Why fox news is sooo important


#237

Quit being so pedantic. The argument isn’t being made that their authority is statutorily limited, but their effectiveness is limited by nature of their temp status.


#238

CRead the Vacancies Act.

Or take it up with Senator Lankford (R-OK).

“Lankford said having acting secretaries has a significant impact because their authority can be more limited than that of Senate-confirmed nominees. “They can’t execute all policy when they are acting,” he told CNN. “Anytime you have an acting, they can’t perform all the duties that a Senate-confirmed appointee can.”


#239

Mulvaney.


#240

I wonder if it has anything to do with the way legislation is worded.

There are lots of "the Secretary shall’ or “the Secretary may”. Not “the acting Secretary shall”.


#241

Which is exactly why FOX is needed the most. If the networks have chosen sides, and they have. It is imperative that both sides be represented. Having only DNC sanctioned news is dangerous.


#242

We don’t need “representation” in ANY news. We need just news.


#243

I agree, But sadly, those days are gone. Everything has been totally politicized.


#244

No, that isn’t what she said. Try reading what’s been posted.


#245

You made the claim, it’s up to you to support it. What part of the “vacancies act” limits their power and in exactly what way?


#246

Mulvaney isn’t a cabinet Secretary, try again.


#247

And you want the politicization to get worse. That’s the entire premise of this OP-to double down.


#248

I’m not sure that it could get much worse. Both sides are all in. That’s why we are fortunate to have one side with an opposing view.


#249

You’re right, he’s only the Director of the OMB and the Chief-of-Staff and until a couple months ago, the Acting-Director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

Not to mention you don’t have to be a cabinet secretary to be nominated to be a cabinet secretary or any other position that hasn’t yet been filled.


#250

You make it sound as if FOX was created to combat the spin from MSNBC and CNN. The reality is that CNN and MSNBC were much more news and information than FOX News.

FOX News was created to provide a conservative message. MSNBC changed their coverage to compete with FOX News.

There’s a whole chicken and egg theory that goes on here.


#251

What does this gibberish even mean? The discussion was about cabinet secretaries.


#252

I responded to a post about filling “offices”.

Read twice, check you humor chip, then respond.


#253

Not fortunate when the problem gets worse.


#254

Really good point.

Everyone here seems to forget that before Hannity and Colmes, and “Fair and Balanced”, CNN had Crossfire, which really was “fair and balanced” and provided useful commentary and back and forths. You had legit players from each side debating-for goodness’ sake, Tucker Carlson was on it for a period of time.

Over the years it hosted conservatives such as Pat Buchanan, Robert Novak, John Sununu, Tony Snow, Mary Matalin, and Tucker.

Now compare any of those people to Alan Colmes, who was only ever a radio host/pundit/commentator. If the above conservatives were the “opposition” to a left-wing, DNC supporting CNN, then they sure brought in a lot tougher opposition than a guy like Colmes.

People pretend like CNN wasn’t already providing “fair and balanced” points of view for years before Fox came around, and with much more legitimacy than Fox can claim.


#255

Colmes was syndicated nationally as both a radio and TV commentator and an author.


#256

Yes, I already went over that. Thanks for reaffirming!