WAS JEFF GANNON 'FAlR AND BALANCED' THE WAR FAUX NEWS IS?
396537
Thats easy, he was interviewing Osama because that is where he is hiding out, him and Bush are really goooood buddys.
389918
When I was in Iraq I watched the news and wondered what country they are talking about.  My only theory is that the news executives made the decision that defeat will produce bigger ratings than victory and are trying to create that defeat.\n\nThe funny thing is that despite their political bias Fox news does provide the best and most balanced news about Iraq.  This is because of a simple factor that is happening over in Iraq - the soldiers are talking to the Fox news reporters because they feel that they can trust them to tell the truth.  The other news agencies get nothing but the press releases.\n\nPS - I saw the same thin happen when I deployed to conduct relief efforts after hurricane Katrina.  Lots of sensationalism but no real attempt to tell the American people what was actually going on.
1023856
Its not Jeff Gannon that he wanted to Marry its Victor Ashe...\nhttp://bushssecretlifein84.tripod.com/\n\nJeff was just a paid man-whore...George and Victor we in love....\nPoor George...He has to follow an agenda he may not agree with!  Its "hard work" living a lie!\n\nhttp://poland.indymedia.org/pl/2004/09/9014.shtml
712642
Yes, people do take him seriously. People also take Faux News seriously as well as Rush Limbaugh. I just wish that Faux would at least add a laugh track to their news. It would make it easier to follow.
939899
What was the joke supposed to be, anyway? And is there anything funny about the Iraq war?
852160
Neither one will ever agree with one another re: the war in Iraq.  I'm sure he was brought back for ratings.  Just entertainment.\nDavid knows darn well, his show isn't the place to discuss serious topics and O'Reilly just wanted to sell his book.  It was a good fit.
294184
Iraq is in the forefront of the news because the president put it there himself to take the focus off Afghanistan. Plus, we're at war there, which is always big news.  I know a little about North Korea, I know they are a threat.  People have to take charge and find out the truth about the news for themselves, and some people just don't care to, they believe everything they hear on TV.
886224
I agree with you completely, I think anyone who watched news other than fox would be ostracized in the military, it has alway's been republican (pro-war)..
31982
Yes. Anything you may have seen to the contrary was probably due to an April Fools joke than ran on a spoof of the CNN website.
707183
The media is the media. They just try and make news. Not report news but make news. We watch the news here in Afghanistan as we did in Iraq and just wonder. Wow is this what really gets told the folks back home. ie: a soldier was convicted of rape and murder in Iraq. It made the news for weeks straight. I'm not condoning his activies and am applauding his conviction but....what the news doesn't say is that the women of Iraq are safer from soldiers that Freshman girls are on any college campus in the states.... but thats not news... the media involvement in the military is bad in the point that . Politician was to "spin" the war into their favor so they can get elected or reelected. The media is the reason politicians are so involved in the war. Desert Storm is a perfect example. Gen Scwarzkopf kicked Saddam and the Army's of Iraq's butt. Then theh politicians got involved and stopped the war before it was over.   The US military is a weapon. Probably the most powerful in the world.  If you, a Democratic politician, a Republican politian and a soldier were in a house with one power weapon and a murderer. Who would you want to give the weapon to? The media makes sure the military stays PC by helping the politicians run the war.
1123518
There is a "Department of Defense and FOX News", now?\n\nAha!!!!! I knew it!!!!!
612397
I think you should do a little research. Six retired generals out of how many generals that encompass the timeframe of the six outspoken ones? Do they consititute a majority of retired military (I can tell you that no, they don't, not even close). What you're seeing is that the press only publishes the interviews of people they agree with - they do not publish the interviews of the other hundred or so generals.\n\nSince what he's done so far has been successful - the actual war was over quickly, there is already a government coming into place, the local police and military are picking up well, and the infrastucture is coming online for the first time in almost 50 years. So yes, he's done a "good job", wouldn't you say??
228009
Bush has done a remarkable job of standing up to a biased media.  He hasn't waivered or "played politics" with American lives on the line.  He has shown nothing but integrity in the face of  constant abuse.\n\nWho here has heard even one story positively written about Iraq?  Are you so naive as to believe that there are none? \nNONE!?\n\nTHE TRUTH IS:\n\nIraq is relatively stable, the "civil war" is the presses way of saying that the Iraqi forces are taking on the responsibility of dealing with the insurgents, relieving our troops to start pulling out.\n\nWater and electricity are flowing.\n\nSchools are being repaired and going up anew.\n\nElections went well.\n\nSaran Gas is a WMD.  (Don't care if they didn't find nukes.  Clinton said they were there, so did the UN.)\n\nNo terrorist attacks on US soil.\n\nGW said it would take a long time and would suck.  It does.\n\nSo does your lack of support.  You abuse the President, terrorists cheer, our troops die.  Be roud that you're part of the problem.\n\nFINALLY:\n\nI don't agree with everything Bush has done, but he is the one that has to do it.  \n\nI support that.
528606
its funny, but even though one can produce word for word accounts, and their own ppl found "no reliable evidence" there will be ppl that will immediately dismiss things like that as "liberalist media" or some crap. \n\ni love it when they use clips on the daily show of bush or rumsfield from a year ago (often much less) and then clip from today, and the things they're saying are polar opposties.\n\ni.e. rumsfield saying "we know where the wmd's are, they're south, north, east and west of baghdad" \n\nand then a week or two ago "i never said we knew where they were".\n\nbrilliant
1027000
The media organizations are run by very rich, powerful people. They have agendas like everyone else. Yours and mine are to get educated, get good jobs, make a decent living, etc.  The media's job is to present a story that sells you on consuming their version of the news. That way, the more that people watch or read their news, the more money they make. And if they report from an angle ( conservative, liberal, American /Patriotic ) they get attention and hopefully more advertising dollars. Picture this, Mr. Jones runs the XYZ TV Network. He also has invested in the stock of corporations that make guns, fighter jets and ammunition - it only makes him wealthier, and therefore more powerful, if his stock increases in value because the US government is buying weaponry from the companies he has invested in.  The media, by no means whatsoever, is against President Bush. If anything, they cater to him, giving his side of the story when he was barking about weapons of mass destruction and Saddam Hussein. Well, there were no weapons of mass destruction and Saddam is in captivity. So, why is the media not screaming at him about ending the war as his "goals" of eliminating wmd's and Hussein were accomplished?  The popular media, for the most part, is run by conservative thinkers who want a good story first, and the truth later.
1120378
HAHAHAHA... that's fair and balanced... it was on Fox News... it has to be true.... HAHAHAHHAA
1182743
heartwarming stories from home are hardly ever in the news, You might as well hang it up that a liberal media outlet will report anything positive from Iraq. That would go against their anti-bush anti-war agenda. Notice the almost non-existent coverage of the sarin and mustard gas that was discovered in Iraq? anyone who reported it implied that since it was expired it was safer than johnson's baby shampoo and doesn't count as WMD's.