Skip to main content

Tea Party group boycotts Fox News for becoming too liberal...

Some Tea Party activists went on a 4-day boycott recently. Whom did they boycott? Fox News. ...and why? For becoming too liberal. No, this is not an article written by someone at The Onion. There are, however, a number of Onion-worthy moments in this very article. So, let's get to know some of these boycotters a little better, shall we?

One such Tea Partier - 70-year old Stan Hjerlied - said the following to The Daily Beast regarding the boycott:

"Particularly after the election, Fox keeps turning to the left... We are really losing our only conservative network."

If Hjerlied means this in a literal sense, perhaps Fox is role-playing as a NASCAR driver. If he means this politically, let's check out what Fox News currently has posted on its website. At this current juncture on FoxNews.com, the following headlines are posted:

 - "Greg Gutfeld fires back at Jim Carrey's anti-gun skit"

- "ObamaCare forces a good doctor to quit"

- "Some advice for Nancy Pelosi"

- "Democrats bow down to Chinese hackers"

- "Why has Obama's State Department left an American pastor behind in Iran?"

- "Stop ObamaCare's massive 'HIT' tax before it puts more Americans out of work"

- "Here comes Team Obama's carbon tax"

- "Judeo-Christian tradition is under attack in America"

- "Adam Carolla vs. the liberal media"

- "Protecting America's children: Why won't liberals join in?"

After reading those ten headlines, I think it's safe to say that Fox is turning left about as much as NASCAR drivers are turning right.

Kathy Amidon of Nashville, Tennessee was another Tea Partier boycotting Fox News, who expressed the following on their boycott website, entitled Benghazi-Truth:

"We have seen FOX suddenly get very loud about Benghazi after the 1st boycott, but conservatives are conservatives because they are not stupid. We recognize, easily, loud noise which is low on substance. In other words, by whining loudly about Benghazi without the kind of hard-hitting investigative reporting that brought down Nixon over Watergate, what we are seeing from FOX IMO is smoke and mirrors; a trick, to fool us into dutifully genuflecting at their alter [sic] of their arrogant hosts who throw us crumbs with one hand while insulting us with the other. If we want FOX to get serious, we're going to have to keep hitting them hard. And that is just exactly what we're going to do."

Yes, because Fox News has always been known for their hard-hitting investigative journalism. Fox is as well-known for their hard-hitting investigative journalism as abortion is for being a good topic to discuss at the dinner table. Also, Ms. Amidon might want to work on her logic a bit, especially with regard to the following comment - "...but conservatives are conservatives because they are not stupid." She could have made the comment, "Conservatives are not stupid, because..." and then attempted to give an actual reason. However, saying "conservatives are conservatives because they are not stupid" is voiding logic altogether. With how she worded that comment, I imagine she'll utter the following lines at some point in her life, if she hasn't already done so:

- "Bananas are bananas because they are good."

- "Wildebeests are wildebeests because they are hairy."

- "Guns are guns because they are black."

- "The sun is the sun because it is hot."

- "Kathy Amidon is Kathy Amidon because I am way more smarter than anybody else."

If Fox News wants these Tea Partiers to stop boycotting them, they'll need to give in to these following demands of the network:

- "To become the right-wing CBS News: to break stories, to break information, and to do what news organizations have always done with such stories: break politicians"

- "To feature at least one segment on Benghazi every night on two of its prime-time shows"

- "To devote similar investigative resources on discovering the truth of Obama's birth certificate"

- "To cease striving to be 'fair and balanced'"

In light of these demands, the before-mentioned boycotting Tea Partier Stan Hjerlied said:

"We need Fox to turn right. We think this is a coverup and Fox is abiding and abetting it. This is the way Hitler started taking over Germany, by managing and manipulating the news media."

What were those current Fox News headlines again?

 - "Greg Gutfeld fires back at Jim Carrey's anti-gun skit"

- "ObamaCare forces a good doctor to quit"

- "Some advice for Nancy Pelosi"

- "Democrats bow down to Chinese hackers"

- "Why has Obama's State Department left an American pastor behind in Iran?"

- "Stop ObamaCare's massive 'HIT' tax before it puts more Americans out of work"

- "Here comes Team Obama's carbon tax"

- "Judeo-Christian tradition is under attack in America"

- "Adam Carolla vs. the liberal media"

- "Protecting America's children: Why won't liberals join in?"

Ah, that's right. Based on these headlines, it certainly sounds like President Obama is "managing" and "manipulating" Fox News. Fox News needs to turn right? Yeah, and George Michael needs to turn straight...

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/03/23/tea-party-group-boycotting-fox-news-for-becoming-too-liberal/

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/index.html

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i