Why I don't watch Fox
I get the Washington Times. I rarely quote from it, but I do get it, because reading only what you already believe isn't much help. But
the WaTimes, strident and obnoxious as I usually find it (last week they ran a series of columns about how evil the Girl Scouts are because they, unlike the Boy Scouts, are not overtly Christian and anti-gay. Seriously. That was the actual pitch.), is head and shoulders over Fox, which has long since ceased to be any kind of news organization whatsoever.For instance, a couple of weeks ago Fox national correspondent Steve Centanni said Kagan's recusal from the health care case may be required by "Article 28 of the Constitution." And Fox's crack screen graphics department put up the actual quote from the "U.S. Constitution, Article 28, Sec. 144".
Just one problem.
There is no such Article in the Constitution.
This is actually a perfect example of why watching Fox News is simply bad for you. It's not an honest presentation of the conservative side of any argument. It is propaganda. It is lies.
Lies do not inform the public conversation. They derail it. They hijack it. They fill it with fear.
Fox is not news.
4 Comments:
-
At 1:10 PM, November 24, 2011
fev had this to say...
-
-
At 3:16 PM, November 24, 2011
Kathie had this to say...
-
-
At 3:40 PM, November 24, 2011
Picky had this to say...
-
-
At 9:13 PM, November 24, 2011
Kathie had this to say...
-
-
<-- Older Post ^ Home Newer Post -->Heh. Well done.
Does anyone know the reason this occurred? What had Fox INTENDED to post -- was this merely a typo that was should have cited some other part of the Constitution, or a law? Or a place-holder till the desired part of the Constitution could be located and inserted (except someone forgot to check before putting the item on-air)? Or was it arrogantly fraudulent "faux-journalism" run amok?
Or did someone misread the calendar and think it was April 1? Nah, didn't think so.
It appears to be not from the Constitution but from the US Code.
Might it be this?
TITLE 28 > PART I > CHAPTER 5 > § 144:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode28/usc_sec_28_00000144----000-.html
§ 144. Bias or prejudice of judge
Whenever a party to any proceeding in a district court makes and files a timely and sufficient affidavit that the judge before whom the matter is pending has a personal bias or prejudice either against him or in favor of any adverse party, such judge shall proceed no further therein, but another judge shall be assigned to hear such proceeding.
The affidavit shall state the facts and the reasons for the belief that bias or prejudice exists, and shall be filed not less than ten days before the beginning of the term at which the proceeding is to be heard, or good cause shall be shown for failure to file it within such time. A party may file only one such affidavit in any case. It shall be accompanied by a certificate of counsel of record stating that it is made in good faith.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]