Who was he apologizing on behalf of, the Fox News network or the Democrat political machine, that has a system-wide policy of not granting interviews to Fox?

Subject says it all

Does Shep even have the authority to apologize on behalf of the whole network? I wonder if his bosses appreciate the apology or not....

FYI Ace, it's a rare day I comment on the reading assignments (too many topics in one location)

I did reply to you in the original comment board for your ever persistent question (that I keep answering quite well actually and you keep dodging)

who was that guy asking for his $2 a while back? Lane Meyer?

Anyway...

Since you dont seem to understand how our govt works or your still stinging from your own federalist papers supporting the idea of judicial review, please - how's about you explain to me how this works.

I've said - many times - we are a representative republic with three equal branches of govt, checking each others power all derived via the constitution, which we (as in We the People) wrote.

So, we can agree that the federal govt needs money to operate, yes? And we agree that we are not a democracy, yes? So, through our elected representatives we vest in them the power to make decisions on things like tax policy, yes?

And we rely on the SCOTUS and the power of the veto and the executive as a conduit for the people to protect the power we vest in congress along with our vote, a free press, and the freedom of speech.

which is why I say - we get the govt we deserve.

you seem to think "moochers" can vote away your property. OK, they can vote for a person who may or may not be able to change the law. But, it takes a lot of them (reps, not people).

damn...it's 353...you prob wont see this until monday and wont resp until then

nvm - catch you on the flip side

snarkybird Agreed with the statement that: we have a duty to turn over our private property to the government no matter how much they want.

snarkybird Doesn't see the obvious contradiction of the government having an unlimited right to your property and by extension your time and efforts, not matter how much property time and effort it needs.

But no worries according to snarkybird, we still retain control of our property, our time and our efforts by the vestiges of our One Vote and the limitations placed on the government by the Constitution.

However, snarkybird forgot that part of yesterday's discussion was on the wonders of JUDICIAL ACTIVISM whereby a leftists judge can simply eviscerate rights set out in plain language and create New rights out of whole cloth.

Plain language rights such as Free speech the right of the people to keep and bear arms.

And creating the Right to healthcare and other claims on everyone's time and property.

Snarkybird failed to explain how we can keep control of our property in the face this chicanery by the government.

Again, according to snarkybird , your right to your property, your time and your efforts is protected by the vestiges of your ONE vote.

Examples were also provided of people who voted based on the plunder they would receive.

Your ONE vote that can be easily overridden by votes from thousand to millions of other voters who can chose with their votes seize your property, your time and your efforts.

Again, snarkybird doesn't see any danger to the Republic with people being able to vote themselves property from others and a political party that is all too willing to enable them to do so.

Why is that?

LOL!

dude...it's called comedy for a reason.

lighten up. sheesh!

although, I thought the whole point about Fox reporting on itself as the "some are saying" "so and so is being accused" was spot on. But, humor always has a kernel of truth.

Pop.

has the obamamedia co*k leash around his neck (and it still fits loosely!).

Ok, I watched about 7 minutes of that Daily Show clip Snarky posted.....what a waste of time.

Definitely designed for the lowest common denominator...aka liberals. And, definitely not where you should be getting your news from.

If that's where you get your ideas and opinions from, Snarky, that explains a lot.

You both nailed it right on the head about Ron Paul not getting coverage. It made me sick how they refused to cover him through the whole thing. The reality is, all news agencies are biased. Fox didn't want to report on him to take votes away from McCain and CNN was reporting on Paul to actually help take votes away from McCain. Sickening to say the least.

How many kids does Shep have?

It seems some just can not understand that was total sarcasm. I love it, find it hysterical. Sarcasm in this rediculous politically correct world is becoming a lost art.

Is that Shep's contract is up soon and he's auditioning for BSNBC or CNN where he'd feel more at home. As for Fox not being balanced, this is a calculated strategy by the left. As was said, either ignore or deny requests to appear on Fox then turn around and accuse them of having bias. Brilliant. It's like on O'Reilly the other day when they ambushed Grayson and Grayson wouldn't answer anything except to tell them to make an appointment. Well, they made several appointments and have yet to be contacted for an interview. But you know what? If Fox has a conservative balance, hurrah for them. The left is upset because they don't have 100% control of the media and are ticked because Fox asks the tough questions...of both sides for those keeping score and based on their ratings, this seems to appeal to a majority, make that a vast majority of viewers.

http://www.thedailyshow.com/

"For Fox Sake!"

...just look back to the 2008 election and see how Ron Paul was treated. It was like fox was trying itself to help the government expansionists win the election. They tried their best to marginalize the constitution...

Hmmmm, that could be taken a few ways.

If he was trying to be sarcastic, it didn't work. It's nothing more than fodder for the Fox haters. His show is the only one I refuse to watch on FNC. I don't like his delivery or his style and I sure as hell don't appreciate comments like he made in April of this year on Fox's online show The Strategy Room.

is truly a lost art.

Don't get me wrong, I know Shep is a bit left of field but I detected a bit of sarcasm there. Maybe I am wrong but that might be the case in this one guys.

John Stossel should get one of Shlep's hours

What an absolute putz. Did he actually expect they'd have an interview ready with Corzine?? Idiot.

Sheppard Smith is nothing more than a pretty-boy talking head. To have him decide on what should or should not be covered is laughable. Stick to reading the teleprompter,Shep. You'll come across as much more intelligent.

Lack of balance? She just said they've been trying to talk to Corzine. Maybe he
just doesn't want to talk to Fox. Get
down off the cross, there Shep.