hot babes
Rare and Intimate photographs of the Japanese Yakuza

hot babes
45 characters found in the real world

hot babes
Some nostalgia to remind us why growing up sucks

hot babes
Clever designs for serious social issues

pugs of westeros
The Pugs Of Westeros!

If Fox News Existed Throughout History (9 Screenshots)

April 6, 2011 | 32 Comments » | Topics: LOL

fox news throughout history

fox news throughout history

via Reddit



Hot Stories From Around The Web



  • Deflector Dish Guy

    This is the most abhorrent crap I’ve ever seen. Just more liberal BS.

    • Deflector Dish Guy SucksBalls

      U mad bro ?

    • elbruce

      These are depictions of conservative BS, actually.

  • http://megaindependent.blogspot.com The Mega Independent

    Sorry… Republicans ended slavery, and a higher percentage of Republicans voted for Civil Rights than Demoncrats. MLK was a conservative who believed in the rights of the individual as opposed to your dopey collective. Photoshop fail. Politics fail. Life fail. You fail.

    • Alex

      while that may true, If compare basic beliefs of a Republican in the 1800′s to the ones today, you would see they are hardly recognizable

      • http://megaindependent.blogspot.com The Mega Independent

        A premise which if accepted makes this “FOX News throughout history” thing even more of a failure. Oh no wait I get it FOX is eeeeevil while NBC, CNN, CBS, NY Times, the rest of the lib media etc. are timelessly angelic little swans.

    • Jason

      The Republicans of the 1800s are not the same as the Republicans today. In fact, the modern day “conseratives” that form the majority of GOP started off as a faction known as the “New Right,” whose politics are defined by so-called “neo-liberal”/supply-side/”trickle down” economics (support of low but regressive taxation, elimination of most regulation of businesses, opposition to spending on social insurance and other social programs), an aggressive “neo-conserative” foreign policy and support of high defense spending, and a social conservatism tempered by evangelical/fundamentalist Christian Protestantism (basically, they support “small government” until social issues come up; regulation of greenhouses gasses is big, bad government, but if the gay couple down the road wants to get married…). The most well-known and/or influential members of the New Right were Barry Goldwater, Ronald Reagan, George Bush Sr. & Jr., and Newt Gingrich. Before these men and their ilk came to be the face of the GOP and their politics its ideological bedrock, Republicans were a far more moderate party. Teddy Roosevelt, Eisenhower, and even Nixon supported many policies that would be considered anathema to the current Republican party, and none of them would be considered “conservatives” in the contemporary sense of the term. Basically, the current ideological divide between the two major political parties manifested itself gradually over the 60s, 70s, & 80s as the “New Right” came to dominate the GOP and conservative Southern Democrats left their party to join the Republicans. The Republican party might be “The Party of Lincoln,” but that’s certainly not in any ideological sense.

      TL&DR version of the above: The political parties of today are not the same ideologically as they were many decades ago. Like everything else, they change over time. Any attempt to link the present incarnation of a party to its past incarnation, whether it’s for taking credit or laying blame, will instantly fail. 50 years from now, it’s possible that the Dems may be the conservative party while the GOP becomes the liberal party. They’ll go wherever factionalism takes them.

      Also, MLK was not a conservative. If you actually bothered to read some of his speeches, he comes across as rather leftist if not downright socialist. I recommend “Beyone Vietnam” for starters.

      • Eric

        Well said!

      • donnie

        finally an intelligent and informed comment. Also MLK was best friends with Bayard Rustin, who was openly gay and was also his closest advisor. Suck on that conservatives.

      • Jerry

        and yet MLK was a registered Republican…yep,definetly a socialist.

        • Anon

          Idiot, Republicans were the liberals back then, and the Democrats were the conservatives. The “switch” came after the passing of the Civil Rights Act, when the Republicans decided to endorse an anti-Rights candidate for president.

    • mather

      Not the GOP of today, get it?

    • YellerKitty

      Thanks ‘Mega’ for, however unintentionally, conflating Fox ‘news’ with the Republican party. This was a parody of Fox ‘news’, a fact which seems to have sailed right past you. While Fox is a willing mouthpiece for the Republicans, they are not, in fact, the same thing. In fact, if viewed on a historical timeline, even Republicans aren’t ‘Republican’ any more. Do you REALLY think they’d be the ones trying to preserve the Union, or wouldn’t they just be talking about how it should be a states-rights issue and that the free market system should be allowed to operate any damn way it chose, even if that meant one group of people were completely disenfranchised? You know, just like they do today!

    • http://www.facebook.com/erafn El Ronbo

      MLK was a conservative? Bwaa haaa haaaaa. Oh, thanks for the laugh. He was in Memphis to support a union of government workers who were on strike (sanitation workers). He was fighting for just the kind of changes that Ron Paul says he’d vote against. He was pressuring government to intrude on and regulate private business. He was in favor of those activist judges forcing things on to state and local elected representatives that they resisted.

      And if you read King’s critiques of capitalism as it existed then, its pretty clear he was in many ways a socialist.

      You conservatives are really laughable, coming up with some nutty angle to cast MLK as a conservative.

  • Hopey Changey Kind of Guy

    This is total garbage. Please stop smoking crack before coming up with these brain farts

    • mather

      Deep.

  • dg

    HAHA! Thats pretty funny! I agree that the Republicans were different way back yonder. But then again, they were worried about a VALID fear – not like the morons that run the network today! I live Australia and I’m back in the states for a wedding and I watched an hour of FOX to remind myself how some people seriously lack insight. Anyways…GO FOX AND GO JESUS! NOT!

  • JackObvious

    The title was “If Fox News Existed Throughout History”, not “If the GOP Existed Throughout History” This article is pointing out how fucking stupid Fox News is, and everybody took an attack on Fox News as an attack on republicans. The article isn’t about left or right, it’s about the incompetence and bullshittery of a truly ridiculous news network. (though I’m sure Fox News is glad that people view attacks on them as attacks on a political party)

    • Fidel

      Of course they feel like it’s an attack on Republicans as Fox is their propaganda tool, a propaganda that is more active today in USA than in Russia, only beaten by those morons of Castro in Cuba.

      Freedom of speech for everybody is vital, it allows this Fox bs but also this article.

    • PotM

      Fox News is the most unreliable news source.

  • Steve

    Lincoln was Republican…. The democratic party during the civil war was against ending slavery!

    • Blah

      Does the title say anything about the Republican Party/GOP? No, it’s about Fox News. The Republican Party has changed from liberal to conservative over time, while Fox has been Fox.

  • Jerry

    I have to admit that it just tickles me pink how afraid you on the left are of a single network.

    • Jeff

      You make it sound like Fox is just some little independent cable channel. In fact Fox, as part of News Corporation, is an enormous multinational media empire. Perhaps the most powerful in the world.

      Considering their massive influence and the amount of trash journalism and near blatant propaganda they produce, I would not be surprised if many leftists are worried about the effects of Fox News.

  • Jeff

    Loved that first one with O’Reilly. I could just hear his falsely solemn voice in my head as I read it.

  • Mike

    FOX news, the channel of cognitive dissonance.
    I don’t even like Obama (HOPEless sellout), why does the human mind repeatedly fall for their BS? (Let’s not forget the other “independent” voices, like NBC, ABC, CBS, or CNN, they are supposedly liberal, when they tell us half-truths maybe?)
    I just don’t get it!
    The American public, told over and over by Big Media how smart they are and how free they are, are losing the ability to discern truth from propaganda, we live in very ominous times…

  • Franc0

    What a load of liberal horse shit

  • Ken

    Who was the IDIOT that put this together.I`m waiting for Holder to Get fired.We need a complete overhaul to the media like this shit and when the Attorney general of the United States won`t prosecute the Black Panther`s for standing in front of a polling place in Penn,because of “what my people went through in the 60`s” is total Bullshit.What if two skin Head`s showed up with Knight sticks.They would be doing 20 to life.

    • joe

      idiot.

  • Joeb

    What a load of crap.

  • T.Cronticke

    The one about terrorists in Boston is the truth.

  • That1Guy

    Everyone sees an attack on Fox News as an attack on conservatives. Did most of see just see the first one and immediately comment? One of those were about Jesus’ death being a carpentry accident. With as many Christians as there are on the right, I doubt they’d call it an accident. This was simply an exaggerated example of how much BS Fox News puts out there. I, for one, didn’t care for any of these images. Does that make me conservative? But I also hate Fox News because they are biased and don’t check facts. Does that make me liberal? BTW, I don’t watch any news channel nor read any biased publication.




Ned Hardy | Advertise | Contact | Privacy Policy | Copyright © 2014 StomachPunch Media LLC. All Rights Reserved