Fox News Uses An Image of Tina Fey To Portray Governor Palin

Shey.com ^ | Sunday June 5, 2011 | Sheya

[Bigtigermike]

Last week in a post titled: With Friends Like Fox News Palin Is Better Off With Her Enemies, we reported on how Fox News is out to take down Governor Palin. We wrote (Emphesis added):

Fox wants Palin out but they don’t want to suspend her contract because by doing so they’ll be conceding that she’s a serious contender. Fox won’t do anything that would lend her credibility. They just want her to resign. The tactic now is to makePalin’s life as difficult and as miserable as possible until Palin just gets frustrated and leaves on her own citing irreconcilable differences. Things are going to get worse. Fox is about to up the ante and it’s going to get ugly.

Later that day we noted on how quick Fox News was to up the ante:

After meeting with Governor Palin yesterday Fox decided to up the ante today. Talking to Carl Cameron on his show today, Shepard Smith announced that fox will now be referring to Governor Palin as “Contributor Palin”.

Today Fox took it a step further with another blunder. In a news bulletin during Shannon Bream’s show, Fox News used a photo of Tina Fey to portray Governor Palin instead of a real one of the Governor.

Now I can see how this could have been an unintentional blunder. But with all that Fox has been accused of lately in relation to it’s treatment of Governor Palin, and with them trying to argue that all those accusations just happen to be a string of coincidences, you would assume they would be extra vigilant.

Furthermore, organizations like Fox News have their images filed, organized and well tagged. So what was a photo of Tina Fey doing filed under “Sarah Palin”?

[philman_36]

Seems too easy to ID ronpaulnutz.
If you could back up your BS you would. Since you can't smears work just as good, right?
It's far easier to ID an Alinsky student.

Another reply and yet another missed opportunity for you to say "Well how about that! I didn't know that had happened."

Oh, BTW...if I'm such an ardent supporter, as you're trying to imply, then why would I ever post this reply if I'm "nuts" for the guy?
Ron Paul to launch W.H. bid Friday
A completely futile effort. It'll make for interesting debates though which, IMO, is his real goal. After all of his fruitless past endeavors he should know he'll never win.

You're too easy and if you could back up your BS you would have already done so.
The only goat that's being gotten here is yours.

[philman_36]

Hypersensitivity and unnecessary aggression are generally signs of serious psychotic issues...
You should really heed your own words.
dusttoyou "ron paul" site:freerepublic.com

You seem to have a most unnatural and unusual obsession with Paul.

[dusttoyou]

Guess I better get on back to something productive and not keep wasting such a learned person’s valuable time by making you reply 40 times to a simple one sentence question.

Just for laughs, my old got goat wants to hear you say ronpaul three times without snickering one more time.

[dusttoyou]

Guess I better get on back to something productive and not keep wasting such a learned person’s valuable time by making you reply 40 times to a simple one sentence question.

Just for laughs, my old got goat wants to hear you say ronpaul three times without snickering one more time.

[JimRed]

If I searched through your Aug-Dec 2008 comments I bet I would find those exact sentiments expressed by you back then as well.

Looking back to his/her sentiments before the primaries would be more appropriate.

[philman_36]

Abandon ship! I've been hit with a direct broadside below the waterline and my jib is floundering!

Del Shannon

[philman_36]

Looking back to his/her sentiments before the primaries would be more appropriate.
Perhaps so. I didn't bother to look, though it's quite easy if you know how.

[dusttoyou]

Hey this really is almost as funny as weiner threads.

JimRob wouldn’t need any fund raisers if he charged fools for wasting bandwidth with 46 hairbrained replies. Come on you can make it 50, even if you have to call ronpaul for instructions.

[philman_36]

Hey this really is almost as funny as weiner threads.
This is equal fun. You're just like him. Neither of you can get your story straight.

JimRob wouldn’t need any fund raisers if he charged fools for wasting bandwidth with 46 hairbrained replies.
BWAHAHAHAHA...Too funny! Your 46 hair-brained replies don't count though, do they?

Go on now. Take your ball and go home. You've got more productive things to do...remember.

[Revolting cat!]

I agree with what you said. If Palin runs and loses, commentators, or at least those sympathetic to her, will fault her for overexposure, which has been her biggest mistake so far, I think.

I'm too young to know why Eisenhower was portrayed by the MSM as an idiot, and I forgot the essay which wrote about it, but that was the case with him as with all the others I mentioned. The problem is that these images, developed as much by the media as by the candidates themselves, stick, and they stick among the conservatives as well as among liberals, because no one will admit that they lack independent judgment to decide for themselves. And it is indeed difficult to decide for yourself, since what you see and what you read about a candidate is all selected and weighed for you by the media gatekeepers.