Yeah but you know= news station biased against your point of view= bias, news station biased in the way you are agree with = objective source of news ;)

Yup, 100% Bush's fault for the global economic disaster.  It was only Bush and his administration that did it.  It has nothing to do with how the Clinton administration is the one who told the banks to start giving loans to a lot more people who should have never gotten them in the first place.  It has nothing to do with Americans wasting their god damn money on things other than the loans that they should be paying off.  It clearly has nothing to do with Wall Street just being greedy and wanting more and more and more as we should just have 8000000 more rules and regulations to prevent this because rules fix everything. 

It is also obviously Bush's fault that the whole entire world is so reliant on the United States that if anything happens to us everything crumbles.

Lets just put 100% of the blame on the Bush administration as that is clearly the way to go.

How about people stop trying to blame a single fucking administration for every single problem that arises and instead realize that we are god damned greedy, cheating bastards that bring this stuff upon ourselves.  And no, making more laws to prevent all of these problems will do no good because people will still cheat and manipulate themselves around the laws.

Edit: And also, could you please explain what exactly Obama has done in these months that is "fixing" what Bush administration supposedly wrecked?  Passing a healthcare bill that will cost billions, if not trillions of dollars when we are in a financial crisis really seems like something to help the situation out a little.  And why should Republicans vote with the Democrats when every single god damned bill they are trying to introduce involves spending more and more and more and mor eand more and more money.  Did you ever think the right approach might be to cut the budget to a more reasonable amount that we can actually afford while in a financial crisis?

And for one final note, I'm sick and fucking tired of people bitching about Republicans being the party of no.  What exactly is it the Democrats do to all the Republican bills when they are in power?  Oh yea, that's right, vote no.

Fox News saying that it's that bad of a game makes me want to buy it.  Yes, I dislike Fox News this much, but only because Stephen Colbert is 1000% better at doing what they do.  Considering all the the money backing that network you would think that they'd be much better at the right-wing phoney news comedy thing.  They really do need to hire better writers.

most of your post has been adressed. so i will just make this point.

up until a month ago, Democrats had super majorities in both houses, and obviously the white hous too. the repubs had zero power, they couldnt do anything, they could have voted no for absolutely everything dems introduced, and the democrats still couldve passed the legislation. (thats what super majority does). they didnt need a single republican vote, they just needed their own party.

you should tell that to Alan Colmes, Juan Williams, bob beckel, Dr. Lamont hill, christin powers among others who either host/ed or appear regularly

I will add a thougth to your list of people.  They are paid to say those things, as to show(try anyway) another point of view for discussion/sensationalism.  Usually the people on your list make short comments and the rest of the people spend the next ten minuts belittling everything that they say.  When the producer of the show directs whats going on, the actual message that he intends usually wins the argument.  This is done on all news shows, but FOX seems to have given up on any sense of neutrality or objectivety.

if thats the case, i would hate to see what you think the other "news" stations have done.

also everyone is paid that appear on news channels, so who cares if fox pays people to have different points of views. (isnt that a good thing) and usually (like on hannity's show) he has 2 or 3 liberals and 1 conservative to debate issues. and for the most part everyone speaks about the same time. and like ive mentioned before Juan williams sometimes hosts the Oriely factor

The point that most everyone is trying to make is that the PERCEPTION of FOX news is that it is one sided.  IN society, perception is reality.  What do i mean?  Well, for example, if your boss at work perceives you to be a highly productive smart individual that exceeds all others around in skills and ability, he will help to promote you.  Now, If in fact you are no more productive than the average employee and maybe less skilled than many others, that is irrelevant.  Perception is reality(unless the person is crazy, that's a different topic).  So, you get the promotion over maybe 5-6 more qualified individuals.  Now, FOX has this perception by the general public, that they pretty much embrace(as others have posted) to get a market niche.  The fact that you are arguing that they don't have that perception indicates that you should probably seek a different website than VGChartz for opiniions on political leanings of the media.  Most of the comments people have made are reflectivie of the general perception of FOX(which is probably the reality for most people).

Raise the taxes for the wealthy. Very simple.. Yet it's so difficult to get through.. Like you said, people are greedy.

It would solve so many problems related to the finance though.

And while indeed, many things caused the global recession.. The main thing was bushes war mongering. Spending money they didn't have.

@osamanobama

There are too many people afread of change in the senate.. And incase you didn't notice, the healthcare got torn to shreds before it got through.. The republicans seem more interesting in destrying anything obama tries to do than to help the country get back up and running.. If they only focused on that.. And worked together..

Though THAT is very unlikely to happen.

Well, while I totally agree that the war cost a lot more than it should, why should a person making $500,000 per year have to pay a higher tax percentage than somebody making $100,000 per year?  If the government would get rid of the billions upon billions of dollars that they are wasting, then our current tax rates would be perfectly fine.  I guess we are on opposite ends of the spectrum :P  I think they should stop wasting money on stupid shit, and that would make the amount of money going in with current taxes work perfectly fine for a balanced budget.

I just don't think its fair that the percentages should go higher yet for only the wealthy, because it isn't fair to somebody like me who is working his ass off in school to get a degree that will put me in the classification of a wealthy person in, say 20 years.  If you would be somebody who worked extremely hard to start up a business or get a fancy schmancy degree and would also be classified as a wealthy person, I'm sure you would agree that it is bull shit that you should get taxed a higher percentage than the people who didn't work as hard as you.  You are already paying considerably more taxes than they are because you have a lot more income being taxed.