No big surprise. I guess that they are just going for more balance.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/01/11/palin-join-fox-news-contributor/?test=faces

Ehhh, no surprise. Just surprised it took this long.

Did anyone not see this coming after she resigned as governor? She's looking for the big paychecks (and I don't blame her) hence the book and now the Fox News job.

I just don't understand how anyone could ever think she'd make a good president, or any kind of politician for that matter.

IMO, her own interests are more important than her constituents which is not ok when you are holding political office. As US citizens it is ok to put your self interests first, but when you hold public office, the people you represent now become the priority. Just like parents to children should be a politician to his/her constituents.

Does signing a multi year contract mean she has accepted that fact that 2012 just isn't possible?

dwccrew wrote: Did anyone not see this coming after she resigned as governor? She's looking for the big paychecks (and I don't blame her) hence the book and now the Fox News job.

I just don't understand how anyone could ever think she'd make a good president, or any kind of politician for that matter.

IMO, her own interests are more important than her constituents which is not ok when you are holding political office. As US citizens it is ok to put your self interests first, but when you hold public office, the people you represent now become the priority. Just like parents to children should be a politician to his/her constituents.

Which makes her different than the other 537 people currently holding national elected office how again?

dwccrew wrote: IMO, her own interests are more important than her constituents which is not ok when you are holding political office. As US citizens it is ok to put your self interests first, but when you hold public office, the people you represent now become the priority. Just like parents to children should be a politician to his/her constituents.

At least she resigned. Most continue to hold political office. Although I know what you are trying to say, the parent/child analogy when referring to politicians and their constituents makes me cringe.

So this adds Palin to Huckabee, Rove, Cheney (Liz), as well as Hannity, Beck, O Reily, etc..... so where exactly is the balance they claim?

zhon44622 wrote: No big surprise. I guess that they are just going for more balance.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/01/11/palin-join-fox-news-contributor/?test=faces

Just watch Cambell Brown and Anderson Cooper instead. They're super duper balanced. :rolleyes:

zhon44622 wrote: So this adds Palin to Huckabee, Rove, Cheney (Liz), as well as Hannity, Beck, O Reily, etc..... so where exactly is the balance they claim?

Where's the balance the other 6 networks claim?

It's no secret that Fox is for the big government, big brother right as the other networks are for the big government, big brother left.

zhon44622 wrote: So this adds Palin to Huckabee, Rove, Cheney (Liz), as well as Hannity, Beck, O Reily, etc..... so where exactly is the balance they claim?

Don't forget:

Bob Beckel, Pat Caddell, Alan Colmes (Fox Radio), Lany Davis, Susan Estrich, Mort Kondracke, Juan Williams

fish82 wrote:

zhon44622 wrote: So this adds Palin to Huckabee, Rove, Cheney (Liz), as well as Hannity, Beck, O Reily, etc..... so where exactly is the balance they claim?

Where's the balance the other 6 networks claim?

I am making no defense of the other networks, but perhaps you could refresh our memories as to the "catch phrases" that the other networks have trademarked, splashed across their website, and repeated during their broadcasts ad nauseum that we may have forgot about.

I believe the current ad campaign for anderson cooper is something to the effect of "I am a lifelong democrat and i watch anderson cooper because when one of those right wing politicians come on......"

zhon44622 wrote:

fish82 wrote:

zhon44622 wrote: So this adds Palin to Huckabee, Rove, Cheney (Liz), as well as Hannity, Beck, O Reily, etc..... so where exactly is the balance they claim?

Where's the balance the other 6 networks claim?

I am making no defense of the other networks, but perhaps you could refresh our memories as to the "catch phrases" that the other networks have trademarked, splashed across their website, and repeated during their broadcasts ad nauseum that we may have forgot about.

I believe the current ad campaign for anderson cooper is something to the effect of "I am a lifelong democrat and i watch anderson cooper because when one of those right wing politicians come on......"

Is that anything like "Change We Can Believe In?"

Perhaps you'd be better served to compare the actual news blocks of the networks instead of the commentary shows.

I'm surprised it took Sarah baby this long to go to Faux news. Wonder if they'll let her do interviews ??

fish82 wrote:

zhon44622 wrote:

fish82 wrote:

zhon44622 wrote: So this adds Palin to Huckabee, Rove, Cheney (Liz), as well as Hannity, Beck, O Reily, etc..... so where exactly is the balance they claim?

Where's the balance the other 6 networks claim?

I am making no defense of the other networks, but perhaps you could refresh our memories as to the "catch phrases" that the other networks have trademarked, splashed across their website, and repeated during their broadcasts ad nauseum that we may have forgot about.

I believe the current ad campaign for anderson cooper is something to the effect of "I am a lifelong democrat and i watch anderson cooper because when one of those right wing politicians come on......"

Is that anything like "Change We Can Believe In?"

Perhaps you'd be better served to compare the actual news blocks of the networks instead of the commentary shows.

You are the one who brought up anderson and campbell.-

Should i block both hours of news that FOX broadcasts together or look at each of the two as individuals?

Well, let's see...we've got Palin on Fox News with all the others (and the liberals also mentioned).

So Fox definitely leans right. No question about it.

Of course, countering that is the following, which clearly lean left (some more than others) but claim to be objective:

ABC
NBC
CBS
MSNBC
CNN
The Washington Post
The NY Times
The LA Times
Associated Press
Reuters
BBC

And a few others I've no doubt forgot to put on the list. But those are certainly the major players.

But still the libs whine and cry about ONE network that doesn't spew the same trash as all the others.

Hope she wears very short skirts, and they show her without a desk in front of her all the time.

Writerbuckeye wrote: Well, let's see...we've got Palin on Fox News with all the others (and the liberals also mentioned).

So Fox definitely leans right. No question about it.

Of course, countering that is the following, which clearly lean left (some more than others) but claim to be objective:

ABC
NBC
CBS
MSNBC
CNN
The Washington Post
The NY Times
The LA Times
Associated Press
Reuters
BBC

And a few others I've no doubt forgot to put on the list. But those are certainly the major players.

But still the libs whine and cry about ONE network that doesn't spew the same trash as all the others.

It's almost as funny as their all consuming obsession with Sarah Palin. At least they can focus all their energy in one place without getting confused now.

BBC? Really? I consider them pretty down the middle. Reuters is pretty reliable as well.

Writerbuckeye wrote: Well, let's see...we've got Palin on Fox News with all the others (and the liberals also mentioned).

So Fox definitely leans right. No question about it.

Of course, countering that is the following, which clearly lean left (some more than others) but claim to be objective:

ABC
NBC
CBS
MSNBC
CNN
The Washington Post
The NY Times
The LA Times
Associated Press
Reuters
BBC

And a few others I've no doubt forgot to put on the list. But those are certainly the major players.

But still the libs whine and cry about ONE network that doesn't spew the same trash as all the others.

Once again - what is the ad nauseum mantra like "fair and balanced" that any of them use? There is no dispute that most media is gonna lean one way or the other, the matter in question would be why would a outlet so obviously biased chose to repeat such a claim, and better yet, how are their folks out there that are so willing to buy into it and parrot the phrase?

Ok - just read this quote

“It’s wonderful to be part of a place that so values fair and balanced news.” Sarah Palin - today

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0110/31364.html#ixzz0cMaCuqIr

zhon44622 wrote:

Writerbuckeye wrote: Well, let's see...we've got Palin on Fox News with all the others (and the liberals also mentioned).

So Fox definitely leans right. No question about it.

Of course, countering that is the following, which clearly lean left (some more than others) but claim to be objective:

ABC
NBC
CBS
MSNBC
CNN
The Washington Post
The NY Times
The LA Times
Associated Press
Reuters
BBC

And a few others I've no doubt forgot to put on the list. But those are certainly the major players.

But still the libs whine and cry about ONE network that doesn't spew the same trash as all the others.

Once again - what is the ad nauseum mantra like "fair and balanced" that any of them use? There is no dispute that most media is gonna lean one way or the other, the matter in question would be why would a outlet so obviously biased chose to repeat such a claim, and better yet, how are their folks out there that are so willing to buy into it and parrot the phrase?

Well at least one study backs them up...

http://www.cmpa.com/releases/07_12_21_Election_Study.pdf

Why does anyone who doesn't watch Fox News give a damn? I don't get it.

Prescott wrote: Why does anyone who doesn't watch Fox News give a damn? I don't get it.

People love to bitch. I despise the advent of 24 hour news stations. It has killed this country.

Writerbuckeye wrote:

Well at least one study backs them up...

http://www.cmpa.com/releases/07_12_21_Election_Study.pdf

The media watchdog group Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR) has challenged CMPA's non-partisan claim, based on the argument that much of its funding has come from conservative sources, and that its founder, Dr. S. Robert Lichter, once held a chair in mass communications at the American Enterprise Institute and was a Fox News contributor.[18][19] After a Washington Post article referred to CMPA as "conservative," the Post published a "Clarification," which concluded, "The Center describes itself as nonpartisan, and its studies have been cited by both conservative and liberal commentators."[20]
Progressive organization MediaTransparency (now run by Media Matters for America, itself a liberal organization[21]) documented that between 1986 and 2005 CMPA received 55 grants totaling $2,960,916 (unadjusted for inflation). The organization, which collated information from returns filed by numerous conservative foundations, found that 86% of CMPA's total funding came from conservative-leaning foundations.