Non Sense -OR- They call it Fox NEWS

They're called partisan hacks for a reason. They aren't experts or analysts or professors. They can lend ONE perspective. Just ONE. Their own blinder-wearing, rote memorized, down pat, absolute, inbred ONE. They seek only that which reinforces their take on a go/no go basis. Black/White. ONLY. Presenting two such "opposing" perspectives in a three-minute format with an equally biased moderator? (aka the Faux News recipe) 24/7/365?

Opposite World. In HD. The premise is phony. We report; you decide? Fair and balanced?
Hardly. The best offense? Get the other guy to play defense. We attack; you defend. Constant, unrelenting, unequivocal in which the target can only be viewed as defensive.

This is a war game that not only can't be won, but shouldn't be played. The only credibility they have is spun from whole cloth. Bag it and tag it. Fence it off and starve it. If there is an upside to engaging them, explain it to me. PLEASE.

Though I'd hate it, why not copy it? Can you imagine the mirror image of today's Faux News in 2000 from a progressive perspective? Given the non-engagement rules that were in place, it probably would have been pretty one-sided eh? Would that have been fair? Balanced? Most likely not, but it would have been something to see.