suspicions - but at least they aren't out trashing one candidate over and over again. If someone does or says something stupid, they report it and move on - they don't belabor it ad nauseum the way Fox Opinion / Pravda-USA does.
So for me, no more. It's open war on Trump, using their FCC license without compunction to sway voters and it's despicable. Fox News has become Pravda-USA - a political propaganda mouthpiece for The Weekly Standard, the National Review, the Washington Establishment and the Donor Class so, since I have a choice, I'll go back to watching CNN.
It is still, disgustingly, the Clinton News Network when the discussion is between the DNC and the RNC or the Dems and GOP, but at least there is some semblance of balance and, when real news is breaking, they're on it.
See ya Roger! Bye Megyn! Hello, Anderson and Don and Dana!
Hope you'll pass the word and then join me.
Best~
Philippa
Follow me on Twitter: https://twitter.com/PhilippaStories
Showing posts with label Fox News. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Fox News. Show all posts
Friday, March 25, 2016
Saturday, March 19, 2016
No, kids. Donald Trump is NOT! a Misogynist
The biggest lie being thrown around the airwaves this election season is that Trump 'hates women'. That whopper is back in the news again because he openly despises one woman. Just one with whom he's picked a running feud. Again, because of that one, he is being painted as hating 'all' women. It's disgusting and it's wrong but the liberal left and the media keep spewing this nonsense like a torrent of wastewater from a sewage plant.
I know where it comes from. It comes from the fact that the man is outspoken and words that should stay 'inside' fall out and become quotes.
If he doesn't respect you - man or woman - he is not going to pretend he does. He's too fundamentally honest to hold back and not say what's on his mind. He is not capable of filtering his thoughts, guarding his opinions and speaking only what is palatable to the listener.
My observations are that if you're an idiot of either gender, he'll tell you. If you're not meeting expectations - no exception given for gender - he'll tell you.
In other words, he appears to treat men and women the same, without exception. Except for Megyn Kelly, but that's something else again.
Putting Kelly aside, the problem with this even-handed approach is that while women screech at the top of their lungs that they want to be treated equally, when someone (a man) doesn't hold back his opinion of them, they slap on the GENDER VICTIM label and start shrieking that this big bad man is mean.
It's disgusting and a case in point is the recent dust-up with the Breitbart female.
I saw that video. I saw it over-and-over-and-over again because the media wanted to make another mountain out of an anthill.
What I did not see in that clip is that she 'almost fell', as was claimed. She was moved to the side, but I did not see a stumble, an arm thrown out for balance or anyone leaping forward to catch her. She was moved to the side because she was standing in the way. End of story. Except for the bruises. But those could also be explained by a medical condition - hypothyroidism, for instance. People who have hypothyroidism tend to bruise very easily. Other conditions and some medications (Coumadin / Warfarin) predispose people to bruising. So give me a break, honey. I don't buy it. You're a woman who was *GASP!!!!* touched by a man without your explicit permission and you threw the GENDER VICTIM card.
Give me a break and grow up.
Either you want to be equal - and that means accepting whatever it is that's being dished because if the person doing the dishing is as rude and unpleasant to their gender peers as they are to the opposite sex, they are treating you equally - or you don't. You can take exception to what they say and how they say it, but don't go slapping on that worthless label and screaming at the top of your lungs the guy's a bastard for saying what he thinks.
Tackle him on his own terms, refute what he's said about you and make it stick, or walk away. Throwing yourself into the crowd and blubbering that you've just been victimized may get a bunch of people feeling sorry for you, but it demeans you not the bastard who called you a moron.
If you're not a big grown-up person capable of standing up to a bully, you don't deserve my respect. Sorry, but that's the standard. I have been bullied all my life - first by a brother and then by my husband. Through it all, having lived that, I eventually learned to step outside of myself and to look at myself as objectively as I was able through the eyes of colleagues and peers whom I respect. They said good things about me, about my person and my work and they helped me to learn my value. I learned to stop labeling myself VICTIM just because someone says something horrible to or about me. Now when someone says something cruel or demeaning I stop. I pause to look inside, to my core, and to evaluate what's been said against what I know to be true. Knowing my worth means the bully has no power over me. S/he can say what they want and it might sting, but in the end, it's my opinion about myself that matters most.
Because of that, because I am that strong, The Donald is a running joke when he says silly things about someone he doesn't respect.
I don't care that he despises Megyn Kelly. That's their problem, between them. That does not mean that he hates all women, and anyone who says it does just proves to me the point that a lot of people are morons.
It's like saying I'm a 'vegsogynist' because I will not eat eggplant or purple cabbage. I like other vegetables - almost all of them, but I am prejudiced against purple vegetables. Does that mean that I'm evil or wrong because I don't like eggplant or purple cabbage? No. I think we can agree that it's acceptable for me not to like purple vegetables.
So why should it be any different between people? Are we supposed to like everyone we cross paths with? Good lord! How boring would that be? Yeah - let's fall into that Utopian lock-step of '1984' where no one has individual thoughts or feelings.
A lot of people like Megyn Kelly. A number of people don't. I find her presentation annoying. She tends toward the melodramatic in some of her reporting - the cadence and tenor of her voice changes - and her voice gets screechy when she's worked up about something. That's irritating. Like fingernails on a blackboard irritating, and I don't find it appealing. Does this make me a misogynist? No. It means I don't like watching Megyn Kelly.
I don't like Carly Fiorna, either. She has this head-bob thing that she does when she talks and it bugs the hell out of me. I like what she had to say when she was campaigning. I think she's an extremely smart woman. But I don't like watching her because of that bobblehead move she does. Does that make me a woman-hater? No. It means I can't watch Carly Fiorna when she talks.
Why can't Donald Trump not like someone? Why does his openly not liking one person make him an entirety of something else? What other women has he slammed? Help me out.
I've already posted about the women he championed long before it became the norm to promote women through the glass ceiling. Here's the post from back in January:
Oh Just Grow A Pair Already
Which explains why I don't get it.
Apparently, he is not allowed to like or dislike particular people - a standard to which others aren't held.
Are you going to sit there and tell me that you like everyone you've ever known? That you have never once in your entire life met someone you didn't like, someone you came to despise through contact and who you think is an idiot? No one? Then I would say you need to get out more, or you need to pass whatever it is that you're smoking so we can all share.
I don't care what the media pinheads say about him. I am smart enough, strong enough for form my own opinions and I do not think that this lie holds water.
So, there you have it. Donald Trump is not a misogynist no matter what the print press, Fox News and other media pinheads want us to believe.
Have a wonderful day.
Best~
Philippa
Follow me on Twitter: https://twitter.com/PhilippaStories
I know where it comes from. It comes from the fact that the man is outspoken and words that should stay 'inside' fall out and become quotes.
If he doesn't respect you - man or woman - he is not going to pretend he does. He's too fundamentally honest to hold back and not say what's on his mind. He is not capable of filtering his thoughts, guarding his opinions and speaking only what is palatable to the listener.
My observations are that if you're an idiot of either gender, he'll tell you. If you're not meeting expectations - no exception given for gender - he'll tell you.
In other words, he appears to treat men and women the same, without exception. Except for Megyn Kelly, but that's something else again.
Putting Kelly aside, the problem with this even-handed approach is that while women screech at the top of their lungs that they want to be treated equally, when someone (a man) doesn't hold back his opinion of them, they slap on the GENDER VICTIM label and start shrieking that this big bad man is mean.
It's disgusting and a case in point is the recent dust-up with the Breitbart female.
I saw that video. I saw it over-and-over-and-over again because the media wanted to make another mountain out of an anthill.
What I did not see in that clip is that she 'almost fell', as was claimed. She was moved to the side, but I did not see a stumble, an arm thrown out for balance or anyone leaping forward to catch her. She was moved to the side because she was standing in the way. End of story. Except for the bruises. But those could also be explained by a medical condition - hypothyroidism, for instance. People who have hypothyroidism tend to bruise very easily. Other conditions and some medications (Coumadin / Warfarin) predispose people to bruising. So give me a break, honey. I don't buy it. You're a woman who was *GASP!!!!* touched by a man without your explicit permission and you threw the GENDER VICTIM card.
Give me a break and grow up.
Either you want to be equal - and that means accepting whatever it is that's being dished because if the person doing the dishing is as rude and unpleasant to their gender peers as they are to the opposite sex, they are treating you equally - or you don't. You can take exception to what they say and how they say it, but don't go slapping on that worthless label and screaming at the top of your lungs the guy's a bastard for saying what he thinks.
Tackle him on his own terms, refute what he's said about you and make it stick, or walk away. Throwing yourself into the crowd and blubbering that you've just been victimized may get a bunch of people feeling sorry for you, but it demeans you not the bastard who called you a moron.
If you're not a big grown-up person capable of standing up to a bully, you don't deserve my respect. Sorry, but that's the standard. I have been bullied all my life - first by a brother and then by my husband. Through it all, having lived that, I eventually learned to step outside of myself and to look at myself as objectively as I was able through the eyes of colleagues and peers whom I respect. They said good things about me, about my person and my work and they helped me to learn my value. I learned to stop labeling myself VICTIM just because someone says something horrible to or about me. Now when someone says something cruel or demeaning I stop. I pause to look inside, to my core, and to evaluate what's been said against what I know to be true. Knowing my worth means the bully has no power over me. S/he can say what they want and it might sting, but in the end, it's my opinion about myself that matters most.
Because of that, because I am that strong, The Donald is a running joke when he says silly things about someone he doesn't respect.
I don't care that he despises Megyn Kelly. That's their problem, between them. That does not mean that he hates all women, and anyone who says it does just proves to me the point that a lot of people are morons.
It's like saying I'm a 'vegsogynist' because I will not eat eggplant or purple cabbage. I like other vegetables - almost all of them, but I am prejudiced against purple vegetables. Does that mean that I'm evil or wrong because I don't like eggplant or purple cabbage? No. I think we can agree that it's acceptable for me not to like purple vegetables.
So why should it be any different between people? Are we supposed to like everyone we cross paths with? Good lord! How boring would that be? Yeah - let's fall into that Utopian lock-step of '1984' where no one has individual thoughts or feelings.
A lot of people like Megyn Kelly. A number of people don't. I find her presentation annoying. She tends toward the melodramatic in some of her reporting - the cadence and tenor of her voice changes - and her voice gets screechy when she's worked up about something. That's irritating. Like fingernails on a blackboard irritating, and I don't find it appealing. Does this make me a misogynist? No. It means I don't like watching Megyn Kelly.
I don't like Carly Fiorna, either. She has this head-bob thing that she does when she talks and it bugs the hell out of me. I like what she had to say when she was campaigning. I think she's an extremely smart woman. But I don't like watching her because of that bobblehead move she does. Does that make me a woman-hater? No. It means I can't watch Carly Fiorna when she talks.
Why can't Donald Trump not like someone? Why does his openly not liking one person make him an entirety of something else? What other women has he slammed? Help me out.
I've already posted about the women he championed long before it became the norm to promote women through the glass ceiling. Here's the post from back in January:
Oh Just Grow A Pair Already
Which explains why I don't get it.
Apparently, he is not allowed to like or dislike particular people - a standard to which others aren't held.
Are you going to sit there and tell me that you like everyone you've ever known? That you have never once in your entire life met someone you didn't like, someone you came to despise through contact and who you think is an idiot? No one? Then I would say you need to get out more, or you need to pass whatever it is that you're smoking so we can all share.
I don't care what the media pinheads say about him. I am smart enough, strong enough for form my own opinions and I do not think that this lie holds water.
So, there you have it. Donald Trump is not a misogynist no matter what the print press, Fox News and other media pinheads want us to believe.
Have a wonderful day.
Best~
Philippa
Follow me on Twitter: https://twitter.com/PhilippaStories
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)