« Poll Shows Bush And GOP Congress’ Numbers Slipping
NOVAK: House GOPers Urged Foley To Run For Re-Election After Learning Of Emails »
Fox: Foley the Democrat
I just noticed this post over at The Brad Blog. It seems that Fox News – suddenly – got a little confused about what party Foley belongs to:
Hot Air believes it’s an honest mistake / typo.
Ezra Klein: Fox is not conservative, its Partisan channel without any intellectual honesty “which is how you get the hackish distortion of reality pictured above.”
The All Spin Zone: “Three times is no damn accident. Three times. Is there no legal recourse for the Democratic Party?”
Its nice that some people seem to be able to read the minds of the editors over at Fox News: I don’t pretend I can and as such I cannot say anything about any possible intention.
15 Responses to “Fox: Foley the Democrat”
This shows why FOX is not capable of delivering the news accurately.
The question here is not about intention, it’s about quality. It’s clear the news product at FOX lacks the necessary qualities that should relate to a Reputable news agency.
If Fox can’t even identify a congressman’s correct party its surely raises doubts about the quality of information they deliver on ALL their reports.
People will make up their own minds about FOXNEWS intentions and given their history there’s plenty of reasons to believe this was intentional.
There are many politicians (and their little water carriers) who count on the utter STUPIDITY of the American public. This was no accident.
It’s just an honest mistake. Like when that guy accidently feel on a broken beer bottle. Three times.
I hear the AP did the same thing.
I seem to recall Fox News accidentally referring to President Clinton as being a Republican. But both Fox and AP have done this?
Hmmm, fool me once shame on me, fool me … won’t get fooled again.
I meant to say that Fox News had referred to Clinton as a Republican during the Lewinsky scandal, but blew it.
Preview once, shame on me, preview twice — aw, nevermind.
so; who seriously believes Fox news don’t know who’s a Republican and who ain’t on the hottest story ever. Furthermore, why would the House Leadership be suspected of protecting a Democrat.
this got nothing to do with mind reading. Fox news has a track record. and unlike some news, when you watch fox you know who’s team they are on and who they back.
Hey the D is near the R on a keyboard. It’s an easy mistake to make. delax. oops. I meant relax.
not unlike CNN and it’s red X over Cheney or the bathroom incident with Bush.
I remember that- it was hilarious!
As if the viewers won’t know the truth sooner orl ater. As much as serious Fox News viewers may be biased they are not total idiots.
John Amato over at C&L has another instance with the AP, only this time they’ve labelled Hastert a Dem.
A slip on a chyron at Fox might have been in error, but we’re heading further into statistical improbability territory now. How’s it go? Once is accident, twice is coincidence, 3 times is enemy action?
You guys are aware the O’Reilly’s show is taped hours before broadcast, aren’t you? Sheer common sense would tell you that they couldn’t possibly show Foley being a Democrat three times on a taped show without it being intentional, yet you claim we can only know it by ‘reading their minds’. Shall I remind you of this the next time you read the minds of Democrats or liberals? Shall I dig up your past words in which you have ‘read the minds’ of people whose views you dislike?
Does anybody still believe that The Moderate Voice is sincerly moderate anymore? He does enough water carrying for the Republicans to be another astroturf blog.
On the balance-yes Joe is a Moderate. If he wasn’t he’d be putting the Republican spin on the Foley incident-that the Democrats have had worse sex scandals and their guys have stayed in office after them. As ridiculous as that sounds, many on this site are buying it.
Kim,
Why is it not possible to say that the Foley incident is bad and that we won’t tolerate a coverup, while simultaneously saying that this isn’t the first time in history that something like this has occurred (and unfortunately won’t be the last), and that in the past it hasn’t been handled well. Isn’t that part of any honest look at an event in historical context, and the first step toward figuring out how we think these things SHOULD be handled?
It’s fine to discuss and deconstruct the arguments, look for differences in the various scandals to see if the comparisons really make sense or not. On that basis I have no problem with people debating. But when the majority here seem to think that there is NO reason to bring up past scandals on both sides of the aisle, other than to deflect blame from the current group, I see that as Democrat spin. I do think that you can go too far with this line of thinking, and some people are definitely trying to put R spin on it by focusing all attention in that direction, but I also think that those who try to dismiss the discussions out of hand are doing the opposite which is just as disingenuous: they’re trying to focus ALL attention on this incident as though nothing else matters and as though we can assume this sort of thing won’t happen under a Dem controlled Congress.