If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Daily Dolt)   Fox News correspondent is as tired as everyone else of all of Fox News' Benghazi coverage   (thedailydolt.com) divider line 137
    More: Ironic, Fox News, coverages, White House correspondent, correspondents, reasonable person  
•       •       •

3334 clicks; posted to Politics » on 07 Dec 2012 at 11:02 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



137 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-12-07 09:14:29 AM
Good.
 
2012-12-07 11:04:44 AM
Fired in 3.....2......1......
 
2012-12-07 11:04:57 AM
Does this mean that poor chicken will be given a respite, however brief?
 
2012-12-07 11:06:01 AM
i.imgur.com
 
2012-12-07 11:06:41 AM
FTA:
"I wouldn't lie to you. I see that we're covering Benghazi a lot, and I think that should be something that we're asking about. ... We've had the proper emphasis. But I would not be so deluded to say that some of our shows, some of our commentators, have covered it more than it needed to be covered."

Am I having a stroke? Am I having trouble parsing English? Because it looks like this guy said the exact opposite of what Subby says he says.
 
2012-12-07 11:07:30 AM
I really want to see a Fox News on-air personality have a real moment of clarity and just quit, right then and there, Half-Baked style.

The horndog in me really wants it to be Megyn Kelly. Logically, I bet Shep does it first.

/fark you, fark you, fark you, you're cool, fark you. I'm out
 
2012-12-07 11:09:27 AM
THIS IS NOT
A BENGHAZI
SCANDAL
 
2012-12-07 11:09:31 AM
The Benghazi conspiracy theories is a new low for foxnews, you wouldn't think that was even possible but here we are.
 
2012-12-07 11:09:32 AM
But there's still so many questions. Like why did Obama read Chris Stevens' emotional plea for more security, laugh derisively, then fly to Libya to personally shoot him, while yelling, "THAT'S WHAT YOU GET FOR BEING A WHINER!"

Why, lib-eraces?
 
2012-12-07 11:10:27 AM

Duke Phillips' Singing Bears: FTA:
"I wouldn't lie to you. I see that we're covering Benghazi a lot, and I think that should be something that we're asking about. ... We've had the proper emphasis. But I would not be so deluded to say that some of our shows, some of our commentators, have covered it more than it needed to be covered."

Am I having a stroke? Am I having trouble parsing English? Because it looks like this guy said the exact opposite of what Subby says he says.


Nope, it's also the opposite of what the article says. Just before that:

"Fox News White House correspondent and actual reasonable person Ed Henry told the AP recently that Fox News probably over-covered the Benghazi attacks just a wee bit:"

Not really. In typical Fox fashion, he defended the coverage and then doubled down and said that no on on the network has over covered it.

"It's the bubble!"
 
2012-12-07 11:11:25 AM

Car_Ramrod: But there's still so many questions. Like why did Obama read Chris Stevens' emotional plea for more security, laugh derisively, then fly to Libya to personally shoot him, while yelling, "THAT'S WHAT YOU GET FOR BEING A WHINER!"

Why, lib-eraces?


And what about the billions of taxpayer dollars he spent on TeabagBot, the horrifying cyborg with the 50 lb scrotum with realistic taint stink, that he brought with him to humiliate Stevens' corpse? What about that?
 
2012-12-07 11:11:27 AM
Ben who?
 
2012-12-07 11:11:33 AM

Duke Phillips' Singing Bears: Am I having a stroke? Am I having trouble parsing English? Because it looks like this guy said the exact opposite of what Subby says he says.


It's as close to an admission of fault as you'll ever see from anyone affiliated with that channel.
 
2012-12-07 11:12:52 AM

Carn: "It's the bubble!"


Thank God, I was beginning to worry about my brain.
 
2012-12-07 11:13:30 AM
Remember that MSNBC is just as bad. I don't have any specific examples, just that they are equally bad
 
2012-12-07 11:14:42 AM
Henry also emphasized that it was an important story to cover since four Americans were killed and there's still some mystery about what the administration knew and when they knew about the attack, and he asserted that other news outlets (ahem, MSNBC, he's looking at you) have under-covered the story

That's a hell of a thing to bring up on Pearl Harbor Day Not that my in-law is at a Japanese Air Force base right now..
 
2012-12-07 11:18:26 AM
ts1.mm.bing.net

Fox producer in his natural state
 
2012-12-07 11:19:09 AM

Britney Spear's Speculum: Remember that MSNBC is just as bad. I don't have any specific examples, just that they are equally bad


So vote Republican.
 
2012-12-07 11:23:15 AM

HMS_Blinkin: It's as close to an admission of fault as you'll ever see from anyone affiliated with that channel.


No this is:

Ms Rice said: "The talking points provided by the intelligence community, and the initial assessment upon which they were based, were incorrect in a key respect: there was no protest or demonstration in Benghazi."

Looking forward to your partisan attacks! Love 16.5
 
2012-12-07 11:23:28 AM

Rattlehead: Ben who?


Ben Wa?
 
2012-12-07 11:24:06 AM
This is a thing that's still going on?
 
2012-12-07 11:25:06 AM
President Obama could end all of the questions regarding Benghazi by admitting that he personally planned the attack on the consulate and by resigning in disgrace. This continued coverage is therefore his fault.
 
2012-12-07 11:25:16 AM

halfof33: Looking forward to your partisan attacks! Love 16.5


troofers usually get it from all sides.
 
2012-12-07 11:25:31 AM

Summer Glau's Love Slave: Rattlehead: Ben who?

Ben Wa?


Balls.
 
2012-12-07 11:26:40 AM

halfof33: HMS_Blinkin: It's as close to an admission of fault as you'll ever see from anyone affiliated with that channel.

No this is:

Ms Rice said: "The talking points provided by the intelligence community, and the initial assessment upon which they were based, were incorrect in a key respect: there was no protest or demonstration in Benghazi."

Looking forward to your partisan attacks! Love 16.5


But there was. The terrorists used it as cover so.....
 
2012-12-07 11:28:23 AM

SigilBear: Summer Glau's Love Slave: Rattlehead: Ben who?

Ben Wa?

Balls.


Insert Archer pic here.
 
2012-12-07 11:29:47 AM

justtray: But there was. The terrorists used it as cover so.....


No there wasn't.

Obama's administration lied to you.
 
2012-12-07 11:29:48 AM
www.bitlogic.com
 
2012-12-07 11:32:26 AM

halfof33: Looking forward to your partisan attacks! Love 16.5


I think you are a wonderful, useful person, and you should continue doing and saying all of the things you've been doing and saying since before the last election. I think you should encourage, loudly (and especially during primaries) your representatives to do the same. I think you should continue doing this forever. Never, ever, ever let Benghazi go. Ever. You're just peaches, friend.
 
2012-12-07 11:33:07 AM

halfof33: justtray: But there was. The terrorists used it as cover so.....

No there wasn't.

Obama's administration lied to you.


It really is unprecedented for the federal government to ever get a fact wrong. Do you think impeachment will be enough, or should everyone involved be tried for treason and shot?
 
2012-12-07 11:36:16 AM

halfof33: justtray: But there was. The terrorists used it as cover so.....

No there wasn't.

Obama's administration lied to you.


I stand corrected. They were indeed wrong.

So?
 
2012-12-07 11:37:38 AM
Let me follow up with - was it a scandal when we invaded Iraq because they were "building weapons of mass destruction?"
 
2012-12-07 11:37:46 AM
Is Milhouse asking whether Benghazi is a scandal yet a meme yet?
 
2012-12-07 11:38:08 AM

Duke Phillips' Singing Bears: halfof33: Looking forward to your partisan attacks! Love 16.5

I think you are a wonderful, useful person, and you should continue doing and saying all of the things you've been doing and saying since before the last election. I think you should encourage, loudly (and especially during primaries) your representatives to do the same. I think you should continue doing this forever. Never, ever, ever let Benghazi go. Ever. You're just peaches, friend.


I'm adding him to my Christmas card mailing list.
 
2012-12-07 11:38:52 AM

Philip Francis Queeg: It really is unprecedented for the federal government to ever get a fact wrong. Do you think impeachment will be enough, or should everyone involved be tried for treason and shot?


Well we can sweep it under the rug, post pictures of Milhouse and attack the messenger. That seems to be the approach here.

Don't worry, the Government is here to take care of you.
 
2012-12-07 11:40:26 AM

justtray: Let me follow up with - was it a scandal when we invaded Iraq because they were "building weapons of mass destruction?"


massive deflection noted.

I'll answer though: No.
 
2012-12-07 11:41:44 AM
Awww.... Poor Fox News. Tried so hard to make this into a "scandal" and nobody cared except for the unhinged, partisan clowns who watch their shiatty programs.
 
2012-12-07 11:42:18 AM
25.media.tumblr.com
 
2012-12-07 11:42:32 AM

halfof33: justtray: But there was. The terrorists used it as cover so.....

No there wasn't.

Obama's administration lied to you.


:YAWN:

Link

Chaffetz was responding to a report in Tuesday's Wall Street Journal that CIA "officials" wanted the terrorist origins of the attack kept from the public because the spy agency did not want certain al-Qaeda operatives to know it was monitoring its communications.


Leave it to the right-wing to damage national security in the service of their own agenda. 

Idiots like our Fark Independents would have wanted investigations to find out why FDR and Churchill didn't tell the Nazis "We've broken the Enigma Code! Suck it, Adolf!" and "Hey, Tojo! See you at Midway!"
 
2012-12-07 11:42:41 AM

halfof33: Philip Francis Queeg: It really is unprecedented for the federal government to ever get a fact wrong. Do you think impeachment will be enough, or should everyone involved be tried for treason and shot?

Well we can sweep it under the rug, post pictures of Milhouse and attack the messenger. That seems to be the approach here.

Don't worry, the Government is here to take care of you.


So, treason trials and firing squads then?
 
2012-12-07 11:43:32 AM
These sheeple just don't know the truth, Romney landslide, benghazi conspiracy, climate change, mayan apocalypse how can you libs trust the lamestream-drieby-liebral-media when they are always wrong?
 
2012-12-07 11:44:25 AM

justtray: halfof33: justtray: But there was. The terrorists used it as cover so.....

No there wasn't.

Obama's administration lied to you.

I stand corrected. They were indeed wrong.

So?


So? It's obvious!

The president must explain everything to us in detail, regardless of national security interests. He must release every classified briefing he gets, because FREEDOM.
 
2012-12-07 11:44:28 AM

HMS_Blinkin: Duke Phillips' Singing Bears: Am I having a stroke? Am I having trouble parsing English? Because it looks like this guy said the exact opposite of what Subby says he says.

It's as close to an admission of fault as you'll ever see from anyone affiliated with that channel.


Actually I think he misspoke and said "have" instead of "haven't", given the context. He was trying to admit that MAAAAYBE it was a tad much, even though he countered himself with an arthritis-jarring dose of MSNBC liberal mainstream birth MSM mediacertificate.
 
2012-12-07 11:47:41 AM

halfof33: justtray: Let me follow up with - was it a scandal when we invaded Iraq because they were "building weapons of mass destruction?"

massive deflection noted.

I'll answer though: No.


Why? Because Costanza?

Or is it OK to lie about the justification for a war you choose to have, but it's not OK to avoid the truth so the enemy doesn't know you're reading their communications?

We really need to know the rules for this.
 
2012-12-07 11:47:45 AM

halfof33: justtray: Let me follow up with - was it a scandal when we invaded Iraq because they were "building weapons of mass destruction?"

massive deflection noted.

I'll answer though: No.


I think it's only a deflection if you DON'T think the Iraq lies should be a scandal. Otherwise, it exposes...

Well, wait. Why don't you think a failure of the intelligence community was a scandal when it led to $1 trillion spent and 4,000 lives lost, yet when everything is scaled down by a factor of 1,000 suddenly it's the biggest scandal to ever scandal a scandal? I'm willing to allow for differences, but I think they'll more than likely expose-

...your partisanship (which is fine, just own it) or have you thinking, correctly, that Iraq should have been MORE of a scandal than it was and that Benghazi may have gotten overblown a bit (especially in comparison).
 
2012-12-07 11:48:10 AM

halfof33: justtray: Let me follow up with - was it a scandal when we invaded Iraq because they were "building weapons of mass destruction?"

massive deflection noted.

I'll answer though: No.


Deflection of what? I asked you, so? They were wrong, exactly like my example where you said that wasn't a scandal.

So, please extrapolate.
 
2012-12-07 11:52:16 AM

rufus-t-firefly: halfof33: justtray: Let me follow up with - was it a scandal when we invaded Iraq because they were "building weapons of mass destruction?"

massive deflection noted.

I'll answer though: No.

Why? Because Costanza?

Or is it OK to lie about the justification for a war you choose to have, but it's not OK to avoid the truth so the enemy doesn't know you're reading their communications?

We really need to know the rules for this.


Its funny to watch him simultaneously deflect and project when painted into a corner. I think i owned a troll today. Im proud of myself
 
2012-12-07 11:53:21 AM

vygramul: [www.bitlogic.com image 300x300]


That was some funny shiat.

/Still chuckling.
 
2012-12-07 11:55:34 AM

rufus-t-firefly: Chaffetz was responding to a report in Tuesday's Wall Street Journal that CIA "officials" wanted the terrorist origins of the attack kept from the public because the spy agency did not want certain al-Qaeda operatives to know it was monitoring its communications.

Leave it to the right-wing to damage national security in the service of their own agenda.

Idiots like our Fark Independents would have wanted investigations to find out why FDR and Churchill didn't tell the Nazis "We've broken the Enigma Code! Suck it, Adolf!" and "Hey, Tojo! See you at Midway!"


That is such bullshiat, and it COMPLETELY misses the point. Lying about whether there was a protest outside the embassy caused by the release of an anti-islamic video does not release any confidential information whatsoever.

Unless you are dumb enough to believe that the people who attacked the embassy just thought to themselves "Say, I wonder how we missed those protests."

Cripes, wise up.
 
2012-12-07 12:32:09 PM

halfof33: rufus-t-firefly: Chaffetz was responding to a report in Tuesday's Wall Street Journal that CIA "officials" wanted the terrorist origins of the attack kept from the public because the spy agency did not want certain al-Qaeda operatives to know it was monitoring its communications.

Leave it to the right-wing to damage national security in the service of their own agenda.

Idiots like our Fark Independents would have wanted investigations to find out why FDR and Churchill didn't tell the Nazis "We've broken the Enigma Code! Suck it, Adolf!" and "Hey, Tojo! See you at Midway!"

That is such bullshiat, and it COMPLETELY misses the point. Lying about whether there was a protest outside the embassy caused by the release of an anti-islamic video does not release any confidential information whatsoever.

Unless you are dumb enough to believe that the people who attacked the embassy just thought to themselves "Say, I wonder how we missed those protests."

Cripes, wise up.


You sounded tired even before the superblack meganazi acorned the election; now you're like the latest season of "two and a half men."

/believe it or not, I watched two sheen-free episodes
//used to like that show, in small doses :(
 
Displayed 50 of 137 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report