FoxNews leaves Q&A session in the dark...

[n david]

Just another example of hypocrisy in the media today ...

Remember a few months ago when the WH and other libs were demanding FoxNews be barred from any interviews, etc because FN is not a news channel.

Well, the tune has changed. Now libs are upset that FoxNews didn't cover BHO's Q&A session with congressional democrats.

What do you want? Do you want FoxNews coverage or not? It's one or the other. Either they whine about getting coverage they feel is biased, or they whine about not getting coverage. Which is it? And since when are libs watching the eeeeeeevil "FauxNews" anyway?

Personally I think FoxNews should have covered it, especially since they covered the BHO vs Republican fiasco last week. JMO.

[Jermyn Davidson]

Dude,

FOX wanted equal access and when it had the chance to inform its viewers on something that was not-so-partisan, they didn't try to backspin it.

They didn't even show up!!!


POOH on FOX news.

The decision to not cover it was completely obsurd and yeah, this GOP'er calls foul on this too.


This was so unbelievably blatant-- but FOX viewers will not have that point of view at all. Neither will they have the point of view that that our President is trying to not be so partisan.

[deacon blues]

Ummmm

MSNBC left the q&a session shortly after Obama advised senators to stop watching CNN, Fox News and MSNBC...

Fox News showed the ENTIRETY of both Coakley's concession speech and Brown's acceptance speech in the Mass Senator election. CNN and MSNBC? ONLY showed Coakley's ans skipped Brown!

Fox News is THE balance/equal time to the liberal media outlets. If you're gonna criticize Fox News for skipping the Q&A you've got to hammer the others for their doing the same.

Fox News is the most trusted news agency according to a recent poll.

[n david]

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

Dude,

FOX wanted equal access and when it had the chance to inform its viewers on something that was not-so-partisan, they didn't try to backspin it.

They didn't even show up!!!

POOH on FOX news.

The decision to not cover it was completely obsurd and yeah, this GOP'er calls foul on this too.

This was so unbelievably blatant-- but FOX viewers will not have that point of view at all. Neither will they have the point of view that that our President is trying to not be so partisan.

It was a business decision. Also, FoxNews IS balanced and does their part to present both sides of the aisle.

I read through the transcripts that HuffPost had of BHO's Q&A session with the Democrats. Most of it was the usual BHO line: blame Bush, blame the Republicans, Republicans are obstructionists, blah blah blah.

After reading the transcript, I don't blame FoxNews for not showing it live. They would've lost a ton of viewers.

As far as the last line about BHO trying not to be so partisan ... HA! BHO is only doing so because of Brown's win in MA and the Dems loss of the majority. It was the Republicans who invited BHO to their congressional meeting. BHO is as partisan as you can get.

[Jermyn Davidson]

Originally Posted by n david

It was a business decision. Also, FoxNews IS balanced and does their part to present both sides of the aisle.

I read through the transcripts that HuffPost had of BHO's Q&A session with the Democrats. Most of it was the usual BHO line: blame Bush, blame the Republicans, Republicans are obstructionists, blah blah blah.

After reading the transcript, I don't blame FoxNews for not showing it live. They would've lost a ton of viewers.

As far as the last line about BHO trying not to be so partisan ... HA! BHO is only doing so because of Brown's win in MA and the Dems loss of the majority. It was the Republicans who invited BHO to their congressional meeting. BHO is as partisan as you can get.

BHO is not as partisan as you can get.

He's not that much of a partisan guy.

He let go of the public option in an attempt to garner support from the GOP.

That's just one occasion.

[n david]

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

BHO is not as partisan as you can get.

He's not that much of a partisan guy.

He let go of the public option in an attempt to garner support from the GOP.

That's just one occasion.

No, JD. He let go of the public option to get so-called blue dog democrats, DEMOCRATS, to support the bill.

It wasn't to get Republican support.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by n david

It was a business decision. Also, FoxNews IS balanced and does their part to present both sides of the aisle.

I read through the transcripts that HuffPost had of BHO's Q&A session with the Democrats. Most of it was the usual BHO line: blame Bush, blame the Republicans, Republicans are obstructionists, blah blah blah.

After reading the transcript, I don't blame FoxNews for not showing it live. They would've lost a ton of viewers.

As far as the last line about BHO trying not to be so partisan ... HA! BHO is only doing so because of Brown's win in MA and the Dems loss of the majority. It was the Republicans who invited BHO to their congressional meeting. BHO is as partisan as you can get.

If that is what Obama did the that makes him seem two faced after having said to the Republicans that he wants to work with them

[n david]

Originally Posted by n david

No, JD. He let go of the public option to get so-called blue dog democrats, DEMOCRATS, to support the bill.

It wasn't to get Republican support.

bump for JD.