By now we all know about the left-wing hatred that exists within FOX News, but it is because of that bias that we are all intrigued about when FOX News actually tries to report factual information. How will they present it?? Who will present it??
Well, today came the latest FOX News/Opinion Dynamics poll, and I tuned in because I was eager to hear their interpretation of the results. Instead of hearing "Fair and Balanced" reporting, what I observed were some things that smelled, well, fishy:
1) FOX News pushes William Ayers in your face leading up to poll results
In waiting for the poll results, one can observe a FOX News trick that they have been pulling for some time now. "The Live Desk" does its show with three boxes on the left-hand side of the screen that are supposed to tell viewers the top stories of the day that they are reporting on. Sitting in the middle box is a picture of William Ayers with a headline that changes every couple of minutes from "DOMESTIC TERRORIST" to "OBAMA LINK?"
2) Trace Gallagher lies about "Huge" poll differences
In promoting the upcoming FOX News/Opinion Dynamics poll, Trace Gallagher (the guy who thinks more oil seeps out of the ground into the ocean than in a major oil spill), told viewers about the upcoming FOX News poll, and that the Barack Obama-William Ayers connection had a "huge" impact on the polls.
But when the polls were reported, it was said that Obama's lead had increased to seven points and that Obama had generally increased in his leads across the board in various areas, including women voters and on the economy. But not to be outdone, Gallagher was determined to follow through with his promise by interrupting the reporter giving the results and shouting about the "REAL SHOCKER": 32% say they are less likely to vote for Obama because of his connection to Ayers.
However, after breaking the numbers down by party (which Gallagher showed no interest in doing), this isn't a shocker at all. Roughly the same percentage of Democrats less likely to vote Obama because of Ayers is equivalent to the amount of Democrats not voting for him anyways, and the same amount of Independents less likely to vote for Obama because of Ayers is equivalent to the amount voting for McCain anyways. If there is a shocker, it is how FOX News/Opinion Dynamics phrases this question on its poll...
3) FOX News/Opinion Dynamics poll questions are phrased to implicate Obama
The poll asks three questions related to past scandals: Reverend Wright, Ayers, and Keating. Here are the three questions in the order they were asked:
42. As you may know, Barack Obama has distanced himself from his former pastor Jeremiah Wright because of controversial and anti-American comments Wright made.
Obama attended Rev. Wright's church for about 20 years. Obama says he did not hear Wright make anti-American comments during the time he went to church there. Do you believe Obama attended Rev. Wright's church for 20 years and didn't hear him make anti-American comments during that time?
This question is a set up for the last two. It does not ask at all if this has to do with how Reverend Wright affects their vote - it simply asks if those taking this poll think Obama is being truthful. Once FOX News establishes the "truth" argument against Obama, they ask the next question on Ayers:
43. There has been some discussion of Barack Obama's relationship with the former radical activist William Ayers. Because Ayers is linked to plots to bomb the Pentagon and the U.S. Capitol in the 1970s, and because Ayres recently said he wished he had done more, some people say Obama's association with Ayers calls into question his judgment. Does Obama's connection with Ayers make you less likely to vote for him for president or does it not really make a difference to your vote?
Now compare the phrasing of this question to the next question on Keating:
44. As you may know, there has been some discussion of John McCain's involvement with Charles Keating, of the so-called Keating Five savings and loan scandal of the 1980s. McCain was cleared of all charges and ethical complaints, but some people think McCain's past association with Charles Keating still calls into question his judgment. Does McCain's past connection with Keating make you less likely to vote for him for president or does it not really make a difference to your vote?
First of all, the Ayers question is phrased more recent to sound more scandalous. Notice that the Ayers question starts with "There has been some discussion" as opposed to the Keating question, which starts with "As you may know". Also, the Ayers question states "Ayers recently said he wished he had done more". Well if 2001 is "recently", then Trent Dilfer recently led the Baltimore Ravens to a Super Bowl victory and I recently became one year away from being able to legally purchase alcohol.
The major malfunction with this question comes in the second sentence of each:
Because Ayers is linked to plots to bomb the Pentagon and the U.S. Capitol in the 1970s, and because Ayres recently said he wished he had done more, some people say Obama's association with Ayers calls into question his judgment.
McCain was cleared of all charges and ethical complaints, but some people think McCain's past association with Charles Keating still calls into question his judgment.
So the Ayers question says: "AYERS...BOMB...BAD STUFF...some people say Obama's association with Ayers calls into question his judgment."
The Keating question says: "MCCAIN WAS CLEARED OF ALL CHARGES...some people think McCain's past association with Charles Keating still calls into question his judgment."
Calling Obama's truthfulness into question with Reverend Wright sets up a perfect way to contrast Obama's NEW PROBLEM and McCain's OLD PROBLEM - THAT HE WAS CLEARED OFF JUST IN CASE YOU FORGOT! DON'T FORGET! WE PUT THAT RIGHT UP FRONT SO YOU DON'T FORGET!
Other questions about the integrity of the FOX News polls should be raised, such as why they always seem to have a high number of undecided voters, or why they preface a question about the public's opinion of the bailout package with the questions "In general, do you think government involvement is usually the solution or the problem?" and "Do you think this is a good time for higher taxes and a larger government or is this a good time for lower taxes and a smaller government?", but I degress...
Something is fishy here, and it stinks bad. Kind of like the show Hannity's America.