[Coach_Owens87]

Wow, I agree with you Eagle . . . CBS, CNN, NBC, MSNBC, and ABC are always straight . . . I am so-oooo disappointed that Fox actually tells the other side of the story. How dare they!!!:lmao:

No one said they are always balanced, because they arent. Were just saying that fox is blantantly lies and distorts stories. And all people can do to defend is make horrible jokes like you attempted to do.

Again, provide video evidence of bias in any network besides MSNBC, we all know they lean left.

[Benchwarmer]

No one said they are always balanced, because they arent. Were just saying that fox is blantantly lies and distorts stories. And all people can do to defend is make horrible jokes like you attempted to do.

Again, provide video evidence of bias in any network besides MSNBC, we all know they lean left.

I agree with you on Fox and lies.

[BIGREDDAWG]

No one said they are always balanced, because they arent. Were just saying that fox is blantantly lies and distorts stories. And all people can do to defend is make horrible jokes like you attempted to do.

Again, provide video evidence of bias in any network besides MSNBC, we all know they lean left.

Fox blatantly lies and distorts stories? Where is the evidence? You may have been brainwashed by the other networks in to believing they are lies and distortions but I beg you to provide undisputable evidence . . . doubt you can. At least Fox attempts to allow another perspective to be heard. On most other networks all you get is liberal spew.

[Coach_Owens87]

Fox blatantly lies and distorts stories? Where is the evidence? You may have been brainwashed by the other networks in to believing they are lies and distortions but I beg you to provide undisputable evidence . . . doubt you can. At least Fox attempts to allow another perspective to be heard. On most other networks all you get is liberal spew.

lol, I easily can do this, with video evidence.

A couple of years ago media matters purchased an ad in the NYT that un-rightfully attacked general Patreaus, and was deemed "General Betray us". Fox lied and said that when a senate vote came up to condemn the ads, Obama refused to vote on it. THAT WAS A LIE.

http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/200...demns.html

"MoveOn.org's "General Betray Us" advertisement was condemned today by the U.S. Senate.

Voting 72-25, senators passed a resolution sponsored by conservative Republican John Cornyn of Texas.

The anti-war group's full-page ad appeared in The New York Times last week as Gen. David Petraeus testified on Capitol Hill. It carried the headline "General Petraeus or General Betray Us? Cooking the books for the White House."

Presidential candidates Sens. Hillary Clinton and Christopher Dodd voted against the resolution. Sen. Barrack Obama did not vote.

Obama did, however, vote for an alternate measure, offered by California Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer, that condemned the MoveOn ad as an "unwarranted personal attack" on Petraeus. It also denounced political attack ads that questioned the patriotism of Vietnam War vets Sen. John Kerry and Max Cleland, a former senator from Georgia who was disabled during the war. That resolution was defeated."


Fox lied about the voting record, and distorted it to make it seem like Obama was for the ad. Wasn't this a lie? Find me something like this from the big bad liberal media. Lying on one show might slip by, but using it as a talking point for days? Come on, thats wrong, and was used to push a right wing agenda!



So wasn't this a LIE from fox by saying that obama didnt vote to condemn it, when there is indisputable evidence that he did. Find me a lie like that from the big bad liberal media!

[oneijoe]

Yep. And thats why I show proof to back up what I say. Just like the video.

The interview with the network news exec. is FAR closer to "proof" than the comedy skit posted at the top.

The closest comparison clip to the "poll of the old folks" is the reporter canoeing in the knee-deep water.

[oneijoe]

Your point proves nothing without some rock hard evidence of bias in reporting, you are just assuming that because they donate to one party, they must be biased, not quite true. I can assume that becuase people at fox donate to republicans they must be biased, but that dont prove anything, so I show videos like the one in this link. Show some evidence, give me a link to a live broadcast that proves your point. Every time you all try to prove liberal bias, you just provide things that assume their is a bias, not proof that their is.


Yes everyone does invite guest on their shows to sell books, Ann Coulter goes around spitting out lies on all the networks to sell books, and so does everyone else. He was there to sell books, not as a guest to take down the liberal media, so I dont take him seriously, you say what people want to hear in order to sell products, just look at his own history, it contradicts his points.


Liberals liking hannity or O'rielly, lol, you are crazy. I actually dont see how anyone can like them. Hannity was especially bad this year, bringing up race and saying obama used it to gain votes, while not letting us know that he has links to the KKK. They are loads of websites dedicated only to showing how ignorant, racist, and bigoted these two guys are.

I dispise those two men because they claim to be moral and "christian", defending Americas moral greatness, while they promote hate, bigotry and violence, everything "Christians" should be against. Now that hannity has his own show, fox will be nothing but a 24 hate fest against everything they don't see as conservative.

As far as watching fox, I actually never, ever tune in to live programs (Ive got the channel blocked on my tv), I usually just do some google checks, or youtube and watch the latest posted videos of their programming. OR just watch any other news network, as they fight against the lies spread by fox. Like the story of Obama attending a Muslim school.

My friend...YOU have been liberally brainwashed by the media. Those "hatred, bigotry, and violence" key-word accusations against conservatism are a dead giveaway.

Free-thinking adults don't aim words like that at fellow human beings.

[BIGREDDAWG]

lol, I easily can do this, with video evidence.

A couple of years ago media matters purchased an ad in the NYT that un-rightfully attacked general Patreaus, and was deemed "General Betray us". Fox lied and said that when a senate vote came up to condemn the ads, Obama refused to vote on it. THAT WAS A LIE.

http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/200...demns.html

"MoveOn.org's "General Betray Us" advertisement was condemned today by the U.S. Senate.

Voting 72-25, senators passed a resolution sponsored by conservative Republican John Cornyn of Texas.

The anti-war group's full-page ad appeared in The New York Times last week as Gen. David Petraeus testified on Capitol Hill. It carried the headline "General Petraeus or General Betray Us? Cooking the books for the White House."

Presidential candidates Sens. Hillary Clinton and Christopher Dodd voted against the resolution. Sen. Barrack Obama did not vote.

Obama did, however, vote for an alternate measure, offered by California Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer, that condemned the MoveOn ad as an "unwarranted personal attack" on Petraeus. It also denounced political attack ads that questioned the patriotism of Vietnam War vets Sen. John Kerry and Max Cleland, a former senator from Georgia who was disabled during the war. That resolution was defeated."


Fox lied about the voting record, and distorted it to make it seem like Obama was for the ad. Wasn't this a lie? Find me something like this from the big bad liberal media. Lying on one show might slip by, but using it as a talking point for days? Come on, thats wrong, and was used to push a right wing agenda!



So wasn't this a LIE from fox by saying that obama didnt vote to condemn it, when there is indisputable evidence that he did. Find me a lie like that from the big bad liberal media!

Looks like he didn't vote . . . just like Fox said. And your evidence is more liberal spin. You just don't like the truth so go ahead and drink your Kool-Aid and fill your mind full of liberal spew. It is a free country after all.:Cheerlead

[DevilsWin]

As a whole FOX is getting better. But the people they have under contract are the all the people who got fired from the other networks for being incompetent. I mean their biggest star, Bill Oreilly used to be the host of "Inside Edition"! Now there's a stalwart of journalism if I've ever seen one.

Rupert Murdoch is beginning to see the light.

[Old School]

lol, I easily can do this, with video evidence.

A couple of years ago media matters purchased an ad in the NYT that un-rightfully attacked general Patreaus, and was deemed "General Betray us". Fox lied and said that when a senate vote came up to condemn the ads, Obama refused to vote on it. THAT WAS A LIE. Here is evidence to prove Obama did vote.



I have plenty more of these if you need them!

Humm, could it be that the site you provided was the real liar and not Fox News, so before you call anyone a liar you may want to check out the facts. The link below shows that Obama and Biden did not vote on this S.Amdt. and that Reid, Clinton, voted nay, I believe this site should provide the proof you need.


http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/ro...vote=00344

[Coach_Owens87]

Humm, could it be that the site you provided was the real liar and not Fox News, so before you call anyone a liar you may want to check out the facts. The link below shows that Obama and Biden did not vote on this S.Amdt. and that Reid, Clinton, voted nay, I believe this site should provide the proof you need.


http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/ro...vote=00344

Could it be that all of you all cant read? Read the link I showed to USA today, he didnt vote on the resolution by the Republican but did vote on another one that deemed the ad as an "unwarranted personal attack". Fox lied, plain and simple.

[BIGREDDAWG]

Could it be that all of you all cant read? Read the link I showed to USA today, he didnt vote on the resolution by the Republican but did vote on another one that deemed the ad as an "unwarranted personal attack". Fox lied, plain and simple.

He did not vote on the issue . . . and the fact that it was a Republican initiative shows he is partisan . . . so he lies when he says he is not. Listen you will not convince me that other media outlets are unbiased and Fox is biased. All outlets lean one way or the other. To say otherwise is simply ignoring reality.

[Old School]

Fox said he did not vote on it, you said he did, you even provided a link that stated that Obama voted for for it. The bottom line is that Obama did not vote to comdemn the General Petraeus ad. So how did Fox News lie, I guess my question is who is the liar here, Fox News or you.

[Coach_Owens87]

Fox said he did not vote on it, you said he did, you even provided a link that stated that Obama voted for for it. The bottom line is that Obama did not vote to comdemn the General Petraeus ad. So how did Fox News lie, I guess my question is who is the liar here, Fox News or you.

lol, now your lying. I asked for the post you are quoting to be removed, which it was, because I posted it before I had finished, so thanks for pulling a fox and distorting my real point. Take a look at post #34. There was 2 different resolutions put before the senate, both of them very similar. Obama voted on a act which deemed the ad as an "unwarranted personal attack", but it also condemned the ads against John Kerry and other vets. Fox lied, theres no way around it.

The real question is can debate with distorting and lying about what people say, or are you just like fox?

[Old School]

lol, now your lying. I asked for the post you are quoting to be removed, which it was, because I posted it before I had finished, so thanks for pulling a fox and distorting my real point. Take a look at post #34. There was 2 different resolutions put before the senate, both of them very similar. Obama voted on a act which deemed the ad as an "unwarranted personal attack", but it also condemned the ads against John Kerry and other vets. Fox lied, theres no way around it.

The real question is can debate with distorting and lying about what people say, or are you just like fox?

Now I'm lying! How so? Did your youtube video state that Fox lied when they said Obama did not vote on the amendment to condemn the Petraeus ad. You yourself said and I quote "Fox lied and said that when a senate vote came up to condemn the ads, Obama refused to vote on it. THAT WAS A LIE. Here is evidence to prove Obama did vote." and then provided the link below.





Again here is the same link I gave in post #39 check out the statement of purpose, this is what the Fox reporters were talking about, so check it out and see if Obama did or did not vote on it.

Statement of Purpose:
To express the sense of the Senate that General David H. Petraeus, Commanding General, Multi-National Force-Iraq, deserves the full support of the Senate and strongly condemn personal attacks on the honor and integrity of General Petraeus and all members of the United States Armed Forces
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/ro...vote=00344

[BIGREDDAWG]

Fox said he did not vote on it, you said he did, you even provided a link that stated that Obama voted for for it. The bottom line is that Obama did not vote to comdemn the General Petraeus ad. So how did Fox News lie, I guess my question is who is the liar here, Fox News or you.

My questions exactly.:praise:

[Coach_Owens87]

Now I'm lying! How so? Did your youtube video state that Fox lied when they said Obama did not vote on the amendment to condemn the Petraeus ad. You yourself said and I quote "Fox lied and said that when a senate vote came up to condemn the ads, Obama refused to vote on it. THAT WAS A LIE. Here is evidence to prove Obama did vote." and then provided the link below.





Again here is the same link I gave in post #39 check out the statement of purpose, this is what the Fox reporters were talking about, so check it out and see if Obama did or did not vote on it.

Statement of Purpose:
To express the sense of the Senate that General David H. Petraeus, Commanding General, Multi-National Force-Iraq, deserves the full support of the Senate and strongly condemn personal attacks on the honor and integrity of General Petraeus and all members of the United States Armed Forces
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/ro...vote=00344

lol, old school, you aren't listening to a thing I say!

The video did say they lied, because they said he didnt vote to condemn the ads, they did not say that he didnt vote on just ONE of the resolutions, they said he REFUSED TO SPEAK OUT. thats a lie. They said this over 6 months after he voted, so there is no excuse to twist and distort stories like this. He voted on a measure that condemns several ads attacking leaders in this war, and veterans of past wars, I provided two links to show this. The video I posted showed that fox said he did not vote on ANY resolution, and then showed video evidence that he DID vote. The USA today link gave details about both measures, the one he didnt vote on, and the one he voted yes to. To say that he didnt speak out is a LIE. No matter how you twist it, they said he didnt condemn the ads, and he did, but he didnt vote on the resolution put up by the Republican, and we all know that not going with republicans is a sin in fox's eyes.

There were two that where put through the senate, one from Boxer (D-CA), which Obama voted on, and is shown in the video, and one from Conryn (R-TX), which Obama did not vote on. They said he refused to speak out against the AD, that was a lie. No other way around it.

[Old School]

lol, old school, you aren't listening to a thing I say!

The video did say they lied, because they said he didnt vote to condemn the ads, they did not say that he didnt vote on just ONE of the resolutions, they said he REFUSED TO SPEAK OUT. thats a lie. They said this over 6 months after he voted, so there is no excuse to twist and distort stories like this. He voted on a measure that condemns several ads attacking leaders in this war, and veterans of past wars, I provided two links to show this. The video I posted showed that fox said he did not vote on ANY resolution, and then showed video evidence that he DID vote. The USA today link gave details about both measures, the one he didnt vote on, and the one he voted yes to. To say that he didnt speak out is a LIE. No matter how you twist it, they said he didnt condemn the ads, and he did, but he didnt vote on the resolution put up by the Republican, and we all know that not going with republicans is a sin in fox's eyes.

There were two that where put through the senate, one from Boxer (D-CA), which Obama voted on, and is shown in the video, and one from Conryn (R-TX), which[/B] Obama did not vote on. They said he refused to speak out against the AD, that was a lie. No other way around it.

Where was it said, give me a time on the video where a Fox News reporter said [B]HE REFUSED TO SPEAK OUT apparently I've missed it somewhere along the way.

Link to Boxer Amendent 2947
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/ro...vote=00343

This is the statement of purpose for amendment 2947 of H.R. 1585 nowhere does it mention General Petraeus or the ad attacking him. For the record Obama did vote "yea" on this amendment.

Statement of Purpose:
To reaffirm strong support for all the men and women of the United States Armed Forces and to strongly condemn attacks on the honor, integrity, and patriotism of any individual who is serving or has served honorably in the United States Armed Forces, by any person or organization.

Listen to the last part of you video when the speaker ask for a vote on the Boxer amendment 2947 and Obama votes "I". Even though the speaker talked about the attack ads on General Petraeus prior to the vote, amendment 2947 does not mention Petraeus.


Link to Cornyn amendment 2934
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/ro...vote=00344 Obama did not vote to condemn the Petraeus ad
This is the statement of purpose to condemn the attack ads by move on for General Petraeus. Even The Jed Report said that Obama voted to condemn the Petraeus attacks, again he did not vote on amendment 2934. The Fox News reporters were reporting that Obama did not vote to condemn the attack ads on General Petraeus on amendment 2934. (which you admit Obama not voting for)

Statement of Purpose:
To express the sense of the Senate that General David H. Petraeus, Commanding General, Multi-National Force-Iraq, deserves the full support of the Senate and strongly condemn personal attacks on the honor and integrity of General Petraeus and all members of the United States Armed Forces

Go ahead and twist this anyway you want to, BTW you always seem to complain about the right putting everything into sound bytes to distort the facts, now after watching your little video clip you have no right to complain anymore. lol

[Coach_Owens87]

Where was it said, give me a time on the video where a Fox News reporter said [B]HE REFUSED TO SPEAK OUT apparently I've missed it somewhere along the way. [/B]

Link to Boxer Amendent 2947
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/ro...vote=00343

This is the statement of purpose for amendment 2947 of H.R. 1585 nowhere does it mention General Petraeus or the ad attacking him. For the record Obama did vote "yea" on this amendment.

Statement of Purpose:
To reaffirm strong support for all the men and women of the United States Armed Forces and to strongly condemn attacks on the honor, integrity, and patriotism of any individual who is serving or has served honorably in the United States Armed Forces, by any person or organization.

Listen to the last part of you video when the speaker ask for a vote on the Boxer amendment 2947 and Obama votes "I". Even though the speaker talked about the attack ads on General Petraeus prior to the vote, amendment 2947 does not mention Petraeus.


Link to Cornyn amendment 2934
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/ro...vote=00344 Obama did not vote to condemn the Petraeus ad
This is the statement of purpose to condemn the attack ads by move on for General Petraeus. Even The Jed Report said that Obama voted to condemn the Petraeus attacks, again he did not vote on amendment 2934. The Fox News reporters were reporting that Obama did not vote to condemn the attack ads on General Petraeus on amendment 2934. (which you admit Obama not voting for)

Statement of Purpose:
To express the sense of the Senate that General David H. Petraeus, Commanding General, Multi-National Force-Iraq, deserves the full support of the Senate and strongly condemn personal attacks on the honor and integrity of General Petraeus and all members of the United States Armed Forces

Go ahead and twist this anyway you want to, BTW you always seem to complain about the right putting everything into sound bytes to distort the facts, now after watching your little video clip you have no right to complain anymore. lol

The whole video said that, lol. Every person shown in that video says that he didnt vote to condemn the ads. Are you deaf?

look up the resolution by Boxer, the one he did vote on, but it got defeated, then talk.

Im done debating, no im done arguing, there is no debating.

[BIGREDDAWG]

The whole video said that, lol. Every person shown in that video says that he didnt vote to condemn the ads. Are you deaf?

look up the resolution by Boxer, the one he did vote on, but it got defeated, then talk.

Im done debating, no im done arguing, there is no debating.

Uh oh, I think Coach just took his toys and went home!

[ImagineThat!]

Kinda looks that way...with his tail tucked too

[DevilsWin]

You guys and gals are hopeless.........

[Coach_Owens87]

Uh oh, I think Coach just took his toys and went home!

I didnt even know you where in this "argument", I asked for you to provide proof of liberal bias, and what did you do? Nothing!

[BIGREDDAWG]

I didnt even know you where in this "argument", I asked for you to provide proof of liberal bias, and what did you do? Nothing!

I did not have to provide proof ---- you provided it for me. Thanks!:bounce:

[Coach_Owens87]

I did not have to provide proof ---- you provided it for me. Thanks!:bounce:

So what your saying is that you dont have any proof? Thats pretty much what I thought, you cant prove anything you say, or disprove what I say, so you just chime it with childish post!

[Beetle01]

now now, no sense in the sarcasm. We do all know it's biased, and this wasnt meant to be an eye opening event, just a funny example of idiots at fox.

The person we really need to thank is you for still posting false stories about Obama, a month after the election is over. Thank goodness we have you around to point us in the right direction.

When did I ever post any lies?

I didnt even know you where in this "argument", I asked for you to provide proof of liberal bias, and what did you do? Nothing!

If you want proof, watch Olberman, Mathews or Rachel MadCow. Check out any of the CBS, ABC, or NBC news shows. Anyone with half a brain who watches them knows they are liberal. I find it interesting that conservatives can admit that Fox is biased, however, no liberal can admit the others are also biased. Coach you're very liberal, so if you're watching these shows and agreeing whole heartedy with everything they say, then I'd say the shows have a liberal slant. To me Fox is probably the least biased, but still very biased. They do have some morons on there who say some stupid things, however, for the most part the shwos are designed to get people from all angles. Anytime I watch Fox 99% of the time they will have someone on there arguing for an opposing view. The same can't be said about the other channels. The bias doesn't really come from the anchors anyways, the anchors are people and every person is a little biased, no big deal. Its the people in charge that decide the way the program leans and have major control of the programming. Thus you see an ABC bigwig openly admit there is a huge bias. Yet you still try and deny it.

If Obama is so non-partisan why didn't he speak out and join in with the Republicans in support of Petreaus? Instead he voted yay on abill everyone knew was going to fail. Obama needed the Iraq war to look bad, almost to the point I feel he may have wanted it to fail, so that it would be easier for him to gain power. If the media shows the true Iraq, and how things have really changed there, and are getting much better and the people actually have some hope for the first time in their lives. McCain would be our President.

[BIGREDDAWG]

So what your saying is that you dont have any proof? Thats pretty much what I thought, you cant prove anything you say, or disprove what I say, so you just chime it with childish post!

It is so hard to give it up liberal mindset when you've been beat isn't it?:lmao: Like I said you provided proof in your own post -----continue to drink your koolaid if you want. I, unlike the liberal left, still believe in the first amendment. Good day.

[Coach_Owens87]

It is so hard to give it up liberal mindset when you've been beat isn't it?:lmao: Like I said you provided proof in your own post -----continue to drink your koolaid if you want. I, unlike the liberal left, still believe in the first amendment. Good day.

lol, and the point of this post was? Oh wait I know, you still dont have any proof to back up your crap, so you just continue to riducule me. In conservative la la land that might work, but in reality we like to see proof.

[DevilsWin]

If you want proof, watch Olberman, Mathews or Rachel MadCow. Check out any of the CBS, ABC, or NBC news shows. Anyone with half a brain who watches them knows they are liberal. I find it interesting that conservatives can admit that Fox is biased, however, no liberal can admit the others are also biased. Coach you're very liberal, so if you're watching these shows and agreeing whole heartedy with everything they say, then I'd say the shows have a liberal slant. To me Fox is probably the least biased, but still very biased. They do have some morons on there who say some stupid things, however, for the most part the shwos are designed to get people from all angles. Anytime I watch Fox 99% of the time they will have someone on there arguing for an opposing view. The same can't be said about the other channels. The bias doesn't really come from the anchors anyways, the anchors are people and every person is a little biased, no big deal. Its the people in charge that decide the way the program leans and have major control of the programming. Thus you see an ABC bigwig openly admit there is a huge bias. Yet you still try and deny it.

If Obama is so non-partisan why didn't he speak out and join in with the Republicans in support of Petreaus? Instead he voted yay on abill everyone knew was going to fail. Obama needed the Iraq war to look bad, almost to the point I feel he may have wanted it to fail, so that it would be easier for him to gain power. If the media shows the true Iraq, and how things have really changed there, and are getting much better and the people actually have some hope for the first time in their lives. McCain would be our President.

I have said MSNBC is liberally biased. In fact I said the were "IN LOVE" w/ Obama.

That opposing view is usually some idiot from the Left thaty they can exploit. Look at Hannity and Colmes. That Colmes guy is ugly and stupid.

Maybe Petreaus isn't deserving of support. We haven't the benefit of the inside scoop.

[Coach_Owens87]

If you want proof, watch Olberman, Mathews or Rachel MadCow. Check out any of the CBS, ABC, or NBC news shows. Anyone with half a brain who watches them knows they are liberal. I find it interesting that conservatives can admit that Fox is biased, however, no liberal can admit the others are also biased. Coach you're very liberal, so if you're watching these shows and agreeing whole heartedy with everything they say, then I'd say the shows have a liberal slant. To me Fox is probably the least biased, but still very biased. They do have some morons on there who say some stupid things, however, for the most part the shwos are designed to get people from all angles. Anytime I watch Fox 99% of the time they will have someone on there arguing for an opposing view. The same can't be said about the other channels. The bias doesn't really come from the anchors anyways, the anchors are people and every person is a little biased, no big deal. Its the people in charge that decide the way the program leans and have major control of the programming. Thus you see an ABC bigwig openly admit there is a huge bias. Yet you still try and deny it.

If Obama is so non-partisan why didn't he speak out and join in with the Republicans in support of Petreaus? Instead he voted yay on abill everyone knew was going to fail. Obama needed the Iraq war to look bad, almost to the point I feel he may have wanted it to fail, so that it would be easier for him to gain power. If the media shows the true Iraq, and how things have really changed there, and are getting much better and the people actually have some hope for the first time in their lives. McCain would be our President.

You lost me in the first sentence becuase I told you that I DO NOT WATCH MSNBC, I dont recieve the channel, and I did admit that MSNBC is biased.

Maybe Obama didnt vote for it becuase it didnt criticize the ads against other vets, ever thought about that? Did fox, or thier republican buddies cry foul when the swift-boat ads came out against Kerry? Did they back off the false story of Obama attending a muslim school, or stop portraying him as muslim, knowing he wasnt?

Wouldnt it be more non-partisan to vote for a bill that condemmed ads against people from both sides of the political spectrum, no matter if it was going to fail or not? Or are you just like the folks at fox, and only see things from the vantage point that suits you?

So again Im asking you to provide some rock solid proof that CBS, NBC, or ABC have a liberal slant. Show me a video from one of thier broadcast and prove how it is slanted, dont give me some crap from someone saying their biased, prove it!

[vundy33]

Lol Coach_Owens and Old School, you all need to meet up at a playground or something and fight.