this post was submitted on
534 points (53% like it)
4,295 up votes 3,761 down votes
shortlink:

funny

subscribe2,394,369 readers

6,331 users here now

PLEASE, No posts with their sole purpose being to communicate with another redditor. Click for an Example.

Welcome to r/Funny:

You may only post if you are funny.

Please No:

  • Screenshots of reddit comment threads. Post a link with context to /r/bestof or /r/defaultgems if from a default subreddit instead.

  • Posts for the specific point of it being your reddit birthday.

  • Politics - This includes the 2012 Presidential candidates or bills in congress.

  • Rage comics - Go to /fffffffuuuuuuuuuuuu instead.

  • Memes - Go to /r/AdviceAnimals or /r/Memes instead.

  • Demotivational posters - Go to /r/Demotivational instead.

  • Pictures of just text - Make a self post instead.

  • DAE posts - Go to /r/doesanybodyelse

  • eCards - the poll result was 55.02% in favor of removal. Please submit eCards to /r/ecards

  • URL shorteners - No link shorteners (or HugeURL) in either post links or comments. They will be deleted regardless of intent.

Rehosted webcomics will be removed. Please submit a link to the original comic's site and preferably an imgur link in the comments. Do not post a link to the comic image, it must be linked to the page of the comic. (*) (*)

Need more? Check out:

Still need more? See Reddit's best / worst and offensive joke collections (warning: some of those jokes are offensive / nsfw!).

Please DO NOT post personal information. This includes anything hosted on Facebook's servers, as they can be traced to the original account holder.

If your submission appears to be banned, please don't just delete it as that makes the filter hate you! Instead please send us a message with a link to the post. We'll unban it and it should get better. Please allow 10 minutes for the post to appear before messaging moderators

The moderators of /r/funny reserve the right to moderate posts and comments at their discretion, with regard to their perception of the suitability of said posts and comments for this subreddit. Thank you for your understanding.

CSS - BritishEnglishPolice ©2011

a community for
to anything interesting: news article, blog entry, video, picture...
message the moderators

MODERATORS

reddit is a source for what's new and popular online. vote on links that you like or dislike and help decide what's popular, or submit your own! learn more ›

533
534

If FOX news existed throughout history (imgur.com)

submitted ago by Jon_Galt

top 200 commentsshow all 266
sorted by:
best
best
top
new
hot
controversial
old

[–]pandaman55 116 points117 points ago

Nobody expects the spanish inquisition!

[–]quirkywriter 30 points31 points ago

Our chief weapon is surprise...surprise and fear...fear and surprise....

[–]thatsnotminesir 8 points9 points ago

I spent most of my time scrolling down through the pictures rolling my eyes. "Ugh, more anti-Fox News crap when ALL media sucks and is bias, not just th......"

Then the last frame turned it all around and made it a win.

[–]1stOnRt1 16 points17 points ago

Its actually a little known fact that everyone expected it, the wrote to you and gave you weeks notice

[–]FuelForTheFeedingEnd 36 points37 points ago

The plans have been available in the local planning office for the last nine months! They were on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying 'Beware of the Leopard'.

[–]pointsforcreativity 8 points9 points ago

The British humour is staggering.

[–]fleckspeck 0 points1 point ago

well played!

[–]ferrets_bueller 0 points1 point ago

Knowledge of the pythons, and a coheed username? Take my upvotes, sir, take them all!!

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points ago

thats a Hitchhiker's guide reference

[–]FuelForTheFeedingEnd 0 points1 point ago

Yup. Though I see Hitchhiker's Guide as a spiritual successor to Monty Python, in a way.

[–]RoflCopter4 6 points7 points ago

Actually, that's becoming fairly well known.

[–]katrionatronica 2 points3 points ago

I'm so pleased this is the top comment right now.

[–]bvanman 0 points1 point ago

We have a mission to convert the Jews! jew jew jew jew jew jew jew

[–]DamOnalbArNunicorN 0 points1 point ago

One day I'll check the comments of a post and noone will have put what I wanted to put.

[–]ZML09 0 points1 point ago

Damn, you beat me to it! Here, take my upvote and i'll be on my way.

[–]ArchieBunkerWasRight 48 points49 points ago

Kent State protestors attacked police with bottles.

[–]kentpilot 17 points18 points ago

And rocks, and they burnt down the ROTC building.

[–]Cyanotic911 40 points41 points ago

HEY, DON'T BRING FACTS IN HERE. WERE BASHING RUPUBLICANS, DONT'CHA KNOW?

Oh shit, capslock was on... I regret nothing.

[–]superfusion1 15 points16 points ago

so, of course, that means that the police had a good reason to shoot and kill the student protesters. (bottles =/= bullets)

[–]ArchieBunkerWasRight 12 points13 points ago

The answer offered by the Guardsmen is that they fired because they were in fear of their lives. Guardsmen testified before numerous investigating commissions as well as in federal court that they felt the demonstrators were advancing on them in such a way as to pose a serious and immediate threat to the safety of the Guardsmen,and they therefore had to fire in self-defense. Some authors (e.g.,Michener,1971 and Grant and Hill,1974) agree with this assessment. Much more importantly,federal criminal and civil trials have accepted the position of the Guardsmen. In a 1974 federal criminal trial,District Judge Frank Battisti dismissed the case against eight Guardsmen indicted by a federal grand jury,ruling at mid-trial that the government's case against the Guardsmen was so weak that the defense did not have to present its case. In the much longer and more complexfederal civil trial of 1975,a jury voted 9-3 that none of the Guardsmen were legally responsible for the shootings. This decision was appealed,however,and the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that a new trial had to be held because of the improper handling of a threat to a jury member.

[–]thatsnotminesir 6 points7 points ago

NO FACTS ALLOWED!!!! Only angry emotional responses based on bumper stickers and blog headlines.

[–]ArchieBunkerWasRight 4 points5 points ago

Rawr! Coexist. Forward. Rawr!

load more comments (1 reply)

    [–]logicalthinker1 3 points4 points ago

    so if someone attacks you with a bottle and is beating you with it you aren't allowed to shoot back with a personal firearm...

    [–]Phellan -5 points-4 points ago

    How the hell you got downvoted for that, I don't know. Have my upvote.

    [–]chudontknow 1 point2 points ago

    so shooting them is justified then?

    [–]ArchieBunkerWasRight 8 points9 points ago

    The answer offered by the Guardsmen is that they fired because they were in fear of their lives. Guardsmen testified before numerous investigating commissions as well as in federal court that they felt the demonstrators were advancing on them in such a way as to pose a serious and immediate threat to the safety of the Guardsmen,and they therefore had to fire in self-defense. Some authors (e.g.,Michener,1971 and Grant and Hill,1974) agree with this assessment. Much more importantly,federal criminal and civil trials have accepted the position of the Guardsmen. In a 1974 federal criminal trial,District Judge Frank Battisti dismissed the case against eight Guardsmen indicted by a federal grand jury,ruling at mid-trial that the government's case against the Guardsmen was so weak that the defense did not have to present its case. In the much longer and more complexfederal civil trial of 1975,a jury voted 9-3 that none of the Guardsmen were legally responsible for the shootings. This decision was appealed,however,and the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that a new trial had to be held because of the improper handling of a threat to a jury member.

    [–]Thad_Jarvis 2 points3 points ago

    so i can shoot someone if i am in fear of my life?

    [–]DJDHD 1 point2 points ago

    yes.

    [–]PhantomRedFistPhoton -1 points0 points ago

    You shouldn't have to ask that question. If you are in fear of your life do whatever is necessary at the time. It's your life, you only get one.

    [–]tyson31415 2 points3 points ago

    The problem with that logic is that a lot of people have irrational fear and/or are paranoid. Think "sheltered white woman alone at night in underground parking lot when a black guy decides to get his car at the same time she does."

    [–]courneliusjones 11 points12 points ago

    Figuring out how the news works is pretty simple. FOX leans republican and MSNBC leans democrat. The news on each network is fit to cater towards the politics they stand for. The only confusing part about this is why I have to put a serious comment about politics in the funny section of reddit.

    [–]cavitycreep -4 points-3 points ago

    It's less about who leans to which side and more about who's putting the most spin on stories (aka, who's telling bigger lies).

    [–]hotairballonfreak 67 points68 points ago

    the republican party was first anti-slavery

    [–]TimMitchell 43 points44 points ago

    They were also champions of the Civil Rights Act and had a much higher voting percentage than the Democrats. Meanwhile Kennedy has MLK surveilled by the FBI.

    Oh wait, this is Reddit. REPUBLICANS RACIST, FOX NEWS BAD.

    [–]Glassesasaur 2 points3 points ago

    Today's republicans were not the past's. They are literally a completely different party under the same name.

    [–]logicalthinker1 12 points13 points ago

    actually they are literally the same party but have shifted their views a little over the years

    [–]Forlarren 11 points12 points ago

    shifted their views a little

    We can put that understatement next to "space is big".

    [–]logicalthinker1 0 points1 point ago

    Yeah maybe "a little" was a poor choice of words

    [–]marsneedstowels -1 points0 points ago

    For emphasis.

    [–]TimMitchell 5 points6 points ago

    We're talking about 1964 here, when exactly did the Republican party "completely change" over the past 50 years? Why are so many Republican and famous Republican families Republican in the 50s and 60s and still the same today if the party has changed so much?

    The only thing that's different today is the focus on religion and the courting of the Christian vote so heavily. However, the party's stance of equality and liberty has remained the same. Only the perception has changed.

    Republicans were the proponents of abolition, women's suffrage, equal rights and desegregation. What racist or bigoted laws have Republicans supported that makes you think that they are a "completely different party"?

    [–]Null_Reference_ 43 points44 points ago

    The republican party of today is not the republican party of old. How could it be when there is no specific manifesto and all of the original creators and members are long dead?

    [–]yep45 26 points27 points ago

    The Democrats were pro segregation until at least LBJ was president

    [–]Burnsey235 15 points16 points ago

    “I’ll have those niggers voting Democratic for the next 200 years.” - Lyndon B. Johnson

    [–]Kestralotp 0 points1 point ago

    Southern democrats*

    It was never a democratic platform until then because if a democratic president ran either supporting it or not, the base would be split between racist and non-racist platforms. And in truth, FDR, Truman, Esienhower, and JFK wanted desegregation.

    [–]giraffeofdoom 10 points11 points ago

    Esienhower was a Republican.

    [–]Kestralotp 2 points3 points ago

    Goes to show that it wasn't an exact split between party lines then, doesn't it? It was no party's platform, it was a regional thing.

    load more comments (4 replies)

      [–]StrangeWill 1 point2 points ago

      Implying that Fox wouldn't just be the mouthpiece of the Democratic party back then. :|

      [–]rustylime 3 points4 points ago*

      "If Fox news had existed throughout history"
      "If Fox news..."
      "...Fox news..."
      This is about Fox News. Not Republicans.

      [–]ringfortheking99 6 points7 points ago

      The same southern states that were racist back then are still racist now. The definition of the parties changed when the Civil Rights Act was signed. Nixon was the first Republican President to sweep the bible belt, and then Reagan really started to court the religious right.

      [–]_pumpkinpies 4 points5 points ago

      I think a more accurate depiction of how there has been a switch is that the southern states wanted small government (for making their own slavery/anti-slavery laws, secession, etc.), something the persists in Republican ideology today.

      The real switch from what each party stood represented came with FDR being Democratic and all his government aid programs during the Great Depression.

      Also fun fact: Democrats=red and Republicans=blue until the cold war era were the liberal Democrats were being compared to the Russians, so they switched colors to stop this since conservatives would never really be equated with them by the public. Political associations are dynamic.

      [–]HEADSHOTHUNTA 6 points7 points ago

      Everyone's a little bit racist. Not just the south.

      [–]PissedOn 3 points4 points ago

      Not sure why you're being downvoted. I'm hella racist, and I love black people!

      load more comments (1 reply)

        [–]Chaco_Taco 0 points1 point ago

        It seems that some of that racism has swept north in recent years. Ohio and Pennsylvania have the highest numbers of KKK and Neo-nazi members. It seems that people up north are little bit more racist now a days, mainly because there are less black people up north. Where I live (Georgia), I don't usually come into contact with really racist people, although that maybe because Atlanta is 54% black with 38% white.

        [–]rasputin777 0 points1 point ago

        "The definition of the parties changed when the Civil Rights Act was signed"
        People always say this. I've never gotten an explanation other than the fact that Dems have always been on the wrong side of history and need a way to quickly explain it away.

        [–]ringfortheking99 0 points1 point ago

        ....It's really not a hard concept. The people who called themselves Democrats back in the 1960s are the people who call themselves Republicans today. Your claim that dems have been on the wrong side of history not only doesn't make sense, but what you are actually trying to say it totally outrageous anyway. Conservatives have time and time again been on the wrong side of history. In the future we will look back at the whole gay rights ordeal and it will be conservatives on the wrong side of history.

        [–]Del_Castigator 0 points1 point ago

        Conservatives do not equal republicans.

        [–]ringfortheking99 0 points1 point ago

        Well they sure as shit don't come anywhere close to equalling Democrats. I think it's safe to say that people who consider themselves vote overwhelmingly more Republican than they do Democrat.

        [–]Phunk131 -1 points0 points ago

        Dot Com: Actually, today's Republican Party would be unrecognizable to Lincoln. He fought a war to preserve federal authority over the states. That's not exactly small government.

        Jack: Dot Com, this need you have to be the smartest guy in the room is... off-putting.

        Dot Com: I guess that's why I'm still single.

        [–]leshake -1 points0 points ago

        And then they were the party of segregationists.

        [–]jakemaniang 7 points8 points ago

        The Kent university was actually pretty hidden when the media presented it. The students actually had bombs and already burned down the ROTC building. They were about to burn down another until the national guard shot at them to stop them. The media only showed the soilders shooting into the crowd because they knew it would get them more ratings. And now you know.

        [–]red321red321 15 points16 points ago

        jesus christ the comments in here. it's a bloodbath.

        [–]Muffinman99021 9 points10 points ago

        hai gais i haz made commentz negatively portraying fox news. Can i haz up boats for clearly not cloned thought and miss-information like always?!

        lol

        [–]DJToastyBuns 0 points1 point ago

        Fak you gooby

        [–]this_isnt_rpolitics 27 points28 points ago

        This isn't r/politics

        [–]TimMitchell 20 points21 points ago

        All of Reddit is /r/politics apparently.

        [–]Oceat 22 points23 points ago

        Why would King George say that the revolutionaries hated America? IIRC, they were British at the time. It was King George who hated 'America,' which didn't... didn't exist.

        [–]Null_Reference_ 14 points15 points ago

        It didn't exist as an independent country, but it was called America. It was the "American Colonies".

        [–]Flamee90 2 points3 points ago

        I find it refreshing to remember the American Revolutionary war would be better descriped as a British civil war. History has so many prespectives... it truely is written by the victors

        [–]ableman 3 points4 points ago

        But Britain had lots of civil wars... If you want, you can think that "American Revolutionary" is the title of this particular one.

        [–]Flamee90 0 points1 point ago

        http://i.imgur.com/Vb4g4.gif

        [–][deleted] ago

        [deleted]

        [–]BillyCheesesteak -1 points0 points ago

        oh shut the fuck up.

        load more comments (5 replies)

          [–]drkabob 2 points3 points ago

          Fun fact, the Republicans were the strongest supporters of freeing the slaves.

          [–]Natural_One 2 points3 points ago

          I dont watch Fox news, but dont remember them ever being racist. Anyone got a link or something?

          [–]MarleyandtheWhalers 93 points94 points ago

          Welcome to r/Funny: You may only post if you are funny. Please No: Politics - This includes OWS & SOPA posts.

          Stop that.

          [–]25_Cent_Booch 62 points63 points ago

          What does this have to do with politics?

          FOX is a Tv station not a presidential frontrunner.

          [–]NoNeedForAName 24 points25 points ago

          Reddit hates FOX because of its politics, mainly because it supports the folks redditors don't like. This image shows FOX through history championing the bad guys.

          It definitely relates to politics, although I'm okay with it being here, too.

          [–]GMonsoon 7 points8 points ago

          Just curious - do the people who despise Fox actually believe/agree with the stuff they hear on NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, etc.?

          [–]GBudee 5 points6 points ago

          Nope.

          [–]NoNeedForAName 2 points3 points ago

          There's always either a middle ground or a third viewpoint. I think that's where most people probably fall. But no, I don't think most people here would believe what they hear on NBC, CBS, etc., just because it comes from those stations. It's just that FOX has such low credibility with redditors that most people here won't even waste their time listening to what FOX has to say.

          I of course can't speak for everyone, but I think that's the general trend on Reddit.

          [–]GMonsoon 0 points1 point ago

          I guess with reddit generally tilting to the left of the political spectrum they're going to be a lot more annoyed with Fox than they are with CNN, MSNBC, etc. I've seen complete lies on all of them, so it's hard to fathom saying one liar is superior to another. Like, it just doesn't make sense to me, ya know? p.s. sorry for slow response - new to reddit and did not even notice the MAIL icon XD

          [–]Drooperdoo 1 point2 points ago

          I'm a registered Republican. I despise Fox News. To answer your question: I also despise CNN, NBC, ABC, etc.

          While Fox is a clown network for rightwing neocon propaganda, CNN (in my opinion) is little better. Watch them do fake news reports from the First Iraq war, where they tell the viewers that they're on the ground in Iraq (while in reality they're in their Atlanta studios, on a sound stage): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gd8SdV80AL8

          After seeing them stone-cold busted manufacturing news (and helping to push the First Iraq War) I couldn't believe a damned thing CNN said afterward.

          Friggin' Ministry of Propaganda.

          [–]GMonsoon 0 points1 point ago

          Totally agree with everything you just said. Sorry for the late response - new to redit and did not notice the little MAIL icon XD I've been a lifelong straight ticket Republican, but now what I see is a complete corruption of both parties by criminals. There's not much left of either party, and it disturbs me when I see the Demo/Repub conflict remaining the focal point. The crooks in these parties get along fine when the cameras go off.

          [–]one_of_reddit 9 points10 points ago*

          I disagree. I would respect a real conservative network that had introspective discussion and worked hard to find the right balance of ideology/policy to fix America.

          Fox is the fucking national enquirer, 14 foot grasshoppers is equivalent with a foreign born US President. They are activists far beyond any other news agency who fought and won in open court the right to lie. They staff most of the Republican candidates as well as an open psychologist "Frank Luntz" who does group studies on air over which language to use to penetrate the conservative mind and re-frame the issues to the GOP liking. e.g, "Estate tax becomes Death tax"

          MSNBC is spineless CNN is fucking clueless and the dems in general are pussies. Fox is the crazy uncle everyone wants to hide away that somehow is now in control of the school mic.

          The best thing that can happen to America is a new conservative network that has real common sense, politeness and dignity as competition to Fox skitzo crazy.

          [–]MarleyandtheWhalers 3 points4 points ago

          You can find introspective discussion on FOX, it's on Special Report with Bret Baier. It's the hour-long program they have to present policy in a thoughtful way, they wrap it up with a discussion panel that tries to get at least one liberal voice. It's pretty cool, but there's only an hour of it (I think they repeat it, also), and it does a pretty good job of living up to the "fair and balanced" stamp they put on it.

          Other than that, though, it's opinion too much of the time. Glenn Beck and Bill O'Reilly are obstinant blowhards who are only still on the air because old people like them, and, well, old people watch the news more. Fox and Friends is important national news as presented by your ignorant neighbors and PTA co-chairs. I don't care for them, but because people in my demographic don't watch the news, they get higher ratings than "Fareed Zakaria: GPS." And there isn't enough news news to fill all that up, anyway.

          tl;dr - Opinion is opinion, it's blatant when you see it and it shouldn't be mistaken for balanced coverage. That said, when they actually report the news, it isn't so bad, just know when the "fair and balanced" sticker no longer applies.

          [–]one_of_reddit 0 points1 point ago

          Bret baier is better than most, almost closer to Shep Smith, that said the rest of his "panel" is there to berate anyone with dem message and further the GOP twisting of news stories to suit the Republican mind.

          "excuses and reasons we are still right" is the name of the game. All the Bush years of spending like drunken sailors or invading Iraq over lies was followed by Fox panels explaining why it didn't matter or was justified. Torture, outing a CIA agent, Katrina response, take your pick.

          More like the excuse panel.

          I even heard someone on this panel say "I put a run Obama run" sticker on my car.. the front bumper" then they all laughed..

          [–]MarleyandtheWhalers 0 points1 point ago

          I don't know if I'd go after the panel so harshly... Juan Williams is with NPR, by standard bias alone, he can't be THAT liberal. Without him, yes, the panel can be a little monochromatic and/or partisan.

          [–]one_of_reddit 0 points1 point ago

          he is there to show how weak and stupid liberals are. the beat him up a lot

          [–]MarleyandtheWhalers 0 points1 point ago

          I never quite saw it that way, but there's some truth to this.

          [–]shiner_man 8 points9 points ago

          I would respect a real conservative network that had introspective discussion and worked hard to find the right balance of ideology/policy to fix America.

          Have you ever watched the opinion shows on Fox News? Honestly, have you ever sat down and watched one or are you just getting your point of view about Fox News from headlines from /r/politics and 30 second videos from Media Matters?

          While it's obvious that Fox has a conservative tilt with their commentators, at least they bring on people with opposing viewpoints. Have you ever watched the Rachael Maddow show or Ed Schultz's show on MSNBC? They only bring on guests who parrot exactly what they say.

          The only reason reddit doesn't freak out about that obvious bias is because the bias goes in reddit's direction.

          [–]Subjugator99 -2 points-1 points ago*

          You are trying to argue with the same people who apparently dont know that Democrats were the ones opposed to ending slavery and granting civil rights to blacks.

          Edit. Dammit, wrong post.

          [–]logicalthinker1 0 points1 point ago

          finally someone who has done their research

          load more comments (2 replies)

            [–]s-mores 5 points6 points ago

            First time I've seen that argument used in a way that makes me laugh, not cringe. Well done, sir.

            [–]ChickenLurker -1 points0 points ago

            It's a TV station that covers political news, and all of those events are political events.

            That's what it has to do with politics.

            [–]deathschool 14 points15 points ago

            If you want to get technical everything has to do with politics. No one complains when someone posts something related to Stephen Colbert or Jon Stewart.

            [–]ellimayhem 3 points4 points ago

            True enough. Most humor involving social satire can in some way be perceived as political. If you take such a ban to it's logical conclusion, all we would have left would be pictures of cats.

            load more comments (4 replies)

              [–]auspiciouslyArete -1 points0 points ago

              FOX News is NOT a news station. It is ENTERTAINMENT.

              Look it up.

              load more comments (4 replies)

                [–]0sprey 9 points10 points ago

                Yup, I unsubscribed from r/Politics so I wouldn't have to read recycled biased blahblah. However, here I am.

                [–]TimMitchell 3 points4 points ago

                SORRY, ITS A POST BASHING REPUBLICANS! TO THE FRONT PAGE!! CHOO CHOO!!!!!!!

                [–]nadrojmail 0 points1 point ago

                especially when that political post is a repost!

                load more comments (3 replies)

                  [–]darkarchonlord 12 points13 points ago

                  /r/politics is that way.

                  [–]kingsway8605 2 points3 points ago

                  Great, now do an MSNBC and CNN one. Cable news channels suck, simply change the channel.

                  [–]Sellout1138 1 point2 points ago

                  Dr. King was painted as anti-American due to his vocal opposition to the war in Vietnam.

                  [–]marginwalkers 1 point2 points ago

                  lost it at "Pilate: we found him like that"

                  [–]snarkhunter 1 point2 points ago

                  The Lincoln one is just sooooo spot on.

                  [–]ara_p 1 point2 points ago

                  Soledad O'Brien isn't on Fox. She's on CNN.

                  [–]SubjectSigma 1 point2 points ago

                  I hate Fox news just as much as the next sane person, but something about this doesn't feel right.

                  Going straight from "Bill O'Reilly is an irrational, mean person with stupid political ideals" to "Bill O'Reilly is a racist and would have supported the brutality of slavery" is a step too far.

                  [–]Zelos 1 point2 points ago

                  Surely you know that Bill O'Reilly isn't a newcaster then, he's a political commentator. He's paid to be controversial.

                  Fox New's actual news is no worse or better than the news on any other station. They can be misinformed, but I assure you there is no bias worth mentioning.

                  [–]captchasarehard 1 point2 points ago

                  So now were making fun of people for opinions that were pretending they would have in a theoretical time traveling situation?

                  [–]rasputin777 1 point2 points ago

                  And MSNBC would pretend National Socialism is no big deal.
                  Do you guys actually want to be identical to ciclejerk or is it accidental?

                  [–]KippySmith 16 points17 points ago

                  For the record, Abraham Lincoln was a republican president

                  [–]thesorrow312 50 points51 points ago

                  He did not share the same ideology as the modern republicans.

                  At a point, republicans and democrats swapped, which one was left and right of the other.

                  The democrats used to be the fucktards.

                  [–]TimMitchell 5 points6 points ago

                  Republicans were also bigger supporters of the Civil Rights act and pushed it through despite Democrat Opposition. That was 1964.

                  [–]esdawg 10 points11 points ago

                  Why are people upvoting KippySmith and downvoting you?

                  No shit Abe Lincoln was Republican. More important than that obvious detail is that Abe's Republican party is vastly different from the modern GoP.

                  [–]luckytree 1 point2 points ago

                  Lincoln also said if he could preserve the Union without abolishing slavery he would have done it. Not the hero our high school history classes make him to be....

                  [–]thesorrow312 10 points11 points ago

                  Well of course. What would be the point of abolishing slavery if there would not be a United States left, to be free of slavery?

                  [–]esdawg 1 point2 points ago

                  In defense of Lincoln's morals -

                  Lincoln's stance wasn't as simple as "Lulz free slaves, fuck the South." As inevitable as the Civil War seems in hindsight, I feel like Lincoln had to choose the lesser of two evils - Maintain the status quo of slavery while containing its spread or a massive war that would divide and ravage the country, while killing thousands. He had one bitch of a decision to make.

                  If you read up on his attitudes towards slavery and the fact that his time as a lawyer involved defending them, it highlights his stance. He believed slavery was wrong but had a very, very large problem. You can see how he handled those issues through his crisis management like the blockade at Fort Sumter. Throughout the Civil War he made some very clever political maneuvers like the Fort Sumter crisis, look at the circumstances of when he brought the Emancipation Proclamation out.

                  I feel Lincoln understood subtlety and patience while having the brilliance to out maneuver opponents politically. He probably favored the idea that slavery could get contained, then wither and die out without massive bloodshed.

                  Lincoln's no saint, but he had a lot of decency and a shit ton of wisdom, he comes across as a guy that understood the big picture much better than many of his peers.

                  [–]Shoola 4 points5 points ago

                  high schooler here, our high school history classes tell us that Lincoln was more concerned with saving the union than freeing slaves and that the Emancipation proclamation was useless, so I think you mean elementary school history classes. I understand that our education system is in a slump, but I get tired of everyone assuming that it's completely in the shitter.

                  [–]insaneHoshi 6 points7 points ago

                  Emancipation proclamation was useless

                  False, it did turn the war into a slavery issue, which dissuaded many european countries from giveing assistance to the CSA. For example Britian couldnt be seen helping the CSA as by extension they would be helping slavery. Which was illegal in Britian

                  [–]Shoola 2 points3 points ago

                  Okay, I will give you that, but Lincoln did basically try to free slaves where he couldn't and didn't free them where he could. It was all about turning it into a righteous crusade for the north and dissuading Europeans from intervening, not freeing slaves. We had already declared slaves in the south free with the Confiscation Act.

                  [–]Tipper213 0 points1 point ago

                  He didn't abolish slavery until the middle of the Civil War when there was no way to get the states back peacefully. Also, all of the south seceded before he was even inaugurated.

                  [–]yep45 1 point2 points ago

                  Its different because the issues are different.

                  [–]rasputin777 1 point2 points ago

                  Everyone says that Rs and Ds swapped. Tell me, when exactly did this occur? They've always somewhat loosely tracked Dem/left and Rep/right. To this day. There was never any swap. Dems are just ashamed of their past.

                  [–]thesorrow312 0 points1 point ago

                  And republicans are not even aware that they are tarneshing their past. The dems should be ashamed of their now

                  [–][deleted] ago

                  [deleted]

                  [–]NancyGracesTesticles 0 points1 point ago

                  Nope. It was a result of the Southern Strategy.

                  load more comments (1 reply)

                    [–]elvisliveson 0 points1 point ago

                    killed by a teabagger

                    [–]Renmauzuo -5 points-4 points ago

                    He was also a liberal president.

                    [–]KippySmith 16 points17 points ago

                    And a Vampire Hunter

                    [–]Shoola -4 points-3 points ago

                    Republicans were progressive rather than conservative during the Civil War. Fox defends conservative establishments.

                    load more comments (2 replies)

                      [–]Frodiddly 5 points6 points ago

                      Man, don't hate on Shep Smith like that.

                      [–]bvanman 2 points3 points ago

                      He's flat out said on air that Republicans will end up being on the wrong side of history concerning gay marriage.

                      [–]davethedick 4 points5 points ago

                      Damnit pa, politics is leaking again!

                      [–]aprlina71 0 points1 point ago

                      Do you dipshits realize that Abe Lincoln was a republican?

                      [–]natatat14 3 points4 points ago

                      death ruled "carpentry accident" is my favorite one

                      [–]ScoobyM 2 points3 points ago

                      Number 1: this is old

                      B: Lincoln was a republican

                      [–]IIHURRlCANEII 3 points4 points ago

                      Oh really, the pundits and talking heads on Fox News aren't hardball news people..good job figuring that out.

                      Their news coverage on Shep Smith and Brett Baer is average, and isn't biased when I watch it, as a moderate.

                      [–]ProtestTheGyro 3 points4 points ago

                      Except for the fact that only Fox News covered the tea party rallies.

                      [–]rushiku -3 points-2 points ago

                      Wait, you mean they went to their own party?

                      [–]Apocalex 6 points7 points ago

                      "Japan was suspected of hiding weapons of mass destruction in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, needless to say the people thank us for intervening"

                      [–]Shoola 12 points13 points ago

                      No, they'd probably use the arguments we use today: An invasion would have led to years of further bloodshed and a greater amount of deaths in Japanese civilians as well Russian and American soldiers. This decision was a hard one to make, and it did kill a lot of civilians, but we attempted to warn them with leaflets and we attacked major points of Japanese military production rather than just annihilating cities like Tokyo or Kyoto where civilian populations were centered.

                      [–]cohrt 6 points7 points ago

                      there's also the fact that we are still using the purple hearts made in preparation of the land invasion of japan

                      [–]Lord_Of_White_Harbor 1 point2 points ago

                      Actually, I think this is unfair to Fox. It is actually really, really dumb. While I am not defending Fox, they're full of bullshit, this is bigger bullshit.

                      As an improvement:

                      Instead of the Titanic(A British ship), they should have used The Maine instead, because not only was it a US Boat, but it would fit with the motif of Fox News making inaccurate, war hawkish, and generally inaccurate new reports.

                      For those who do not know it was a ship at a Cuban Harbor that blew up. Hearst Pulitzer and other yellow journalists used it to help begin the Spanish-American war. It is doubtful that it was actually blown up by The Spanish.

                      [–]huskerarob 1 point2 points ago

                      Dumbest shit ive ever seen.

                      [–]yep45 0 points1 point ago

                      HEY GUYS, FOX NEWS SUCKS! Can I have upvotes to help stop them?

                      [–]perdidoentx -4 points-3 points ago

                      See? It's funny because, like Fox News is bad and stuff, right? Ha ha ha!

                      Upvote me!! Faux Nooze is teh suxorz!!!!!

                      [–]TheDayManCometh 0 points1 point ago

                      Torquemada do not implore him for compassion, do not beg him for forgiveness, do not ask him for mercy, lets face it you cant talk him outta anything.

                      [–]Little_Jerry 0 points1 point ago

                      Death ruled a carpentry accident.

                      [–]MrYaah 0 points1 point ago

                      This just in, bias exists!, so does hyperbole apparently!

                      [–]DuckSmash 0 points1 point ago

                      whats with all the fox news bashing, news like the young turks is only slightly better than mainstream stuff. the conservative right is only slightly worse than the "left"

                      when are people going to realize they're being farmed and there are no choices.

                      [–]noobingheimer 0 points1 point ago

                      most of these are opposite. just saying is all.

                      [–]Marcos_95 0 points1 point ago

                      Cracked.com Photoplasty contest, if anyone wanted to know where this is from.

                      [–]BlazingFox 0 points1 point ago

                      I like the one with Jesus where it says King Of Jews, but it should be Christians.

                      [–]Whooterzoot 0 points1 point ago

                      Christians didn't exist until after he died. They were Jews, they ahd jsut found a Messiah.

                      If you believe in stuff like that.

                      [–]hatdude 0 points1 point ago

                      Who is Jon Galt?

                      [–]Jellowarrior 0 points1 point ago

                      Political

                      [–]too_confuzzled 0 points1 point ago

                      http://www.quickmeme.com/meme/3p9ir9/

                      [–]Whooterzoot 0 points1 point ago

                      False, FOX News makes passionate love to Jesus and would never say anything against him.

                      [–]Shesaidshewaslvl18 0 points1 point ago

                      I was going to post a relevant and rather long post detailing how I really felt about this, but then I realized this is reddit and the topic is political. Fuck it, here's some boobs!

                      [–]thecarrotdude 0 points1 point ago

                      Good try, some were retarded.

                      [–]jack_johnson1 0 points1 point ago

                      So brave! So brave! /r/libtard has infested my precious r/funny.

                      [–]EnderBaggins 0 points1 point ago

                      It is best to consider this a commentary on the way fox news spins news journalism in far less subtle ways than other networks. It's not so much a criticism of position as a criticism of competence.

                      [–]MysteryNerd 0 points1 point ago

                      First world problems: can't read tiny text from reddit post on iphone.

                      [–]dave1233 0 points1 point ago

                      The only thing that is correct about is the Tea. DAMN IT AMERICA. GIVE US BACK OUR TEA!!!!!!!

                      [–]Sw1tch0 0 points1 point ago

                      I must admit, when i saw "We found him like that" next to the crucifixion, I laughed much harder than i should have.

                      [–]bill_gonorrhea 0 points1 point ago

                      Wow, I'm surprised this horse hasn't fully decomposed yet

                      [–]decalo 0 points1 point ago

                      Its funny cuz its true

                      [–]izakk1220 0 points1 point ago

                      "POST ON INTERNET FORUM ABOUT FOX NEWS BEING BAD

                      POSSIBLE TERRORIST THREAT?"

                      -Fox News

                      [–]ShadySam -1 points0 points ago

                      The last one had me dying laughing!

                      [–]bluelikejazz -2 points-1 points ago

                      Well, this had the potential to be funny...

                      [–]kryten4000 -1 points0 points ago

                      Fox News: Neville is an idiot. Preemption is the only answer.

                      [–]yep45 2 points3 points ago

                      Neville Chamberlain? As in the guy who gave Czechoslovakia to Hitler?

                      [–]kryten4000 0 points1 point ago

                      Yeps

                      load more comments (1 reply)

                        [–]mtnman7610 -1 points0 points ago

                        Im really not sure how anyone can downvote this... its so true!

                        [–]chabanais -1 points0 points ago

                        Actually this is what Liberals think Fox News would have been about.

                        [–]AJGreenMVP -1 points0 points ago

                        There are so many things wrong with this. For example, Abe Lincoln was a Republican. Pretty sure Fox wouldn't be against him dipshit

                        [–]Ausp3x -2 points-1 points ago

                        LMAO, I lost it at 'Titanic under attack'

                        [–]I_Eat_Thermite7 -2 points-1 points ago

                        I think you forget Abe was the first Republican President, if you are going for the Fox stereo type, they would have been on his side.

                        load more comments (22 replies)

                          Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy. © 2012 reddit inc. All rights reserved.

                          REDDIT and the ALIEN Logo are registered trademarks of reddit inc.

                          π Rendered by PID 13578 on app-137 running 8e56ab8.