Do you seriously believe that channel is "fair and balanced"?  How can anything based on ratings be considered "fair and balanced"?

The bottom line is Fox wants Hillary to win the Democratic nomination.  They feel McCain has a better shot at beating her than Obama in the general election.

I said nothing about whether Fox was Fair and Balanced What you and I believe has nothing to do with what the big dog Dems think. They realize they can reach more of the "swing votes"

In a span of eight days, Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.), Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY.) and Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean are all taking their seats with the network that calls itself “fair and balanced” but is widely viewed as skewing conservative

Roger I see nothing in your comment that really concerns the message I posted. You don't like Fox I imagine the Dems don't either but for what ever reason the Dem party thinks they need to make several apperances on Fox

Roy Mark

Why do you think Democrats stay away from the network?  Because it's "fair and balanced"?

You stated more Democrats on appearing on FOX....I stated why they haven't in the past.  Of course they're going to appear during an election when the race is tight.  What news is that?

Rog asked  Do you seriously believe that channel is "fair and balanced"?  How can anything based on ratings be considered "fair and balanced"?

Rog most recent   Of course they're going to appear during an election when the race is tight.

What has changed?

Roy Mark

Just because their ratings are decent doesn't mean they're "fair and balanced".  People watched Hillary on the O'Reilly Factor not because they wanted to see where she stood on the issues....they wanted to see her clash with a Republican loud mouth.....and FOX knew that.  Even Bill O'Reilly, himself, said he alreay knew where she stood on the issues before the interview.  That was his reasoning for replaying the Rev. Wright sound bytes for 4 weeks straight.....because that was the "story" as he already knew where both candidates stood on the political issues. 

When you have a network so one-sided, it is common sense for the Democrats to come on during a tight race.....to answer all the attacks and get the story right.  Once the election is over, count how many times they appear.

They came on because Fox had more viewers? Right ? Never mind fair and balanced.

Rog wrote  When you have a network so one-sided, it is common sense for the Democrats to come on during a tight race.....to answer all the attacks and get the story right..

That's is what Fox has said all along. If you don''t agree with what we say come on over and talk about it.  Big audience will hear you.

Roy Mark

Look, I think we agree to some extent, but disagree on how we got to the agreement.  If that makes sense.

I don't believe Fox comes out and says, "Hey, if you disagree with us, come on over and talk about it".  They ran an overwhelmingly negative campaign against Obama for the past month.  Did he appear with Chris Wallace because Fox has such huge ratings?  Possibly, but I don't believe so.  I believe he appeared to set the record straight because he's in a tight race for the nomination and was unfairly represented by Fox.  If Rev. Wright wasn't overblown and replayed 50,000 times (and that number is probably not an exaggeration), I don't believe Obama would have appeared.

Fox said Hey, if you disagree with us, come on over and talk about it".

Obama on Cris Wallace rog says "I believe he appeared to set the record straight "

With Fox ratings Obama needed Fox far more than Fox needed Obama

If Fox was as biased as you and the other Democrats claim they would never allow Obama or Hillary to get all the viewers they draw every night. The top 7 shows on Cable TV news are on Fox.

Roy Mark

Ratings are a numbers game.  You can watch CNN throughout the day and they claim they're #1. 

But seriously, I can't believe you watch that and not be convinced of it's bias.  But then again, you like what you hear.

Rog sez  You can watch CNN throughout the day and they claim they're #1. 

You can claim in one hand and pip in the other and see which get full the fastest. I really doubt that CNN makes that claim. The Neilson Ratings the Bible of rating system show Fox News to have the top 7 shows Pore ol Lare comes in eighth with lees than half of O'R Keith Ober caomes in a nineteenth.with less than a third of O'R

Net / Program / Total Audience / Adults 25-54

> > > FOXNEWS THE OREILLY FACTOR __ 2,394,000 451
> > > FOXNEWS HANNITY & COLMES __ 1,793,000 396
> > > FOXNEWS ON THE RECORD W/GRETA __ 1,398,000 315
> > > FOXNEWS SPECIAL REPORTW/BRIT HUME __ 1,312,000 265
> > > FOXNEWS THE OREILLY FACTOR (RPT) __ 1,239,000 350
> > > FOXNEWS THE FOX REPORT W/S.SMITH __1,229,000 256
> > > CNN LARRY KING LIVE __ 1,069,000 298
> > > FOXNEWS FOX AND FRIENDS __ 1,023,000 321
> > > FOXNEWS AMERICAS NEWSROOM __ 1,017,000 228
> > > FOXNEWS AMERICAS ELECTION HQ __ 977,000 186
> > > CNN CNN ELECTION CENTER __ 962,000 291
> > > FOXNEWS YOUR WORLD W/NEIL CAVUTO __ 951,000 161
> > > ||
> > > ||
> > > ||
> > > ||
> > > ||
> > > ||
> > > ||
> > > ||
> > > ||
> > > V
> > > #19 - MSNBC COUNTDOWN W/ K. OLBERMANN __ 707,000 261

Once again the old Democrat ploy. We can't deny the message so we attack the messenger In case Fox News. Iif  Rog hasn't noticed Obama, Hillaary and Howard  Dean have appeared on Fox. 

Just what has Fox said that you makwe the claim they are so biased?  If you wish to comment try to come up with something beside your off repeated Fox is biased.

Roy Mark

> > > -------------

rog sez   in RE Fox top ratings          Ratings are a numbers game. 

Right on Roger  The number odf viewers.  Does Rog think Fox was biased when they showed the wright looney toon remarks? Evenually even Obama admitted what Fox AND the rest of the media was showing to be true.

In your gut you know he's nuts

If you want to see extreme conservative biased commentary  Watch Lou Dobbs on CNN.

Roy Mark