If there was any lingering doubt that Evan Bayh is a whore...

[cinyc]

I guess Alan Colmes was too controversial and opinionated for their taste.

Yeah, Alan Colmes is so controversial and opinionated to Fox News that he's still on the network and his radio show is syndicated by Fox News Radio.

[cinyc]

Now I'm confused. He has a ridiculous amount of money in his campaign account, but will shortly make himself unelectable in the Democratic Party by bashing it left and right on the Fox network. What's he going to do? Run as a Republican?

Who says Bayh will be bashing Democrats?  Does every talking head on MSNBC bash Republicans?

Getting national exposure on the most-watched cable news network isn't a bad thing.

[cinyc]

Now I'm confused. He has a ridiculous amount of money in his campaign account, but will shortly make himself unelectable in the Democratic Party by bashing it left and right on the Fox network. What's he going to do? Run as a Republican?

Who says Bayh will be bashing Democrats?  Does every talking head on MSNBC bash Republicans?

No, but that's one of the differences between MSNBC and Fox News. Democratic fixtures on Fox News have a certain role to fill (see Joe Lieberman, Pat Cadell) and that's what they are paid for.

Yeah.  The 'Lean Forward" network that employed Keith Olbermann clearly isn't biased because "progressives" say so.  Only Faux News is.  Sure.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The most-watched cable news network is viewed by only a small fraction of the regular public, including approximately zero Democratic primary voters.
[/quote]

Last I checked, Indiana holds open primaries.  And even Democrats watch Fox News.

[cinyc]

Now I'm confused. He has a ridiculous amount of money in his campaign account, but will shortly make himself unelectable in the Democratic Party by bashing it left and right on the Fox network. What's he going to do? Run as a Republican?

Who says Bayh will be bashing Democrats?  Does every talking head on MSNBC bash Republicans?

No, but that's one of the differences between MSNBC and Fox News. Democratic fixtures on Fox News have a certain role to fill (see Joe Lieberman, Pat Cadell) and that's what they are paid for.

Yeah.  The 'Lean Forward" network that employed Keith Olbermann clearly isn't biased because "progressives" say so.  Only Faux News is.  Sure.

You're arguing with someone other than me who is saying something other than I have.

Most of the times Fox has a Democrat on, it's to make Democrats look bad. You brought up MSNBC, which has some liberal talk show hosts but doesn't do the same thing. Joe Scarborough isn't there because he hates Republicans more in sorrow than in anger. Pat Cadell is on Fox because he's a Democrat from 35 years ago who bashes Democrats. Etc.

Fox News doesn't employ Juan Williams or Alan Colmes to make Democrats look bad.

Why do you suppose MSNBC employs a crank like Pat Buchanan, exactly?

[cinyc]

Who says Bayh will be bashing Democrats?  Does every talking head on MSNBC bash Republicans?

Wow, talk about a false equivalence.

To those who live in the "progressive" bubble, watch MSNBC, don't watch Fox News at all, and think MSNBC, CNN and/or the alphabet networks are unbiased or have a right-wing bent, perhaps.  But all those networks are biased and have a leftist tilt, some more than others. 
 
The fact is that some Republicans on MSNBC, like Pat Buchanan, bash Republicans.  They are on that network to do so, pandering to its liberal audience.  But not every Republican does.  And it's downright laughable to suggest that every Democrat on Fox News bashes Democrats.  Most Democrat guests and pundits defend the party.  But if you don't actually watch the network, how would you know?

[cinyc]

I see but can you admit that FOX is also biased and most likely a bit more biased than say, CNN?

Every news organization is biased, including FOX.  CNN has a definite liberal tilt, albeit not as pronounced as MSNBC.  FOX News Channel is the only major news organization with a conservative slant.

The fact is that non-partisan, "objective" news coverage has never existed.  Newspapers have always been partisan and slanted, despite their more recent claims of printing all the news that's fit to print.  And the alphabet networks' newscasts had an uncontested liberal slant for decades, until the advent of Fox News.  Again, they claimed to be "objective", but news readers like Peter Jennings and Walter Cronkite were hardly so.