What's new

Head of Fox News makes Obama/Osama joke

Rune

Muckdog
Joined
Aug 19, 2002
Messages
6,260
Reaction score
0
(cnn)A Nevada Democratic presidential debate that was to have been co-hosted by Fox News Network was canceled by organizers, in part because of a joke by Fox Chairman and CEO Roger Ailes about presidential contender Sen. Barack Obama.

Democrats canceled the debate Friday. They said a comment by Ailes during a Thursday night speech to a group of radio and television news directors indicated the network was biased against their party.

"It's true that Barack Obama is on the move," Ailes said, deliberately confusing the Illinois senator's name with that of terrorist leader Osama bin Laden. "I don't know if it's true President Bush called [Pakistan President Pervez] Musharraf and said, 'Why can't we catch this guy?' "

Even before Ailes' remarks, there was intense pressure from the liberal group MoveOn.org to cancel the August event as part of its boycott of Fox.

Ailes has served as a campaign adviser to Republican candidates, including former Presidents Reagan and Bush.

Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards dropped out of the debate Thursday, citing, in part, Fox's participation.

Fox News Vice President David Rhodes responded to the debate cancellation with a written statement saying MoveOn.org owns the Democratic Party

I know some on this board will point to the source and claim its the left wing media damaging a rival but the quotes are taken directly from context.

Everyone knew Roger Ailes ties to Republican leadership but honestly if you're going to lead an organization claiming to be a straight news source shouldn't you hope to damper some of your own rhetoric?
 

Dodge

Muckdog
Joined
Apr 24, 2004
Messages
12,304
Reaction score
0
Yeah some of my Republican friends have already made this joke. It's really cool being delusional I guess.
 

Buckeye

Muckdog
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
4,985
Reaction score
0
Yeah some of my Republican friends have already made this joke. It's really cool being delusional I guess.

But, dood, their names sound alike! Obama. Osama.

There's, like, a one letter difference.

:mischief
 

Dodge

Muckdog
Joined
Apr 24, 2004
Messages
12,304
Reaction score
0
Yeah some of my Republican friends have already made this joke. It's really cool being delusional I guess.

But, dood, their names sound alike! Obama. Osama.

There's, like, a one letter difference.

:mischief

Yeah and Obama's a Democrat! And we all know Osama would vote Democrat right?!?!?! RIGHT?! :shifty
 

Hotcorner

Muckdog
Moderator
Joined
Aug 22, 2002
Messages
21,691
Reaction score
11
Yeah some of my Republican friends have already made this joke. It's really cool being delusional I guess.

But, dood, their names sound alike! Obama. Osama.

There's, like, a one letter difference.

:mischief
but it's just so dammed FUNNY!





:|
 

Buckeye

Muckdog
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
4,985
Reaction score
0
Yeah some of my Republican friends have already made this joke. It's really cool being delusional I guess.

But, dood, their names sound alike! Obama. Osama.

There's, like, a one letter difference.

:mischief

Yeah and Obama's a Democrat! And we all know Osama would vote Democrat right?!?!?! RIGHT?! :shifty

They should run on that platform.

"A vote for democrats is a vote for terror!"
 

Hotcorner

Muckdog
Moderator
Joined
Aug 22, 2002
Messages
21,691
Reaction score
11
Yeah some of my Republican friends have already made this joke. It's really cool being delusional I guess.

But, dood, their names sound alike! Obama. Osama.

There's, like, a one letter difference.

:mischief

Yeah and Obama's a Democrat! And we all know Osama would vote Democrat right?!?!?! RIGHT?! :shifty

They should run on that platform.

"A vote for democrats is a vote for terror!"

Don't kid yourself, I'm sure some of them will do just that. Not in so many words perhaps...



and back to the article, I'm not sure if this part is valid or not:
Fox News Vice President David Rhodes responded to the debate cancellation with a written statement saying MoveOn.org owns the Democratic Party.
but even if that's the way you feel, blurting that out as the VP of a major news network ain't the way to go about making you look "fair and balanced".
 

FutureGM

Muckdog
Joined
Jul 6, 2003
Messages
10,845
Reaction score
5
Fox News is a propaganda network. Anyone who just realized this needs a wakeup call.

I wish I understood why the Nevada Democratic Party wanted anything to do with this debate to begin with.
 
Joined
Dec 23, 2003
Messages
5,865
Reaction score
18
Right but CNN and MSNBC are completely unbiased and straight news. Its only OK to exercise your freedom of speech if your joke offends the armed forces but it was intended allegedly to be about Bush. Its also ok to refer to Bush or Cheney as evil, greedy, or similar to Hitler or Nazi's. Yet you can't make a joke, god forbid, about a democrat. Freedom of speech is freedom of speech, nothing wrong with what he said. Of course fox is conservative, but CNN and MSNBC are liberal .American media for the most part is terrible. And, I must add, I don't have a problem with Barack Obama. Too bad they didnt make a Hitlery joke
 

prinmemito

Muckdog
Joined
Nov 14, 2004
Messages
6,445
Reaction score
0
Right but CNN and MSNBC are completely unbiased and straight news. Its only OK to exercise your freedom of speech if your joke offends the armed forces but it was intended allegedly to be about Bush. Its also ok to refer to Bush or Cheney as evil, greedy, or similar to Hitler or Nazi's. Yet you can't make a joke, god forbid, about a democrat. Freedom of speech is freedom of speech, nothing wrong with what he said. Of course fox is conservative, but CNN and MSNBC are liberal .American media for the most part is terrible. And, I must add, I don't have a problem with Barack Obama. Too bad they didnt make a Hitlery joke

I disagree with you. MSNBC is not biased at all. Tucker Carlson, Joe Scarborough are two big conservatives that have their own show on MSNBC. Granted, Olberman is a complete lefty. But overall I think it is balanced. I consider myself left of center (but not totally liberal) and watch Scarborough every night. I often disagree with him, but he's very intelligent and makes reasonable arguments. His arguments are based on true conservative political philosophy and he is extremely consistent. Most of the pundits on Fox, however, make knee-jerk Republican arguments. They simply agree with what Bush and the Republican party says, no matter how consistent it is with conservative philosophy.
 

TSwift25

Muckdog
Joined
Dec 2, 2003
Messages
13,534
Reaction score
0
Right but CNN and MSNBC are completely unbiased and straight news. Its only OK to exercise your freedom of speech if your joke offends the armed forces but it was intended allegedly to be about Bush. Its also ok to refer to Bush or Cheney as evil, greedy, or similar to Hitler or Nazi's. Yet you can't make a joke, god forbid, about a democrat. Freedom of speech is freedom of speech, nothing wrong with what he said. Of course fox is conservative, but CNN and MSNBC are liberal .American media for the most part is terrible. And, I must add, I don't have a problem with Barack Obama. Too bad they didnt make a Hitlery joke

I disagree with you. MSNBC is not biased at all. Tucker Carlson, Joe Scarborough are two big conservatives that have their own show on MSNBC.

:lol

Hannity and Colmes gives Fox News a liberal voice, does that make them unbiased?

Anyway, re: Obama:

If his father's Muslim and race/religion is always a tremendous issue for the office of the President (rightly or wrongly) why isn't stuff like this in play? Sure playing the "name game" isn't particularly intelligent, but it's not as if these allusions are completely off the wall.

Is comparing him to a terroirst fair? No, but it's not fair to compare the armed forces to a collection of high-school drop-outs either. Stupid stuff is said when partisanship comes into the picture and Obama has a plethora of questions to answer, and just because he's black and part muslim doesn't mean that those questions should be out of bounds.
 

Flying_Mollusk

Muckdog
Joined
Nov 14, 2003
Messages
5,230
Reaction score
0
Right but CNN and MSNBC are completely unbiased and straight news. Its only OK to exercise your freedom of speech if your joke offends the armed forces but it was intended allegedly to be about Bush. Its also ok to refer to Bush or Cheney as evil, greedy, or similar to Hitler or Nazi's. Yet you can't make a joke, god forbid, about a democrat. Freedom of speech is freedom of speech, nothing wrong with what he said. Of course fox is conservative, but CNN and MSNBC are liberal .American media for the most part is terrible. And, I must add, I don't have a problem with Barack Obama. Too bad they didnt make a Hitlery joke


Um, what were you reading when Kerry made that comment about the troops? He got absolutely destroyed by the news media, CNN and MSNBC included. Foxnews could barely hide it's glee that a dem could be undermining the impending mid-term election. His presidential bid was declared officially over. Where in the world are you pulling this argument from?

And nobody has ever refuted the point prinmemito made. CNN has absolutely no liberal commentators. MSNBC has numerous conservatives to its one liberal. Foxnews has zero liberal to its multitude of conservatives.


Right but CNN and MSNBC are completely unbiased and straight news. Its only OK to exercise your freedom of speech if your joke offends the armed forces but it was intended allegedly to be about Bush. Its also ok to refer to Bush or Cheney as evil, greedy, or similar to Hitler or Nazi's. Yet you can't make a joke, god forbid, about a democrat. Freedom of speech is freedom of speech, nothing wrong with what he said. Of course fox is conservative, but CNN and MSNBC are liberal .American media for the most part is terrible. And, I must add, I don't have a problem with Barack Obama. Too bad they didnt make a Hitlery joke

I disagree with you. MSNBC is not biased at all. Tucker Carlson, Joe Scarborough are two big conservatives that have their own show on MSNBC.

:lol

Hannity and Colmes gives Fox News a liberal voice, does that make them unbiased?

Anyway, re: Obama:

If his father's Muslim and race/religion is always a tremendous issue for the office of the President (rightly or wrongly) why isn't stuff like this in play? Sure playing the "name game" isn't particularly intelligent, but it's not as if these allusions are completely off the wall.

Is comparing him to a terroirst fair? No, but it's not fair to compare the armed forces to a collection of high-school drop-outs either. Stupid stuff is said when partisanship comes into the picture and Obama has a plethora of questions to answer, and just because he's black and part muslim doesn't mean that those questions should be out of bounds.

Alan Colmes has admitted he is not a liberal. And how is it ok for Hannity to get to hand pick his debate partner? Maybe in the world where everyone to the left of Limbaugh is a liberal, this idea works.

Your defense of this guy is pretty weak. How are these allusions even remotely relevant? Your point makes no sense. Are you saying it's proper or improper to use race and religion as a consideration? Or are you saying it is improperly done so we shouldn't get mad when it is done?

And what does Kerry making a foolish remark have to do with the fairness of comparing him to a terrorist? Are you basically admitted that the comment made by him was just as stupid and partisan as what Kerry said? Look back at how republiacns reacted to that. Don't tell me Kerry got off and now people shouldn't be upset with Ailes.

Btw, here is the White House blasts Kerry for Iraq remarks thread

http://www.marlinbaseball.com/forums/index...68546&st=25

Im sure the two of you were making freedom of speech arguments and "it happens in partisan politics, no big deal" comments in that thread right?
 
Joined
Dec 23, 2003
Messages
5,865
Reaction score
18
Unfortunately what you're all wrong about is that the pundits aren't what determine if a station is biased or not. A show like scarborough or chris matthews are supposed to be slanted b/c theyre basically editorial shows. Where the liberal/conservative slant is dangerous and unacceptable is whent he regular news is slanted. For example, Fox has brit hume and cnn has wolf blitzer. I dont get my news from the internet, i usually watch it on TV and anyone who knows anything about political theory can tell that when either of these gentlemen is tlaking about news stories, their ideological slant can be seen clearly. And it isnt just them, next time you watch the news look for it. So the pundits argument is irrelevant. Furthermore, i don't know what news you're watching but when Kerry made his 'botched joke'. CNN and MSNBc presented it as a botched joke about bush that offended members of the military and their families. Fox reported it as just a statement made that offended the military. Calling it a botched joke about Bush is a liberal slant b/c it gives Kerry the democrat, the benfit of a doubt. Not saying it was a joke at all is a conservative slant.

Furthemore, it isn't about how republicans responded to Kerry's remark, as I stated above its how certain media groups portray the same set of facts differently. In my opinion, the Kerry statement and the Obama joke are just stupid partisan remarks, that should be criticized and should notn have been made b/c of political consequences. But that doesn't change the fact that the liberal media outlets use more condemning language for this than for kery. and vice versa.
 
Joined
Dec 23, 2003
Messages
5,865
Reaction score
18
I'm not following your argument.

I too realized my argument sounds like a ramble, I apologize, I typed that up while i was doing some work. My argument is the measure of a media entity's political slant/bias is not measured by the number of pundits it has that lean a certain way, rather it is measured by the slants in their supposedly unbiased news coverage.

I have no problem w O'Reilly being conservative or Chirs Matthews being liberal. My problem is when the anchors and reporters add political slant to the straight news stories, which anyone that has training in political theory can pick up on such slanted statements quite easily.
 

prinmemito

Muckdog
Joined
Nov 14, 2004
Messages
6,445
Reaction score
0
I'm not following your argument.

I too realized my argument sounds like a ramble, I apologize, I typed that up while i was doing some work. My argument is the measure of a media entity's political slant/bias is not measured by the number of pundits it has that lean a certain way, rather it is measured by the slants in their supposedly unbiased news coverage.

I have no problem w O'Reilly being conservative or Chirs Matthews being liberal. My problem is when the anchors and reporters add political slant to the straight news stories, which anyone that has training in political theory can pick up on such slanted statements quite easily.

Gotcha.

Give me an example or two of political slant to the straight news stories.
 
Joined
Dec 23, 2003
Messages
5,865
Reaction score
18
I'm not following your argument.

I too realized my argument sounds like a ramble, I apologize, I typed that up while i was doing some work. My argument is the measure of a media entity's political slant/bias is not measured by the number of pundits it has that lean a certain way, rather it is measured by the slants in their supposedly unbiased news coverage.

I have no problem w O'Reilly being conservative or Chirs Matthews being liberal. My problem is when the anchors and reporters add political slant to the straight news stories, which anyone that has training in political theory can pick up on such slanted statements quite easily.

Gotcha.

Give me an example or two of political slant to the straight news stories.

The example I gave which of course F-M will disagree is the Kerry 'you'll end up in Iraq statement'.

Whne I watched it on CNN it was presented as John Kerry makign a stupid mistake by botching a joke about Bush and offending some military members and their families.
Fox presented the same story as Kerry made a statement portraying service men and women as people who are uneducated.

Seems similar, but an unbiased way of saying it would be, Some servicemen and women are complaining that a statement Kerry made during...(whatever the occasion was) was offensive to them.

Now I dont read online news, I usually read the paper or watch TV so these aren;t direct quotes. But if you watch newscasts and listen attentively you'll see these slants. The CNN slant gives Kerry the benfit of the doubt that the joke was indeed about Bush, but he botched it. The fox slant assumes the joke was directed at the service men and women.

Now when I watch O'Reilly I expect to hear the conservative side, or when I watch Chris Matthews I expect to see a liberal slant. But thats ok, thats what those shows are for. But I want my newscasts to be direct.

Another example is CNN says suicide bombers, Fox says homicide bombers. CNN says insurgents, Fox says terrorists. Technically both sucide bomber and homicide bomber correctly describe these people. But which one to chose is a slant.
 

Top Bottom