Fox News - The fightback starts

I'm as conservative as the bulk of 'em.

And though I am, when some of the (as I call 'em) knuckle-dragging, mouth-breathers come out, I either steer clear and stay up wind (so as to avoid a knock-down drag-out) of 'em, or I call 'em out. I challenge their views on race directly.

Now for many folks (my close friends and family included), some of my views are just as bad as the ones you might percieve to be the bad ones.

All I have on my side is my own rationale and logic. I do go out of my way to be more open to actual conversation, though - certainly more than some folk on FR. (shrug) But that's who I am. And I refuse to apologize for it.

This is one of the things that sets FNC apart from the others - FNC makes a grand issue of creating "personal" editorial space for each of their hosts. MSNBC does this to a lesser degree with Chris Matthews, Keith Olberman and Joe Scarborough (not to mention Dennis Miller - yes, THE Dennis Miller - on CNBC).

CNN doesn't do that as much, though Aaron Brown, Wolf Blitzer and Judy Woodruff (among others) have no qualms about putting their personal two cents in on an issue.

Out of interest, as a conservative, do you believe that the Bush administration is a conservative one?

The odd war against Muslims and faith-based learning may be in with Bush, but the size of the government has ballooneed under him.

How do you feel about Secretary of State Colin Powell's criticism of those who dodged combat military service (viz going into reserve units or the National Guard units instead of going out for combat in Vietnam) due to class, wealth, and family connections, when his Commander In Chief did exactly that by doing his draft service in the National Guard?

Yes and no. You actually hit the nail on the head. The war on terror and many of the underpinnings of the conservative core (personal responsibility, faith-based inititaves, vouchers for private schools, cuts in taxes - which contrary to the pundits hand-wringing, are directly aimed at the MIDDLE class, not the "rich" - et.al.) are certainly things that I support in as far as Bush is concerned. But on the other hand, the size of the federal government has not shrunk but grown, and we're stuck with such boondoggle suggestions as this "guest worker" program that the White House has proposed that ultimately will cost jobs and encourage more illegals to enter the nation from Mexico.

I don't like the notion of fooling around in people's bedrooms. I don't like forcing my faith onto anyone else; but at the same time, I do believe that religious-based outreach programs (feeding the hungry, providing day care, helping the homeless) shouldn't be hindered by government "prohibitions" on church-state interaction.

I believe in a strong defense and certainly protection for us and our allies. As a result, I think the war on terror (which in my estimation is the early stages of WW3 - or WW4 if you believe, as some do that the Cold War was World War 3) is worth fighting. I believe that tyranical states like Iraq, Zimbabwe, North Korea and others need to be addressed. Some fronts may be violent (Iraq, and unfortunately I believe that Zimbabwe will be as well when that time comes), while others will be bloodless (Libya, North Korea and Cuba - both when their times come will be bloodless; Kim isn't crazy enough to blow up the Pacific rim, and Castro's regime, IMO, will fade away once he dies and more Western money enters Cuba).

I think that affirmative action is a system that is broken and being taken advantage of by those in the know, both black and white; and that many blacks are being used by the so-called black leadership in this country that take advantage of emotional scars left by decades of strife to keep blacks and whites divided. The Spanish-speaking culture, as a result of this ongoing divide, will come in (as they have already started) and supplant blacks as the leading minority voice in this nation, relegating blacks to an even lesser percieved presence.

Without participation on both sides of the ideological debate by blacks, this will continue. However, there are more and more blacks who, like myself, are finding ourselves politically on the more conservative side of the coin.

Many of us are "independent" in thinking as opposed to being die-hard, hard-core Republicans. But most of us find that the GOP provides an alternative voice that the Democratic party and liberals in this country does not.

Liberals take black support for granted, and as a result, ignores our base concerns. The GOP is willing to talk to blacks as people, and not to pander to base instincts and issues.

As you can imagine, this doesn't endear me to friends and family. But they all find that they can respect me for having the courage and honesty to stand up for what I believe in.

I don't necessarily agree with Secretary Powell's comments. From where I stand, his comments are colored by his own service in the armed forces, where he served with distinction over the years.

The National Guard, contrary to popular belief, is not an "out" for people who don't want to serve. Certainly there were people who use that service as a supplement to their own incomes, but there are many who served there in varying degrees over the years as a means to serve while attending school.

The President would fall into that latter category. Had it been a "dodging tool," as many have intimated, we would have heard of many more people falling into that category over the years as opposed to the notion of heading overseas.

So as far as I'm concerned, I do not fault the President for serving in the Guard (I've got several friends who have served and who continue to serve faithfully in the Guard today while holding down jobs, taking care of their families or going to school). He served his time in the Guard, and was honorably discharged.

Thanks for your response, Michael. It is a pleasure to speak with someone whose views I may disagree with but does not take that disagreement as a personal insult, as it is not that.

I've read a bit about the "Gaestarbeiter" scheme in America and I know it's got most of the GOP in uproar. Didn't Reagen try something similar 20 years ago which was similarly disasterous? I read as well that the border crossing are busier than ever now with the amnesty.



I too have no problem with faith-based initiatives - I'm atheist, but I felt the flap over the "10 Commandments" in the courtroom was a storm in a teacup, as the laws are derived essentially from this document.



I think Israel's "peace plan" is the beginning of WW3/4 - the latest proposals from the Butcher of Beirut and the growing calls for transfer because the Palestinians are not "the right type of people" will inflame war in the Middle East. I personally hope a couple of the Arab states get nuclear weapons, as this will put a real check on Israel's unreasonable attitudes



I don't really disagree with you about taking action against states which oppress, but it should be done with UN backing. And it will be very difficult to persuade the increasingly angry British and American publics to go to war again after they were lied to so blatantly by our leaders.

The "black vote" thing is a pickle. Similarly, in the UK, the Labour party is virtually assured of winning every seat in the North East of England. So, neither major party promises the region anything because one knows it will always win in the region and the other knows it will always lose.



As do I.

I watched the report with interest. I'm already aware of the British Government's response to BBC claims regarding weapons of mass destruction, but it's news to me that the BBC are anti-American! I actually live in the United States and we get the BBC News on Public Television. Neither my wife nor I watch Fox news, mostly we watch MSNBC News or even CNN.

During Gulf War II we were all having a good laugh at "Baghdad Bob", who reported, for example, that the Americans were being driven back when, at the same time, embeded reporters were showing Americans moving through Baghdad. What the BBC reported at the time I have no idea, but it would be a stretch to call it anti-American if all they did was repeat what "Baghdad Bob" had said.

Okay, reporters get it wrong from time to time. Some may indeed be anti-this or that. I wouldn't know. What I can say is that the report by Fox news does not represent the feelings of most Americans. Americans are very much aware that many Bristish soldiers gave their lives in this conflict. Even those Americans who were and still are against the war, appreciate the sacrifice and support that Britain has given to America. I hope you all keep this in mind.

Have a bit of this, Fox:

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/article/ds13593.html

Ofcom fights back!

Yes, all well and good.

What punishment do FOX NEWS CHANNEL receive for breaching the code?

But, what is OFCOM doing, if anything, about all the complaints with regard to the alleged violations in FOX NEWS CHANNEL's output listed previously in this thread?

My guess is "nothing", but I hope somebody can prove me wrong.

With any luck, they will find them in breach of the Programme Code and the due impartiality guidelines with regards to the complaint I and at least some others made. Although in the letter I got from Ofcom they said they cannot investigate issues of fairness to do with the complaint, because they have to be made by the individual or organisation affected by it, they said they were going to investigate the programme for issues of Standards. Hopefully they will slap down FOX by throwing the book at them, and give them some sort of penalty; a £50,000 symbolic fine would do nicely, that is what Sky News got for faking that report during the Iraq War, the same should apply to FOX News for their blatent distortion of the facts.

Give it time, someone will 'ave 'em