Defending the Truth

It never fails... everywhere there is a large gathering of liberal whackos and Fox News appears, the Whacked bunch of progressives decide its open season on FOX Property and their news teams!

I observed this myself in DC last year when A.N.S.W.E.R. and the rest of their communist creeps were shown for what they are, and that is total anti-American, anti-Military and the most extreme Bush-haters imaginable filled with bile, contempt of others space, speech, property!

O’Reilly: Fox Vandalized, Attacked


Friday, January 11, 2008 12:10 PM By: Jim Meyers
Bill O’Reilly says all Fox News employees are now “cautious” after several run-ins during coverage of the New Hampshire primary that were fueled by “anti-Fox hatred.”
In his syndicated column out this week, O’Reilly described attacks on Fox that border on violence.
“I saw the anti-Fox hatred first-hand when I traveled to New Hampshire. Fox News vehicles have been vandalized; FNC reporters cursed; and all Fox News personnel are cautious,” the cable news star writes.
O’Reilly also detailed in his column an encounter he had at a Barack Obama rally, which was aired on “The O’Reilly Factor.” O’Reilly described an Obama staffer’s attempt to block his camera crew “a blatant assault on press freedom.”
O’Reilly says the anger towards Fox is due to the network’s ratings success, which has created “a bitterness unprecedented in the U.S. press.
“So it comes as no surprise that Fox News, which gives equal time to conservative thought, is despised by many in the liberal press."
O’Reilly said that Democratic presidential candidates have refused to take part in debates sponsored by Fox News because “the far-left Web crazies told them to do it. Sites like the Daily Kos and Media Matters made it clear to the Democrats that anyone dealing with Fox would be punished.”
O’Reilly added: “Note that the GOP candidates haven’t played that game, appearing on ultra-liberal MSNBC and every other news network.”
MSNBC has also been in O’Reilly’s crosshairs.
Parent company GE was featured on "The O’Reilly Factor" Thursday night, including allegations the conglomerate went easy on the bin Laden family after the Sept. 11 attacks. GE has done business with the bin Laden family.







© 2008 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

When Fox News establishes themselves as the poster child for propagandistic reactionism, they should expect no less. But I fail to see how people vandalizing Fox News provides any kind of substantiation for such a dubious claim such as "anti-American" or "anti-military". In fact, I've seen many veterans (many of which veterans who have returned from Afghanistan or Iraq) involved in left-wing peace organizations, and they tend to be the most involved.

Calling ANSWER communist just shows your ignorance of the left. You might get away with socialist, as many of their leaders and organizers are self-described socialists, but the general population of such protests generally constitute a broader microcosm of the American political scene, united only by the common interest of ending the war. The only major anti-war organizations that were primarily organized by communists that I know of is Not in Our Name and perhaps the more popular World Can't Wait. I've seen all three and marched along side all three (along with countless other groups, ranging from conservatives, to centrists, to anarchists) in Washington as a member of Military Families Speak Out. Not in Our Name and the World Can't Wait were organized mostly by members of the Revolutionary Communist Party, USA (perhaps you're familiar with their more well-known youth organization the Revolutionary Communist Youth Brigade?); but nonetheless, the people that I've talked with that were rallying with the World Can't Wait were far from communist.

Not that it should matter anyway. Even if they were, it is their right to be communist and voice their opinions, but I'm sure you knew that already.

When Fox News establishes themselves as the poster child for propagandistic reactionism, they should expect no less. But I fail to see how people vandalizing Fox News provides any kind of substantiation for such a dubious claim such as "anti-American" or "anti-military". The point is, in 30 years of my political activity, I have seen/ directly observed the LEFT, the so-called Progressives, liberals, socialists, communists and anarchists (of course) causing mayhem and destruction to personal, corporate and public property... civil discourse and diplomacy, HA! They can't do it at home so how in the world could the do it abroad without signing away our national sovereignty!? In fact, I've seen many veterans (many of which veterans who have returned from Afghanistan or Iraq) involved in left-wing peace organizations, and they tend to be the most involved. In-Fact, those numbers are miniscule compared to the veterans and active duty who are FAR from center on the issues of the day concerning the battle in the Middle east and around the globe! AND I am one of the number...

Since 1985 I have been in and out of the Middle East/North Africa and Central & Eastern Europe... tyranny, communism and socialism reign... thugs galore, gangs/mafia, human trafficing/slave trade, black market....

Calling ANSWER communist just shows your ignorance of the left. My ignorance of the LEFT... thats a bold statement when you know me not! I have pulled down their posters of so-called troop support from around our base perimeter at least 6-7 times in the last 18 months... and theirs was one among them which even had a LISTING at the bottom of supporting organizations... there must have been at least 10 communist/socialist/anarchy type Orgs on it!! You might get away with socialist, as many of their leaders and organizers are self-described socialists, but the general population of such protests generally constitute a broader microcosm of the American political scene, united only by the common interest of ending the war. The only major anti-war organizations that were primarily organized by communists that I know of is Not in Our Name and perhaps the more popular World Can't Wait. I've seen all three and marched along side all three (along with countless other groups, ranging from conservatives, to centrists, to anarchists) in Washington as a member of Military Families Speak Out. Not in Our Name and the World Can't Wait were organized mostly by members of the Revolutionary Communist Party, USA (perhaps you're familiar with their more well-known youth organization the Revolutionary Communist Youth Brigade?); but nonetheless, the people that I've talked with that were rallying with the World Can't Wait were far from communist. Far from Communists... probably true! The real problem is the willingly ignorant fall prey to the emotional trappings of their sentiment and failed premise of government is the answer and should be involved more and more in our daily lives from the New Deal to the Great Society to the present our citizens have been robbed daily to pay for failed government departments which still operate to this day... they have also fallen prey to the real propagandists, NBC, CBS, CNN, ABC, BBC, NPR and PBS!! If we had todays type of support and rhetoric back in 1942 - 45 Japan and Germany would be the reigning tyrannical empires they set out to be with Russia not far behind!!

Not that it should matter anyway. Even if they were, it is their right to be communist and voice their opinions, but I'm sure you knew that already. You're doggone right, its their right to act a fool... to express their IGNORANCE of what this nation is truly about!

Radical actions in self-stated radicalism is to be expected. What I have a problem with in your rhetoric is a very simplistic black-and-white dualism. It's hard to associate "the left" with the actions of a few, let alone generalize "the left" about anything in the first place, considering its very wide-encompassing set of competing ideas. You seemed to have encompassed "them" as one group, including 'progressives', liberals, socialists, communists, and anarchists; and you seemed to have encompassed the actions of a few subscribing to some of those particular identifications as the attitude of the many. When in actuality each one of those is a philosophy very different from one another, hence my accusation of your ignorance of the left. I don't need to know you when you make it self-evident. And anarchism isn't even a part of the 'left'; it can equally as much be apart of the 'right' or 'center' (depending upon the method; i.e. anarcho-syndicalism, anarcho-capitalism, etc.).

In my experiences, almost always the only ones breaking windows and setting dumpsters on fire are the anarchists. The most radical thing socialists or communists do is march around with their drums waving their Che Guevara flags.

It is interesting you should say that, when in actuality the 2008 Presidential candidate to have received the most in personal donation from members of the military is Ron Paul. Perhaps that should say something.

Then I understand your ignorance of the left. Tyrants are liars (does that come off as a surprise?). Their use of the indignation of the proletariat are merely power tools. There hasn't yet been an example of communism. As for socialism, the closest is probably Scandinavia, the nations of which of course have the highest standards of living and lowest crime rates. The second closest is probably Cuba, and (in per capita terms) they have done very well considering they are third-world and have been suffering a blockade for decades; especially in comparison to third-world capitalist nations which are pillaged and raped by corruption and tyranny.

The point is, while you can give examples of third-world so-called "socialist" nations, I can give examples tenfold of third-world capitalist nations which are just as bad or even worse off. Your examples are worthless to me.

If your example of all the supporting organizations is correct then that would mean they're a coalition, not communist. Meaning they're as much any political philosophy as they are communist (so long as such a philosophy is against the war in Iraq). And I guarantee you that the majority of those taking place in their organized marches don't subscribe to the socio-political philosophies of their organizers; because ANSWER is primarily an anti-war organization.


How arrogant of you to assume that the only way to hold a communist philosophy is in some sense by coercion. I don't doubt you have reasons (some of them probably logical) for believing the way you do, why should you doubt mine on no valid premise whatsoever? Incidentally, compared with the right, the left I've encountered are very open-minded in the sense that they don't fear going to multiple sources (even ones that go against their philosophies). Obviously, they're not so open minded as to have their brain fall out, and the radical left obviously don't change their mind, but they're well-versed in the philosophy of right. The right on the other hand, lean toward the opposite (hence liberal vs. conservatism sometimes has more than just a political connotation). This is self-evident in your quip about the "real propagandists". You just so-happened to list every station that does not have a readily apparent conservative leaning as a 'propagandist' (Fox News is noticeably absent from your list).

And what is this nation truly about, then?

Poll: Fox Most Trusted News for Americans


Sunday, January 13, 2008 3:05 PM

Article Font Size

Fox News has supplanted CNN as the 'most trusted' news source for Americans, a new nationwide poll finds.

The poll conducted by Sacred Heart University, found that the most trusted national TV news organizations, for accurate reporting, in declining order included: Fox News (27.0%), CNN (14.6%), and NBC News (10.90%). These were followed by ABC News (7.0%), local news (6.9%), CBS News (6.8%) MSNBC (4.0%), PBS News (3.0%), CNBC (0.6%) and CBN (0.5%).

In 2003, CNN led Fox News on “trust most for accurate reporting” 23.8% to 14.6%.

The Sacred Heart University Poll also found significantly declining percentages of Americans saying they believe all or most of media news reporting.

In the current national poll, just 19.6% of those surveyed could say they believe all or most news media reporting. This is down from 27.4% in 2003. Just under one-quarter, 23.9%, in 2007 said they believe little or none of reporting while 55.3% suggested they believe some media news reporting.

You sound as though, in person, you could be someone to have a real and reasonable discussion on many topics... I have friends who are Dem/Lib/Socialist types... we agree to disagree on many topics... b ut it always amazes me how they enjoy the benefits of a Republican Democracy and how they can curse it in the same breath while quoting dogmatically from Marx to the Holy Bible on how life should be lived and NONE of it has to do with PERSONAL Responsibility, working and earning from physical/mental sweat & blood, sacrifice for family, community, state & nation... and no... their minds usually so open their brains fall out but they come darn close on many ocassions...

You're citing a poll as evidence for objectivity? This is completely worthless. This is a logical fallacy called argumentum ad populum.

Instead you should look at studies done on levels of knowledge of current events by people that use certain sources. When you do, Fox News generally always finishes last.

Take this study for example, done by the Pew Research Center. Basic current events literacy of Fox News viewers in general is last beaten only by viewers of network morning talk shows. Whilst among the top are viewers of the Daily Show and the Colbert Report. The top major news source is NPR, whilst CNN is somewhere in the middle, and of course Fox is last.

I usually attempt to keep a civil tone, though usually that tone doesn't carry over well through text.

I would not like to live in a place where we all agreed, that goes against the grain of my philosophy. I've read a lot of Marx, and indeed I do quote him a lot, but I don't think it necessarily goes against your statement of "PERSONAL Responsibility, working and earning from physical/mental sweat & blood, sacrifice for family, community, state & nation" but in many instances compliments it. Democracy is complimentary to socialist ideas because socialism is merely the application of democracy to the socio-economic strata. Usually, I'd say, capitalism encompasses either working hard in exploitation or working hard in selfishness. No one said everything is provided for you in communism; it just takes the emphasis off of exploitation and on cooperation.

Agreed. Not to mention that "universal health care" (in general) could mean anything. "Single-payer" and "socialized medicine" are actually two different things, though closely related.

You're right that in American politics, the use of the term "socialized medicine" puts people off to whatever notion they're describing, and usually the debate doesn't go much further than that. However, I'm not put off but interested; must be some kind of freak.