This should be good. From Fox news, video follows.
Bret Baier travels across America, revealing rogue regulators, tracing the truth about the president’s environmental agenda and exposing programs that could devastate our economy!
Check out a sneak peek of the special below, and tune in on Sunday at 9p ET to watch the full ‘Fox News Reporting: Behind Obama’s Green Agenda’ on Fox News.
Dr. Spencer writes in an email today:
Tonight at 8 p.m. CDT (9PM EDT/6PM PDT) I’ll be on a FoxNews special entitled “Behind Obama’s Green Agenda”, hosted by Bret Baier. They have not decided when it will air again…FNC probably will announce that in the next few days.
link to video here
UPDATE: – here is an Email from Dr. Spencer tonight:
Well, for those watched…no Roy. They used a couple animations I gave them (early in the show), but the direction of the show was quite different that they envisioned a few months ago, when I spent half a day with them.
Oh, well…it will save me from being harassed over what I said on-camera…for now. 😉 Maybe they will do something more climate-specific later.
Fox news:
You can fool some of the people all of the time and those are the ones you go after.
****
CodeTech says:
October 7, 2012 at 11:12 pm
I’m always amused when someone starts spouting the “FoxNews is a right wing mouthpiece” stuff. The FACT is that FoxNews is the only balanced media. I hear both sides of everything on FoxNews. There is not another media outlet that even pretends to be in the middle.
****
Exactly. When the MSM has been leftist for decades, any balanced coverage will seem rightist by comparison. Anyone that says FoxNews is rightist is ignorant of newsmedia history since the late ’60s. Walter Cronkite tried to stay impartial, but the floodgates opened when Dan Rather became the leftist’s propaganda darling.
Once again, we see the danger of being so OpenMinded that you’re brain falls out.
@OpenMind – the majority voted for Obama last time…they got fooled too.
ABC, NBC, CBS, Washington Post, PBS, NY Times: You can fool most of their audience all of the time and those are the ones who believe crap about Fox News. /sarc
Fox news is neo con garbage.
Better to have real balance and ‘neo-con’ ‘garbage’ than left wing propaganda 24/7.
Only Fox news is propaganda just like the rest of it.
rocknblues81,
I get the impression you don’t like Fox news. I do not watch TV, except for some football and an occasional movie, so I am curious: what TV network news do you think presents the news in the most unbiased manner, reporting fairly on both sides of an issue?
beng October 8, 2012 at 7:35 am
Did you mean to say that Walter Cronkite “tried to seem impartial” vice “tried to stay impartial”? A recent Douglas Brinkley biography on Cronkite suggests he was not impartial and was even worse behind the scenes. To me and others watching him, he did seem impartial, but that was largely because there were no centrist counter views in the media to contrast to.
Well, D… I make an effort to not watch any of it on a consumption basis… I like Anderson Cooper and John Stossel I would say. I really can’t stand Sean Hannity or MSNBC. After that, it gets pretty iffy with me.
As far as TV overall, it’s mostly NFL, NBA, Forensic Files and crime programs. Things like that. And the occasional Sanford and Son, All in the Family and Married with Children rerun. =)
I don’t watch TV news much at all but I do check Foxnews.com and MSN.com frequently. I’ve seen stories that were not probama and not proCAGW on Fox but rarely if ever on MSN.
About the program itself. Too bad Dr. Spencer ended up being edited out. But I thought the program did give credit where credit is due. In the early days of its existence the EPA did a fantastic job. And the U.S. air and water are much cleaner today for that effort. In those days their targets were real pollutants.
I don’t think the main problem is “mission creep” as the program kept saying. Although there is always some of that. I always say the regulators have kids to put through college too, so they want their jobs to continue. I think the main problem is that it became a mature government agency. It seems inevitable that as government agencies mature, politics overrides whatever the mission is.
I worked for an EPA contractor in the mobile source area from the beginning of EPA. For the first 15 years or so they were just interested in the facts. As time went on they became more and more interested in making the facts fit the politics. By the turn of century the facts didn’t matter; only the politics.
“””””…..Kiwisceptic says:
October 7, 2012 at 6:59 pm
This is excellent news, especially with Roy Spencer on the programme adding a strong even-handed and sober scientific voice. The only problem I see with airing it on Fox is that the people they most want to reach probably don’t watch that channel for its sometimes ‘extreme’ views and right-wing bias. At least that’s how Fox is generally perceived here in NZ. Loonie lefties wouldn’t be seen dead watching it……”””””
Well given a choice between watching Fox “news”, as a right wing raid the hen house channel, and the CNN (izzat Clinton news network, or Communist news network) , I’d usually prefer the former. In fact I WON’T watch the latter, and I avoid flying anywhere, including to NZ, because that propaganda socialist network is all over every airport.
Actually, I just discovered for the first time yesterday (Sunday) that my T&V rabbit ears can now pick up the Bay Area’s CH-2 which is Fox. No you don’t think I’m actually going to pay money for somebody to send me 500 channels of shop at home; when I can get Jewellery Television for free, and also now the WWE(F), and also for free, I get the 24 hour English Language Communist Red Chinese World News station, with its various and sundry white guy shills, trying to con me, they are on the level. Yes I do get a lot from CCTV, but I am always mindful that I am getting what the People’s Liberation Army wants me to get.
For News of America, then I watch the two Spanish Language Channels because I get better local news from Mexico City, than from San Francisco or San Jose, and I have a built in family translator, if it gets out of my range.
I’m still reeling from having had to spend 90 minutes of my time watching Dave Letterman’s favorite evening comedy guest (Barbara Wahwah’s too) trying to act the role of POTUS, after having spent four years trying to actually do the job of fixing up what the previous Democrat Controlled Congress messed up, and GWB failed to squash. In that four years, I never spent a total of even 90 seconds, watching the Teleprompter reader in chief; so having to endure 90 minutes was a torture.
Fortunately I was able to save last weekend, watching the six hours of Gotterdammerung from the Met, all the way up to when the fat lady finally does sing, what we spend that six hours waiting for.
So in alphabet soup news, I do now have Fox, and CBS, but mostly I watch the Commies. At least I know I’m being conned there.
I have to laugh whenever I hear so-called “liberals” yawping about “neocons” and “rightwingers.” Today’s “liberals” are the real right wing – they’re reactionaries, clinging to inhumane ideas long since discredited and wanting to go back to the bad old days of tyranny and slavery.
A real life example: Old money, authoritarian impulses, the hoi polloi shall bow and scrape, and rules I make for you don’t apply to me – who have I just described? How does Al Gore grab you? Uses 10 times as much electricity in his house as the average American household uses – mostly fromm coal-fired power plants – and flies hither and yon in a private Boeing 727 (the ultimate gas guzzler among commercial aircraft) – and then criticizes John Q. Public for driving an SUV. Hypocrisy, effrontery, mendacity, sociopathy a la mode.
The AGW freaks and “liberals” who talk about “neocon warmongering” should stop and think about the new Holocaust that will result if they get their way – millions of avoidable deaths due to economic disruption and perpetuated third world poverty. But of course that’s what they want – millions of deaths as “a necessary step in reforming society,” as one of my former history professor colleagues said in regard to Stalin’s murder of 80 million people. Who are the REAL warmongers here?
AGW is a war of aggression against science and against civilization and AGAINST HUMANITY.
Roha et al., Australia is not a democracy. You voted for Rudd and got a Gillard that is not a democracy. US and Fox far more advanced than anything in Australia. Go home.
Sigh…
Australia is a representative democracy, just like the USA. The people vote for representatives, and the representatives then (in theory) represent the views of those who vote for them. In neither case do the voters vote directly in either running the country or in who is the senior political figure (President in the USA or the Prime Minister in Australia). In the USA, voters elect delegates who are the ones who vote for the President. While this is close to being a direct election of a President, it’s not difficult to find examples in history where it has failed – ie. the President who had the most Electoral College votes was NOT the candidate who had the most votes.
Australia doesn’t have the equivalent of the President. The USA has three branches of government – the courts, Congress and the executive. Australia has two – the courts and parliament (the Governor-General in theory is a third branch, but in practise they’re generally not involved – the dismissal of the Whitlam government being a noted exception).
The Prime Minister in Australia is simply the leader of the party that is in power in the lower house of Parliament. The only Australians who voted for Rudd were those in his electorate… and he continues to represent them, so the representative democracy is still working. The elected representatives are the ones who vote for who will be Prime Minister, just like the the delegates in the Electoral College vote for who is President. The difference between the two systems is that in Australia, those that voted to make someone the Prime Minister can change their minds, while those in the USA can not.
RoHa is accused of ignorance when it comes to the reality of Fox News. All I can say is that Eliza has clearly demonstrated a similar ignorance when it comes to the government systems of USA and Australia.
Graeme W says (October 8, 2012 at 3:51 pm): “In the USA, voters elect delegates who are the ones who vote for the President. While this is close to being a direct election of a President, it’s not difficult to find examples in history where it has failed – ie. the President who had the most Electoral College votes was NOT the candidate who had the most votes.”
Um, it didn’t “fail”. The system worked exactly as it was supposed to. The American founding fathers didn’t want presidents (and Senators, originally) elected directly by the voters, and so set up an indirect system. It can be changed by constitutional amendment, but strangely nothing has been done about this “failure” for over 200 years. I guess most Americans don’t see it as broken.
There have been four instances in US history in which presidents were elected without receiving the most popular votes: John Quincy Adams, 1824; Rutherford B. Hayes, 1876; Benjamin Harrison, 1888; and George W. Bush, 2000. In addition, the following presidents received less than 50 percent of the vote (a plurality only, not a majority) Abraham Lincoln, 1860; Woodrow Wilson, 1912; John F. Kennedy, 1960; Richard Nixon, 1968; Bill Clinton, 1992.
These were not failures, except perhaps in the case of Hayes, who came into office via a corrupt deal with the Southern states in which the federal government backed away from protecting the rights oif the freed slaves; and it has now been proven that Nixon actually did win the election of 1960 by about 85.000 popular votes, due to voter fraud in Illinois and Louisiana and probably at least two other states, which cost him enough electoral votes to cause him to lose the election. In Illinois alone, at least 120,000 Republican ballots were not counted.
Bjorn Lomborg is actually ”Hagar the Horrible” After the Copenhagen flop – he should have put a brown paper bag over his had; Unfortunately, he is a person with no shame….
I never said it was broken. I was just pointing out that in neither system do the voters directly elect the leader of their nation (which is what Eliza was implying happens with the comment about Australia not being a democracy), though I did acknowledge that the USA system is closer to a direct elect than the Australian system. My comment about failure was when comparing the existing system to a direct elect system. Whether a direct elect system is worthwhile is a completely different discussion 🙂
stefanthedenier says:
October 8, 2012 at 9:53 pm
“Bjorn Lomborg is actually ”Hagar the Horrible” After the Copenhagen flop – he should have put a brown paper bag over his had; Unfortunately, he is a person with no shame….”
For a “horrible” person he has written a rather fine book, namely The Skeptical Environmentalist. Which stays THE must-read for every Malthusian on the planet.
DirkH says:
October 9, 2012 at 3:33 am
“For a “horrible” person he has written a rather fine book, namely The Skeptical Environmentalist. Which stays THE must-read for every Malthusian on the planet.”
…and not because it is a Malthusian book but because it is the cure for Malthusianism…
Found the video!
In case you missed it like I did, here is the link:
MODS: May want to provide the link as an update too so it is easy to find.
Ben says:
Ro Ha – A major UCLA journalism study covered US media outlets,
Ben – second call for a link. Do you have one?