why that was nice

[azimuth 5,000+ posts]

I find it humerous how many on this forum are so anti-FoxNews when all you have to do is tune into ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNBC, CNN, PBS, NPR, BBC, etc., etc., etc. so you can get the leftist view of the world. News is no longer "news", it's opinion. It's "journalists" giving you their slant on the world, which is typically liberal. If you don't like FoxNews, then simply don't tune in. But wonder of wonders, they kick *** in the ratings against all the other cable news shows. Gee, I wonder why?
Like I said, you can hate FoxNews all you want. Just don't tune in. Tune into one of those other channels I mentioned and you will be happy and ignorant. Afterall, ignorance is the one thing that most Americans have in abundance. But based on the ratings, I fear that you are in the minority when it comes to hating FoxNews. IMHO.

Have a nice day. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/biggrin.gif.d71a5d36fcbab170f2364c9f2e3946cb.gif

FOX is blasting the others in ratings. especially on opinion shows. i don't like o'reilley much, but his ratings are killing oberman, matthews and even the actual supposed katie couric news. i do like glenn beck, even though he is crazy, but i like chris matthews too. repubs blast matthews, but he's not trying to hide that he's a democrat, he's wide open with it. couric and the other news skewers are who annoy me. commentators trying to act like news. i don't like people trying to mind fvck me.

 

[faulkton 5,000+ posts]

look into ezekial emmanual's ideas. he personally does have ideas on guaging the worth of someone's life.

society as a whole has these same ideas in terms of money, enjoyment, and convenience.

An easy example would be say pollution levels. Minute traces of some pollutant might cause say 1 in a million to get cancer and die. Society has said that the financial cost to completely eliminate the pollutant is too high.

Another would be child safety standards. We have accepted that say 1 in a million kids will die from playing on a swing set. But we accept that because kids think they're fun.

Cars kill a lot of people but we're completely ok with those deaths for convenience.

now getting that idea into a bill that gets signed by the president is a different debate,

this.

 

[AlterEgo99 5,000+ posts]

He is speaking out, I guess you missed that part. His decision that there was nobody worth voting for does not make him any less patriotic, reasonable, intelligent or worthy of discussion on the topics at hand. Why does a non-voter voicing his opinions upset so many people? Id rather someone who is unsure, uneducated or untrusting NOT vote than simply fall in line lock step and vote for whom he is told he is suppose to by the media or his peers.
Your choice to vote does not make you any more or less of an expert than does someone who choses not to. In the end, you are merely looking for an excuse to quiet someone with whom you disagree.

I'm not trying to "quiet" anyone, but IMO if you don't vote, don't complain. He certainly doesn't seem to like this country and I simply stated he should try living somewhere else then. Give somewhere else a go and then see if this country is so bad. I certainly don't think the government we have now is all that great, from either side, but if you don't vote to try to change it, you really have nothing to complain about.

 

[AlterEgo99 5,000+ posts]

How you got that Im bitching about the 2000 election is beyond me. You appear to have no clue as to my view of the 2000 election. Dont tell me to read up on the elctoral college when you couldn't even correctly interpret the few lines of text I wrote on the subject.
edit: oh yeah... Geesh!!!111!!oneone!

Well then be so kind as to educate me as to what it was you were trying to convey. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/confused.gif.e820e0216602db4765798ac39d28caa9.gif

 

[faulkton 5,000+ posts]

Fox News women > all others.

agree.

Except Greta Van Stroke-Victim.

She's a dawg.

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

Its true:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=fox+news+photoshop&aq=f&oq=&aqi=g1

In my opinion they are the best at what they do.

Can you show me even one example of a mainstream media outlet deliberately doing anything as nefarious as those photos?

All channels sensationalized that story. The governor went AWOL for Christs sake. They all began reporting long before they knew why he went AWOL.

All media sensationalized the Clinton bj too.

The main difference is that Clinton didnt lose any support from his base and Sanford did.

And you are entitled to your opinion. Especially because Im too lazy to research a counter. If you want to believe Fox is the worst, and the liberal organizations who were manipulating us through the 'news' long before Fox news was even around are innocent in comparison, that's your choice. but dont expect to change too many minds here, or anywhere else, when you continue to show such a biased view of the situation.

If "all" channels sensationalized it, I take it that includes Fox news as well? And when CNN did it, they of course only did it for the pure news aspect of it, right? And once it was found out the story revolved around a personal relationship that doesn't affect Sanford's ability to govern, CNN and the NY Times dropped the story.... right? //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wink.gif.608e3ea05f1a9f98611af0861652f8fb.gif Again your bias is reallt starting to show in your comments. Its too bad you cant see them too. One example is how you talk out of both sides of your mouth about the Sanford story. On the one hand you claim he could still run for pres and see how the votes pan out (even after taking a pounding from the press about how he's no longer a 'viable candidate'), and on the other hand you claim he has 'lost support from his base' when no vote has be taken on the matter. You want to believe he's lost support without really knowing either way, or you chose to believe the mostly liberal press who tells us to think this way.

 

[azimuth 5,000+ posts]

Its true:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=fox+news+photoshop&aq=f&oq=&aqi=g1

In my opinion they are the best at what they do.

Can you show me even one example of a mainstream media outlet deliberately doing anything as nefarious as those photos?

All channels sensationalized that story. The governor went AWOL for Christs sake. They all began reporting long before they knew why he went AWOL.

All media sensationalized the Clinton bj too.

The main difference is that Clinton didnt lose any support from his base and Sanford did.

liberals do it a different way than fox. lib news just leaves out pertinent facts and purposely takes people out of context to discredit anything they've every said. they also use verbal personal attacks. joe the plumber and sarah palin are prime examples of the liberal news succesfully using tactics straight from the rules for radicals. fox does it visually rather than using the spoken word, but they are both using alinsky political tactics.

 

[faulkton 5,000+ posts]

I find it humerous how many on this forum are so anti-FoxNews when all you have to do is tune into ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNBC, CNN, PBS, NPR, BBC, etc., etc., etc. so you can get the leftist view of the world. News is no longer "news", it's opinion. It's "journalists" giving you their slant on the world, which is typically liberal. If you don't like FoxNews, then simply don't tune in. But wonder of wonders, they kick *** in the ratings against all the other cable news shows. Gee, I wonder why?
Like I said, you can hate FoxNews all you want. Just don't tune in. Tune into one of those other channels I mentioned and you will be happy and ignorant. Afterall, ignorance is the one thing that most Americans have in abundance. But based on the ratings, I fear that you are in the minority when it comes to hating FoxNews. IMHO.

Have a nice day. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/biggrin.gif.d71a5d36fcbab170f2364c9f2e3946cb.gif

I will use your own logic, which i dont even agree with, to destroy your stupid argument.

tune into ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNBC, CNN, PBS, NPR, BBC, etc., etc., etc. so you can get the leftist view of the world

ok that's a lot of stations.

But based on the ratings, I fear that you are in the minority when it comes to hating FoxNews.

If you add up all the ratings for all the other "liberal" media they would be larger than faux.

Using your logic people who like faux news are the actual minority.

 

[faulkton 5,000+ posts]

Well then be so kind as to educate me as to what it was you were trying to convey. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/confused.gif.e820e0216602db4765798ac39d28caa9.gif

go back and read ... its painfully obvious.

even the faux news monkeys could grasp it.

 

[AlterEgo99 5,000+ posts]

I will use your own logic, which i dont even agree with, to destroy your stupid argument.



ok that's a lot of stations.

If you add up all the ratings for all the other "liberal" media they would be larger than faux.

Using your logic people who like faux news are the actual minority.

Unfortunately, that's not how the ratings are determined. Nice try tho.

FoxNews rocks! //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/biggrin.gif.d71a5d36fcbab170f2364c9f2e3946cb.gif

 

[azimuth 5,000+ posts]

go back and read ... its painfully obvious.

even the faux news monkeys could grasp it.

but i don't think anyone on NBC would. they are still the kings of the lay down media stations. chris matthews even got a shiver up his leg.

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

I'm not trying to "quiet" anyone, but IMO if you don't vote, don't complain.

The sad part is your inability to see the irony within that one simple sentence. Why do the opinions of non-voters discomfort you so? If an illegal immigrant had the perfect solution to fix all the U.S.'s problems, would you not allow him to speak either?

Maybe a non-voters opinion is if you vote for the same old same old politicians fromt he same old same old political machine, you have no right to voice your displeasure at the way things are. Would you feel you were being quieted for non-related reasons when voicing your ideas and opinions?

 

[faulkton 5,000+ posts]

How you got that Im bitching about the 2000 election is beyond me. You appear to have no clue as to my view of the 2000 election. Dont tell me to read up on the elctoral college when you couldn't even correctly interpret the few lines of text I wrote on the subject.
edit: oh yeah... Geesh!!!111!!oneone!

he's an illiterate moron.

but i like chris matthews too. repubs blast matthews, but he's not trying to hide that he's a democrat, he's wide open with it.

I like Matthews too.. he created his career blasting clinton though.. so its hard to claim he's a blind ideologue....

 

[AlterEgo99 5,000+ posts]

he's an illiterate moron.

Sticks and stones faulky 'ol boy...//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

Well then be so kind as to educate me as to what it was you were trying to convey. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/confused.gif.e820e0216602db4765798ac39d28caa9.gif

I was talking about the double standard being used to support one agenda, while also being used to combat the opposite agenda. I was, in no way, saying I dont understand the electoral college, think the 2000 election was unfair in this regard, or voicing an opinion that Gore got the shaft and Bush stole the election. Again if you think I said otherwise, I have to question your reading comprehension, as Im assuming you have at least bothered to go back and re-read my statement a second time by now, and still miss the point.
Better? Never let it be said Im not a patient person for special-needs people and head injury victims.