Talk about misleading headlines, that headline of the article posted above - something about Fox network being too critical of Obama. Boy is that one misleading.

Quote from the article:

The latest weekly News Interest Index survey, conducted April 17-20 by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, finds a substantial partisan divide in views of how TV news networks cover Obama. More than four-in-ten Democrats (44%) say Fox has been too critical of Obama, compared with 25% of independents and just 18% of Republicans. No other network comes close to Fox, though 11% overall – including 18% of Democrats – say CNN has been too critical of the president. Very few Americans cite the broadcast networks – ABC (4%), NBC (4%) or CBS (3%) – as too critical.

I might put some confidence in the article if an overwhelming majority of Independents had said they were or even if a biased group of researchers or focus group did. But with them asking members of each party and separating it by Party Lines - of course they are going to come up with the headline they did. I have never met a Democrat who did not think that Fox News wasn't too hard on any Democrat much less Obama.

So wow they broke some real news there. None of those results surprise me at all.

Now that's funny.

I see a little good... a lot of bad. Our credibility on the world stage has been severely damaged. I'm waiting for the next Obama misstep... perhaps ice skating with Putin?

I’m surprised you didn’t state that he would ice skating with pirates in there.

Then again, he did order them to be killed when they were holding one of our own prisoner.

I don’t think talking with our “enemies” is all that bad. Those pictures of him and Chavez didn’t do any justice, because we weren’t there. We do not know what was exactly was exchanged between Chavez and President Obama verbally. Obama could have very well scolded Mr. Chavez behind the scenes, while putting up a front for the press. We just don’t know.

I’m surprised you didn’t state that he would ice skating with pirates in there.

Then again, he did order them to be killed when they were holding one of our own prisoner.

I don’t think talking with our “enemies” is all that bad. Those pictures of him and Chavez didn’t do any justice, because we weren’t there. We do not know what was exactly was exchanged between Chavez and President Obama verbally. Obama could have very well scolded Mr. Chavez behind the scenes, while putting up a front for the press. We just don’t know.

No, Michael. You see, Obama is supposed to do the same garbage Bush and Co. did for the last 8 years. No wonder other nations hate out guts. I mean, a popular U.S. President? Who actually TALKS to other leaders instead of acting like Marshall Dillon? No, we shouldn't do that.

IA with you. Talk to your damn enemies to find out where you stand, and then go from there.

What an idea...let's waste a ton of money and scare the entire city of New York... all for a photo opportunity--- Seriously Obama??!!

No, Michael. You see, Obama is supposed to do the same garbage Bush and Co. did for the last 8 years. No wonder other nations hate out guts. I mean, a popular U.S. President? Who actually TALKS to other leaders instead of acting like Marshall Dillon? No, we shouldn't do that.

IA with you. Talk to your damn enemies to find out where you stand, and then go from there.

The policies of the last 8 years did not allow for that and the US image paid a price. All GWB and his "dream team" of Rice, Cheney and Rumsfeld did was ridicule our enemies with sound bites to the media and ignoring them at the UN. It didn't work. That's a fact. Hell, Rumsfeld even had the nerve to ridicule our ALLIES (France, Germany among them) when they didn't kowtow to the administration's tactics regarding Iraq.

What is the harm in talking to people we don't see eye to eye with? Don't we all - on a personal level - do this in our everyday lives? Or do we simply write them off because they disagree with us? Why can't heads of state behave in the same manner? There are no logic reasons why this approach should not be on the table. If, once again, the relationship goes sour during these talks then it would be another time to change how we deal with our enemies.

That being said, Chavez, Ahmadinejad, Castro and Kim Yong-ll are horrible "leaders" and guilty of many crimes against their own citizens. These things should not be forgotten. I don't believe that President Obama is going this route, nor is there any evidence that this is his plan. If there is, please correct me. A photograph of shaking hands does not prove anything.

Lastly, let's not all forget that China is prime example of a country that is the polar opposite of our democracy. However, we have an open dialogue with them regardless. Whose to say that the same type of relationship can not be formed with one of the dictators I mention above? Wouldn't that help to make America safer? Like the old saying goes - keep your friends close and your enemies closer! JMO.

DAMN! I thought this was a joke!

http://crooksandliars.com/david-neiwert/sp...ies-gives-democ

Specter becomes a Democrat, giving them 60 votes in the Congress!

And Spector just BLASTED the Republican Party. Damn!

Spector has always been one of the more moderate Republican voices and this makes complete sense now that his party has become the bastion of the religous right. The modern day Republican can't see past gay marriage, abortion and legislating morality. It's a shame because some of their fiscal platforms make a lot of sense to me.

And I'm actually surprised this didn't happen sooner.

After reading the article, I'm glad he stated that he wouldn't be an "automatic" 60th vote. Now that it appears the Dems picked up the Senate seat in Minnesota, the filibuster proof majority appears to be nigh. Not something that I believe is good for the country. Honestly. Yes, I'm a liberal SOB and proud of it. But what this country needs is a consensus between the two major parties on how to fix things. I don't believe that it will be saved on all Republican ideas nor do I believe it will be saved on strictly Democratic proposals. A mixture of both would help to ensure that if a liberal idea falters, perhaps a conservative one is needed.

President Obama should continue reaching out to Republicans on fixing America. It's the only way it's going to succeed. And for all of the grandstanding "WE LOVE AMERICA!" crap the Republicans spouted during the election, NOW is the time to act like you truly love the country and work to make it better. That's the way to show that you love this country and want it to continue.

Spector has always been one of the more moderate Republican voices and this makes complete sense now that his party has become the bastion of the religous right. The modern day Republican can't see past gay marriage, abortion and legislating morality. It's a shame because some of their fiscal platforms make a lot of sense to me.

And I'm actually surprised this didn't happen sooner.

After reading the article, I'm glad he stated that he wouldn't be an "automatic" 60th vote. Now that it appears the Dems picked up the Senate seat in Minnesota, the filibuster proof majority appears to be nigh. Not something that I believe is good for the country. Honestly. Yes, I'm a liberal SOB and proud of it. But what this country needs is a consensus between the two major parties on how to fix things. I don't believe that it will be saved on all Republican ideas nor do I believe it will be saved on strictly Democratic proposals. A mixture of both would help to ensure that if a liberal idea falters, perhaps a conservative one is needed.

President Obama should continue reaching out to Republicans on fixing America. It's the only way it's going to succeed. And for all of the grandstanding "WE LOVE AMERICA!" crap the Republicans spouted during the election, NOW is the time to act like you truly love the country and work to make it better. That's the way to show that you love this country and want it to continue.

IA with you 110%. No party should have a majority.

Russ Feingold gives the President a D in handling state secrets, while Michelle Bachman blames the Pandemic outbreak in 1976 on Jimmy Carter (even though Gerald Ford was president at the time).

And Spector just BLASTED the Republican Party. Damn!

It was pretty awesome. Republican strategist have been warning the party that they need to stop going so far right and so far to the religious aspect because the majority of Americans don't want that shoved down their throats.

It was pretty awesome. Republican strategist have been warning the party that they need to stop going so far right and so far to the religious aspect because the majority of Americans don't want that shoved down their throats.

But is it the actual majority. There are still a lot of Democrats that are on that line or else things like Prop 8 wouldn't have passed.

Yes there are a lot that don't want it but at the same time there is a large part of the Democrats who feel that the Democratic party has gone too far to the left in embracing gay marriage and issues in that vein.

Many strategist said this last election would have been closer if those were the basic issues but when the economy went south it pushed the advantage in favor of Obama. Obama was truly benefited by the economy this last election in much the same way that Reagan was in 1980 when he beat Carter. It was very similar then. The economy was so bad and just like George Stephanopolous said one morning whenever the economy is bad the party in charge no matter which one it is always gets the blame.

The right - left and religious - anti-religion thing is the biggest thing that turns me off about the parties. When they both started embracing those instead of what I feel are real political issues is when I could no longer identify with them. And it is because of all that [!@#$%^&*] I no longer am registered as a party member.

I agree with Greg 100% on this. It will not be a good thing for the country for any party to be in full charge. And it will not be good at all for the Democrats if things don't turn around big time in the next 4 years. Who in the hell will they blame when they have a Democratic President and full control.

A political party always need a fall back or else they have to say well this one was all on us. The party go to has always been well the Republican's block us on this or we just couldn't get enough Democrats to vote with us.

It was pretty awesome. Republican strategist have been warning the party that they need to stop going so far right and so far to the religious aspect because the majority of Americans don't want that shoved down their throats.

IA with you. The party did this to themselves. Maybe they will finally kick people like Limbaugh and Co. out and shove themselves to the center. And it wont be good for the Democrats to have this type of majority, but what it downright stupid is Obama continuing to go hat and hand to a broken party who has absolutely no foresight to work with him. All they want to do is is say no to everything he proposes, and then not have any ideas themselves or just downright lie on the issues, like that crap Bachmann said yesterday (she is key to why the Republican Party is in the toilet).

Edited April 29, 200916 yr by Roman

But is it the actual majority. There are still a lot of Democrats that are on that line or else things like Prop 8 wouldn't have passed.

Yes there are a lot that don't want it but at the same time there is a large part of the Democrats who feel that the Democratic party has gone too far to the left in embracing gay marriage and issues in that vein.

Many strategist said this last election would have been closer if those were the basic issues but when the economy went south it pushed the advantage in favor of Obama. Obama was truly benefited by the economy this last election in much the same way that Reagan was in 1980 when he beat Carter. It was very similar then. The economy was so bad and just like George Stephanopolous said one morning whenever the economy is bad the party in charge no matter which one it is always gets the blame.

The right - left and religious - anti-religion thing is the biggest thing that turns me off about the parties. When they both started embracing those instead of what I feel are real political issues is when I could no longer identify with them. And it is because of all that [!@#$%^&*] I no longer am registered as a party member.

I agree with Greg 100% on this. It will not be a good thing for the country for any party to be in full charge. And it will not be good at all for the Democrats if things don't turn around big time in the next 4 years. Who in the hell will they blame when they have a Democratic President and full control.

A political party always need a fall back or else they have to say well this one was all on us. The party go to has always been well the Republican's block us on this or we just couldn't get enough Democrats to vote with us.

I don't think it is just one issue. I think the majority of Americans don't want their morality legislated. I think people like to make their own decisions.

Dissent is very important. We need a two party system to keep dialogue flowing. Compromise is important. The issue with the GOP today is that they have marginalized and confine themselves within in a very narrow area. They don't seem to allow for diversity or disagreement withn their own party. They are demanding that "true" Republicans adhere strictly to their ideology. (Stimulus package, budget, cabinet nominees). They really do appear to be party first.

I don't think it is just one issue. I think the majority of Americans don't want their morality legislated. I think people like to make their own decisions.

But what is sad is that while we are fighting for the ability to make our own moral decisions, we are losing the right to make other decisions for ourself.

We have to wear a seatbelt now. It's a law.

In some states, you can't make the decision to smoke in public anymore or even in a restaurant or bar. And if you do then just like in Tennessee it costs you an arm and a leg to smoke as with the added tax some packs of cigaretts are now 10 dollars a pack.

Next year Tennessee and a few other states are even talking about a "fat" tax for people who are overweight. They have taxed the hell out of cigarette smokers citing that they cause health issues so they should pay more than other American's. Now they are going over the "fat" people since they meet the same criteria and they need more money so let's let the smokers rest. And all these at least in Tennessee have been done with a Democratic governor in charge and while the Democrats briefly had control of the state house or senate.

Some states are pushing more and more to make it mandatory that a parent has to immunize their child when that has always been the right of the parent to make that choice for their child. We immunized ours but we understood the health risks that were there, and know of many parents who didn't.

You have people in Government and teaching jobs who are being forced to learn Spanish in order to keep their jobs. Many of them have been in their positions for years, but now face early retirement or the loss of their jobs because they don't know Spanish. I have been to other countries, and it is rare that you find someone in a shool or a government office that knows how to speak English. Yet we are forcing restrictions on our teachers and employees to learn a second language to accomodate foreigners here. Where is it going to stop. If the US suddenly has a influx of Russian immigrants coming in, are these same employees going to be required to learn Russian too. Instead we should be focusing on forcing the immigrants to learn our language - even offering more programs to educate them. Why punish our citizens?

And I guess many would argue that their right to bear arms is being infringed on too. Personally I don't see why anyone needs to own some guns, but at the same time if all the guidelines are followed who is to say what guns they should and should not have.

I agree that there should be a separation of church and state, but I think way too much emphasis has been put on it in recent years. I want to get back to less government involvement in our lives. I think in many areas the government has way overstepped its bounds. Hell I don't even think the government should be regulating abortion at all. I think that is a medical thing and should be up to the doctor and the patient. And I am one who thinks that except in extreme cases abortion is wrong. But I don't think the government should have a say in that at all.