For those of you who skip this column, do not worry about missing anything. Apparently America is closed for a few days because of the holidays.
Today is Nonsense Saturday, because that is all that I see around me.
Therefore, I offer a combination of disjointed thoughts on a few issues that range from whatever constitutes opposite ends of a range.
First of all, only in America could an entire news cycle be dedicated to a professional athlete having a driving accident that might possibly involve something but might not.
If ever a story deserved short shrift, this non-story is it. Here is my input.
Tiger Woods is the perfect spokesperson for golf. He is colossally boring, and so is golf. He is a great golfer, which does not make him remotely interesting. Somewhere out there a guy exists who manufactures ball bearings better than anybody else. Hooray. Tiger Woods is as far from the Dos Equis guy on the interesting scale as our President is. Being boring is not a crime. Elevating boring people to interesting status is a waste. Stay thirsty, my friends.
One news story that actually is serious is being treated like a childhood prank. A scheming bimbo desperate to be seen as relevant crashed a White House party and managed to meet the President.
No, not Katie Couric, that ideologically bigoted slutty dancer shaking her badonkadonk while turning her nose up at other women. The other one. If this event had any more useless wannabe flesh candy, it would be the Clinton White House.
As for Mr. and Mrs. Salahi, waterboard them. Or beat the heck out of them in a private room. Burn them with cigarettes if need be. Just do something.
This was not a harmless prank akin to toilet papering somebody’s yard. This was a serious security breach. I don’t have to have voted for President Obama to pray for his safety. The idea that he was not in danger is ludicrous. Anybody that ever breaches his security potentially puts his life in danger.
In private, I hope he bangs his fist on the table and demands that heads roll, whether it be resignations or more. What if this couple had anthrax or something else that would not be picked up by metal detectors?
They wanted to be on a reality show. I say make them America’s Most Wanted.
It was funny when Vince Vaughn and Owen Wilson became Wedding Crashers. The Salahis are not funny. They are criminals.
I would spend more time on this but America is asleep from either Thanksgiving Thursday, Black Friday, or Nonsense Saturday. It would not be the first time one of my columns put people to sleep.
Too many people think Law and Order is just a television show.
Which leads me into my next random segue in the great tradition of Larry King Live, an oxymoron if there ever was one (Thank you Evan Sayet for that joke).
Why is Law and Order so d@mn predictable?
I can save you all 20 years of watching this once solid program that is now just liberal blather. Here are a couple things that sum up the show.
First of all, if there are four suspects, three of them are white, and the fourth one is black, the black guy is automatically innocent. There is no way he did it. For those who do not know, the American crime statistics are wrong. 95% of all violent crime is committed by rich, white, Republican, investment bankers.
Folks, Wall Street has its share of greed, but men in navy blue suits with red and blue diagonal neckties are not out murdering people. For those who want to say that they are killing society metaphorically, this show is about murders in the literal sense. Minorities are victims, as corporate white executives bludgeon minorities on the street during their three martini lunch breaks.
More importantly, the level of the crime is predetermined by the number of Powerful Bald White Guys (PBWGs) barking orders.
PBWG Level 1 usually involves the phrase “One Police Plaza is all over my @ss!” Then the guy storms off.
PBWG Level 2 has another guy show up with his military uniform on with all of his medals. He growls, “The Mayor is all over my @ss!”
PBWG Level 3 is like Defcon Highest Level. At that point it gets kicked up to the Governor (Donald Shalvoy is an Eliot Spitzer character played brilliantly by Tom Everett Scott, a Tom Hanks lookalike, only balder.) or Fred Thompson.
Law and Order worked when Sam Waterston, aka arrogant liberal gasbag Jack McCoy, was the number two guy. He would get bombastic, and Fred Thompson’s Arthur Branch would calmly, and I am paraphrasing, say “sit your liberal @ss down McCoy.”
Even when the boss was a liberal, Stephen Hill as Adam Schiff was great. His answer to everything was “Make it go away. Offer him a deal.” McCoy would ramble on, and Schiff would remind him was that his job was to put away bad guys, not save the world.
Now McCoy is like any other raging liberal with unchecked power.
Without Fred Thompson, Angie Harmon, or even Dennis Farina doing his tough guy Chicago cop routine, the show is just another left wing program. They should just bring in Dixie Carter and rename it “Designing Women.”
No wait, I take that back. May those ladies never be on my tv again.
Some of you may think that Julia Sugarbaker is not worth discussing today. Oh, and Tiger Woods is?
What the heck should I discuss? I live in a country where Saturdays are dedicated to commercials about a “Snuggie” for dogs. Anybody who bought that or bottled water for their dogs on Black Friday should face black and blue Saturday for spending this money when others are hurting.
Sunday is football and on Monday politics returns. Those days cannot come soon enough.
Some of you think I have a masterful ability to say so much and say so little.
No, that would be our current President and Vice President. At least I don’t pretend to be important.
For them, every day is Nonsense Saturday.
eric
Green Bay @ Detroit
(Green Bay by 10, they win but fail to cover)
Oakland @ Dallas
(Dallas by 13.5, they win but fail to cover)
N.Y. Giants @ Denver
(N.Y. Giants by 6.5, they win but fail to cover)
Miami @ Buffalo
(Miami by 3, they cover)
Carolina @ N.Y. Jets
(N.Y. Jets by 3, upset special, Carolina wins outright)
Cleveland @ Cincinnati
(Cincinnati by 14, they cover)
Arizona @ Tennessee
(Tennessee by 1, they cover)
Indianapolis @ Houston
(Indianapolis by 3, upset special, Houston wins outright)
Chicago @ Minnesota
(Minnesota by 11, they cover)
Tampa Bay @ Atlanta
(Atlanta by 12, they win but fail to cover)
Washington @ Philadelphia
(Philadelphia by 9, they win but fail to cover)
Seattle @ St. Louis
(Seattle by 3, they cover)
Kansas City @ San Diego
(San Diego by 13.5, they win but fail to cover)
Jacksonville @ San Francisco
(San Francisco by 3, upset special, Jacksonville wins outright)
Pittsburgh @ Baltimore
(Baltimore by 2.5, they cover)
New England @ New Orleans
(New Orleans by 3, upset special, New England wins outright)
eric
I guess this is more proff that “reality has a well-known liberal bias.” Law and Order (no so much SVU and CI) episodes are always based on current events. The stories are take-offs from various contemporary headlines. Mind you – headlines – not just the daily police blotter for your local newspaper. Headlines get made when something big happens, as opposed to some banal event. Your reference to black people – once again showing the utter ineptitude of conservatives when speaking of race – is not relevent. Black people don’t make big news much. They’re a minority, and a smaller and smaller minority every day, crime is down amongst them, and the major “liberal” news outlets tend to cover stories regarding white people a lot more than black people. For instance, if a little black girl goes missing, it might make the local news for a night or two, while if a litttle white girl goes missing it’s all over the national networks and Nancy Grace and Greta non-stop for a year. So much for the “liberal” media. Anyway, L&O takes on the big national news stories, and those are dominated by whote people. On top of that, when there is a black person involved, L&O will play the story just as any other, with the same general bad guy/good guy/victim/witness characters. I think conservatives are just paranoids. they see incidious and ubquitous “liberalism” attacking them at every turn. It’s not. you’re just being paranoid.
JMJ
> Tiger Woods is as far from the Dos Equis guy on the interesting scale as our President is.
So you’re saying he just needs a little Captain in him.
Isn’t this what the whoopla is all about, though?
:oP
> This was not a harmless prank akin to toilet papering somebody’s yard. This was a serious security breach. I don’t have to have voted for President Obama to pray for his safety. The idea that he was not in danger is ludicrous. Anybody that ever breaches his security potentially puts his life in danger.
This was a harmless prank on THEIR part. I believe they could have, and should have, been subject to any potential damage during the course of it that the Secret Service had at hand for potential terrorists. But it’s now a fait accompli, and as such is akin to breaking into a weapons silo just to show it can be done — the person who did it is, in effect, a classic whistle blower. They are akin to a white hat hacker who breaks into security installations just to show the holes. As long as they are forthcoming with the full details, and did not damage anything more than a black-hat hacker would in the same action (i.e., necessary to get in, not malicious destruction for its own sake) then the knowledge of the security hole is more valuable than the damage done, for most cases. Better to have white hat hackers encouraged to find holes than to discourage them by punishing them for the action once completed (getting caught and taking the consequences is just one of the rules of the road in such hacking)
The only heads that should roll is anyone on the security detail that was nominally responsible for organizing it and screening people properly (which certainly includes some admin people and may or may not include some of the bozos checking names at the door). That’s who dropped the ball, and allowed an unverified person into it.
OTOH, who knows who was organizing this thing? If it was under the control of the Obamas, security arrangements may well have been assigned to the same genius who bought the DVD present for Gordon Brown. They probably gave the title of “Chief of Security” to some SIEU hack they owed a favor to.
We’ll see as this blows out, whether it was yet another massive Obama failure or an actual security failure by a formerly presumed competent professional… Any bets on who gets thrown under the bus?
You have to forgive the Obamas for their repeated lack of experience organizing important events… right?
JMJ,
1) There’s this amazing new tool: spellcheck. (Hint: It’s not “proff”. It’s not “relevent”. It’s not “whote”) Even if you can’t spell worth a damned yourself, at least take advantage of the tech when it CAN keep you from looking like a semi-literate dumbass. We’re talking three errors in only 250 words. I might take you more seriously, if you actually looked like someone worthy of serious note.
2) “The stories are take-offs from various contemporary headlines.” Which says not one single thing about the issues he speaks, since they will go the LONG way around (via Florida, Cali, Seattle) to avoid anything incriminating of the Democrat “official victim groups” — especially including blacks and, particularly, anyone Islamic. It’s “based on a true story” — not a retelling of the true story. When it’s a white collar crime in question, sure, it’s probably a white guy. But — sorry, are you telling me no wealthy black person ever commits a crime? How about a story about the murder of a rich black guy (say, a football player) by his mistress? I seem to recall that one happening recently — But they just never seem to CHOOSE anything but white collar criminals. Apparently those are the only criminal actions that actually take place in NYC — no one is ever mugged by a black person, no black junkie ever breaks into a home, and, more importantly — no black maid turns out to be the ringleader behind the widespread rash of thefts all over the city. This latter is the worst sort of “soft bigotry” on the part of the left — you can’t even be a decent criminal if you’re black. Just junkies, cheap hos, and other lowlife social parasites. If you are black and well-off, you’re not significant to the story (since he’s probably a Republican, that’s all for the best, correct?)
3)
a) “crime is down amongst them” cite, please.
b) is it down more than among whites, or are we speaking of the general decline overall, with the decline among blacks less than the overall? Misused statistics should not be.
4) “I think conservatives are just paranoids.” Not bothering to defend this twaddle. Dr. Sanity has already written widely on the vast capacity for projection on the part of libtards everywhere. I shan’t repeat it. Since she’s got the chops for making an official diagnosis (among her credentials is that she was the mission psychiatrist during the unfortunate Challenger mission), I’ll take her opinion as having some weight and merit. Hint: Rove is not an eeeevil criminal mastermind. Cheney was not the actual president behind a figurehead chimp. Halliburton is not relevant. The Iraq War is not a war for oil — never was, in any way, shape, or form. In other words, “Helloooooooo, KETTLE! This is THE POT: ‘You’re black!’ ”
4) they see incidious and ubquitous “liberalism” attacking them at every turn. Funny, I didn’t notice any mention of liberals attacking conservatives anywhere. As a matter of fact, he doesn’t even use the word “conservative” in the entire missive. I repeat, sorta: “Project, much”? Oh, I see — “white guys” == “conservatives”, “rich people” == “conservatives”. You know, the relentless racism inherent in the libtard viewpoint of all things really, really should be discouraged. And it’s not the GOP who gets the vast majority of their funding from “rich people”, so throw that one out while you’re at it.
I gotta go. There’s a football game to watch, which I expect will be even more fun than fisking your dumb ass to pieces…
Yes folks, I need a grammer lesson from a man with the moniker “O Bloody Hell.”
If you want to be a pedanttic little schoolchild, take it elsewhere. We talk about Tygrrrr’s posts and debate them here, not grammar.
The point about L&O was that they cull their stories from the national news. I’ve never noticed any particular liberal bent to L&O. The show is pretty much a straight docu-drama. If it seems liberal, then like Stephen Colbert said, “Reality has a well-known liberal bias.”
As for crime being down amongst African-Americans, crime has been going down everywhere accross the board since the early ninties, probably mostly as a result of Roe v Wade. It’s true that African-Americans have not seen the same steep decline as some other groups, but that is probably more a reflection of a combination demographics, the inforcement of a virtual police-state in the inner-cities, and draconian criminal laws. Here’s an insteresting look at the subject: http://www.peace.ca/truthaboutblackcrime.htm
Conservatives have long complained about the “liberal media.” I don’t see it. I only wish it was true. I don’t think of GE, for example, owner of NBC and Universal, as “liberal.” It’s a corporation, not a liberal public advocacy think-tank. Liberty Media, AOL/Time Warner, GE, NewsCorp, Vivendi, Viacom – these are all corporations looking to make money, not score liberal points. If “liberal” programming makes money, then they’ll air liberal programming. If conservative programming makes money, etc. Yes, actors and writers tend to be liberal – most artists tend to be liberal. But CEO’s, shareholders, studioheads? I don’t think so. So it’s a mixed bag. Yeah, sure, I guess you could say there is some liberal media out there, just as there is some conservative media – but when you get down to it, it’s most all CORPORATE media, and that’s all you really have to know about it. Like I said to another poster the other day – far more people watch Spongebob than Fox News. Spongebob makes money.
Yes, liberals attack conservatives and conservatives attack liberals (and usually over peripheral non-issues created by Coporatocracy to keep us divided), but there is no insidious and ubquitous plot by the left to attack the right at every turn. If anything, the left in this country has always been diverse and divided amongst ourselves. We couldn’t plot any great coup against the right if we tried with all our might. We can’t even agree on what we ostensibly agree upon! The right, on the other hand, tends to march in lock-step and when they don’t, the chasm usually closes quickly. The right, for instance, is currently divided by the rather insipid populist movement of Beck, Palin and the like, and the old school Wall Street and Establishment GOP that would take a President Romney over a President Palin any day. The Wall Street/Establishment wing will win in the end because the Becks and Palins of the world are simply never going to win over a majority of Americans. Most people think they’re sleazy idiots.
Oh, and thanks for the petty insults. You must be a really big boy now! What? 10? 12? Wow. They grow up so fast…
JMJ
Somebody slipped big time today, per my analysis of a TV news programs reporting on crime.
The commentator listed the top cities in the USA with crime, then
the top California cities.
Oh me oh my, oy vey, will there be a cry, asa smart people see
where the crime is.
Hey guys, and the thousands of people who come here, what about
the Sudanese, aren’t they for law and order?
Our President ( call him the do-nothing guy ), okayed the State Department’s new approach towards this genocidal country, which
is to engage, talk, have discussions, meet and greet and deal.
One problemo..is that their President is wanted for genocide..and
has been flaunting the court’s decision (world) and even snearing
at the authority.
Okay, so back to the law and order issue: it’s under Sharia Law
(the Muslim code of barbaric ethics). It seems a young gal had the chutspah
to wear a shorter skirt than allowed, under her longer outer garment.
She was given 50 lashes…in the courtroom no less.
And our President doesn’t say squat about the potential of
the dastardly crime of the party crashers. I mean,
a martial arts expert..you get the idea.
Could we endure Joe Biden for President..but then again, he was
also there and shown with the couple. After the Pres, VP. who is next.
Heaven forbid it is Pelosi.
It could have happened folks.
Hey guys, hows about the IAEA head (who is leaving office) finally
doing what we all knew..condemning Ahmad, the mullahs and the
Rev Guards.
Did anyone see him being interviewed on the leftist Charlie Rose show?
I did. He said, there are two sides to every story. Begin changed his
mind about the Palestinians..and so can Iran’s leaders. ( ..”wipe Israel off the face of the earth”). He also noted that Iraq had replaced it’s destroyed
nuke reactor in 1981, one year after Israel bombed it.
I admit, that was a new one on me.
Hey IAEA, according to the statements by the release and tortured
Iranian news reporter and TV producer, the Revolutionary Guards
are taking over the country..and may replace the current Muslim
leader..if not the entire gov’t apparatus. (Ahmad was a Rev Guard).
Their goal is a nuke capability, but they are unlikely to nuke Israel or
other countries one day after they test (successfully).
Yeah right..like how can he be so sure?
One nuke over Tel Aviv, just a 15kt..and it’s all over but the
Spielberg movies.
You know, I like turkey,,but not the one in the White House.
Gobble, gobble.
For an interesting book, read The Israel Test..it’s the truth
about why the Arabs hate US.
Or go to an article in the Jerusalem Post English edition…the 9 words
that best describe the Palestinian/Arab world’s goals for Israel:
no recognition, no peace, no negotiation, still not enough. (We want
it all volk).
Vidi. Vici. Veni.
OK, not me personally. More in the plural and metaphorical sense, but I don’t know how to redo the Latin. But you get the point. And yeah, I mean exactly what I said.
So, I come back from my football game and Lo and Behold — it’s just in time to find someone mindlessly blathering in response to my earlier posts. It’s mostly hand-waving excluses but, hey — I’m in a good mood, so I shall fisk you a second time…
Yes folks, I need a grammer lesson from a man with the moniker “O Bloody Hell.”
Rather obviously, when you can’t spell things correctly even with a spell checker readily available…
Oh, yeah — it’s “grammar”, BTW.
English. Learn It. Use It.
I realize, as a Card Carrying Libtard, you are against everything that has ever come out of Greek culture, including the notion of proper usage of your own native language, but people with a brain grasp how little you actually know when you cannot even put 100 or fewer words together without a misspelling, even with a computer looking over your shoulder.
I find it interesting that “foreigners” want to use our language more correctly than many of the natives — most especially the ones who go on and on about how multiculti they are. Hint: “Multiculti””ZeroCulti”
“Nye culturniy” is no way to go through life.
> I’ve never noticed any particular liberal bent to L&O.
Yeah, and you’ve never noticed any sort of liberal bent on CNN or MSNBC, either, right? But there’s damned sure as hell a massive, totally distorting conservative bent on Fox, right?
“I’ve never…” in this case is more a measure of your absolute lack of a clue than any kind of testimonial justification.
> Conservatives have long complained about the “liberal media.” I don’t see it
Gee, and I hadn’t even READ that far yet… Call me “Obloodyhell Kreskin”, please. Thanks. “OK” is fine.
Also — I officially dub thee “Jersey McClueless”
…(continued)…
Wow. Still harping on the spelling, huh? Any other substantial crtiques? Do I tie my tie correctly? Are there any spots on my silverware? Is my lawn the correct hieght? Man, you must be a real drag at parties… “Look at those drapes! Who puts mauve with taupe? And these canopies! Is this manchego or friggin’ cheddar? And just look at the outfit on his wife! 1969 is calling… they want their waistcoat back!”
I’ve never noticed much of a liberal bent on CNN (if you do, that says more about you than CNN), but MSNBC is another story. They were re-fashioned not that long ago to be a counter to Fox News, running directly against them. They don’t get quite the ratings Fox gets, however, but they do have a following. Liberals, in general, don’t watch a lot of news-talk, nor do they listen to that much of it on the radio. They would rather get their news from PBS and NPR, and just get thier local news from local outfits and the local papers. But MSNBC saw a small market they felt was worth attracting – a sort of anti-Fox News market – and they went with it. I don’t have a problem with that. But to take MSNBC, which has such a small market share, and extrapolate from that the “media is liberal” is like saying “a waiter once was rude to me therefore all waiters are rude” That is typical conservative-think (take an anecdote or small sample and apply it to everything from then on). Me, on the other hand, will qualify that type of opinion with “I think” or “I’ve never” or “I, personally” so as to make that point that I am only conferring an opinion. You may “think” the “media is liberal,” but that’s just an opinion, not a fact. “Liberal” and “conservative” are pretty subjective labels, best left to the realm of modified personal opinion. To me, labeling “the media,” a huge and dynamic sector, heck, the whole Fourth Estate, as anything in particular is rather simple-minded. It is what it is, but that’s a whole lot of things. Then again, in the comic-book universe of conservatism, everything must be singularly labeled – good or evil, right or wrong, left or right, conservative or liberal, etc. In real life, things are rarely so simple.
JMJ
Dan, when are you moving to Israel?
JMJ
> Wow. Still harping on the spelling, huh? Any other substantial crtiques?
What, you mean other than the 250 words that follow that? Or the thousand or so that preceded it? Are you even more arithmetically challenged than you are spelling challenged?
You managed three spelling errors that I noticed in that paragraph alone. You really, really are “intellectually challenged” aren’t you? You live in your mother’s basement, right? Does she know you’ve had a friend break the CyberNanny internet protection? I suspect not.
> I’ve never noticed much of a liberal bent on CNN (if you do, that says more about you than CNN)
Right. It says I’m less clueless than you OR the so-called “journalists” at CNN. Since even the poll data constantly reflects a recognition of this bias, and has for years, you’ve not got a leg to stand on in this comment either.
> They were re-fashioned not that long ago to be a counter to Fox News, running directly against them. They don’t get quite the ratings Fox gets
Oh, wait. Wait. What happened to these corporations just being interested in “profit” a couple comments back? Fox has got like 10x the ratings that CNN does, and CNN was the original news channel. Why would CNN want to go for a blatantly smaller market? Especially when all the others are competing for that same market? Why would they not go after Fox? Your so-called “logical argument” is more corrupted by errors than your spelling.
> But to take MSNBC, which has such a small market share, and extrapolate from that the “media is liberal”
BWAAAHAHAHAAAAAAA. Yeah, we conservatives all lump in every Network with MSNBC. Uh-huh. “That’s the ticket”
Ask any conservative how they rank, and they will give you a spectrum, mostly far to the left but still distinctly a spectrum — there’s no group think or “monothought” involved.
That’s far more common among libtards, too — once more: Project, much?
> Me, on the other hand, will qualify that type of opinion with “I think” or “I’ve never” or “I, personally” so as to make that point that I am only conferring an opinion.
“Some circumstantial evidence is very strong, as when you find a trout in the milk.”
– Thoreau –
When you find that a vast array of opinion polls says that the public as a whole finds the media to be biased left, with Fox’s rightward bias to be the least biased, it’s time to re-assess your “opinion” to align with what is more than likely fact: The Nets are biased. It’s called a reality check. Amazing how the “reality-based” community wants nothing like that, ever.
> You may “think” the “media is liberal,” but that’s just an opinion, not a fact.
Equine feces. There are objective measures of this, by comparing both semantic usages and also by topics covered and “spin” applied. And by all such objective measures, the nets are BIASED. Yes, even Fox.
One of the more obvious signs of this is that Fox almost always has a talking head with a lefty bent involved in many of its commentaries, while the others rarely include a conservative, and if they do, a casual examination of the background of the individual would show that they are RINOs and not actual conservatives at all.
> In real life, things are rarely so simple.
Oh, yessss, DO PLEASE GO THERE. It’s not the conservative positions (with the exception, offhand, of abortion, and maybe a few which are more statements of defiance than justifying a position) which can be reduced to a single statement that can fit onto a bumper sticker.
Go find a car with two dozen bumper stickers on it:
1) 99% of the time, they will be liberal positions, and the owner is a flaming libtard
2) They cover a vast array of topics, because ALL liberal positions can be reduced down to one sentence, pretty much.
The more bumper stickers there are on a car, the more likely it is that “1” will be true.
Most conservative and libertarian positions cannot be reduced to something that small.
So, sorry, once more, your argumentative points are found to be thoroughly defective.
a) Even “opinion” can be quantified. The media fail on these tests, abysmally.
b) “profit” only matters when it’s liberalism being promoted.
c) The only “simple” positions are the liberal ones.
So far, you’re really really proving your worthiness of the “McClueless” name.
I hate wordpress.
Jeez, still with the grammar, huh? Someone had trouble potty training when they were a kid…
I don’t think you understand market economics. Fox and MSNBC are not competing in the same exact market. Yes, they are both in the news-talk business, MSNBC targets a more liberal and progressive audience while Fox targets a more conservative, religious-right audience. These are two distinct market sub-classes. There’s no point in competing with Fox with it’s specific market because it’s too small for two major players. So MSNBC takes another target demographic, offering basically the product but with a distinct appeal for that specific market. You do get that, right?
I always get a kick out of “Free Market Conservatives” who know absolutely nothing of free market economics.
Demand creates supply – much moreso than the other way around. That’s why “supply-side economics” has never worked well for the majority of the people. Voo-Doo Economics run contrary to the workings of real economies. CNN, FOX, MSNBC all target different audiences, with some overlap. The same could be said of many other sectors and industries. This is pretty basic stuff, OBH. Perhaps you should study up on economics before you try arguing with someone who actually knows what he’s talking about.
Speaking of not knowing what you’re talking about…
http://www.mrc.org/biasalert/2009/20091005025345.aspx
Only about 45% of Americans believe the media is “too liberal” – far from “the public as a whole.” Most people are smarter than that. The important fact is that only about ten percent of Americans really trust any of the mass media at all! They know, like I know, that most of the mass media is profit driven, and skews our perception of the news for the benefit of their advertisers – not the government or the political parties. Fox and MSNBC may seem ideologically driven, but their business model is pretty clear: news for angry, disaffected people (specifically white people, in Fox’s case). It’s just an available market. That’s all.
As for most “conservative and libertarian positions,” as I’ve mentioned many times before, John Kenneth Galbraith summed those up very nicely: “The modern conservative is engaged in one of man’s oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.” I’d throw racism and misogyny in with selfishness, while we’re at it.
JMJ
“Nancy Grace and Greta non-stop for a year. So much for the “liberal” media. ”
Yeah, too bad 75% of em vote democrat
Ohh, boring boring boring with your superior moral justification.
Liberals are the epitome of hypocrisy. I made the example with proof positive factual examples and you persist with your same endless dribble.
whatever it takes to feel good huh ?
Bloody hell spanked your butt raw !!!!
“but MSNBC is another story. They were re-fashioned not that long ago to be a counter to Fox News, running directly against them. They don’t get quite the ratings Fox gets, however, but they do have a following.”
Yeah, all ten of em
” as anything in particular is rather simple-minded.”
Yeah, your most epoquent point ever was photoshopping horns to Bushs head and calling terrosust unruley children
Eloquent, epoquent ?
“you’re just being paranoid.”
heh, this coming from the guy who thinks conservatives are the universal birth of evil
I HATE WORDPRESS.
It is THE most USELESS POS on the planet.
Sorry, I’m going elsewhere. I’m sick of dealing with this piece of utter garbage.
Eric, if you ever switch to a comment engine that doesn’tjust suddenly eat things on a single mistyped keypress without any word why (and no visible option for recovery) — one that doesn’t refuse to post things without any information as to the reason for it, I’ll happily come back.
Haloscan sucks, but nowhere near as much as wordpress does. And blogspot’s comment engine is literally orders of magnitude better than either. I’ve had <B<FOUR problems in the last two days. I can’t recall the last time I had ANY problems with either Haloscan or Blogspot.
Whatever your reasons for using WP are, they aren’t sufficient for me.
Sorry about that — I like your content, but not enough to deal with WP screwing me over time and again. It’s an incompetently written piece of crap.
“No WP Blogs” is my new ironclad rule.
:-(
One last point:
> They don’t get quite the ratings Fox gets
Indeed. They get 1/3rd of the ratings Fox gets. (Fox’s numbers are more than all the other three libtard nets (CNN, HNN, MSNBC) combined
FSU didn’t score quite as much as UF did last Saturday, according to McJones.
> Yeah, too bad 75% of em vote democrat
The numbers for the media are actually 90%, Mickey. Funny how their interest in “diversity” only encompasses those who match their ideology.
If the newsroom only had 2.4% blacks in it (20% of black population demo) , would that be acceptable? I don’t think so.
This blog does not allow profanity or personal attacks. My latitude has been used up.
The discourse will be raised in a heartbeat. If that involves people leaving, so be it.
Stick to policy, not linguistic nonsense.
eric