Fair and balanced? Um ... no

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Riot

Yes, they do all the time. Some are far better than others, but plenty of "left wing" bias and falsehoods are pointed out, too.



Probably because Obama himself has publically said he is a Christian.

There's also years of back-info and evidence about him attending Christian services.



Nonsense. It's reporting the truth. The problem today seems that many readily confuse truth with ... something else.

If someone has other provable information - not fear-mongering - that the President of the United States is lying, bring it on. So far that's been a pretty big fail on the part of many.

I'm going to give you a hypothetical. I'm sure you won't answer it because you never answer questions that hurt your argument.

I'll make the hypothetical about a Republican. Let's say a poll was done tomorrow and 10% of people say they think that Rudy Giuliani is probably an atheist. If an article was written about this, do you think that the journalist should write that 10% of people "incorrectly" and "wrongly" believe that Giuliani is an atheist? I don't. I think they should report the results of the poll and that should be it. They should say that Giuliani is a professed Catholic but 10% of the respondents think he's an atheist.

They shouldn't make an assesment of whether the people are right or wrong because the truth of the matter is we don't what Rudy Giuliani truly believes. Politicians will often pretend to be religious even if they aren't.