Video scenes shots:
Watch the video:
| URL: | |
| Embed: |
Display Video Comments | Hide Video Comments | Add Comment
Other videos by this author:
 |
ONE HUNDRED examples of Fox News Bias at http://www.youtube.c om/view_play_list?p= ... Posted by: LiberalViewer
Video duration: 174 seconds ONE HUNDRED examples of Fox News Bias at http://www.youtube.c om/view_play_list?p= A3BD2524FE99BD4D This video celebrates the addition of the 100th item to my Fox News bias playlist on YouTube Related: fox, news, bias, youtube, playlist, examples, evidence, documentation, cnn, msnbc, abc, cbs, nbc, liberal, viewer, liberalviewer Display Video Comments | Hide Video Comments | Add Comment Latest comments made on this video:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Latest comments made on this video:
By: sapofgold. on 16 Mar 10, 00:58:43
An abortion is far more dangerous than a pap smear. Where are the abortion advocates warning women about these dangers?
By: mrlagx. on 27 Feb 10, 20:47:09
These republicans that call themselves "Christians" give real Christians a bad name... thanks to them more and more people hate evangelicals and don't take the path God wants all of us? to take... it seems Satan uses the republican party to destroy america from within...
By: Pongball. on 09 Feb 10, 23:16:48
I lived in Canada most of my life, and I was advised by my doctor, as any American would have been under the old guidelines, to get a pap smear once every year. Clearly, even countries that already have a government healthcare system in place aren't "rationing" pap smears.
By: davisfleetwood. on 30 Jan 10, 07:58:30
i got more flavor than fruits got gum
By: MogKnight09. on 14 Jan 10, 00:22:52
that's so sad. . .FOX News should be banned
By: scorpionkings. on 10 Jan 10, 16:00:20
78% of conservatives get there news information from FOX NEWS, which explains WHY they are so misinformed in what's really going on in Government issues!
By: MEpianist. on 01 Jan 10, 05:05:02
Good man, I'm sorry for any abuse. You're a good man and so am I. God bless and let's make this year better than next. Happy 2010, happy decade to you sir!
By: TAMARLANE. on 01 Jan 10, 04:38:12
@MEpianist I'm having a great new year's celebration here in San Diego. Weather is awesome, like 56 degrees, no wind, clear sky, full moon, surrounded by people who have their camp fires going and kids playing in the streets with their scooters and skate boards and bicycles. Watching Fox news times square coverge on TV. Just had some black eyed peas for good luck, southern style, for the new year. I'm 73 now and feel blessed to be healthy and ambulatory. Happy New Year, dude.
By: MEpianist. on 01 Jan 10, 03:39:40
You have nothing. You failed at all points and only succeeded in getting something off your chest. Have a miserable New Year, we both know you will.
By: TAMARLANE. on 01 Jan 10, 03:28:59
@LiberalViewer A pack of lies. An ordinary garden variety effort that discredits none but the presenter. Eat shit and die.
By: TAMARLANE. on 01 Jan 10, 03:26:46
@MEpianist What are you trying to prove, dude. That you are a lying piece of shit leftist? Or just a stupid ignorant plain vanilla piece of shit.
By: MEpianist. on 01 Jan 10, 02:56:37
Looks like you're the fail here, twerp.
By: annpetasupporter. on 30 Dec 09, 00:35:51
any facts to back your statement up?
By: dantheleo. on 29 Dec 09, 05:36:56
I have never seen such lies and misinformation in one video on YouTube until this one.
By: nightmathzombieethan. on 27 Dec 09, 06:09:15
my apologies.....
By: Voltegasproductions. on 27 Dec 09, 04:46:18
the sad thing is its my friends favorite news station and he isnt an idiot or republican I don't how..
By: nightmathzombieethan. on 24 Dec 09, 18:26:50
Actually I think Fox "News" should just remove the "News" part of it's title. The whole fuckin thing is just a tool/mouthpiece for Rupert Murdoch and his "business buddies". There is NO journalism in simply picking up AP feeds and then spinning the stories in an attempt to backup a particular political/religious view. There's also no journalism in creating propaganda. If they want to broadcast, then by all means go ahead, but it should be renamed "Fox Editorial", or maybe "Right Wing World".
By: controlclerk. on 23 Dec 09, 21:57:37
So, since "proving intent" is something most lawyers can't even do, I'll just say that the people perpetuating those un-truths are just stupid. How dumb you have to be to take someone's position and think it's the exact opposite of what was said is something of a mystery, but I guess they've done it.
By: controlclerk. on 23 Dec 09, 21:53:43
Instead of checking up what I've said, you just say I haven't done what I did and are now playing semantic games. I countered the lies. If my assertions are wrong, then prove them wrong. You can't, so you'll play your word games and bring up proving intent, as if now I have to find the articles that twisted the stories and prove they did it deliberately. I guess I could go the easy route and say they aren't "lying" so much as just being unable to comprehend what the people were saying.
By: controlclerk. on 23 Dec 09, 21:46:56
So in other words, you're not going to check on what was said, you're just going to tell me I've given no "evidence" of the lies about Fox's coverage. I quoted an indivdual in one of the stories he mentioned that countered his assertion. I said for the record that Beck did the opposite of what he said, which is provable with a simple google search. I can't put links here and I know you know how to type. I showed that the assertion regarding rationing is supported. Check my assertions.
By: controlclerk. on 23 Dec 09, 21:38:59
Saying that it's true doesn't make it so. Again- Nothing at all dangerous about pap smears. Not even an accurate paraphrase of Dr. Smith. You've "shown" nothing. You just repeat yourself. Who says you "ignore" the results when doing tests to monitor an ailment? You said that, but you're wrong. You see, when you MONITOR something, you're not really ignoring it.
By: LiberalViewer. on 23 Dec 09, 21:27:05
controlclerk wrote "That takes care of the 'untrue,' 'lies' and 'hating' of Fox news" No, you've mainly supported your assumptions just with other assumptions. "Hating" and "lying" require evidence of intent and you don't have any, nor do you know the politics or the motivations of the people who downrated your comments. Why not just admit you jumped to conclusions w/o evidence to support the validity of your assumptions? Thx for commenting :-)
By: LiberalViewer. on 23 Dec 09, 21:23:35
controlclerk wrote "Saying paps are dangerous is wrong" Actually, I said "PBS let its viewers know that there are actually dangers from getting too many pap smears" which is TRUE (and, as I showed, an accurate paraphrase of Dr Smith) b/c of the danger of false positives that result in tests/treatments harming women. And, again, doing the test but ignoring the results makes no sense (even if you call it "monitoring") I hope that helps clear up your misunderstanding and thx 4 commenting :-)
By: controlclerk. on 23 Dec 09, 20:15:54
To clarify my statement regarding it not being about "causation." Had you said, "Getting too many pap smears can lead to getting TREATMENTS THAT CAN BE DANGEROUS" I wouldn't have a beef. You're misdirecting the argument by bringing up "causation" and writing off your misstatement by inferring an intent that wasn't obvious to the listeners. My bro likes you. He subscribes to you. Your misstatement confused him and I'm sure others as well. Saying paps are dangerous is wrong. Period.
By: controlclerk. on 23 Dec 09, 19:51:48
It seems you don't understand that pap smears are not treatments (they're tests). Pap smears don't demand treatments. Those are up to the doctors discretion. Tell me what's dangerous about too many pap smears. Here's a hint- it starts with "not" and ends with "ing."