Obligatory "Fox News Is Evil" Thread

[Ceannairceach]

The evidence is the lack of it. There is no verifiable connection between the White House shooter and the Occupy movement. Even conservative watchdogs claim that Fox is the only news source to claim such, and hasn't presented any evidence to verify this claim. Unless, of course, you can show me what evidence they have brought up.

There's about as much connection between this shooter and a "movement" as there was between this shooter and his brain-stem. None.

Then again, seeing liberals whining about Fox claiming he was a member of the Occupy movement, when they endlessly claimed the Giffords shooter was a Tea Partier, as well as a couple other notable falsities, makes me laugh.

Ah, once again, descend to "But they did it too!"

[Cannot think of a name]

Stand by, your Waaaaahmbulance is on its way.

In the meantime, let me point out some things that might help you and your pity party.

You, like every other member of this forum, have the ability to post threads. On the main page, the big button that says "New Topic", just press that and you can make topics about whatever your little heart desires.

Furthermore, there is a difference between over-representation and bias. Learn it.

Now, I know you're just twisting yourself up about all the horrible, horrible things that might happen if you 'dare' to make a thread about any one of the little red herrings you've brought up in order to avoid the rather indefensible act that Fox has pulled here because it makes you uncomfortable. The important thing to remember is that no one can actually do anything to you. These are all just words on a screen, and if the words scare you that much that you're afraid to venture out with a thread of your own you can always turn the computer off and stare at a blue sheet of paper to calm down.

If you've got a complaint about CNN, hit "New Topic" and make one. Because just like the conservatives you're pretending don't exist on NSG so as to nail yourself to the cross that came to this thread before you who brought up 'B-but MSNBC!', vague whining about CNN does not address this situation in anyway. CNN could rival the Onion in random bullshit around the clock and it would not excuse Fox. Much in the same way what Timmy did next door didn't excuse the shit you did with your momma.

All of your complaints about bias this and bias that, moot. Fuck all to do with anything, except in the context of this lie. And it is a lie. What anyone else does is not an excuse. No one is going to go, "Oh well...conservatives hate CNN, so it's all okay now." Doesn't work that way.

We take your flopping around and changing of the subject as a tacit acknowledgment that this is an inexcusable act and the people at Fox are in fact hacks.

1. First off don't claim things about me, you don't know me or my emotions.
2. I'm not excusing either news station, don't put words in my mouth.
3. Personal attacks make you look like a fool, look at the bold above.

Contrast and compare:
ISSUE:Fox News, despite investigators saying there is no connection between the White House shooter and the Occupy Movement, has a day after that connection has been denied reported that the White House shooter is part of the Occupy Movement.
RESPONSE:Well, CNN is biased. So...

ISSUE: A kid breaks a window.
RESPONSE: Well, Timmy broke a window. So...

You see how in this second example the response does not actually address the problem of the kid having broke the window? It is shockingly similar to the way that claiming CNN has a bias does not in any way address the fact that Fox has falsified a connection to a group they do not like.

This is what we call a simile. They can seem like personal attacks if they are glaringly obvious and thus make you uncomfortable, but they are not in fact the same thing.

The very act of bringing up CNN is an attempt to distract from what Fox has done. While this may or may not be actually condoning what they have done, it is excuse making because you are actively dismissing the criticism by essentially saying, "so, CNN does X." So I am not putting a single word in your mouth but rather responding to the ones you've already typed.

Additionally, I am not trying to imply your emotional state, but again responding to your martyrdom regarding the liberalness of this board and other sources. If you don't want that addressed, don't bring it up.

[Grave_n_idle]

Apparently, because those stories are already known to be untrue.

You don't think that's a problem?

Loaded question. Nice try.

Fox ran a story that was established one day earlier to be unsupportable.

Both left AND right media watchdogs pointed out Fox was unique in this approach.

Saiwania claims to 'hold nothing against them'.


I'm not really sure you're comprehending what's at issue here. Or what a loaded question is, for that matter.

[North Calaveras]

1. First off don't claim things about me, you don't know me or my emotions.
2. I'm not excusing either news station, don't put words in my mouth.
3. Personal attacks make you look like a fool, look at the bold above.

Contrast and compare:
ISSUE:Fox News, despite investigators saying there is no connection between the White House shooter and the Occupy Movement, has a day after that connection has been denied reported that the White House shooter is part of the Occupy Movement.
RESPONSE:Well, CNN is biased. So...

ISSUE: A kid breaks a window.
RESPONSE: Well, Timmy broke a window. So...

You see how in this second example the response does not actually address the probably of the kid having broke the window? It is shockingly similar to the way that claiming CNN has a bias does not in any way address the fact that Fox has falsified a connection to a group they do not like.

This is what we call a simile. They can seem like personal attacks if they are glaringly obvious and thus make you uncomfortable, but they are not in fact the same thing.

The very act of bringing up CNN is an attempt to distract from what Fox has done. While this may or may not be actually condoning what they have done, it is excuse making because you are actively dismissing the criticism by essentially saying, "so, CNN does X." So I am not putting a single word in your mouth but rather responding to the ones you've already typed.

Additionally, I am not trying to imply your emotional state, but again responding to your martyrdom regarding the liberalness of this board and other sources. If you don't want that addressed, don't bring it up.

Your saying what I bolded WASN"T a perosnal attack?

"Much in the same way what Timmy did next door didn't excuse the shit you did with your momma."

yeah totally not a personal attack......

[Cannot think of a name]

There's about as much connection between this shooter and a "movement" as there was between this shooter and his brain-stem. None.

Then again, seeing liberals whining about Fox claiming he was a member of the Occupy movement, when they endlessly claimed the Giffords shooter was a Tea Partier, as well as a couple other notable falsities, makes me laugh.

Ah, once again, descend to "But they did it too!"

It's like that bit:
That's life.
What's life?
A magazine.
What's it cost?
Twenty twice.
That's too much.
That's life.
What's life?
etc.

Though at this point you can translate any of these "CNN/MSNBC/NSG bias blah blah blah" posts as "I acknowledge that this is a fairly heinous act for a news station to do and have no defense for their actions. As a viewer, this makes me uncomfortable so I wish to change the subject quickly."

[Hellenic Protectorates]

There's about as much connection between this shooter and a "movement" as there was between this shooter and his brain-stem. None.

Then again, seeing liberals whining about Fox claiming he was a member of the Occupy movement, when they endlessly claimed the Giffords shooter was a Tea Partier, as well as a couple other notable falsities, makes me laugh.

Ah, once again, descend to "But they did it too!"

...which is only brought up, ever, when a conservative is doing it.

The amount of double standards here is enough to make someone choke.

[Cannot think of a name]

Contrast and compare:
ISSUE:Fox News, despite investigators saying there is no connection between the White House shooter and the Occupy Movement, has a day after that connection has been denied reported that the White House shooter is part of the Occupy Movement.
RESPONSE:Well, CNN is biased. So...

ISSUE: A kid breaks a window.
RESPONSE: Well, Timmy broke a window. So...

You see how in this second example the response does not actually address the probably of the kid having broke the window? It is shockingly similar to the way that claiming CNN has a bias does not in any way address the fact that Fox has falsified a connection to a group they do not like.

This is what we call a simile. They can seem like personal attacks if they are glaringly obvious and thus make you uncomfortable, but they are not in fact the same thing.

The very act of bringing up CNN is an attempt to distract from what Fox has done. While this may or may not be actually condoning what they have done, it is excuse making because you are actively dismissing the criticism by essentially saying, "so, CNN does X." So I am not putting a single word in your mouth but rather responding to the ones you've already typed.

Additionally, I am not trying to imply your emotional state, but again responding to your martyrdom regarding the liberalness of this board and other sources. If you don't want that addressed, don't bring it up.

Your saying what I bolded WASN"T a perosnal attack?

"Much in the same way what Timmy did next door didn't excuse the shit you did with your momma."

yeah totally not a personal attack......

What did it attack?

[North Calaveras]

Your saying what I bolded WASN"T a perosnal attack?

"Much in the same way what Timmy did next door didn't excuse the shit you did with your momma."

yeah totally not a personal attack......

Pray tell, my little martyr, what did it attack?

my mom and I , stop calling me something I'm not

[Hellenic Protectorates]

Your saying what I bolded WASN"T a perosnal attack?

"Much in the same way what Timmy did next door didn't excuse the shit you did with your momma."

yeah totally not a personal attack......

Pray tell, my little martyr, what did it attack?

Another personal attack. My, someone's feeling a little insecure about their position.

[Grave_n_idle]

In the case of FOX, we have evidence that they mare making shit up. Is there evidence that Toyota's claims are true?

You have no solid evidence, even the OP dosn't have solid evidence of "story fabrication"

I presented the link to news from the DAY BEFORE Fox ran the stuff linking them, where the official verdict was that there was no link. I highlighted that part.

Fox ran the misleading articles, discussions and chyrons the DAY AFTER the link was shown to be unsupported.


What would be more 'solid' evidence of 'story fabrication' than the fact that they RAN the story the day AFTER it was shown to be false?

[New Conglomerate]

The amount of double standards here is enough to make someone choke.

If you really want to goad your persecution complex, kindly do it elsewhere where it doesn't constitute a threadjack.

[Ceannairceach]

Ah, once again, descend to "But they did it too!"

...which is only brought up, ever, when a conservative is doing it.

The amount of double standards here is enough to make someone choke.

Not in my case. Any instances of justification by "They did it too" is idiotic. Don't claim things about me that aren't true. I suppose you have proof that everyone here is not similarly against double standards, or are you just bullshitting to prove a point?

[Hellenic Protectorates]

The amount of double standards here is enough to make someone choke.

If you really want to goad your persecution complex, kindly do it elsewhere where it doesn't constitute a threadjack.

False-implications. Logically fallacious assumption. Strawman.

Seriously. Can anyone respond without some sort of condescending personal attack, and that actually touches the subject at hand?

[North Calaveras]

If you really want to goad your persecution complex, kindly do it elsewhere where it doesn't constitute a threadjack.

False-implications. Logically fallacious assumption. Strawman.

Seriously. Can anyone respond without some sort of condescending personal attack, and that actually touches the subject at hand?

On Nationstates, being anywhere near the right-wing, no way.

[Cannot think of a name]

Pray tell, my little martyr, what did it attack?

my mom and I , stop calling me something I'm not

What did it call you?

Pray tell, my little martyr, what did it attack?

Another personal attack. My, someone's feeling a little insecure about their position.

Yes. That was vile.

[Ceannairceach]

False-implications. Logically fallacious assumption. Strawman.

Seriously. Can anyone respond without some sort of condescending personal attack, and that actually touches the subject at hand?

On Nationstates, being anywhere near the right-wing, no way.

Oh, yes, obviously you are being oppressed and harassed for being in a debate forum whilst being right-wing.

You are not a victim for having people disagree with you.

[Hellenic Protectorates]

...which is only brought up, ever, when a conservative is doing it.

The amount of double standards here is enough to make someone choke.

Not in my case. Any instances of justification by "They did it too" is idiotic. Don't claim things about me that aren't true. I suppose you have proof that everyone here is not similarly against double standards, or are you just bullshitting to prove a point?

Are you able to propose a point without some sort of personal attack double-dipped in condescension? I literally just posted about this.

I'm not defending or attacking "they did it too" justifications. Assuming I am is a mistake on your part. I'm making an observation based on my readings of this thread.

[North Calaveras]

On Nationstates, being anywhere near the right-wing, no way.

Oh, yes, obviously you are being oppressed and harassed for being in a debate forum whilst being right-wing.

You are not a victim for having people disagree with you.

Cause those two personal attacks by CTOAN were not harassment...

[Ceannairceach]

Oh, yes, obviously you are being oppressed and harassed for being in a debate forum whilst being right-wing.

You are not a victim for having people disagree with you.

Cause those two personal attacks by CTOAN were not harassment...

One is not representative of all, chum.

[Hellenic Protectorates]

On Nationstates, being anywhere near the right-wing, no way.

Oh, yes, obviously you are being oppressed and harassed for being in a debate forum whilst being right-wing.

You are not a victim for having people disagree with you.

Meanwhile, any opinion not fully held by the "herd" is openly heckled, and the poster attacked personally, and the argument not taken seriously, with responses from opposition degrading to " ".

[Ceannairceach]

Not in my case. Any instances of justification by "They did it too" is idiotic. Don't claim things about me that aren't true. I suppose you have proof that everyone here is not similarly against double standards, or are you just bullshitting to prove a point?

Are you able to propose a point without some sort of personal attack double-dipped in condescension? I literally just posted about this.

I'm not defending or attacking "they did it too" justifications. Assuming I am is a mistake on your part. I'm making an observation based on my readings of this thread.

How did I attack you? Pointing out your lack of argument is not an attack against you.

You aren't, but you are using it.

[North Calaveras]

Cause those two personal attacks by CTOAN were not harassment...

One is not representative of all, chum.

I never said it was...

[Cannot think of a name]

Oh, yes, obviously you are being oppressed and harassed for being in a debate forum whilst being right-wing.

You are not a victim for having people disagree with you.

Cause those two personal attacks by CTOAN were not harassment...

You know what? I removed the martyr comment, I won't even try and defend it. I'll even apologize, I'm sorry. Now maybe you can get back to the subject at hand.

[Grave_n_idle]

I watch Fox and CNN and i notice bias in BOTH of them equally. This is just NS doing its typical circle jerk on Fox followed with a nice put down of Israel.

Bias is not the issue, running a story that's already discredited is.

CNN is not the issue.

Israel is not the issue. Or even related to it.

This is nothing to do with a circle-jerk. The title is even a parody of the traditional 'Fox News Is Evil' stereotype, because that's not the point of the thread.

Jesus. Is it really too much to expect people to at least read the whole OP before they open their mouths?

[Ceannairceach]

One is not representative of all, chum.

I never said it was...

You imply that everyone is against you here, when only one person is, apparently, getting even close to harassing you. Which, as you'll note, is against site rules, and you should report people who do so, not respond to them.