Lloyd Newman

You must have expected to "get smart' by osmosis. The size of your library doesn't impress, and neither does your wishy-washy political beliefs.

You're naive because you appear to actually believe the nonsense you spout, and swallow the kool-aid talking points by the gallon.

And by laughing your ass off, it's clear you won't have a leg to stand on.

__________________

Seyla Warden

I wasn't aware that Cindy is a regressive Beck-watching Tea Partier with FOX News on 24/7.

I WAS LIED TO.

__________________

Lloyd Newman

Shhh... She's undercover as a liberal.

Seyla Warden

I don't know, her posting seems pretty progressive to me.

Tengu Yamabushi

__________________

Cindy Claveau

And you don't believe a word YOU spout? Wow, Lloyd, that would make you a troll!

As for "wishy washy", I've gotten sick and fucking tired of the anti-science, anti-gay, anti-woman, anti-poor crap that poors out of the corporate-owned Right Wing. That's not wishy-washy. I think I'm pretty outspoken and uncompromising when it comes to my political beliefs.

And if you don't think that's happening I can only suggest that it's not me who is naive, here.

Your attempts to redefine my positions and impose your own interpretations on what I've said tells me everything I need to know: You are an uninformed rightwing jackass.

How's that for wishy washy?

Now kindly go fuck yourself. Nobody else wants to.

__________________
"As long as there’s one person on earth who remembers you, it isn’t over." - Oscar Hammerstein

Void

they have classes for it now? when I was in school you had to be part of the after school team/club to learn anything about it =/

__________________
- These eyes can do more than see

Mr. B

I believe Fox News leans right, just as I believe other outlets lean left.

Amity Slade

I am reminded of a story a professor told me. One of his areas of expertise is terrorism, and on the day of the 9/11 attacks, local news programs were calling around to any sort of expert they could find and one of them scheduled him for the next morning's news.

Well it was all very hurried, so the station never really got a chance to talk to him beforehand specifically what he would be saying. They went on the air and the anchor just basically said "tell us what you know." And so my professor started by giving a generalized background of the psychology of terrorists. He was planning to go into more specifics about the groups believed to be involved in the attacks, but the anchor cut the interview short and they sent my professor on his way.

Apparently, they were looking more for the security type information such as who is in what terrorist cell where, and that's no what my professor was giving them. And when he got home, he already had a bunch of phone messages from people he knew who were angry the he suggested there was any reason terrorists attacked us (regardless of whether that reason was a good reason or completely disgusting).

Maybe that soon after the attacks really was too soon for us to do anything but deal with our grief and fears. But there comes a time we have to deal with the full problem, if we want to end it. I as a citizen cannot know every security detail, but I need to know something if I am going to make decisions about what I ask my representatives to do about it and for whom I vote.

I am fortunate that I did not lose any loved ones in the 9/11 attacks. At the time they happened, I was working a few blocks away from the White House. Maybe not close enough that I actually would have been caught in the blast radius had Flight 93 hit its hijackers' intended target, but nevertheless I have always felt that the passengers who fought with the hijackers for control of that plane were saving my life. I don't need reminders of how frightening and vile and frightening al-Qaida is, and that I am included on the list of people they are trying to kill.

Seyla Warden

Let me guess, the truth is somewhere in the middle, right?

Cindy Claveau

Well, compared to Fox everyone leans left.

Baltha

Fox news leans right like the Titanic had damp carpets. I have no issues with these media outlets having biases, only a fool would believe they are serious sources of news but Fox has been shown over and over again to spread FUD about the current administration through lies, insinuation and distortion.
Do you honestly believe that Fox and MSNBC show the same levels of bias as each other and are as dishonest as each other?
Do you honestly believe that Joe Scarborough and Michael Steele are distorting the truth every day in hope of an Obama victory?
This BS about both sides being as bad as each other is yet another lie put out there by the Koch Bros et al and lapped up by fools like you who think they alone see the truth.

__________________

Baltha

I dress to the left myself.

Mr. B

The truth is often somewhere between the spectrums of what is broadcast.

Baltha

And water is often wet...Thank you for your words of wisdom.

Aliselia Aeon

Hon, I doubt that anything you have said has put even a dent in anyone's world view-let alone caused it to explode.

Mr. B

So the theory here is that since there are conservative talk shows and editorial programs on Fox that have guests on and cover topics that might be of interest to their audience (such as the Tea Party) that means the network has unfairly influenced policy? Perhaps you are more concerned that people who may have ideas that conflict with your ideas have any mechanism to exchange those ideas and would much prefer that only outlets you like exist? Almost sounds as much like a case of sour grapes as anything else.

On the issue of just how far worse Fox is compared to CNN (which was your claim);
Journalism.org (Pew Research Center) study of the 2008 election coverage found (regarding Obama);

CNN coverage was 46% positive and 8% negative and 46% neutral.
Fox coverage was 16% positive, 32% negative and 52% neutral.

Considering that Fox is supposed to be filled with nothing but shills for the Republican party - those numbers are astounding.

Mr. B

You might explain it to Seyla since it was her question I was answering and she seemed confused on the matter.

Baltha

Not as confused as you seem to be about Seyla.

Mr. B

I am not fixated on the issue of what Fox broadcasts compared to others - that is a religious cult dominated by the left.

I don't expect to get all of a political story from any of them so I don't spend my time keeping score (that and I almost never watch TV news).

Has Fox broadcast information that was not true? No doubt.
Have others also? No doubt.
Has Fox broadcast a higher percentage than others? I don't know. But I do know that most (not all) of the stories I have read that proclaim "Fox lied!" contain so much spin and falsehoods as to be laughable.

Mr. B

Your next response will be something about rubber and glue - please proceed.

Amity Slade

Personally, I don't care about any particular news source having some bias. I do care whether it is honest.

If Fox News Channel were conservatively biased but nevertheless honest, I would watch it. I learn a lot from listening to someone who has an honest disagreement with me. I have friends who are staunch Republicans with whom I can discuss politics honestly and civilly. If I could get something close to that from watching Fox News, I would be eager to watch. (And even those Republican friends I mention admit that even though they will watch Fox News, they watch more for entertainment value than to actually learn anything useful.)

But not only is Fox News dishonest with me and its entire audience, it's on-air personalities make it quite clear that they utterly hate me. Because my values tend to fall more into the liberal category than the conservative category, they consider me to be an enemy of America and at war with them. Fox News hates me, and I am not going to waste time listening to how much they hate me.

Now, I don't think that Fox News has a monopoly on dishonest "journalism" (can it be called "journalism" anymore?) And I stopped watching both MSNBC and CNN not really because I thought they were being dishonest, but because I felt both were getting one-sided to the point where they were clearly showing that they didn't trust me to make up my mind about anything and became more focused on telling me what to think rather than providing me information to make up my own mind. To me, which network is somehow worse is moot, because when I lose trust in one of them, that's really the end of it for me; I'm not really looking for the news source I deem least untrustworthy.

And though which network is worse is a moot point for me, it is the commercial success of Fox News that leads the way for other networks and news sources to follow suit. Whether or not Fox is the worst, it is definitely the most lucrative and powerful.

Jolene Benoir

Wait?

Isn't the premise of this whole thread THAT al Qaeda HAS a clue about our news policies, and that they prefer some over others?

I'm not all that big on counting Terrorist Organizations's word for anything.

Jolene Benoir

I'm completely in agreement with most here regarding Faux News.

They are slanted, don't present the news as it is.

But to equate them to the ONLY ones against Al Quaeda? And that they have a lack of balance in such issues?

That applies to most of our media.

Funny thing. Kill our people, and we aren't open to your message.

I don't SEE a need to be open to organizations like this. It would be equatable with media who endorsed or *made easy to the palate* Hitler.

Some things are just wrong and NEED to be called out as that.

Too bad if Al Quaeda doesn't like how they are portrayed. Maybe they could stop with killing people to make their point?

Jolene Benoir

To be fair. Maybe WE could stop killing civilians too.

I wouldn't expect Iraqi citizens to treat us with utmost fairness in their press either.