Fox News racist or just hates Obama?

[chipmunk stew]

Cosby is 71 and Obama is 46, yet they are both "old?" Obama was Ivy League educated while Cosby went to the inner city Temple University. I wonder which one of these guys experienced true racism growing up? Cosby was the only black co-star on TV in 1965. Obama was learning how to walk at that time. Obama may be many things, but wisdom is not one of his attributes. Maybe after his first term as president, we may be able to see if he can claim to possess common sense.

You mean this is no longer a valid appraisal? Since when?

Do you still wish to stand behind the claim that Obama's speech echoed Cosby's?

 

[varwoche]

No wonder you redacted the second paragraph in my above post #85 because ...

Read the thread please -- this ground has been covered. And stay on topic.

 

[jberryhill]

Has he ever held a job? Has McCaine, for that matter?

Their biographies are readily available in a lot of places.

Obama worked for a couple of law firms during school, and then was an associate and of counsel to another firm while also teaching at University of Chicago. McCain has never held a private sector job.

 

[Gene L]

Whaddya know. Howdy Gene!

Given that we've had a communications breakthrough, I'm going to do some legwork for you again -- against my better judgment.

I raised Fox's touting of Obama = Islamanchurian Attentiveness isn't your strong suit.

Attentiveness isn't my strong suite, (not suit) and I question the use of the word "touting" which means something else. Not touting, maybe "tying" or something like that?

Also, is Fox and Friends "news?" I don't watch it, but supposed it was like "The View" with less estrogen. Or, more likely like the Today Show, which is NOT hard news; it's entertainment.

I will say that while I may not be attentive, I am very good at recognizing unwarranted hostility, and will not allow you to flog that horse in my barn.

And you should never, ever go against your better judgement!

 

[varwoche]

Attentiveness isn't my strong suite, (not suit)

Strong suit.

and I question the use of the word "touting" which means something else. Not touting, maybe "tying" or something like that?

A dictionary is your friend:

3. To promote or praise energetically; publicize

 

[Gene L]

So you think Fox was promoting or praising Obama? you said previously they were attacking him.

Nah...you need another word.

But, to make your day, you were right on "suit."

 

[joobz]

I see gene L has challenged varwoche's use of tout.

I raised Fox's touting of Obama = Islamanchurian here. You asked for evidence here. I provided it here. See also this, this and this.

to Tout, (from Varwoche's post)

To promote or praise energetically; publicize

How shall we resolve this?
Hmm.. Let's play WORD REPLACEMENT!!!
*insert dating game theme music intro*

That's the fun new game where we take a word which was used to define another word and see if that sentence makes sense afterwards.

Let's meet our guest sentences:
Sentence Number 1.) I raised Fox's promoting of Obama = Islamanchurian here.

Sentence Number 2.) I raised Fox's energetic praise of Obama = Islamanchurian here.

and straight in from Long Island
Sentence Number 3.) I raised Fox's publicizing of Obama = Islamanchurian here.

Well, by context, all of our sentences state that Fox News is putting forth the claim that Obama is a Islamanchurian.

the only ambiguity is seen in sentence number two. In this sentence, we do not know if Fox is praising the concept of obama being an islamanchurian or if Fox is praising Obama for being an islamanchurian. Despite this ambiquity, the remaining sentences clearly show that varwoche's use of the original word was fully appropriate.

Varwoche is our winner today!!! yeah!!!


But that's ok, Gene L. Please take as a parting gift our WORD REPLACEMENT home game. Use it to help practice before claiming others are not using proper vocabulary. And who knows, Maybe next time you'll be the big
WORD
REPLACEMENT
WINNER!!!!

*insert dating game theme music outro*

 

[Gene L]

No he's not. And who are you, sir or madam, to make judgements on proper word usage? Your name wouldn't happen to be Webster? I am the word master.

The previous two definitions (promoting, energetic prasie) make it clear that tout has a favorable meaning, to publicize favorably. So the hapless Varwoche used it improperly. The dictionary he linked to would serve him, and you, sir or madam, might benefit from occasionally checking instead of making unsupportable claims.

It says so in the Scriptures.

 

[gdnp]

No he's not. And who are you, sir or madam, to make judgements on proper word usage? Your name wouldn't happen to be Webster? I am the word master.

I don't recall voting for you. Perhaps there should be a re-vote.

The previous two definitions (promoting, energetic prasie) make it clear that tout has a favorable meaning, to publicize favorably. So the hapless Varwoche used it improperly. The dictionary he linked to would serve him, and you, sir or madam, might benefit from occasionally checking instead of making unsupportable claims.

It says so in the Scriptures.

The phrase "I raised Fox's touting of Obama = Islamanchurian" is stating "Fox publicized the theory that Obama = Islamancurian." In your focusing on the favorable meaning tout, are you claiming that Fox was trying to dispel rather than promote this rumor? That was certainly not the impression I got from looking at the clips.

remember, the touting claimed was of the rumor, not of Obama.

 

[joobz]

No he's not. And who are you, sir or madam, to make judgements on proper word usage? Your name wouldn't happen to be Webster? I am the word master.

Why, sir. I am joobz. Your host for WORD REPLACEMENT!

And of course the dictionary doesn't dictate definitions, rather merely reports upon common/acceptable usage of words.

The previous two definitions (promoting, energetic prasie) make it clear that tout has a favorable meaning, to publicize favorably. So the hapless Varwoche used it improperly. The dictionary he linked to would serve him, and you, sir or madam, might benefit from occasionally checking instead of making unsupportable claims.

Ah, but it is clear that he did use the word properly. As gdnp said, the praise is for the rumor not for Obama. That was the context that I, Gdnp, varwoche and I am willing to bet many others all see. As such, the word is used in its fully acceptable and proper form.

It says so in the Scriptures.

 

[Gene L]

A flacid attempt to justify your own conclusions. Ah, the pity.

 

[joobz]

A flacid attempt to justify your own conclusions. Ah, the pity.

I do not see how this logically fits with the discussion. It must mean something to you, but what that could be I have no idea.

Getting back to the thread topic:
Do you view FOX's continued unsubstantiated insinuations that Obama is a secret terrorist as acceptable Bias?

 

[Gene L]

I don't recall voting for you. Perhaps there should be a re-vote.
.

You may not have voted for me, but lots of dead people in New Jersey cross the party lines to vote for me. And they will in a re-count.

 

[varwoche]

Hmm.. Let's play WORD REPLACEMENT!!!

Thanks for the laugh!

The previous two definitions (promoting, energetic prasie) make it clear that tout has a favorable meaning, to publicize favorably. So the hapless Varwoche used it improperly.

And thank you too for the laugh! I have to admire such wry, self-effacing humor. I mean, you are joking aren't you? Surely you can't be serious when two times you incorrectly correct my grammar and then call me hapless!

 

[Gene L]

Actually, when I tell a joke, I wiggle my ears, and my ears aren't wiggling. I checked!

 

[varwoche]

Hopefully my last comment about touting: I was almost hoping that "energetic" would be challenged, seeing as Doocy was positively effervescent each time he said MADRASSA, MUSLIM and Barack HUSSEIN Obama. It's like he stuck some fizzies up his ***.

 

[varwoche]

Getting back to the thread topic:
Do you view FOX's continued unsubstantiated insinuations that Obama is a secret terrorist as acceptable Bias?

Though he refuses to answer the question directly, Gene has made it semi-clear (pls correct me if I'm wrong) that it's ok for pundits to tout (or if you prefer: hype, promote, echo, propagate, spread, you get the idea) unfounded smears -- to engage in character assassination -- because it's part and parcel of vigorous journalism.

And here we are on a skeptical forum dedicated to critical thinking and exposing bs.

(Gene, I'll bet you don't really think this way -- you'd have to be a nut. Giving you the benefit of the doubt, I guess that you jumped into the thread without paying very close attention and then were too stubborn to concede a point.)

 

[joobz]

Though he refuses to answer the question directly, Gene has made it semi-clear (pls correct me if I'm wrong) that it's ok for pundits to tout (or if you prefer: hype, promote, echo, propagate, spread, you get the idea) unfounded smears -- to engage in character assassination -- because it's part and parcel of vigorous journalism.

And here we are on a skeptical forum dedicated to critical thinking and exposing bs.

(Gene, I'll bet you don't really think this way -- you'd have to be a nut. Giving you the benefit of the doubt, I guess that you jumped into the thread without paying very close attention and then were too stubborn to concede a point.)

And here is the kicker, It isn't just the pundits doing these smears. The fact was the Obama baby mama comment was done during a News anchor's report and interview with a pundit.

The fact that FOX news anchors will often editorialize during and in between news items and will often interview pundits in news pieces for thier reaction. This blurs the distinction between the news and the talking heads and really makes "it's only the pundits" a disingenuous claim.

 

[Gene L]

OK, people...when has Fox news or ANY news said or indicated that Obama was a terrorist? Has he hung with terrorists? Damn right. Is HE a terrorist? Not according to Fox news. I feel qualified to say that because I watch it exclusively.

Challenge: I hereby challenge anyone on this board to point out ONE instance of Fox news saying Obama is a closet terrorist, or yes, even insinuating that. Go ahead, you crowd...you said it, now prove it. Talk about "unsubstantiated insinuations." If you can't prove it, then you have a paper rectum, as the saying goes. But I suppose that saying, like "the baby's mama" is not generally known among you white guys.

As for "tout" it badly needs a preposition, perhaps a prepositional phrase, and at the least an adjective, adverb, or a noun to make the meaning clear. As it was stated, it's basically unclear. I might say garbled. Heck, I WILL say garbled.

There is, however, hope in the form of a booklet "Sound and Sense" by Funk and Wagnell, I believe. It will answer all your grammar questions.

 

[Dr Adequate]

OK, people...when has Fox news or ANY news said or indicated that Obama was a terrorist? Has he hung with terrorists? Damn right. Is HE a terrorist? Not according to Fox news. I feel qualified to say that because I watch it exclusively.

Challenge: I hereby challenge anyone on this board to point out ONE instance of Fox news saying Obama is a closet terrorist, or yes, even insinuating that.

"Terrorist fist-jab". That was an insinuation. There you go.

Go ahead, you crowd...you said it, now prove it. Talk about "unsubstantiated insinuations." If you can't prove it, then you have a paper rectum, as the saying goes. But I suppose that saying, like "the baby's mama" is not generally known among you white guys.

As for "tout" it badly needs a preposition, perhaps a prepositional phrase, and at the least an adjective, adverb, or a noun to make the meaning clear. As it was stated, it's basically unclear. I might say garbled. Heck, I WILL say garbled.

There is, however, hope in the form of a booklet "Sound and Sense" by Funk and Wagnell, I believe. It will answer all your grammar questions.

Here's a hint for you as you wend your way through life. When you find that you are the only person in the vicinity who finds difficulty in understanding a non-obscure word in a simple English sentence, that is a good time not to start lecturing those around you on English usage.