Do you think it needs to be MANDITORY for all politicians to debate on FOX, MSNBC, CSPAN?

Question

Since there's only one non-biased, fair reporting media outlet like FOX, do you think the republicans would get a good laugh watching all the democrats shed their feathers FOR THE FIRST TIME and have a debate in an atmosphere where they aren't fully protected by drive-by media flakes pandering for political protection from slimy democrat politicians?

Jim... Mark the date (save it for your archives!) lol
I don't have too many typo's. Good catch! And of course - you left no answer.

I left you speechless huh?

LittleLamb - Just for the record... I'm not a little neocon... I'm a major ****** conservative. Try paying attention better!

Answer 1

I love to see republicans go on CNN and wipe the floor with them

Answer 2

And how do you propose that be done? Should the gubment enforce your idea?

The one thing that I've learned, on YA, is that there isn't a bit of difference between you little neocons and the radical liberals. You both want more and more gubment control to force people to do things your way. You don't have the slightest clue what conservative means.

Oh I did pay attention to you pal. Anyone can call themselves anything they choose. But your suggestion is more than enough proof that you don't know what conservatism is. You're definitely a wolf in sheep's clothing. No doubt about it. You're a little neocon.

Answer 3

HOW CAN YOU CALL FOX NOT BIASED

THE ONLY COMEDY SHOW ON TV THAT HAS SUED FOR THE RIGHT TO LIE TO ITS VIEWERS AND WON !!!

During their appeal, FOX asserted that there are no written rules against distorting news in the media. They argued that, under the First Amendment, broadcasters have the right to lie or deliberately distort news reports on public airwaves.


The Right to Lie in the "News"
If ever we needed to know why the biggest media consumers in the world are so badly informed, this pretty well tells it all. The Media Can Legally Lie.
According to Akre and Wilson, the station was initially very excited about the series. But within a week, Fox executives and their attorneys wanted the reporters to use statements from Monsanto representatives that the reporters knew were false and to make other revisions to the story that were in direct conflict with the facts.
Fox editors then tried to force Akre and Wilson to continue to produce the distorted story. When they refused and threatened to report Fox's actions to the FCC, they were both fired.
Akre and Wilson sued the Fox station and on August 18, 2000, a Florida jury unanimously decided that Akre was wrongfully fired by Fox Television when she refused to broadcast (in the jury's words) “a false, distorted or slanted story” about the widespread use of BGH in dairy cows.
[...] FOX appealed the case, and on February 14, 2003 the Florida Second District Court of Appeals unanimously overturned the settlement awarded to Akre. The Court held that Akre’s threat to report the station’s actions to the FCC did not deserve protection under Florida’s whistle blower statute, because Florida’s whistle blower law states that an employer must violate an adopted “law, rule, or regulation."
In a stunningly narrow interpretation of FCC rules, the Florida Appeals court claimed that the FCC policy against falsification of the news does not rise to the level of a "law, rule, or regulation," it was simply a "policy." Therefore, it is up to the station whether or not it wants to report honestly.
During their appeal, FOX asserted that there are no written rules against distorting news in the media. They argued that, under the First Amendment, broadcasters have the right to lie or deliberately distort news reports on public airwaves.
Fox attorneys did not dispute Akre’s claim that they pressured her to broadcast a false story, they simply maintained that it was their right to do so.
OK, pick your jaw up off the floor. That some court thinks they CAN is bad enough, that these people assert their right to do so pretty well kicks it all down the hole. And these guys wonder why their credibility is in the toilet and the net is burning them left right and centre.
Oh, and February 2003, 30 days before Iraq.

Answer 4

Fox is non biased and fair???? Don't believe everything you hear on that channel if they are telling you that!!! All I've ever heard on there was a bunch of loud mouth bigots that have no idea what it like to live a real life, let alone be able to put themselves in anyone else's shoes for awhile. People must get off the media bandwagons and start to think for themselves.

Answer 5

No, Fox has admitted in court that it misleads thier listener's. No self respecting candidate would appear on that show.

Answer 6

Yes!

Answer 7

I think it should be mandAtory that a question be removed if it contains spelling errors THREE TIMES!