Faux news seemed dissapointed the Dems didn't 'attack' one another...

[gully]

and went after Bush instead. Of course they gave props to Lieberman as the only one to 'attack' Dean. But they went on to chattle about how 'generally' in a debate people go after the front runner, and instead the Dems went after Bush. BOOO HOOO!

Ah, I thought, the 'real' motive for the Fox coverage is revealed. They wanted to see Dean trashed on their network by other Dems? Thank goodness they are focusing on Bush first and foremost! I am falling in love with all of them, ceptin JL of course.

Also their so called fair and balanced review last night didn't include any 'liberals' imagine that?

:evilgrin:

[wndycty]

1. I bet. . .

. . .they are hearing from a ton of angry viewers who were upset that Bush* took such a whipping last night.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

2. And the Pugs were so kind to Clinton in 1999-2000.

Not to mention the daily parade of Dem bashing, 24/7 on Faux. Hypocrits.

[robbedvoter]

3. Not that Juan Williams didn't try his best to stir the pot

The other two questioneers were quite good actually, but Williams seemed to have the sole purpose to make everyone look bad.

[liberalnurse]

4. I guess he did not get his bonus check then....

.

[candy331]

5. Juan Williams

I used to listen to Juan Williams when he was on NPR and he sounded like he was on base. Did he change or did I miss something? Please let me know because he is digusting to listen to since he has been on TV.

[arcane1]

6. even the goddamned QUESTIONERS were attacking Dean

paraphrase: "Mr Dean thinks white people should have less gun control than black people. Would you follow that line of reasoning in your presidency?"


Dean has to jump in and say :wtf:


ragged on Kerry too because they didn't like his answer