you have to see the interview, of course, all 15min of which can be found on google video... search 'clinton fox'

I HATE FOXNEWS!!!!! How can these people live with themselves?????

Bastards. I wish they would stop driving a wedge in between the American people.

"Pick up votes"??? That woman is insane. And then she goes on to say, "Have you ever seen the Clintons not blame everybody else for their problems." She should be careful...too many people can replace that name with "Bush."

I couldn't watch the whole thing. I would have had an aneurysm.

"I HATE FOXNEWS!!!!! How can these people live with themselves?????"

I get such a laugh everytime I hear someone say something like this. Just because FOX doesn't play by the same rules as CNN, MSNBC, NBC, ABC et al., they all accuse them of being slanted, in the tank, racist or whatever. Of course it doesn't mater that FOX beats them all in ratings every night of the week, I'm sure their indignation is purely professional in the principles of broadcast journalism..

Secondly, they WERE legitimate questions and it's obvious that he doesn't like talking about it. I'm not glossing over the fact that both Clinton and Bush have made their mistakes, but Clinton continually gets the soft treatment from the media. He accused the interview of being a Republican hit job and his behavior shows nothing less of a temper tantrum on camera. I don't remember there being this kind of a reaction when Matt lauer questions Bush about torture.

Lastly, watching this should give you an aneurysm, considering it comes from Media Matters.

those little beeps are annoying.

wumpus, Bush DID react in a similar fashion. Did you not see the interview? Did you not see Bush get up in Matt Lauer's face when Lauer kept asking for an answer to his question?

Who's getting the soft treatment now?

And for the record, I hate ALL biased journalism, whether it is Liberal or Conservative. Fox News IS slanted, in the tank, and racist. Ratings don't mean their journalism is correct...it means they are pandering to the lowest common denominator.

Lowest commen denominator. Think about that.

I love the alternative universe Wumpus lives in.

"Who's getting the soft treatment now?"

Here's a fun little game, Go searching this site and others and find as many videos as you can that portray Bush as idiotic, dumb, incompetent, the next Hitler or otherwise having the I.Q. of a doorknob, then try to find a comparable number that show Clinton in the same light. Clinton overwhelmingly gets the soft treatment by the media.

"And for the record, I hate ALL biased journalism, whether it is Liberal or Conservative."

Then I hate to burst your bubble, because then you must hate all journalism because 99% of it is biased in one way or another. By it's own admission, the mainstream media and most cable news stations are biased to the Left and they seem to get along with each other pretty well. While Fox tends to be biased to the right, and the other broadcast and cable outlets, MoveOn.org, MediaMatters.org and people like yourself just CAN'T STAND IT.

The truth is a very elusive thing these days as it always has been, especially with such an intense flow of information it's increasingly hard to find the pure truth. Most often what we tend to accept as the truth is nothing more then distorted sound bytes that simply reinforce our world view, Why? Because it's easy, and you/I don't have to graple with the startleing realisation that we might wrong. With so much of it flying around, it has become increasingly difficult to separate pure fact from biased distortion. I'd argue that people wouldn't know the pure truth if it ran up and smacked them in the face, because while the truth doesn't have a bias to it, people waste an incredible amount of time trying to find one if it doesn't agree with their world view.

It must have been a slow news day on FOX . . . could they bleed the story a little more?

Bush receives the treatment because he deserves it AND NOT THROUGH A MAINSTREAM MEDIA unless he really really fucks up. Clinton is receiving it because Fox was attempting to set a political agenda through the interview and elections are fast approaching... Fox takes any and all shots at known democrats to attempt to alleviate pressure on the republicans and the Bush administration. Remember the battle against Chrismas? Completely orchestrated by Fox News in order to turn the cameras away from the administration.

Not to mention that Clinton was arbitrarily ambushed, the interview was NOT ABOUT his anti-terror policy, rather his humanitarian initiative. He may have looked prepared but I will guarantee you that he wasn't. Would Fox ever do that to Bush or anyone in the republican party? Hell no. The reporter continually interupted him which of course would make Clinton angry, it would make my blood boil to be interupted while attempting to answer a question, and that was what half of this piece was about, him not being able to control his temper and being an "angry democrat". They said that Clinton was beating or whatever in this piece, but he still answered the questions well and was able to prove that he did do things, and more things than the current administration pre 9/11. Was this mentioned at all? no...

Don't attempt to pull moveon.org and other partisan political interest groups to justify Fox's right journalism because there are just as many if not more interest groups for the republicans. News organisations like CNN and MSNBC might lean one way or the other, but they don't feed viewers propaganda which Fox does. Also you seem to be very naive in what a majority of democrats or a moderates are. I'll speak on my ideology (moderate). I don't care where the news comes from so long as it isn't slanted and the viewer is able to recognize bias, it is very easy to do this while watching CNN and MSNBC, reading the New York Times, New York Post, whatever. But whenever I turn on fox news or read the washington post I see them indirectly and sometimes directly saying that John Kerry or X canidate will create chaos as president without ANY BACKING, or NCLB has outstanding results and enough funding, just opinionated or false statements pushed as facts. It has come to the point where I will not believe any publication of Fox news as fact or if the ISSUES ARE EVEN RELEVANT... I do not represent the majority of individuals (as the ratings and lack of a party show) but all that does is show the oppression of democracy because I end up with a president that a majority of retards voted for.

"I'd argue that people wouldn't know the pure truth if it ran up and smacked them in the face, because while the truth doesn't have a bias to it, people waste an incredible amount of time trying to find one if it doesn't agree with their world view."
I'm assuming "it" refers to truth or the status quo? I'll assume the status quo as "trying to find truth if truth doesn't agree with their world view." doesn't make sense. If you have that little faith in people's intellect why are you defending Fox news which so obviously distorts reality and creates more ignorance?

Well said, Sammy.

"News organisations like CNN and MSNBC might lean one way or the other, but they don't feed viewers propaganda which Fox does."

That's the point some people don't want to see.

I find it infuriating that the right-wing believers cannot make a decision on their own. And if anyone makes a decision contrary to the right-wing's belief - based on the facts presented - then the right-wing calls them "liberal leftists."

Wumpus, this site is created by it's community...the videos here are a reflection of what said community enjoys. These are our views. The majority has spoken. THAT is what a Democracy is about.

And I DO hate most journalism. It is up to me - as it is up to EVERYONE - to search for the facts behind the spin. What I have found in my search frightens me. I base my opinions on the facts and the results of those facts. I don't watch or listen to the News...unless it's NPR.

But I'm sure you'll say that NPR is biased because it doesn't agree with your views.

Remember this above all else - just because you don't WANT to believe something, it doesn't mean it isn't true.

". Clinton is receiving it because Fox was attempting to set a political agenda through the interview and elections are fast approaching... Fox takes any and all shots at known democrats to attempt to alleviate pressure on the republicans and the Bush administration. Remember the battle against Chrismas? Completely orchestrated by Fox News in order to turn the cameras away from the administration."

Ah yes, more evidence on the "vast right-wing conspiracy". If Clinton is such a terffic statesman and elegant speaker then this whole thing shouldn't have happened. By your estimation, the fact that he gave a round of interviews to several networks during election season is by design and not by coincidence. He could have turned Fox down and we wouldn't be having this discussion. But this isn't about Fox, it's about Clinton, and it still shows that he is used to soft treatment by the media. Larry King; Soft, Olberman; Soft, then Chris Wallace asks if he did enough to connect the dots about Al Qeada, and he COULDN'T HANDLE IT, and calls it a republican hit job. What did he expect? Every interview he gives is centered around how awesome he is, did he honestly think he wouldn't be asked a hard question?



"I find it infuriating that the right-wing believers cannot make a decision on their own. And if anyone makes a decision contrary to the right-wing's belief - based on the facts presented - then the right-wing calls them "liberal leftists." "

The door swings both ways.

"He could have turned Fox down and we wouldn't be having this discussion."

No, we'd be having a discussiona about how the Republicans accused Clinton of being "too scared to go on Fox News." There is always a spin.

I have never, ever seen or heard any RW Conservative say anything nice about anyone who did not agree with their creed. And I'm not talking about the creed iteslf...I'm talking personally. Never once have I had the pleasure of seeing anyone on the RW Conservative camp say anything positive about a non-RWC. If you can find something, please share it.

"Every interview he gives is centered around how awesome he is...."

Maybe because he DID do an awesome job.

"The door swings both ways."

Make you a deal...you WRC people stop bashing any non-RWC and we'll stop asking RWC government employees to do their jobs right.

"Never once have I had the pleasure of seeing anyone on the RW Conservative camp say anything positive about a non-RWC. If you can find something, please share it."

O.K. Here's one. Clinton did a good job on welfare reform. Since he passed the Welfare Reform Act in 1996, there has been a significant drop in Welfare recipiants in the range of 40 to 50% nationwide. So much so that counties in Kansas and Nebraska have been openly advertising Food Stamps because they can't spend their annual funds and face cuts in funding.

I wasn't clear - I meant a public politician or RWC figurehead. But that's a really nice (and interesting) observation to make.

DANGER, DANGER.. fix the link. Looks like Fox asserted their copyrightwing laws. I'll bet you can find a working link.

Expired in Queue (4 day limit)