[Jason's Ultimatum]

When you look at the dichotomy between MSNBC and Fox News on the handling of the Trayvon Martin case in Florida, it isn't hard to see past Fox New's thinly veiled mask on how they're reporting the news. Even in general, the blatant racism and fearmongering from the hosts on the network can make you sick.

It got me thinking that if Fox News were around during the Civil Rights movement and the push for passing the Civil Rights Act, would the network have been against the movement? Would they have called it "radicalized", and "dangerous" to the country? My answer is yes.

What say you?

[Jackpot]

Of course. Just look at anything they report on with gay marriage.

[Schattenjäger]

Oh look another fox news sucks thread

Can you give us specific examples of this thinly veiled racism ?

[LordCanti]

They'd have been against the Civil War too. Can't be having those northern liberal elites taking southern "property".

This is sarcasm. Blaming people for what they may have done is silly when you can blame them for what they do right now.

[zomaha]

When you look at the dichotomy between MSNBC and Fox News on the handling of the Trayvon Martin case in Florida

Would NBC have edited video during the Civil Rights movement?

[SouthernDragon]

Yes. Is there any doubt?

We would have panels discussing how dangerous blacks are to America.

[Marius_]

Yes due to the conservative mentality to reject change when it comes to social issues

Of course. Just look at anything they report on with gay marriage.

[explodet]

All right, hypothetical Fox News thread!

[Mammoth Jones]

Would NBC have edited video during the Civil Rights movement?

Sad thing is then, like now, they wouldn't *need* to.

[mj1108]

Yes. Is there any doubt? We would have panels discussing how dangerous blacks are to America.

Bingo.

[Escape Goat]

[CHEEZMO™]

[Kosmo]

When you look at the dichotomy between MSNBC and Fox News on the handling of the Trayvon Martin case in Florida, it isn't hard to see past Fox New's thinly veiled mask on how they're reporting the news. Even in general, the blatant racism and fearmongering from the hosts on the network can make you sick. It got me thinking that if Fox News were around during the Civil Rights movement and the push for passing the Civil Rights Act, would the network have been against the movement? Would they have called it "radicalized", and "dangerous" to the country? My answer is yes. What say you?

I say no, a higher percentage of Republicans were in favor of the Civil Rights act than Democrats:

H.R.7152 passed the House on Feb. 10, 1964. Of the 420 members who voted, 290 supported the civil rights bill and 130 opposed it. Republicans favored the bill 138 to 34; Democrats supported it 152-96. Republicans supported it in higher proportions than Democrats. Even though those Democrats were Southern segregationists, without Republicans the bill would have failed. Republicans were the other much-needed leg of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Have you watched MSNBC? It's probably a bigger smear machine than Fox News, not that Fox News doesn't do some untoward things. Case in point:

http://www.abc4.com/content/news/top...k2b4m3PMg.cspx Lawrence O'Donnell criticized The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints Tuesday saying, "Mormonism was created by a guy in upstate New York in 1830 when he got caught having sex with the maid and explained to his wife that God told him to do it. Forty-eight wives later, Joseph Smith's lifestyle was completely sanctified in the religion he invented to go with it. Which Mitt Romney says he believes."

Gee, funny he never mentioned this in the context of Harry Reid, who is also a Mormon.

[Mammoth Jones]

One thing is for sure...Fox News still calls em "Radical Liberals".

(Racist campaign poster from the Post-Civil War Era)

[hokahey]

Just curious, how old are you?

To answer, maybe. And I'll extrapolate. But fear mongering from the right on the Trayvon case? Seems clear the left has consistently distorted the facts.

Fox may have been against the Civil Rights act as those on the right should be.

Your problem is that you equate someone being against big government as for racism. That's poor logic.

If I am for the first amendment I have to agree that the KKK has a right to espouse their beliefs. Does it then make me racist for being pro constitution?

A privately owned business should not be forced to accept clientelle they dont want. Just like you, in your private residence, should not be forced to allow people in your home that you dont want.

[Jason's Ultimatum]

Uh, I already gave an example. Plus, there's Geraldo Rivera. It goes on and on.

[Mammoth Jones]

Just curious, how old are you? To answer, maybe. And I'll extrapolate. But fear mongering from the right on the Trayvon case? Seems clear the left has consistently distorted the facts. Fox may have been against the Civil Rights act as those on the right should be. Your problem is that you equate someone being against big government as for racism. That's poor logic. If I am for the first amendment I have to agree that the KKK has a right to espouse their beliefs. Does it then make me racist for being pro constitution? A privately owned business should not be forced to accept clientelle they dont want. Just like you, in your private residence, should not be forced to allow people in your home that you dont want.

Are you a white christian male by any chance?

[ChiTownBuffalo]

I think Fox News would present their case against the Civicl Rights Act of 1964, the same way that Ron Paul does.

[Jason's Ultimatum]

Just curious, how old are you? To answer, maybe. And I'll extrapolate. But fear mongering from the right on the Trayvon case? Seems clear the left has consistently distorted the facts. Fox may have been against the Civil Rights act as those on the right should be. Your problem is that you equate someone being against big government as for racism. That's poor logic. If I am for the first amendment I have to agree that the KKK has a right to espouse their beliefs. Does it then make me racist for being pro constitution? A privately owned business should not be forced to accept clientelle they dont want. Just like you, in your private residence, should not be forced to allow people in your home that you dont want.

Ron Paul supporter? Might as well give up with this poster since rational thinking goes out the window.

[eznark]

One thing is for sure...Fox News still calls em "Radical Liberals". (Racist campaign poster from the Post-Civil War Era)

Hiester Clymer was a Democrat.

[B_Rik_Schitthaus]

Are you a white christian male by any chance?

White christian male's are the most persecuted group in America, I heard it on the news.

[Sho_Nuff82]

There are people on this very board who think that Brown vs BOE or the Civil Rights Act were examples of the government overstepping its bounds, so I don't think it's a stretch to argue. It is, however, a pointless, speculative, slam. "What side would Fox be on in the Civil War?" is just as vapid of a mental exercise.

[Mammoth Jones]

Hiester Clymer was a Democrat.

Back then Democrats were the conservatives and Republicans were the liberals.

[Kusagari]

Just curious, how old are you? To answer, maybe. And I'll extrapolate. But fear mongering from the right on the Trayvon case? Seems clear the left has consistently distorted the facts. Fox may have been against the Civil Rights act as those on the right should be. Your problem is that you equate someone being against big government as for racism. That's poor logic. If I am for the first amendment I have to agree that the KKK has a right to espouse their beliefs. Does it then make me racist for being pro constitution? A privately owned business should not be forced to accept clientelle they dont want. Just like you, in your private residence, should not be forced to allow people in your home that you dont want.

Hey the Paulites are here.

[eznark]

Back then Democrats were the conservatives and Republicans were the liberals.

Correct (well, simplistic but close enough) but if we are really calling out FOX News, they don't seem to care about positions, they just want their team to win. I.E., they will support anyone with a (R).

I guess the answer to the question then is no, FOX News would have been for the Civil Rights movement while MSNBC would have been championing white supremacists.

[DY_nasty]

I say no, a higher percentage of Republicans were in favor of the Civil Rights act than Democrats: Have you watched MSNBC? It's probably a bigger smear machine than Fox News, not that Fox News doesn't do some untoward things. Case in point: Gee, funny he never mentioned this in the context of Harry Reid, who is also a Mormon.

the Rep party's message has changed a lot since the 60s

Don't know why you bring up stuff from back then...

[Dali]

This thread title feels like someone mixed the IGN random article title generator with subjects relevant to the OT.

[Htown]

I say no, a higher percentage of Republicans were in favor of the Civil Rights act than Democrats:

The Republican party then is different from the Republican party now. Largely because many of the white Southern Democrats moved over to the Republican party after the civil rights movement.

[Orayn]

the Rep party's message has changed a lot since the 60s Don't know why you bring up stuff from back then...

It's easier to ignore the runaway monster the party has become.

[Enron]

This thread title feels like someone mixed the IGN random article title generator with subjects relevant to the OT.

It's about as nifty as an IGN article as well.

[Dude Abides]

I say no, a higher percentage of Republicans were in favor of the Civil Rights act than Democrats:

And nothing about the parties has changed at all since that day! Democrats still sweep the South in national elections!

Hiester Clymer was a Democrat.

So was Strom Thurmond. And Jesse Helms. I wonder why they switched? Such a puzzlement.

[DY_nasty]

Correct (well, simplistic but close enough) but if we are really calling out FOX News, they don't seem to care about positions, they just want their team to win. I.E., they will support anyone with a (R). I guess the answer to the question then is no, FOX News would have been for the Civil Rights movement while MSNBC would have been championing white supremacists.

You're right about them being team (r) but... I don't know. It seems like there's a lot of gymnastics going on to say that fox, right now, would support them because of what Republicans said back then - but fox, right now, isn't even subtle. I guess if you squint hard enough you don't see it though.

[The Technomancer]

I say no, a higher percentage of Republicans were in favor of the Civil Rights act than Democrats:

Would Fox News have been a Republican network back then?

[CHEEZMO™]

Oh great, Kosmo and the Paulestinians are here.

[Kosmo]

And nothing about the parties has changed at all since that day! Democrats still sweep the South in national elections!

I'm surprised you didn't just go for "Bush's fault."

[Jason's Ultimatum]

Would Fox News have been a Republican network back then?

Rogers Ailes was pondering for a conservative network during the Nixon era.

[DR2K]

No more than they would Obama.

[Cheebo]

I say no, a higher percentage of Republicans were in favor of the Civil Rights act than Democrats.

This is the dumbest thing I ever heard. At the time the Democrats were the Southern dominated extremely pro-states rights extremely religious party while the Republicans were the party dominated by the North, and strong backers of big government and federal government authority.

The Republican Party of the Civil War was the politically liberal party and Democrats were politically conservative. You can't use that label. I mean Teddy Roosevelt is one of the most liberal Presidents in American history yet he was a Republican.

Fox News has a CONSERVATIVE bias.

[Dude Abides]

I'm surprised you didn't just go for "Bush's fault."

I'm surprised you don't have a substantive rejoinder.

Oh wait, I'm not surprised at all.

[Dash27]

Following this logic though Fox News would have been pro freeing the slaves to support Lincoln and later on pro desegregation and pro Eisenhower's civil rights legislation that Democrats largely opposed.

[ChiTownBuffalo]

You can't compare Dixiecrats to modern Democrats.

They ran on the Democratic tickets simply because Lincoln was a Republican.

[eznark]

You're right about them being team (r) but... I don't know. It seems like there's a lot of gymnastics going on to say that fox, right now, would support them because of what Republicans said back then - but fox, right now, isn't even subtle. I guess if you squint hard enough you don't see it though.

The cheerleaders would support their teams.

So was Strom Thurmond. And Jesse Helms. I wonder why they switched? Such a puzzlement.

Yet Exalted Cyclops Robert Byrd remained? The mystery...it boggles.

[BotoxAgent]

It got me thinking that if Fox News were around during the Civil Rights movement and the push for passing the Civil Rights Act, would the network have been against the movement? Would they have called it "radicalized", and "dangerous" to the country? My answer is yes. What say you?

They would be against it and call it socialism that threatens America's freedoms

[ToxicAdam]

Would a conservative news organization give more voice to conservative southern concerns? Yes.

So, now what?

[Dude Abides]

Yet Exalted Cyclops Robert Byrd remained? The mystery...it boggles.

Yep. He put party and patronage over racism. Unlike those who switched to the GOP, who did the opposite.

[eznark]

Yep. He put party and patronage over racism. Unlike those who switched to the GOP, who did the opposite.

Good for him, bad form from the party when electibility trumps overt and active racism.

[Dude Abides]

Good for him, bad form from the party when electibility trumps overt and active racism.

Agreed. The Southern Strategy is an indelible stain on the GOP.

[eznark]

Agreed. The Southern Strategy is an indelible stain on the GOP.

lol @ only one party harboring disgusting people. You're a great team player, you'd have been a natural for Civil War era Fox News!

[Dude Abides]

lol @ only one party harboring disgusting people. You're a great team player, you'd have been a natural for Civil War era Fox News!

You quoted me but your response has no bearing on what I said. Strange.

[eznark]

You quoted me but your response has no bearing on what I said. Strange.

Most of that has to do with trying to bring our discussion back to the topic at hand. If it missed the mark, at least I can say I tried.