Posted: November 30th, 2012 | Author: | Filed under: Cartoons | Tags: , | 13 Comments »

13 Comments on “”

  1. Kathy Baratta said at 1:59 pm on December 1st, 2012:

    Thank you, Art for illustrating the difference between real news organizations and the Faux conglomerate that just calls itself that.

    I’d say Lord Leveson’s inquiry (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/leveson-inquiry/9712801/Leveson-Report-David-Cameron-became-too-close-to-newspaper-executives.html) into what Rupert Murdoch hath wrought pretty much makes the point that Fox “News” (talk about using a term loosely) is not only not fair and balanced but rather skewed.

    Then of course there are the indictments of News Corp principals. (http://news.firedoglake.com/2012/07/24/news-of-the-world-editors-journalists-indicted-in-phone-hacking-scandal/)

    I know you hate it when the facts get in the way of your good times but, Art, it is what it is.

  2. Proud Republican said at 5:13 pm on December 1st, 2012:

    Wrong as usual Kathy Baratta. Fox News is the only news organization not in the tank for Obama and the Democrat party – that’s why liberals hate them so much and why, incidentally, their ratings are so high. They were the only ones to note how voter fraud was behind Obama’s win, you know, like St. Lucie County in Florida, where there are 174,000 registered voters, but 245,000 votes were cast? Or how Obama lost every state that had voter I.D. (Democrats can’t cheat in those states)? I wonder if voter fraud also gives Chris Matthews a “tingly feeling down his leg” the same way he gets when he hears Obama speak. To use your phrase, it is what it is.

  3. Helen Wheels said at 5:47 pm on December 1st, 2012:

    Their ratings are so high because, as H.L. Mencken once observed, “Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public.”

    And THAT, my friend, is the way it is and is a FACT that Murdoch manipulated well to his advantage.

  4. Kathy Baratta said at 5:49 pm on December 1st, 2012:

    Their ratings are so high because, as H.L. Mencken once observed, “Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public.”

    And THAT, my friend, is the way it is and is a FACT that Murdoch manipulated well to his advantage.

  5. Proud Republican said at 6:13 pm on December 1st, 2012:

    Typical snide, elitist liberal comment – if you aren’t “enlightened” to the superiority of liberal drivel, then you are unintelligent. Here’s some facts for you Kathy Baratta, or Helen Wheels or whatever your moniker of the moment is – George Soros, the greatest manipulator of them all, is behind just about every major liberal think tank and news organization in existence today. And how about the liberal journalists who were caught on camera setting up questions for Romney? Or the reporter from the Star Ledger who told Project Veritas that they have to do whatever is necessary to get Obama re-elected? Or how about the failure of the liberal press to do its due diligence and investigate Obama’s background the way every other president has been vetted? Here’s an irrefutable fact – liberals hate Fox News because they are not controlled by the far left, Chicago-thug White House stormtroopers. Liberals can never give one example of inaccurate reporting on Fox, just reporting that doesn’t glow over the lightweight in the White House – who, by the way, won the election by cheating.

  6. Joe said at 6:38 pm on December 1st, 2012:

    Does anybody give a crap what Kathy B. says? Who cares.

  7. Kathy Baratta said at 7:05 pm on December 1st, 2012:

    Talk about “monikers,” Proud Republican.

    Yours is a description, not a name. If I am to continue this “conversation” then I must insist on knowing with whom it is I am engaging in this online debate. Art signs his name, I sign mine. You get the idea.

    As you correctly noted, “Helen Wheels” is a moniker. I use it as an inside joke in another, frivolous game-like venue. How it came up here when I posted is beyond me but that it did is the reason I reiterated the post under my own name. You see, unlike some, I take political discourse very seriously. I have established, professional bona fides and am well-read and just as well-informed. Also, I am decidedly, shall we say, ecumenical in my information gathering. My online bookmarks (a long, eclectic list) include representation from the Right and the Left – everything from The Blaze to Gawker).

    On election night I happened to be watching Faux News because I knew it would be the campiest side-show going and boy, they did not disappoint. I got to watch as Karl Rove and the Party he perverted slid into ignominious defeat.

    Anyway, when I come here I want people to know who’s thoughts they are considering. Even though this is the Internet, Art’s site is a county-site read, for the most part, by county residents. (Please, Art. No need to post proof of out-of-county viewership. I believe you get my drift and that is that this is more of a local community site than a global offering.)

    Now, “Proud Republican.” If you’re too ashamed/afraid to post under your own name when seeking to discuss such weighty matters as your Faux News talking points don’t expect me to respect anything you have to say or even want to continue this any further by easily refuting the ridiculously specious assertions you already posted.

    So, unless and until you post under your own name consider this me giving you a big, Over and Out.

  8. brian said at 11:00 am on December 2nd, 2012:

    Ever since the Pennysaver folded—their “award winning” commentator needs to spew her vitriolic nonsense somewhere.
    Don’t feed the trolls so they go back to silly liberal blogs like patches or pig boy.

  9. brian said at 11:04 am on December 2nd, 2012:

    using miss pennysaver’s logic, the most informative, honest network must be Algorewarming’s channel with it’s tens of viewers as opposed to multiple millions who watch FOX, and the 30 million who listen to Rush aren’t as smart as both NPR listeners…………………………….SMH

  10. Proud Republican said at 11:39 am on December 2nd, 2012:

    As I thought Kathy Baratta, you can’t provide any examples. Instead, you go off on some silly diatribe about names. Since liberals are so superior and more intelligent than the rest of us, why not explain how St. Lucie Fl. has 174,000 registered voters and received 245,000 votes? Or how Obama got 19,650 votes in 60-something districts in Philadelphia and Romney got zero – a statistical impossibility? Or why voting machines registered a vote for Obama even though the person selected Romney? Or why Obama lost every state that had voter I.D.? Why not explained how you think it is good for America that the community organizer in chief squeaked out a victory by cheating? Let’s hear the liberal wisdom on those.

  11. brian said at 12:03 pm on December 2nd, 2012:

    Liberal Wisdom—LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

  12. You See, Libs Like Kathy Barretta said at 6:30 pm on December 2nd, 2012:

    They want someone’s name so that they can personalize it, isolate it, demonize it and attack a person, just like Alyniski’s Rules for radicals.

    Why can’t libs just ANSWER the question, rather than playing a game of canards?

  13. Proud Republican said at 9:16 pm on December 2nd, 2012:

    @6:30 p.m.

    I’ll tell you why, because they are wrong on just about every issue. The minute you talk facts, they have no comeback. Do you notice she can’t give one example of sloppy, or false reporting on Fox News? Nor can she answer the voter fraud questions. When presented with facts, liberals run and hide like a French soldier who just heard a car backfire.