Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Bootleg Jack
Potters Field
15
|
Posted - 2012.02.04 19:16:00 -
[1] - Quote
Is a Republican Super Pac
Send a message, use parental control, block FOX! |
Lithalnas
Privateers Privateer Alliance
101
|
Posted - 2012.02.04 20:21:00 -
[2] - Quote
you dont need to make political stuff here in eve online. It is against the rules and not wanted. How to build a PC for EVE thread (by Akita T) http://eve-search.com/thread/1559734-0/page/1
|
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
31
|
Posted - 2012.02.04 20:25:00 -
[3] - Quote
And it really took you this long to figure it out? |
SpaceSquirrels
260
|
Posted - 2012.02.04 21:16:00 -
[4] - Quote
I dont even have cable... And I assume those that do watch fox news could give it a **** that it was... In fact that would be more of a reason for them if anything. |
Caleidascope
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
87
|
Posted - 2012.02.04 21:50:00 -
[5] - Quote
IBTL Life is short and dinner time is chancy Eat desert first! |
THE L0CK
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2012.02.04 21:53:00 -
[6] - Quote
Sorry I'm late. Do you smell what the Lock's cooking? |
Destination SkillQueue
Are We There Yet
1784
|
Posted - 2012.02.04 21:59:00 -
[7] - Quote
IATL |
2bhammered
Perkone Caldari State
30
|
Posted - 2012.02.04 23:19:00 -
[8] - Quote
So OP, what wouldyou reccomend instead? MSNBC? lol I hate both fox, cnn and abc BBC etc. All terrible and none of them are good sources for news or opinion.
I sometimes watch RT, seems better still not sure though. |
Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
310
|
Posted - 2012.02.05 00:59:00 -
[9] - Quote
2bhammered wrote:So OP, what wouldyou reccomend instead? MSNBC? lol I hate both fox, cnn and abc BBC etc. All terrible and none of them are good sources for news or opinion.
I sometimes watch RT, seems better still not sure though.
They all push an agenda, RT is pushing one too. They all suck. |
VKhaun Vex
Viziam Amarr Empire
303
|
Posted - 2012.02.05 03:08:00 -
[10] - Quote
I tend to go with BBC news. They are guilty of their share of spin, but it's less intrusive because their articles and anouncements are are far more concise than our media. They also seem to do better with keeping up with science, and I love their one minute world news.
|
|
Surfin's PlunderBunny
mUfFiN fAcToRy Psychotic Tendencies.
940
|
Posted - 2012.02.05 03:53:00 -
[11] - Quote
Daily Show and Colbert Report |
Brisco County
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
4
|
Posted - 2012.02.05 05:28:00 -
[12] - Quote
Fox is "news entertainment", so they can make up whatever they want. Kinda like the onion. |
baltec1
539
|
Posted - 2012.02.05 08:14:00 -
[13] - Quote
lol fox. |
Taedrin
Kushan Industrial
331
|
Posted - 2012.02.05 08:39:00 -
[14] - Quote
THE L0CK wrote:Sorry I'm late.
Dude, where have you been? I haven't seen you in what seems like FOREVER. |
Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
311
|
Posted - 2012.02.05 20:53:00 -
[15] - Quote
The Muppets Attack Fox News
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y8YhED4IgQA |
Shadowsword
The Scope Gallente Federation
113
|
Posted - 2012.02.06 11:45:00 -
[16] - Quote
Adunh Slavy wrote:2bhammered wrote:So OP, what wouldyou reccomend instead? MSNBC? lol I hate both fox, cnn and abc BBC etc. All terrible and none of them are good sources for news or opinion.
I sometimes watch RT, seems better still not sure though. They all push an agenda, RT is pushing one too. They all suck.
That's one reason I stopped watching TV, and keep myself informed with googlenews. It give my a sample of every political inclinations (left, right or neutral) for any specific subject.
But I hate Faux News espescially, since Murdoch took control of it. They aren't just interpreting facts in their favor, they have been caught several times creating facts out of thin air. And their anti-Obama propaganda often reach /facepalm levels. |
stoicfaux
727
|
Posted - 2012.02.06 16:43:00 -
[17] - Quote
Shadowsword wrote: That's one reason I stopped watching TV, and keep myself informed with googlenews. It give my a sample of every political inclinations (left, right or neutral) for any specific subject.
You might also be interested in http://www.politifact.com/, which checks the accuracy of various political claims. The history behind the politifact "owners" is interesting: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/blog/2011/oct/06/who-pays-for-politifact/
You can tell me what is and isn't Truth when you pry the tinfoil from my cold, lifeless head.
|
LiSung
New Eden Asteroid Preservation Society
11
|
Posted - 2012.02.06 20:58:00 -
[18] - Quote
Fox what?
People get their news from TV still? |
baltec1
556
|
Posted - 2012.02.06 21:23:00 -
[19] - Quote
LiSung wrote:Fox what?
People get their news from TV still?
Mainly radio for me now. BBC world service at night makes the shifts so much more bareable. |
Dunbar Hulan
The Flaming Sideburn's Art of War Alliance
68
|
Posted - 2012.02.06 21:27:00 -
[20] - Quote
Fox and News in the same sentence....... -áThe Sideburns- Always Outnumbered- Never Outgunned. Manchester United - Paul Scholes= Genius |
|
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
31
|
Posted - 2012.02.06 22:08:00 -
[21] - Quote
Dunbar Hulan wrote:Fox and News in the same sentence.......
It's actually a pretty good source for news, if a bit indirect. All you have to do is just watch FOX, and then assume that the exact opposite is true. |
FloppieTheBanjoClown
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
819
|
Posted - 2012.02.06 23:07:00 -
[22] - Quote
Merin Ryskin wrote:It's actually a pretty good source for news, if a bit indirect. All you have to do is just watch FOX, and then assume that the exact opposite is true. Soo....the Patriots won the Super Bowl last night? |
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
31
|
Posted - 2012.02.07 02:00:00 -
[23] - Quote
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:Merin Ryskin wrote:It's actually a pretty good source for news, if a bit indirect. All you have to do is just watch FOX, and then assume that the exact opposite is true. Soo....the Patriots won the Super Bowl last night?
Even a broken clock is right twice a day. |
Jada Maroo
Mysterium Astrometrics
574
|
Posted - 2012.02.07 02:01:00 -
[24] - Quote
My only problem with Fox News is that it goes too soft on Obama. |
2bhammered
Perkone Caldari State
30
|
Posted - 2012.02.07 12:56:00 -
[25] - Quote
Jada Maroo wrote:My only problem with Fox News is that it goes too soft on Obama.
They go too soft on everyone, except Bill Clinton, come on the dude is a guy, so what he received a blow job from some ugly fat hog that probably begged for the day to come when someone, anyone, would give her some attention. That guy did her a favor and most likely made her day with some protein, also he put US in a surplus of 1 trillion USD and US best living standards in history etc. But nooo he lied about getting a fracking blowjob |
Shadowsword
The Scope Gallente Federation
113
|
Posted - 2012.02.07 13:34:00 -
[26] - Quote
I remember a particular Fox News documentary that left me litteraly speechless. The commentator took a few theme words from obama's speechs, like for example Security, and with only the first letter of each word, then formed the word SOCIALIST, and started to depict that as Obama's hidden agenda.
I was stunned by the implicit insult toward the average US resident this little word manipulation represented. Just what kind of fool would believe this crap? |
stoicfaux
736
|
Posted - 2012.02.07 14:15:00 -
[27] - Quote
Shadowsword wrote:I remember a particular Fox News documentary that left me litteraly speechless. The commentator took a few theme words from obama's speechs, like for example Security, and with only the first letter of each word, then formed the word SOCIALIST, and started to depict that as Obama's hidden agenda.
I was stunned by the implicit insult toward the average US resident this little word manipulation represented. Just what kind of fool would believe this crap? It's reminiscent of good old numerology: http://www.merriampark.com/numbeast.htm Just proves that appealing to the Stupid isn't new.
Quote:Attempts have been made to identify particular Popes (rather than the Pope in general) with the Beast. Michael Stifel (1487-1567, better known for introducing modern symbols for addition, subtraction, and square root) proved that Pope Leo X (lived 1475-1521, Pope 1513-1521) was the Beast by means of the following calculation, as described by Howard Eves, An Introduction to the History of Mathematics (NY: Rinehart, 1953), p. 217:
From LEO DECIMVS he retained the letters LDCIMV. He then added X, for Leo X, and omitted the M, because it stood for mystery. A rearrangement of the letters gave DCLXVI, 666, or the "number of the beast".
You can tell me what is and isn't Truth when you pry the tinfoil from my cold, lifeless head.
|
Jada Maroo
Mysterium Astrometrics
574
|
Posted - 2012.02.07 15:09:00 -
[28] - Quote
Shadowsword wrote:I remember a particular Fox News documentary that left me litteraly speechless. The commentator took a few theme words from obama's speechs, like for example Security, and with only the first letter of each word, then formed the word SOCIALIST, and started to depict that as Obama's hidden agenda.
I was stunned by the implicit insult toward the average US resident this little word manipulation represented. Just what kind of fool would believe this crap?
They should have spelled out MARXIST, but Obama probably didn't say anything that started with X. |
Micheal Dietrich
Standards and Practices
33
|
Posted - 2012.02.07 15:27:00 -
[29] - Quote
http://img404.imageshack.us/img404/9594/hipsterkittynews.jpg |
SpaceSquirrels
260
|
Posted - 2012.02.07 15:44:00 -
[30] - Quote
^
Shadowsword wrote:I remember a particular Fox News documentary that left me litteraly speechless. The commentator took a few theme words from obama's speechs, like for example Security, and with only the first letter of each word, then formed the word SOCIALIST, and started to depict that as Obama's hidden agenda.
I was stunned by the implicit insult toward the average US resident this little word manipulation represented. Just what kind of fool would believe this crap?
^
I noticed a funny thing recently. Discussing news sources in a media class. Many uber liberal types now like to say they watch/read al jezeera. Because it's so progressive and worldly. However every single person from the middle east in every class I've had that brings this issue up loathes that station because often times it's censored or partially run by the government.
I suppose the grass is always greener. Really people need to diversify their news sources. It's not the job of the news to agree with you or give you an opinion. Should just state the facts, and you have to use your own brain to interpret it.
|
|
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
32
|
Posted - 2012.02.07 17:02:00 -
[31] - Quote
Jada Maroo wrote:Shadowsword wrote:I remember a particular Fox News documentary that left me litteraly speechless. The commentator took a few theme words from obama's speechs, like for example Security, and with only the first letter of each word, then formed the word SOCIALIST, and started to depict that as Obama's hidden agenda.
I was stunned by the implicit insult toward the average US resident this little word manipulation represented. Just what kind of fool would believe this crap? They should have spelled out MARXIST, but Obama probably didn't say anything that started with X.
You know, I would love to see a REAL marxist/socialist/whatever president, not a spineless center-right empty suit like Obama. Not because I actually like marxism, but because the tears from people like you would be so beautiful. |
baltec1
560
|
Posted - 2012.02.07 17:42:00 -
[32] - Quote
SpaceSquirrels wrote:^ Shadowsword wrote:I remember a particular Fox News documentary that left me litteraly speechless. The commentator took a few theme words from obama's speechs, like for example Security, and with only the first letter of each word, then formed the word SOCIALIST, and started to depict that as Obama's hidden agenda.
I was stunned by the implicit insult toward the average US resident this little word manipulation represented. Just what kind of fool would believe this crap? ^ I noticed a funny thing recently. Discussing news sources in a media class. Many uber liberal types now like to say they watch/read al jezeera. Because it's so progressive and worldly. However every single person from the middle east in every class I've had that brings this issue up loathes that station because often times it's censored or partially run by the government. I suppose the grass is always greener. Really people need to diversify their news sources. It's not the job of the news to agree with you or give you an opinion. Should just state the facts, and you have to use your own brain to interpret it.
The general rule out there is watch/listen the BBC. Gotta admit, when you hear the words "This is the BBC, and now for the news at 00:00 GMT" in that very british voice with big ben chiming you just trust them to be getting it right. |
Jada Maroo
Mysterium Astrometrics
574
|
Posted - 2012.02.07 18:49:00 -
[33] - Quote
Merin Ryskin wrote: You know, I would love to see a REAL marxist/socialist/whatever president, not a spineless center-right empty suit like Obama. Not because I actually like marxism, but because the tears from people like you would be so beautiful.
If it's tears you like, you're in luck! Marxism is the most efficient system of distributing human misery ever created. |
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
32
|
Posted - 2012.02.07 19:29:00 -
[34] - Quote
Jada Maroo wrote:Merin Ryskin wrote: You know, I would love to see a REAL marxist/socialist/whatever president, not a spineless center-right empty suit like Obama. Not because I actually like marxism, but because the tears from people like you would be so beautiful.
If it's tears you like, you're in luck! Marxism is the most efficient system of distributing human misery ever created.
That would be why I'm not a Marxist. I just hate people like you who think Obama is a Marxist/socialist/whatever*, and I want to watch from a safe distance as you experience what REAL Marxism is. Extreme stupidity deserves extreme punishment, after all.
*Hint for the clueless: he's not. By the standards of anyone who isn't a raving nutcase conservative, Obama is a center-right career politician with no real ideology beyond "get elected". |
stoicfaux
737
|
Posted - 2012.02.07 19:30:00 -
[35] - Quote
Jada Maroo wrote:Merin Ryskin wrote: You know, I would love to see a REAL marxist/socialist/whatever president, not a spineless center-right empty suit like Obama. Not because I actually like marxism, but because the tears from people like you would be so beautiful.
If it's tears you like, you're in luck! Marxism is the most efficient system of distributing human misery ever created. Two problems with that statement: a) Marxism doesn't exist in the real world. Name one country where the working class has all the power.
b) Capitalism is much more efficient. Look at the British Empire and colonialism. Or the US's history with banana republics. Never underestimate the efficiency of capitalism. Raw capitalism only appears friendly because a capitalistic society needs to keep its own citizens happy. What you don't see is the abuse going on off-shore. Meaning, Wal-Mart prices are great for US citizens if you ignore where the products are made and the working conditions in those countries.
You can tell me what is and isn't Truth when you pry the tinfoil from my cold, lifeless head.
|
Herping yourDerp
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
394
|
Posted - 2012.02.07 20:42:00 -
[36] - Quote
fox news is a comedy network. |
Hans Zwaardhandler
Borealis Mining Concern IMPERIAL LEGI0N
3
|
Posted - 2012.02.07 21:18:00 -
[37] - Quote
Shadowsword wrote:I remember a particular Fox News documentary that left me litteraly speechless. The commentator took a few theme words from obama's speechs, like for example Security, and with only the first letter of each word, then formed the word SOCIALIST, and started to depict that as Obama's hidden agenda.
I was stunned by the implicit insult toward the average US resident this little word manipulation represented. Just what kind of fool would believe this crap? Glenn Beck?
Listening to Fox News for extended periods of time has a habit of turning your brain into slush and making it pour out of your ears. When on a cable network you call the Muppets communists, and so on and so forth, you begin to lose a lot of credit to your name. |
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
1197
|
Posted - 2012.02.07 21:41:00 -
[38] - Quote
Two kinds of media, two kinds of zombies.
CNN: zombies who like the welfare state. FOX: zombies who like the warfare state.
CNN: Socialism. FOX: Nationalism.
Remember what happened last time someone got a nation to get behind National Socialism?
No need to remember, the refresher is happening right now.
|
Shadowsword
The Scope Gallente Federation
113
|
Posted - 2012.02.07 21:50:00 -
[39] - Quote
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:
Remember what happened last time someone got a nation to get behind National Socialism?
That argument is stupid. History is full of dictators from every kind of governement, and tyranny and socialism/capitalism/comunism/whatever are NOT related.
|
Bootleg Jack
Potters Field
15
|
Posted - 2012.02.07 22:36:00 -
[40] - Quote
Shadowsword wrote:I remember a particular Fox News documentary that left me litteraly speechless. The commentator took a few theme words from obama's speechs, like for example Security, and with only the first letter of each word, then formed the word SOCIALIST, and started to depict that as Obama's hidden agenda.
I was stunned by the implicit insult toward the average US resident this little word manipulation represented. Just what kind of fool would believe this crap? There are a lot of haters who will believe anything, they just want to feed the hate. |
|
Hans Zwaardhandler
Borealis Mining Concern IMPERIAL LEGI0N
4
|
Posted - 2012.02.07 22:50:00 -
[41] - Quote
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:
Remember what happened last time someone got a nation to get behind National Socialism?
No need to remember, the refresher is happening right now.
So... CNN and Fox are one and the same? Their ideology seems quite a bit different, as Fox leans more to the conservative right and CNN (to me) more to the liberal/central side of things.
Connecting the two together and getting National Socialism and connecting them to a certain previous political figure is illogical and pointless and has already shown off one of the online forum laws in effect; the longer a thread goes on, the better a likelihood is of there being a mention of Adolph ******.
|
Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
314
|
Posted - 2012.02.07 23:26:00 -
[42] - Quote
Hans Zwaardhandler wrote:Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:
Remember what happened last time someone got a nation to get behind National Socialism?
No need to remember, the refresher is happening right now.
So... CNN and Fox are one and the same? Their ideology seems quite a bit different, as Fox leans more to the conservative right and CNN (to me) more to the liberal/central side of things.
Stop looking at the world with the dualist lens of left and right. There are other perspectives; from another perspective, CCN and FOX look very much the same.
Consider the perspective of Authoritarianism and Collectivism versus Individualism and Libertarianism. Using that perspective, both CCN and FOX promote the idea that the State is good. Though one promotes a more socialist view, and one is more nationalistic, both lead to the same authoritarian result.
The dualist left-right view is just what the powerful want the little sheep to use in their evaluations of the world, to keep people fighting and squabbling over trivial wedge issues while they, the powered interests do what they want, consuming your rights and your wealth.
This left-right charade goes on in just about every country in the West to one degree or another, it is tailor made for sheep and their subsequent fleecing. |
Hans Zwaardhandler
Borealis Mining Concern IMPERIAL LEGI0N
6
|
Posted - 2012.02.08 02:01:00 -
[43] - Quote
I can agree on the first three paragraphs, and on the fourth I am a little skeptical. But it's your own beliefs and I respect that. |
Telegram Sam
The Drones Club
230
|
Posted - 2012.02.08 18:43:00 -
[44] - Quote
I thought Fox News was entertainment/fiction? Just designed to do outrageous things and whip up controversy, thereby drawing viewers and selling commercials. Commercials by giant corporations very interested in keeping things going their way (a.k.a. the right wing uncontrolled capitalism way). I could swear, if you look closely at the closing credits, you'll see "For Entertainment Purposes Only...."
|
RiskyFrisky
The Hebrew In Me
12
|
Posted - 2012.02.08 20:38:00 -
[45] - Quote
SpaceSquirrels wrote:^ Shadowsword wrote:I remember a particular Fox News documentary that left me litteraly speechless. The commentator took a few theme words from obama's speechs, like for example Security, and with only the first letter of each word, then formed the word SOCIALIST, and started to depict that as Obama's hidden agenda.
I was stunned by the implicit insult toward the average US resident this little word manipulation represented. Just what kind of fool would believe this crap? ^ I noticed a funny thing recently. Discussing news sources in a media class. Many uber liberal types now like to say they watch/read al jezeera. Because it's so progressive and worldly. However every single person from the middle east in every class I've had that brings this issue up loathes that station because often times it's censored or partially run by the government. I suppose the grass is always greener. Really people need to diversify their news sources. It's not the job of the news to agree with you or give you an opinion. Should just state the facts, and you have to use your own brain to interpret it.
To the above quote: People think it's Obama turning the U.S. into a socialist country? Pfft. That's happening by itself, with or without him. It's unstoppable.
And I only read Reuters and Al J Jazeera. They always have the same exact ****, though different opinions. Get to choose which one I like more(Al Jazeera is better for gruesome stuff) |
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
1209
|
Posted - 2012.02.09 06:19:00 -
[46] - Quote
You see while everybody is squabbling over left versus right, the election process that sooooo many people say that sooo many soldiers gave their life for is corrupted as hell.
This stuff ends in death camps and gulags. Adult-sized-child comic book la la land is coming to an end.
|
Fuee
Cupcake Catapults
2
|
Posted - 2012.02.09 10:04:00 -
[47] - Quote
Bootleg Jack wrote:Is a Republican Super Pac
Send a message, use parental control, block FOX!
Such tired angst.
|
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
1210
|
Posted - 2012.02.09 15:47:00 -
[48] - Quote
Adunh Slavy wrote:Hans Zwaardhandler wrote:Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:
Remember what happened last time someone got a nation to get behind National Socialism?
No need to remember, the refresher is happening right now.
So... CNN and Fox are one and the same? Their ideology seems quite a bit different, as Fox leans more to the conservative right and CNN (to me) more to the liberal/central side of things. Stop looking at the world with the dualist lens of left and right. There are other perspectives; from another perspective, CCN and FOX look very much the same. Consider the perspective of Authoritarianism and Collectivism versus Individualism and Libertarianism. Using that perspective, both CCN and FOX promote the idea that the State is good. Though one promotes a more socialist view, and one is more nationalistic, both lead to the same authoritarian result. The dualist left-right view is just what the powerful want the little sheep to use in their evaluations of the world, to keep people fighting and squabbling over trivial wedge issues while they, the powered interests do what they want, consuming your rights and your wealth. This left-right charade goes on in just about every country in the West to one degree or another, it is tailor made for sheep and their subsequent fleecing.
Two wings on the same bird of prey.
(oh look, Freedom Watch is on FOX - but it took some fighting to keep FOX from dropping that show or shuffling it off somewhere to die) |
Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
314
|
Posted - 2012.02.09 17:06:00 -
[49] - Quote
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote: (oh look, Freedom Watch is on FOX - but it took some fighting to keep FOX from dropping that show or shuffling it off somewhere to die)
LOL yeah, The Judge, Stossel and even Cavuto, to a lesser degree, are not the typical fox BS artist. |
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
1212
|
Posted - 2012.02.10 01:44:00 -
[50] - Quote
Adunh Slavy wrote:Herzog Wolfhammer wrote: (oh look, Freedom Watch is on FOX - but it took some fighting to keep FOX from dropping that show or shuffling it off somewhere to die)
LOL yeah, The Judge, Stossel and even Cavuto, to a lesser degree, are not the typical fox BS artist.
Woops - we'll have no talk of liberty and all that crap in modern Amerika shall we?
Looks like the last truly popular show on FOX was CANCELLED today and guess what show it was?
(hint: the one everybody liked )
|
|
Xenuria
Marcabian 5th Invasion Fleet
275
|
Posted - 2012.02.11 00:59:00 -
[51] - Quote
Dear OP True Republicans do Not play eve online. If they ever tried to they would just say it was boring and give up. Xenuria for CSM |
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
337
|
Posted - 2012.02.12 08:16:00 -
[52] - Quote
FOX news is real. I wish I could braodcast it from my retriever while ice mining for the 20 mackinaws to listen to it. Signature removed, CCP Phantom |
Bootleg Jack
Potters Field
16
|
Posted - 2012.02.13 15:09:00 -
[53] - Quote
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:Two kinds of media, two kinds of zombies.
CNN: zombies who like the welfare state. FOX: zombies who like the warfare state.
CNN: Socialism. FOX: Nationalism.
Remember what happened last time someone got a nation to get behind National Socialism?
No need to remember, the refresher is happening right now.
lol, one of the gullible ones.
Do you really think McCarthy era threats of socialism scare people?
Get some new material |
Riedle
Wayne's TV and Appliances
69
|
Posted - 2012.02.13 15:27:00 -
[54] - Quote
I like Fox News. Nothing wrong with it. They have opinion shows and they always present both sides of the story. They will have panelists from the left and the right.
The biggest problem with Fox news is the morons on the left who are seemingly incapable of differentiating between hard news and commentary. lol.
Why? Because they are used to the old guard media presenting leftward opinion as hard news.
Edit: To the OP:
Typical leftist GÇô wanting to control what others do. HereGÇÖs a hint GÇô if you donGÇÖt like it, turn the channel. |
2bhammered
Perkone Caldari State
65
|
Posted - 2012.02.13 15:32:00 -
[55] - Quote
Riedle wrote:I like Fox News. Nothing wrong with it. They have opinion shows and they always present both sides of the story. They will have panelists from the left and the right.
The biggest problem with Fox news is the morons on the left who are seemingly incapble of figuring out the difference between hard news and commentary. lol.
Why? Because they are used to the old guard media presenting leftward opinion as hard news.
sorry but, really? You really believe what you just said??
(to make it clear, I feel same way about networks like ABC and MSNBC, CNN, BBC etc.) |
Bootleg Jack
Potters Field
16
|
Posted - 2012.02.13 15:39:00 -
[56] - Quote
On FOX radio in South Dakota they convinced the listeners that if Obama Care happened there would be a Fed Inspector in every doctors office.
People really belive that ****, that is why we need to put FOX on parental control, to protect the gullible and the naive. |
Riedle
Wayne's TV and Appliances
69
|
Posted - 2012.02.13 15:39:00 -
[57] - Quote
Quote: sorry but, really? You really believe what you just said?? (to make it clear, I feel same way about networks like ABC and MSNBC, CNN, BBC etc.)
Yes, really. I know it's not popular with the "in crowd" these days, but some times I like tuning into opinion pieces about politics and one of the stops on my dial is fox news.
I know, I know - you and others will call or infer that I am a hick/redneck/ obviously stupid / not right in the head etc etc but thatGÇÖs ok.
I donGÇÖt need to be in the GÇÿin crowdGÇÖ and if my opinion on wanting to watch opinion shows on fox news featuring great opinion people like Charles Krauthammer then I couldnGÇÖt really care less so have at it.
|
Riedle
Wayne's TV and Appliances
69
|
Posted - 2012.02.13 15:41:00 -
[58] - Quote
Bootleg Jack wrote:On FOX radio in South Dakota they convinced the listeners that if Obama Care happened there would be a Fed Inspector in every doctors office.
People really belive that ****, that is why we need to put FOX on parental control, to protect the gullible and the naive.
You sure seem to know a lot about Fox News for someone who doesn't watch it.
lol |
2bhammered
Perkone Caldari State
66
|
Posted - 2012.02.13 15:47:00 -
[59] - Quote
Riedle wrote:Quote: sorry but, really? You really believe what you just said?? (to make it clear, I feel same way about networks like ABC and MSNBC, CNN, BBC etc.) Yes, really. I know it's not popular with the "in crowd" these days, but some times I like tuning into opinion pieces about politics and one of the stops on my dial is fox news. I know, I know - you and others will call or infer that I am a hick/redneck/ obviously stupid / not right in the head etc etc but thatGÇÖs ok. I donGÇÖt need to be in the GÇÿin crowdGÇÖ and if my opinion on wanting to watch opinion shows on fox news featuring great opinion people like Charles Krauthammer then I couldnGÇÖt really care less so have at it.
No I wont call you a hick or redneck. I would call it being uninformed and I strongly believe it is a mistake to get their news from those big networks, not just FOX NEWS. Same goes for the big papers and other media. Of course best solution is to always read summary of the news then get the spin from both left right and middle of the political spectrum to make a well informed opinion.
PS: I even watch it sometimes, I just make sure to always watch with a skeptical mind and never take their word for it. |
Bootleg Jack
Potters Field
16
|
Posted - 2012.02.13 15:50:00 -
[60] - Quote
Riedle wrote:Bootleg Jack wrote:On FOX radio in South Dakota they convinced the listeners that if Obama Care happened there would be a Fed Inspector in every doctors office.
People really belive that ****, that is why we need to put FOX on parental control, to protect the gullible and the naive. You sure seem to know a lot about Fox News for someone who doesn't watch it. lol
I unfortunatly have a family member who does. There needs to be a 12 step program for news junkies |
|
Riedle
Wayne's TV and Appliances
69
|
Posted - 2012.02.13 15:57:00 -
[61] - Quote
2bhammered wrote:Riedle wrote:Quote: sorry but, really? You really believe what you just said?? (to make it clear, I feel same way about networks like ABC and MSNBC, CNN, BBC etc.) Yes, really. I know it's not popular with the "in crowd" these days, but some times I like tuning into opinion pieces about politics and one of the stops on my dial is fox news. I know, I know - you and others will call or infer that I am a hick/redneck/ obviously stupid / not right in the head etc etc but thatGÇÖs ok. I donGÇÖt need to be in the GÇÿin crowdGÇÖ and if my opinion on wanting to watch opinion shows on fox news featuring great opinion people like Charles Krauthammer then I couldnGÇÖt really care less so have at it. No I wont call you a hick or redneck. I would call it being uninformed and I strongly believe it is a mistake to get their news from those big networks, not just FOX NEWS. Same goes for the big papers and other media. Of course best solution is to always read summary of the news then get the spin from both left right and middle of the political spectrum to make a well informed opinion. PS: I even watch it sometimes, I just make sure to always watch with a skeptical mind and never take their word for it.
So I should take your word for it instead? lol
You are the one parroting the tired, lame line that Fox News is LOL etc etc..
Well a couple of things: Newsflash - Everything is biased. All media, all newswires etc etc. bias is inescapable to the human condition.
Now Agenda, that is something we can talk about.
However, the very fact that I am unafraid to speak my mind about how I don't mind fox news in a thread about people who like to feel superior to others by demeaning a news and opinion outlet that they have deemed inferior should tell you all you need to know about how well informed and unafraid to counter the tide of herd thinking.
So maybe I am not the one who is in need of 're-education' comrade? Perhaps if you and others were really concerned about independant thinking you would be on the OP and others for saying very openly that some opinion/news should be censored. Someone truly interested in skepticism would be able to spot the dangerous thinking in people purporting to be looking out for the best interests of others. It's always the one's who act and feel superior to others that think they know best and that is ALWAYS the path to tyranny - no matter if it is on the left or the right.
Something worth thinking about anyways. |
Riedle
Wayne's TV and Appliances
69
|
Posted - 2012.02.13 15:58:00 -
[62] - Quote
Bootleg Jack wrote:Riedle wrote:Bootleg Jack wrote:On FOX radio in South Dakota they convinced the listeners that if Obama Care happened there would be a Fed Inspector in every doctors office.
People really belive that ****, that is why we need to put FOX on parental control, to protect the gullible and the naive. You sure seem to know a lot about Fox News for someone who doesn't watch it. lol I unfortunatly have a family member who does. There needs to be a 12 step program for news junkies
I see.. So you are forced to watch it?
let me guess, you are a young adult living at home and dear old Dad likes to watch?
Lol GÇô I get that right? |
baltec1
595
|
Posted - 2012.02.13 16:00:00 -
[63] - Quote
2bhammered wrote: sorry but, really? You really believe what you just said?? (to make it clear, I feel same way about networks like ABC and MSNBC, CNN, BBC etc.)
BBC is most likely the most trustworthy news on the planet.
American media is like the newspapers over here. Opinionated, full of lies and never let you see all the facts. American media also suffers from not telling you about the world. ABC world news has one or two stories from outside the US, one night they didnt have anything at all! |
Riedle
Wayne's TV and Appliances
69
|
Posted - 2012.02.13 16:03:00 -
[64] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:2bhammered wrote: sorry but, really? You really believe what you just said?? (to make it clear, I feel same way about networks like ABC and MSNBC, CNN, BBC etc.) BBC is most likely the most trustworthy news on the planet. American media is like the newspapers over here. Opinionated, full of lies and never let you see all the facts. American media also suffers from not telling you about the world. ABC world news has one or two stories from outside the US, one night they didnt have anything at all!
I find it odd that a person from the UK is counting how many news stories a news organization from another country is doing about international news.
Kind of a weird hang-up wouldnGÇÖt you agree?
|
baltec1
595
|
Posted - 2012.02.13 16:15:00 -
[65] - Quote
Riedle wrote:
I find it odd that a person from the UK is counting how many news stories a news organization from another country is doing about international news.
Kind of a weird hang-up wouldnGÇÖt you agree?
Used the have BBC news 24 running in the reception. At 00:30 they would play ABC world news to "get the view of the Americans". Given that it was more interesting to listen to that rather than the wering of the CCTV screen I would listen in. Would have thought the world news would have news about the world outside of the US but I guess not |
2bhammered
Perkone Caldari State
66
|
Posted - 2012.02.13 16:18:00 -
[66] - Quote
Riedle wrote:2bhammered wrote:Riedle wrote:Quote: sorry but, really? You really believe what you just said?? (to make it clear, I feel same way about networks like ABC and MSNBC, CNN, BBC etc.) Yes, really. I know it's not popular with the "in crowd" these days, but some times I like tuning into opinion pieces about politics and one of the stops on my dial is fox news. I know, I know - you and others will call or infer that I am a hick/redneck/ obviously stupid / not right in the head etc etc but thatGÇÖs ok. I donGÇÖt need to be in the GÇÿin crowdGÇÖ and if my opinion on wanting to watch opinion shows on fox news featuring great opinion people like Charles Krauthammer then I couldnGÇÖt really care less so have at it. No I wont call you a hick or redneck. I would call it being uninformed and I strongly believe it is a mistake to get their news from those big networks, not just FOX NEWS. Same goes for the big papers and other media. Of course best solution is to always read summary of the news then get the spin from both left right and middle of the political spectrum to make a well informed opinion. PS: I even watch it sometimes, I just make sure to always watch with a skeptical mind and never take their word for it. So I should take your word for it instead? lol You are the one parroting the tired, lame line that Fox News is LOL etc etc.. Well a couple of things: Newsflash - Everything is biased. All media, all newswires etc etc. bias is inescapable to the human condition. Now Agenda, that is something we can talk about. However, the very fact that I am unafraid to speak my mind about how I don't mind fox news in a thread about people who like to feel superior to others by demeaning a news and opinion outlet that they have deemed inferior should tell you all you need to know about how well informed and unafraid to counter the tide of herd thinking. So maybe I am not the one who is in need of 're-education' comrade? Perhaps if you and others were really concerned about independant thinking you would be on the OP and others for saying very openly that some opinion/news should be censored. Someone truly interested in skepticism would be able to spot the dangerous thinking in people purporting to be looking out for the best interests of others. It's always the one's who act and feel superior to others that think they know best and that is ALWAYS the path to tyranny - no matter if it is on the left or the right. Something worth thinking about anyways.
Are you trying to be a smart ***?
Fact is all major news networks, fox news several times, have been caught for even fabricating news or purposefully changing and spinning its meaning.
So what I basically say is trust no one and you parrot by asking why you should trust me? If you understood what I said you would not need to question my credibility now would you?
I am a skeptic, but Fox News and Glen beck people breed cynicism and they have an agenda which is obvious just as MSNBC has.
Having Fox News as only source for politics and world events is bad, plain and simple, even for something as easy as reporting a bulletin. |
2bhammered
Perkone Caldari State
66
|
Posted - 2012.02.13 16:47:00 -
[67] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:2bhammered wrote: sorry but, really? You really believe what you just said?? (to make it clear, I feel same way about networks like ABC and MSNBC, CNN, BBC etc.) BBC is most likely the most trustworthy news on the planet. American media is like the newspapers over here. Opinionated, full of lies and never let you see all the facts. American media also suffers from not telling you about the world. ABC world news has one or two stories from outside the US, one night they didnt have anything at all!
I have seen some terrible bias by BBC over the years. I am sure if you google you can find a lot of stuff, not as bad as Fox News but not best by any means, perhaps, but not great and I am also skeptical watching their news.
ABC news is pretty damn bad from what I have seen I have read some good papers, forgot their names though, no, not the new york times |
Riedle
Wayne's TV and Appliances
69
|
Posted - 2012.02.13 19:00:00 -
[68] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Riedle wrote:
I find it odd that a person from the UK is counting how many news stories a news organization from another country is doing about international news.
Kind of a weird hang-up wouldnGÇÖt you agree?
Used the have BBC news 24 running in the reception. At 00:30 they would play ABC world news to "get the view of the Americans". Given that it was more interesting to listen to that rather than the wering of the CCTV screen I would listen in. Would have thought the world news would have news about the world outside of the US but I guess not
Ok, thatGÇÖs a good explanation that makes it less weird but you must admit, it is a pretty limited sample size
:) |
Riedle
Wayne's TV and Appliances
69
|
Posted - 2012.02.13 19:05:00 -
[69] - Quote
Quote:Fact is all major news networks, fox news several times, have been caught for even fabricating news or purposefully changing and spinning its meaning.
And this surprises you? That is the shocking to me. "News organization makes mistake - more at 11!" lol
"News organization sipjns story - more at 11!" hahaha
Quote:So what I basically say is trust no one and you parrot by asking why you should trust me? If you understood what I said you would not need to question my credibility now would you?
You are telling me to not trust anyone - when exactly did I say I trust anyone? lol. Stop inferring who I am or what viewpoints I have by the mere fact I am not ashamed of watching fox news and then maybe you will get it.
Quote:I am a skeptic, but Fox News and Glen beck people breed cynicism and they have an agenda which is obvious just as MSNBC has .
fascinating. Look, you are free to like or not like whatever you want to watch. I couldn't care less to be honest. My point is why do you people who hate fox news so much hate the fact that it is a very popular medium?
Quote:Having Fox News as only source for politics and world events is bad, plain and simple, even for something as easy as reporting a bulletin.
Well thanks for clearing that non-existent problem up. lol |
baltec1
597
|
Posted - 2012.02.13 21:03:00 -
[70] - Quote
Riedle wrote:
Ok, thatGÇÖs a good explanation that makes it less weird but you must admit, it is a pretty limited sample size
:)
Granted its only ABC I have seen (aside from some angry guy on FOX who shouts at his guests and boots them off his show if they start winning). Still I know a good few Americans and they all agree the US news has very little news from outside of their borders.
Guess its different over here in the UK what with the BBC being founded in the time of Empire. |
|
Selinate
650
|
Posted - 2012.02.14 01:56:00 -
[71] - Quote
I typically watch MSNBC or *sometimes* CNN. I have a brain, so I know when the liberal crap is coming and when to stop listening, but aside from the occasional blatant support for democrats regardless of the issue, they at least have some good information and their show hosts make some good points.
I've watched FOX a few times, but I've always had to turn it off because I just end up not listening to it at all for the same reason as above except for conservative crap. No point in watching a network like that. They're much worse in their political bullshitting than any other network I've watched.... |
Surfin's PlunderBunny
mUfFiN fAcToRy
960
|
Posted - 2012.02.14 02:07:00 -
[72] - Quote
I get my news from The Daily Show and The Colbert Report |
Bootleg Jack
Potters Field
16
|
Posted - 2012.02.14 04:23:00 -
[73] - Quote
Riedle wrote:Bootleg Jack wrote:Riedle wrote:Bootleg Jack wrote:On FOX radio in South Dakota they convinced the listeners that if Obama Care happened there would be a Fed Inspector in every doctors office.
People really belive that ****, that is why we need to put FOX on parental control, to protect the gullible and the naive. You sure seem to know a lot about Fox News for someone who doesn't watch it. lol I unfortunatly have a family member who does. There needs to be a 12 step program for news junkies I see.. So you are forced to watch it? let me guess, you are a young adult living at home and dear old Dad likes to watch? Lol GÇô I get that right?
No, you didn't.
|
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
1231
|
Posted - 2012.02.14 20:09:00 -
[74] - Quote
The last thing said on the last good show on FOX
|
baltec1
608
|
Posted - 2012.02.14 20:27:00 -
[75] - Quote
Thats a good show |
THE L0CK
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
3
|
Posted - 2012.02.14 21:07:00 -
[76] - Quote
Look at the lot of you lambs. Got us a bucket'o'hipsters here all playing a game of grab ass with each other while mimicking each others rehashed phrases. It's pretty damn apparent that non of you know a good news network when you see one. I'm glad that Fox has the team that they do and they have been dead on with Nobama since before he took office. The man has lied to us time and time again and Fox has caught it and exposed it every. single. time. Do you smell what the Lock's cooking? |
baltec1
608
|
Posted - 2012.02.14 21:12:00 -
[77] - Quote
THE L0CK wrote:Look at the lot of you lambs. Got us a bucket'o'hipsters here all playing a game of grab ass with each other while mimicking each others rehashed phrases. It's pretty damn apparent that non of you know a good news network when you see one. I'm glad that Fox has the team that they do and they have been dead on with Nobama since before he took office. The man has lied to us time and time again and Fox has caught it and exposed it every. single. time.
Im guessing they left out the fact he has been blocked by republitards at every turn... |
Bootleg Jack
Potters Field
16
|
Posted - 2012.02.15 01:18:00 -
[78] - Quote
THE L0CK wrote:Look at the lot of you lambs. Got us a bucket'o'hipsters here all playing a game of grab ass with each other while mimicking each others rehashed phrases. It's pretty damn apparent that non of you know a good news network when you see one. I'm glad that Fox has the team that they do and they have been dead on with Nobama since before he took office. The man has lied to us time and time again and Fox has caught it and exposed it every. single. time.
lol, another one who actually believes in FOX |
Slade Trillgon
T.R.I.A.D
191
|
Posted - 2012.02.15 18:04:00 -
[79] - Quote
stoicfaux wrote:Jada Maroo wrote:Merin Ryskin wrote: You know, I would love to see a REAL marxist/socialist/whatever president, not a spineless center-right empty suit like Obama. Not because I actually like marxism, but because the tears from people like you would be so beautiful.
If it's tears you like, you're in luck! Marxism is the most efficient system of distributing human misery ever created. Two problems with that statement: a) Marxism doesn't exist in the real world. Name one country where the working class has all the power. b) Capitalism is much more efficient. Look at the British Empire and colonialism. Or the US's history with banana republics. Never underestimate the efficiency of capitalism. Raw capitalism only appears friendly because a capitalistic society needs to keep its own citizens happy. What you don't see is the abuse going on off-shore. Meaning, Wal-Mart prices are great for US citizens if you ignore where the products are made and the working conditions in those countries.
Thank you for that Stoicfaux. I was about to bring up the concept of Banana Republics, but decided that it would fly over the heads of too many people.
But brace yourself, because it is ineveitable that it will be said that the US brought prosperity to the people of those 'nations'
Riedle wrote:I like Fox News. Nothing wrong with it. They have opinion shows and they always present both sides of the story. They will have panelists from the left and the right.
The biggest problem with Fox news is the morons on the left who are seemingly incapable of differentiating between hard news and commentary. lol.
Why? Because they are used to the old guard media presenting leftward opinion as hard news.
Edit: To the OP:
Typical leftist GÇô wanting to control what others do. HereGÇÖs a hint GÇô if you donGÇÖt like it, turn the channel.
The highlighted part is just righteous Reidle, considering that the wedge issues that the 'two parties' use to manipulate the 'two sides' of the voting public revolve around the Right and the Left telling people what they can and can not do and what they should and should not do. One would be a fool to think the 'Righ't truly wants to be fiscally conservative and non-invasive
Get over yourself. Both sides want to control you; you just happen to be more in favor of the things the 'Right' want to control.
Slade
|
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
1236
|
Posted - 2012.02.15 18:27:00 -
[80] - Quote
It's believed that episodes like this didn't help stay on FOX
But ANY talk of false flag terrorism gets you in trouble of sorts
|
|
Riedle
Wayne's TV and Appliances
69
|
Posted - 2012.02.15 20:36:00 -
[81] - Quote
Bootleg Jack wrote:THE L0CK wrote:Look at the lot of you lambs. Got us a bucket'o'hipsters here all playing a game of grab ass with each other while mimicking each others rehashed phrases. It's pretty damn apparent that non of you know a good news network when you see one. I'm glad that Fox has the team that they do and they have been dead on with Nobama since before he took office. The man has lied to us time and time again and Fox has caught it and exposed it every. single. time. lol, another one who actually believes in FOX
You think Fox News is like Santa Claus? |
Riedle
Wayne's TV and Appliances
69
|
Posted - 2012.02.15 20:45:00 -
[82] - Quote
Slade Trillgon wrote:stoicfaux wrote:Jada Maroo wrote:Merin Ryskin wrote: You know, I would love to see a REAL marxist/socialist/whatever president, not a spineless center-right empty suit like Obama. Not because I actually like marxism, but because the tears from people like you would be so beautiful.
If it's tears you like, you're in luck! Marxism is the most efficient system of distributing human misery ever created. Two problems with that statement: a) Marxism doesn't exist in the real world. Name one country where the working class has all the power. b) Capitalism is much more efficient. Look at the British Empire and colonialism. Or the US's history with banana republics. Never underestimate the efficiency of capitalism. Raw capitalism only appears friendly because a capitalistic society needs to keep its own citizens happy. What you don't see is the abuse going on off-shore. Meaning, Wal-Mart prices are great for US citizens if you ignore where the products are made and the working conditions in those countries. Thank you for that Stoicfaux. I was about to bring up the concept of Banana Republics, but decided that it would fly over the heads of too many people. But brace yourself, because it is ineveitable that it will be said that the US brought prosperity to the people of those 'nations' Riedle wrote:I like Fox News. Nothing wrong with it. They have opinion shows and they always present both sides of the story. They will have panelists from the left and the right.
The biggest problem with Fox news is the morons on the left who are seemingly incapable of differentiating between hard news and commentary. lol.
Why? Because they are used to the old guard media presenting leftward opinion as hard news.
Edit: To the OP:
Typical leftist GÇô wanting to control what others do. HereGÇÖs a hint GÇô if you donGÇÖt like it, turn the channel. The highlighted part is just righteous Reidle, considering that the wedge issues that the 'two parties' use to manipulate the 'two sides' of the voting public revolve around the Right and the Left telling people what they can and can not do and what they should and should not do. One would be a fool to think the 'Righ't truly wants to be fiscally conservative and non-invasive Get over yourself. Both sides want to control you; you just happen to be more in favor of the things the 'Right' want to control. Slade
Get over myself? In what way? I never said that anything should be banned nor did I say that the 'right' doesn't infringe on freedoms.
What I did say was that the OP was implying a restriction because it was something that he did not agree with. He was behaving like a typical leftist in that, by in large, do not like dissenting opinions and will demonize people who disagree with them. It becomes a pile on. Leftists despise fox news because the narrative doesnGÇÖt fit with their world view. MSNBC and CBC here in Canada typically do not fit my world view but it doesnGÇÖt even cross my mind to have access to them restricted.
So if you would care to debate on that then we can but I will not be getting over myself anytime soon, sorry. I quite like myself just the way I am GÇô thanks.
|
baltec1
617
|
Posted - 2012.02.15 20:57:00 -
[83] - Quote
Riedle wrote:
You think Fox News is like Santa Claus?
Theres about as much truth in both. |
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
3132
|
Posted - 2012.02.15 21:57:00 -
[84] - Quote
I came here expecting news about fox and left disapointed.
Either way there plenty of documents showing an active political campaign to destroy the network and who would think you acutally NEED money to shut up a news station.
As Huxly feared the most, the truth would be buried in obscurity.
|
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
39
|
Posted - 2012.02.15 22:36:00 -
[85] - Quote
Riedle wrote: Leftists despise fox news because the narrative doesnGÇÖt fit with their world view.
No, leftists despise fox news because they outright lie while pretending to be a source of "news". Since many people don't have the time or interest to double-check every single claim they hear on the news, the end result is fox gets to use any dishonest strategy they like to promote a conservative agenda* and gain way more influence than they should legitimately have. Like it or not, freedom of speech was never intended to cover willful fraud and deception, and the only reason fox "news" is still around is because our entire government would never dare to regulate a profitable corporation that gives frequent campaign donations.
Now, if fox news changed to offer news with an honest conservative viewpoint, we'd hate them a lot less. Of course they'd also be a lot less popular...
*Not that the owners of fox news actually care about the conservative agenda, they've just figured out that selling conservative bull**** to gullible morons is a profitable business strategy.
|
Riedle
Wayne's TV and Appliances
69
|
Posted - 2012.02.16 00:30:00 -
[86] - Quote
Merin Ryskin wrote:Riedle wrote: Leftists despise fox news because the narrative doesnGÇÖt fit with their world view. No, leftists despise fox news because they outright lie while pretending to be a source of "news". Since many people don't have the time or interest to double-check every single claim they hear on the news, the end result is fox gets to use any dishonest strategy they like to promote a conservative agenda* and gain way more influence than they should legitimately have. Like it or not, freedom of speech was never intended to cover willful fraud and deception, and the only reason fox "news" is still around is because our entire government would never dare to regulate a profitable corporation that gives frequent campaign donations. Now, if fox news changed to offer news with an honest conservative viewpoint, we'd hate them a lot less. Of course they'd also be a lot less popular... *Not that the owners of fox news actually care about the conservative agenda, they've just figured out that selling conservative bull**** to gullible morons is a profitable business strategy.
got it.
1) fox news peddles lies but no one knows this because no one can be bother to check but you are pretty sure it's correct anyways.lol
2) They cannot be shut up as they are protected under freedom of speach but you think they are perverting the intent of freedom of speach and freedom of speach should be protected so long as you agree with what they are saying... haha You be trollin right? gotta be
3) The government is afraid to shut them up in anycase because they give a ton of money to politcal campaigns.. LOL
4) People who watch fox news are gullible morons (piece du resistance)
There isn't too much that you know nothing about is there?
lols
PS: Fox news has a larger liberal audience than either CNN or MSNBC - but you know, I can see that reality and you are not on speaking terms so I will leave it be.
toodles |
Riedle
Wayne's TV and Appliances
69
|
Posted - 2012.02.16 00:33:00 -
[87] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Riedle wrote:
You think Fox News is like Santa Claus?
Theres about as much truth in both.
I thougnt you only got ABC news over there or are you just parroting the same line people have told you?
thought so. |
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
39
|
Posted - 2012.02.16 00:39:00 -
[88] - Quote
Riedle wrote:1) fox news peddles lies but no one knows this because no one can be bother to check but you are pretty sure it's correct anyways.lol
Please learn to read. I said that MANY people do not check their facts independently, not that I refuse to. It's unfortunate, but there are a lot of people who trust anything published in the newspaper/stated on tv/etc and don't verify controversial claims with independent sources. Therefore:
1) Fox news has more influence than they would in an ideal world where their entire audience would immediately notice any dishonesty.
and
2) Like all other news sources, fox news needs to be held to a much higher standard than the average person. Unfortunately, this does not happen.
Quote:2) They cannot be shut up as they are protected under freedom of speach but you think they are perverting the intent of freedom of speach and freedom of speach should be protected so long as you agree with what they are saying... haha You be trollin right? gotta be
Once again, please learn to read.
I said that freedom of speech does not cover deliberate fraud and deception. You can't claim "freedom of speech" when someone sues you for a fraudulent contract, false advertising, etc.
Please do not strawman this into the very different claim, which I have never made, that freedom of speech only covers things that I agree with. There is plenty of room for legitimate disagreement, so long as it is honest disagreement.
Quote:3) The government is afraid to shut them up in anycase because they give a ton of money to politcal campaigns.. LOL
So, what fantasy world do you live in where the US government does NOT give favorable treatment to large corporations in exchange for bribery in all but name?
Quote:4) People who watch fox news are gullible morons (piece du resistance)
No, people who believe in the conservative agenda are gullible morons. Fox news has just figured out that they're a very profitable market to sell to. |
Riedle
Wayne's TV and Appliances
69
|
Posted - 2012.02.16 00:53:00 -
[89] - Quote
Quote:Please learn to read. I said that MANY people do not check their facts independently, not that I refuse to. It's unfortunate, but there are a lot of people who trust anything published in the newspaper/stated on tv/etc and don't verify controversial claims with independent sources. Therefore:
1) Fox news has more influence than they would in an ideal world where their entire audience would immediately notice any dishonesty.
and
2) Like all other news sources, fox news needs to be held to a much higher standard than the average person. Unfortunately, this does not happen.
Oh, I see. I was unaware where they had lost their license to broadcast? You do know that they are members in good standing with all the relevant jouralistic and new reporting organizations do you not?
Quote:Once again, please learn to read.
I said that freedom of speech does not cover deliberate fraud and deception. You can't claim "freedom of speech" when someone sues you for a fraudulent contract, false advertising, etc.
Please do not strawman this into the very different claim, which I have never made, that freedom of speech only covers things that I agree with. There is plenty of room for legitimate disagreement, so long as it is honest disagreement.
Freedom of speech indeed does not protect fox from broadcasting libelous and malicious content - correct! Funny, despite this, they are still on. Why do you suppose that it is so in the most litigious society on earth? lol
Quote:So, what fantasy world do you live in where the US government does NOT give favorable treatment to large corporations in exchange for bribery in all but name?
Ummmm.. You DO know Obama is a democrat right? You realize conservative = republican most of the time? lol
Quote:No, people who believe in the conservative agenda are gullible morons. Fox news has just figured out that they're a very profitable market to sell to.
Ahhh.. I see! So it's not just fox news watchers who are the morons but just anyone who doesn't see things your way politically. Got it! Thanks! |
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
39
|
Posted - 2012.02.16 01:00:00 -
[90] - Quote
Riedle wrote:Oh, I see. I was unaware where they had lost their license to broadcast? You do know that they are members in good standing with all the relevant jouralistic and new reporting organizations do you not?
I said they SHOULD be regulated, not that they are. Please learn to read.
Quote:Freedom of speech indeed does not protect fox from broadcasting libelous and malicious content - correct! Funny, despite this, they are still on. Why do you suppose that it is so in the most litigious society on earth? lol
Because they haven't yet crossed the line into open libel and malicious content? No doubt they have plenty of lawyers advising them on exactly what they can legally broadcast without getting into trouble.
However, I'm talking about what is ethically justified, not what is permitted under a legal system which is clearly in favor of large corporations. In case you hadn't noticed, legalism is a pretty terrible ethical system.
Quote:Ummmm.. You DO know Obama is a democrat right? You realize conservative = republican most of the time?
Hint for the clueless: the president of the US has very little power over this subject.
Also, if you think that the democrats are anti-conservative enough to actually go against corporate interests in any meaningful way, then you clearly haven't been paying any attention to US politics. Remember the part where the current democrat leadership is made up of center-right career politicians who value compromise above all else?
Quote:Ahhh.. I see! So it's not just fox news watchers who are the morons but just anyone who doesn't see things your way politically. Got it! Thanks!
I'm sorry to give you this unpleasant news, but large parts of the conservative agenda require you to be a complete ****ing idiot to accept them. There are a lot of intelligent people who I don't agree with, but people who believe things like "global warming is a myth" and "abortion is murder" are not included in that group. |
|
Riedle
Wayne's TV and Appliances
69
|
Posted - 2012.02.16 02:17:00 -
[91] - Quote
Quote:I said they SHOULD be regulated, not that they are. Please learn to read.
umm.. but they are regulated? by law and by the various boards they are members of being a booadcaster.
Quote:Because they haven't yet crossed the line into open libel and malicious content? No doubt they have plenty of lawyers advising them on exactly what they can legally broadcast without getting into trouble.
Ok, let's take that as true. So what is your issue? You are admitting that they have done nothing to either breach regulations that broadcasters are subject to nor federal laws that they are subject to. Seems like you are going donw a rather large rabbit hole here when "WAAHHH, I HATE FOX NEWS" would be much more concise.
Quote:However, I'm talking about what is ethically justified, not what is permitted under a legal system which is clearly in favor of large corporations. In case you hadn't noticed, legalism is a pretty terrible ethical system .
Not even sure where to start on this one. Boys you sure like to spin a good yarn eh? They have broken no laws but you think that they are rthically unjustified? According to who's ethics exactly? Yours? Laws, in a common law system (such as they have in the USA) are more or less societies ethical system however imperfectly they accomplish that, that's what common law is all about.
Quote:Hint for the clueless: the president of the US has very little power over this subject. Also, if you think that the democrats are anti-conservative enough to actually go against corporate interests in any meaningful way, then you clearly haven't been paying any attention to US politics. Remember the part where the current democrat leadership is made up of center-right career politicians who value compromise above all else?
gotcha, starting to sound like a conspirary. Please regale me with the juicy tidbits.
I see, so the Dems are conservatives too. LOL Are you a comedian? Am I being trolled?
Quote:I'm sorry to give you this unpleasant news, but large parts of the conservative agenda require you to be a complete ****ing idiot to accept them. There are a lot of intelligent people who I don't agree with, but people who believe things like "global warming is a myth" and "abortion is murder" are not included in that group.
I see. Well let's take abortion for an example. What parts of it do you believe that should be allowed? |
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
39
|
Posted - 2012.02.16 02:28:00 -
[92] - Quote
Riedle wrote:umm.. but they are regulated? by law and by the various boards they are members of being a booadcaster.
Fine. Regulated effectively, since you insist on nitpicking.
Quote:Ok, let's take that as true. So what is your issue? You are admitting that they have done nothing to either breach regulations that broadcasters are subject to nor federal laws that they are subject to. Seems like you are going donw a rather large rabbit hole here when "WAAHHH, I HATE FOX NEWS" would be much more concise.
My point is that legalism is a worthless ethical system. What fox news does may be legal under a system that is biased in favor of corporations, but it doesn't make it RIGHT.
Quote:They have broken no laws but you think that they are rthically unjustified? According to who's ethics exactly? Yours? Laws, in a common law system (such as they have in the USA) are more or less societies ethical system however imperfectly they accomplish that, that's what common law is all about.
FFS. Legal =/= ethical.
And if you believe that "common law" means "everything unethical is illegal and punished" and "nobody could possibly want the laws to be changed" you're even dumber than I thought.
Quote:I see, so the Dems are conservatives too. LOL
On the full scale of political beliefs, the democratics are a center-right party. The only reason they appear to be anything else is that there's no far-left equivalent of the tea party (and similar conservative groups) in the US to compare them to, and far too many people in this country have a habit of pretending the rest of the world doesn't exist.
This is why I want to see a legitimate communist party in the US (from a safe distance), so all of the conservative idiots who whine about "liberal democrats" can see what a real far-left government looks like.
Quote:I see. Well let's take abortion for an example. What parts of it do you believe that should be allowed?
What parts of what? Abortion, or discussion about abortion?
If it's the former, then any and all abortion before the blob of cells has a functioning brain and consciousness/ability to feel pain/etc (and if you think this happens at conception, you're a ****ing idiot).
If it's the latter, then I don't have a nice simple dividing line, because that was just one example of part of the conservative agenda that only an ignorant moron can believe in. I know you seem to have limited reading comprehension, but it was not something that is directly related to my objection to fox news.
|
Selinate
653
|
Posted - 2012.02.16 06:05:00 -
[93] - Quote
As a side note, I found this to be funny.
I searched "Fox News comments" in google and the first thing (literally) that came up was this website.
http://foxnewscomments.com/
An entire website devoted to all the absolutely asinine **** that is said in comments by the people who actually watch Fox.
Also, any station that can actually justify giving someone like Glenn Beck (the ACTUAL closest public figure to H!tler that we have had in a good many years), or Sarah Palin (effectively the least intelligent and most self-entitled politician I have ever seen on T.V.) really doesn't even deserve to be watched... |
baltec1
622
|
Posted - 2012.02.16 09:18:00 -
[94] - Quote
Riedle wrote:baltec1 wrote:Riedle wrote:
You think Fox News is like Santa Claus?
Theres about as much truth in both. I thougnt you only got ABC news over there or are you just parroting the same line people have told you? thought so.
We can get fox news over here too. Its horrid. |
Slade Trillgon
T.R.I.A.D
191
|
Posted - 2012.02.16 12:29:00 -
[95] - Quote
Riedle wrote:
So if you would care to debate on that then we can but I will not be getting over myself anytime soon, sorry. I quite like myself just the way I am GÇô thanks.
OP Title [FOX News]
OP
Bootleg Jack wrote:Is a Republican Super Pac
Send a message, use parental control, block FOX!
Your Edit to your first post.
Riedle wrote:
Edit: To the OP:
Typical leftist GÇô wanting to control what others do. HereGÇÖs a hint GÇô if you donGÇÖt like it, turn the channel.
It seems that you believe the OP meant a direct and population level block of FOX news, which is totally not what the text implies. It implies that if parents do not want their children to watch something they do not agree with then they should use the parental controls that their technology provides. That is basically what you say with your edit by saying change the channel. Both are censorship.
It again seems that at the first hint of a left/right debate you come in with right/left comments. So you successfully troll me and my centrist self. So the dance continues.
So what are we debating again? Was it about how your reading comprehension may be cloweded by distaste for a group of people that believe differently from you?
/shudders.
Fake Edit:
And I would not block the channel, but Bill OGÇÖReilly would definitely be censored.
Slade
|
Riedle
Wayne's TV and Appliances
69
|
Posted - 2012.02.16 13:24:00 -
[96] - Quote
Quote:What parts of what? Abortion, or discussion about abortion?
If it's the former, then any and all abortion before the blob of cells has a functioning brain and consciousness/ability to feel pain/etc (and if you think this happens at conception, you're a ****ing idiot).
Well ok, let's take this then. Here in Canada you are allowed to terminate the pregnancy up to the moment of birth. Do you think that should be allowed in the context of your own ethics?
|
Riedle
Wayne's TV and Appliances
69
|
Posted - 2012.02.16 13:27:00 -
[97] - Quote
Quote:It seems that you believe the OP meant a direct and population level block of FOX news, which is totally not what the text implies. It implies that if parents do not want their children to watch something they do not agree with then they should use the parental controls that their technology provides. That is basically what you say with your edit by saying change the channel. Both are censorship.
It again seems that at the first hint of a left/right debate you come in with right/left comments. So you successfully troll me and my centrist self. So the dance continues.
So what are we debating again? Was it about how your reading comprehension may be cloweded by distaste for a group of people that believe differently from you?
/shudders.
Fake Edit:
And I would not block the channel, but Bill OGÇÖReilly would definitely be censored.
Slade
Perhaps I jumped the gun a bit but from my perspective leftist who hate fox news do tend to have a fantasy of not allowing it to broadcast and to me the OP was along those lines by wanting people to block out the channel by using parental control. I have no idea what you are talking about in referring to my edit. Whatever edit I did was immediately after I posted the reply and was probably for a typo.
I consider myself a centrist as well for whatever that's worth |
Bootleg Jack
Potters Field
16
|
Posted - 2012.02.16 15:20:00 -
[98] - Quote
Riedle wrote:Merin Ryskin wrote:Riedle wrote: Leftists despise fox news because the narrative doesnGÇÖt fit with their world view. No, leftists despise fox news because they outright lie while pretending to be a source of "news". Since many people don't have the time or interest to double-check every single claim they hear on the news, the end result is fox gets to use any dishonest strategy they like to promote a conservative agenda* and gain way more influence than they should legitimately have. Like it or not, freedom of speech was never intended to cover willful fraud and deception, and the only reason fox "news" is still around is because our entire government would never dare to regulate a profitable corporation that gives frequent campaign donations. Now, if fox news changed to offer news with an honest conservative viewpoint, we'd hate them a lot less. Of course they'd also be a lot less popular... *Not that the owners of fox news actually care about the conservative agenda, they've just figured out that selling conservative bull**** to gullible morons is a profitable business strategy. got it. 1) fox news peddles lies but no one knows this because no one can be bother to check but you are pretty sure it's correct anyways.lol 2) They cannot be shut up as they are protected under freedom of speach but you think they are perverting the intent of freedom of speach and freedom of speach should be protected so long as you agree with what they are saying... haha You be trollin right? gotta be 3) The government is afraid to shut them up in anycase because they give a ton of money to politcal campaigns.. LOL 4) People who watch fox news are gullible morons (piece du resistance) There isn't too much that you know nothing about is there? lols PS: Fox news has a larger liberal audience than either CNN or MSNBC - but you know, I can see that reality and you are not on speaking terms so I will leave it be. toodles
Did you hear the one about last years Super Bowl?
Announcer 1: FOX is covering the Super Bowl this year... Announcer 2: Which Team? |
Bootleg Jack
Potters Field
16
|
Posted - 2012.02.16 15:24:00 -
[99] - Quote
Riedle wrote:Bootleg Jack wrote:THE L0CK wrote:Look at the lot of you lambs. Got us a bucket'o'hipsters here all playing a game of grab ass with each other while mimicking each others rehashed phrases. It's pretty damn apparent that non of you know a good news network when you see one. I'm glad that Fox has the team that they do and they have been dead on with Nobama since before he took office. The man has lied to us time and time again and Fox has caught it and exposed it every. single. time. lol, another one who actually believes in FOX You think Fox News is like Santa Claus?
ha ha
I'm an American, english is my second language.
"lol, another one who actually believes FOX"
Better? |
Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
315
|
Posted - 2012.02.16 16:41:00 -
[100] - Quote
*eating pop corn, watching sheep fight the manufactured left-right divide while the authoritarians do what they want and the libertarians shout ... *
WAKE THE F UP! |
|
Riedle
Wayne's TV and Appliances
69
|
Posted - 2012.02.16 18:01:00 -
[101] - Quote
Adunh Slavy wrote:*eating pop corn, watching sheep fight the manufactured left-right divide while the authoritarians do what they want and the libertarians shout ... *
WAKE THE F UP!
Libertarians are more to the right than the left. Authoritarianism is almost always left leaning. You have to have a big governement to control people after all. |
Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
315
|
Posted - 2012.02.16 19:18:00 -
[102] - Quote
Riedle wrote:Adunh Slavy wrote:*eating pop corn, watching sheep fight the manufactured left-right divide while the authoritarians do what they want and the libertarians shout ... *
WAKE THE F UP! Libertarians are more to the right than the left. Authoritarianism is almost always left leaning. You have to have a big governement to control people after all.
LOL, way to try and make it a left-right thing, I rest my case. |
Surfin's PlunderBunny
mUfFiN fAcToRy
965
|
Posted - 2012.02.16 19:32:00 -
[103] - Quote
Remember, if you lose either wing your plane is going straight down |
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
41
|
Posted - 2012.02.16 22:08:00 -
[104] - Quote
Riedle wrote:Well ok, let's take this then. Here in Canada you are allowed to terminate the pregnancy up to the moment of birth. Do you think that should be allowed in the context of your own ethics?
No, not that late. I prefer the US (federal) law, where abortion is legal early on (before the blob of cells is anything remotely resembling a "person"), but not late in development unless it is necessary for medical reasons. As long as the dividing line is placed according to scientific knowledge about when a baby gains consciousness/the ability to feel pain/etc, this is the best compromise between protecting both innocent lives and the life of the mother.
Not that it's really all that much of an issue, since a woman who does not want a child is going to get an abortion at the earliest possible opportunity. A "just before birth" abortion is only going to happen in the case of serious medical problems.
Riedle wrote:Libertarians are more to the right than the left. Authoritarianism is almost always left leaning. You have to have a big governement to control people after all.
Err, lol? Right-wing authoritarianism:
*War on terror. Best way to pass lots of laws removing fundamental rights? Declare war on an abstract concept, ensuring that you will always have enemies to justify Doing What Must Be Done. Now you can arrest your own citizens with no warrant or criminal charges (after spying on them without a warrant, of course), throw them in a secret prison without access to a lawyer, and not even bother with that pesky trial thing because they might be proven innocent.
*War on drugs. Warrant-less seizure where the burden of proof is on you to prove your innocence if you want your property back, no-knock raids, massive expansion of police power, harsh mandatory minimum sentences for victimless crimes. But hey, at least we can scare people into re-electing "tough on crime" politicians to solve the problem.
*War on people Jesus hates. Priorities when you have serious economic problems to deal with: define marriage as between one man and one woman, ban abortion, ban "obscene" materials, etc.
At least left-wing authoritarianism usually involves expanding the government to provide benefits for people, instead of just punishing those who "deserve" it with little concern for collateral damage. |
Riedle
Wayne's TV and Appliances
69
|
Posted - 2012.02.16 23:34:00 -
[105] - Quote
Quote:No, not that late. I prefer the US (federal) law, where abortion is legal early on (before the blob of cells is anything remotely resembling a "person"), but not late in development unless it is necessary for medical reasons. As long as the dividing line is placed according to scientific knowledge about when a baby gains consciousness/the ability to feel pain/etc, this is the best compromise between protecting both innocent lives and the life of the mother.
Funny story - that is pretty much my exact views on the issue except I reserve my scorn for those who decry any attempt to put a law on late term abortions for reasons other than medical necessity.
You would be branded a far right wing kook on that issue up here. |
Riedle
Wayne's TV and Appliances
69
|
Posted - 2012.02.16 23:39:00 -
[106] - Quote
Adunh Slavy wrote:Riedle wrote:Adunh Slavy wrote:*eating pop corn, watching sheep fight the manufactured left-right divide while the authoritarians do what they want and the libertarians shout ... *
WAKE THE F UP! Libertarians are more to the right than the left. Authoritarianism is almost always left leaning. You have to have a big governement to control people after all. LOL, way to try and make it a left-right thing, I rest my case.
No, you made no case. |
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
42
|
Posted - 2012.02.16 23:50:00 -
[107] - Quote
Riedle wrote:Funny story - that is pretty much my exact views on the issue except I reserve my scorn for those who decry any attempt to put a law on late term abortions for reasons other than medical necessity.
You would be branded a far right wing kook on that issue up here.
So what is your point in bringing it up then? You clearly aren't one of the conservative "life begins at conception because Jesus said so" idiots I was talking about, so where exactly is your disagreement?
And yes, I know that Canada is a lot farther to the left than the US. However, the subject is American politics, since fox news is (primarily) a US network. |
Riedle
Wayne's TV and Appliances
69
|
Posted - 2012.02.17 00:12:00 -
[108] - Quote
Merin Ryskin wrote:Riedle wrote:Funny story - that is pretty much my exact views on the issue except I reserve my scorn for those who decry any attempt to put a law on late term abortions for reasons other than medical necessity.
You would be branded a far right wing kook on that issue up here. So what is your point in bringing it up then? You clearly aren't one of the conservative "life begins at conception because Jesus said so" idiots I was talking about, so where exactly is your disagreement? And yes, I know that Canada is a lot farther to the left than the US. However, the subject is American politics, since fox news is (primarily) a US network.
We get fox here and I like to catch it once in a while.
My point is that you made a blanket, shallow declaration on abortion and upon further query discovered that your views are closer to being conservative than left wing. I'd say that in both countries. Life does begin at contraception so i can see where they are coming from but I do find it unreasonable to bestow personhood to something immediately at conception. That is a pretty fringe right wing movement in anycase as far as i can tell and certainly does not contain the entirety of the rights views on abortion. I would be a case in point.
|
Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
315
|
Posted - 2012.02.17 01:50:00 -
[109] - Quote
Riedle wrote: No, you made no case.
*eats popcorn* |
Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
315
|
Posted - 2012.02.17 01:56:00 -
[110] - Quote
Riedle wrote: Libertarians are more to the right than the left. Authoritarianism is almost always left leaning. You have to have a big governement to control people after all.
LOL, way to try and make it a left-right thing, I rest my case.[/quote]
No, you made no case.[/quote]
Sure I did, I clearly defined a four point map, to axis, and you stumble in and try and make it a dualist argument.
Sorry, try again. |
|
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
42
|
Posted - 2012.02.17 04:38:00 -
[111] - Quote
Riedle wrote:[That is a pretty fringe right wing movement in anycase as far as i can tell and certainly does not contain the entirety of the rights views on abortion.
Here's where you're out of touch with American politics. The idea that "personhood" begins at conception is a MAJOR part of the conservative agenda in the US. Just in the past year or two we've seen many different state laws which define a "person" in that way, impose additional rules on abortion based on religious doctrine instead of science, etc.
So, before you object to the fact that I call conservatives in the US idiots, perhaps you should look a little deeper into what those conservatives are actually advocating?
|
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
3164
|
Posted - 2012.02.17 05:11:00 -
[112] - Quote
Ive seen enough dead people to know that what one side wants is going to get alot more people killed when civilization collaspes.
Zombie Apoclasyp is comming.
War on Proverty is being fought entirely the wrong way.
And why in the hell are we punishing success to reward failure?
Gold is worthless when government and society go to hell.
When you depend on the government to give you everything doesnt that mean they have the power to take everything away?
Also if you're so liberal why are you playing this game to be honest, liberal people dont survive long in new eden.
|
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
1280
|
Posted - 2012.02.28 16:36:00 -
[113] - Quote
The days of FOX/CNN/CNBC/MSNBC/ABC/CBS are coming to an end.
The job of the press was to manipulate and control public opinion as well as voting blocks during the heyday of print media, radio and recently even cable news. The elites bought and controlled most media outlets, developed and promoted a controlled political opposition on the left and the right that allowed them to set the parameters for discussion and debate. America has effectively been a one party state for 100 years with power elites controlling the major political parties using the American style democracy both as their cover and to convey legitimacy on their behind the scenes manipulation.
Minds are being freed.
|
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
46
|
Posted - 2012.02.28 17:20:00 -
[114] - Quote
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:hey guyz ron paul got 5% of the primary vote MINDS R BEING FREEEEEED!!!!!!! TINFOIL FOR EVERYONE!@!!!!!!!!!!
1) Like most people who argue that the end of traditional media is near, this moron doesn't seem to understand that most of those "independent" writers he loves do little more than parrot the stuff written by traditional media. Without organized reporters/writers/etc to get to newsworthy events, do research, get information out to a wide audience, etc, where does he think he's going to get his facts? Does he really think that some random blogger is going to go off to the middle of a war, for example?
2) TBH, the best thing for the libertarian cause would be for Ron Paul to STFU. Not that I actually want libertarians anywhere near power, but let's be honest here: Ron Paul's racism, misogyny, and general conservative religious idiocy do a very good job of making the "movement" look bad. And if anarcho-capitalist idiocy ever became a relevant force in politics, everyone would hear all of the worst of Ron Paul's "ethics" 24/7. |
So Sensational
Ventures
4
|
Posted - 2012.02.28 17:40:00 -
[115] - Quote
stoicfaux wrote:Jada Maroo wrote:[quote=Merin Ryskin] You know, I would love to see a REAL marxist/socialist/whatever president, not a spineless center-right empty suit like Obama. Not because I actually like marxism, but because the tears from people like you would be so beautiful. b) Capitalism is much more efficient. Look at the British Empire and colonialism. Or the US's history with banana republics. Never underestimate the efficiency of capitalism. Raw capitalism only appears friendly because a capitalistic society needs to keep its own citizens happy. What you don't see is the abuse going on off-shore. Meaning, Wal-Mart prices are great for US citizens if you ignore where the products are made and the working conditions in those countries. Yes, oh the horror of third world countries rapidly going through the industrial revolution that we (The west) spent a good deal of time suffering under. Because just like we once did, they had a much better life before someone put factories in their countries |
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
46
|
Posted - 2012.02.28 18:40:00 -
[116] - Quote
So Sensational wrote:Yes, oh the horror of third world countries rapidly going through the industrial revolution that we (The west) spent a good deal of time suffering under. Because just like we once did, they had a much better life before someone put factories in their countries
Nice false dilemma fallacy. You conveniently miss the third option: industrialize, but pay the workers enough to have a decent standard of living, ban unsafe working conditions, etc. The only problem with doing this is that it conflicts with unrestricted capitalism, since it would cut into corporate profits. Which is exactly his point: unrestricted capitalism causes massive and unnecessary suffering, it just hides it from most customers, and everyone is happy as long as their new iphone is $1 cheaper. |
So Sensational
Ventures
4
|
Posted - 2012.02.28 19:02:00 -
[117] - Quote
Merin Ryskin wrote:So Sensational wrote:Yes, oh the horror of third world countries rapidly going through the industrial revolution that we (The west) spent a good deal of time suffering under. Because just like we once did, they had a much better life before someone put factories in their countries Nice false dilemma fallacy. You conveniently miss the third option: industrialize, but pay the workers enough to have a decent standard of living, ban unsafe working conditions, etc. The only problem with doing this is that it conflicts with unrestricted capitalism, since it would cut into corporate profits. Which is exactly his point: unrestricted capitalism causes massive and unnecessary suffering, it just hides it from most customers, and everyone is happy as long as their new iphone is $1 cheaper. Every system we've had causes massive and unnecessary suffering, capitalism as is does so yet it is the best system we've had so far. That is my point, decent standards of living, the ban of unsafe working conditions, these happen and have happened under capitalism.
Implying that capitalism is the cause of the problems for people in third world countries is silly. It has side effects like every system, but is vastly superior to the alternatives we've tried before, and certainly not "more efficient at creating human misery" which is the point I was adressing. Just because the people who work there get ****** jobs in their factories does not mean they'd be better off under communism.
Of course the theoretical ideal Marxism will be better than Capitalism is in practice. Now if you were to replace the two ideologies in this sentence it would still be true. |
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
1281
|
Posted - 2012.02.28 19:09:00 -
[118] - Quote
Merin Ryskin wrote:failed neocon/neolib blather
Thank you for showing your bias and ignorance.
My favorite part about your post is how it changes nothing and how it shows your way if thinking being steamrolled by reality.
I will now bask in what people like me are going to be doing to people like you for a long long time.
Markos ignored the very real trajectory of Ron Paul just like his friends on the supposedly liberal side of the establishment media...
Hey, watch out for my trap.... |
Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
319
|
Posted - 2012.02.28 19:40:00 -
[119] - Quote
Merin Ryskin wrote: 1) Media
2) Statist Rant
1 - You miss the point of the essay. The point of the essay was who is in control of the conversation, the national debate. Real news, facts, will always need confirmation. How those facts are interpreted and what actions they should prompt is a different matter.
2 - Not only are you lying about a politician's positions, you make it pretty clear you worship the state in item two, and this after pointing out you miss the point on item one. I'll let that juxtaposition speak for it self. |
baltec1
734
|
Posted - 2012.02.28 19:41:00 -
[120] - Quote
All I see is a bitter rant full of fact holes
|
|
stoicfaux
762
|
Posted - 2012.02.28 20:33:00 -
[121] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:All I see is a bitter rant full of fact holes You cad. It's called an internet opinion blog.
Personally, I keep wanting to write congress to require that every blog and news site include the phrase:
THE "Article" IS PROVIDED "AS IS" WITH ALL FAULTS. TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW, ${Foo}'s DISTRIBUTORS, LICENSORS HEREBY DISCLAIM ALL Accuracy, WHETHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION WARRANTIES THAT THE Article IS FREE OF Inaccuracies, Unsupported Opinions, Misleading Language, FIT FOR A PARTICULAR Reality AND NON-INFRINGING of someone else's copyrighted stuff we reprinted with a few changes to make it non-infringing. YOU BEAR ENTIRE RISK AS TO Actually trusting THE Information FOR YOUR PURPOSES, such as engaging in erudite conversation or making life-changing decisions, AND AS TO THE truth AND self-serving bias OF THE Article. THIS LIMITATION WILL APPLY NOTWITHSTANDING THE FAILURE OF ESSENTIAL PURPOSE OF ANY REMEDY. SOME JURISDICTIONS DO NOT ALLOW THE EXCLUSION OR LIMITATION OF IMPLIED WARRANTIESThe First Amendment says we can make **** up, SO THIS DISCLAIMER MAY Will Always NOT APPLY TO YOU.
You can tell me what is and isn't Truth when you pry the tinfoil from my cold, lifeless head.
|
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
46
|
Posted - 2012.02.28 20:50:00 -
[122] - Quote
Adunh Slavy wrote:1 - You miss the point of the essay. The point of the essay was who is in control of the conversation, the national debate. Real news, facts, will always need confirmation. How those facts are interpreted and what actions they should prompt is a different matter.
No, YOU missed the point of what I wrote. Let me make this very simple for you:
1) Many facts are difficult to obtain. For example, it is very hard, as a random blogger, to discover that 100 innocent civilians were killed by a drone airstrike unless you read about it in another news source.
2) The mainstream media has the resources to obtain those facts.
Conclusion: the mainstream media isn't going anywhere, and you're just going to have to put up with them controlling the conversation. Even if you got your wish (by magic) and made the mainstream media go away, the result would be a complete absence of news, not the "free" conversation that you imagine.
Quote:2 - Not only are you lying about a politician's positions, you make it pretty clear you worship the state in item two, and this after pointing out you miss the point on item one. I'll let that juxtaposition speak for it self.
In other words, you don't actually know what Ron Paul has been saying, you're talking about a fictional candidate that only exists in your own mind. Perhaps you should do a little more research on your hero before you accuse me of lying about his positions?
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:My favorite part about your post is how it changes nothing and how it shows your way if thinking being steamrolled by reality.
My favorite part about your post is how it contains nothing more than empty boasting of how awesome you are, instead of an attempt to argue against anything I said.
Quote:article about politicians and dirty tricks that nobody is in any way surprised by
Complain all you want, but if you think Ron Paul is any better than those people you're completely delusional. Do you really think that Ron Paul would hesitate for even a second if he actually had the power to do something like that to ensure his own election?
Also, I'm amused that you think a site full of 9/11 conspiracy morons is actually a valid source of information. Can we please limit this discussion to more reliable sources?
|
Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
319
|
Posted - 2012.02.28 21:46:00 -
[123] - Quote
Merin Ryskin wrote: Conclusion: the mainstream media isn't going anywhere, and you're just going to have to put up with them controlling the conversation. Even if you got your wish (by magic) and made the mainstream media go away, the result would be a complete absence of news, not the "free" conversation that you imagine.
You are so blinded by your love of the establishment media and your statist masters you can't even see where we agree. I will start to now point out the sky is blue so you can show us all how silly your arguments are.
Merin Ryskin wrote: In other words, you don't actually know what Ron Paul has been saying, you're talking about a fictional candidate that only exists in your own mind. Perhaps you should do a little more research on your hero before you accuse me of lying about his positions?
LOL, who made you the arbiter of fact? There is 40 years of a consistent record and adherence to the philosophy of liberty to back up Paul. All you have is the distortions of the establishment media you so jealously defend.
If you have a particular topic you want to discuss, bring it up. If you expect me to spend time going after each and everyone of your lies, you're full of your own self importance. Of course such threads are likely to be locked, surprised this one is still going actually. Let's have it, and we'll see who's full of ****. |
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
3320
|
Posted - 2012.02.28 21:49:00 -
[124] - Quote
Let me get this straight, Merin here thinks Ron Paul is more imaginary than Derpy Hooves?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cg-_HeVNYOk
|
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
46
|
Posted - 2012.02.28 22:23:00 -
[125] - Quote
Adunh Slavy wrote:LOL, who made you the arbiter of fact? There is 40 years of a consistent record and adherence to the philosophy of liberty to back up Paul. All you have is the distortions of the establishment media you so jealously defend.
Who needs an arbiter of fact when you have Ron Paul's own words to prove his racism and conservative Christian stupidity?
No, I think that the "Ron Paul" that isn't a racist conservative Christian is purely imaginary. Unfortunately, most Ron Paul fans don't seem to realize just how terrible a person he is. |
stoicfaux
762
|
Posted - 2012.02.28 22:31:00 -
[126] - Quote
Merin Ryskin wrote: No, I think that the "Ron Paul" that isn't a racist conservative Christian is purely imaginary. Unfortunately, most Ron Paul fans don't seem to realize just how terrible a person he is.
Yeah so? George Washington was a racist conservative/libertarian Christian and he's still pretty popular today.
You can tell me what is and isn't Truth when you pry the tinfoil from my cold, lifeless head.
|
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
1282
|
Posted - 2012.02.28 22:39:00 -
[127] - Quote
Statists are an interesting breed. Had a run-in a couple of weeks ago with one of them. Don't expect reason from them. It truly is a mental illness of sorts. The statist I dealt with was saying he could get me in all kinds of trouble and didn't like that my girlfriend had a gun on her either. He went on some rant talking up his government service and I let him be wrong on all counts until a hole opened up to distract him and we made our extrapolation without further trouble.
That's the point about statists and control freaks I like to make. If I wanted to traffic drugs, for example, I would end up having to deal with rather scummy people for those ends. You won't find any good people amongst the pool of traffickers. The same would go for sex slavery, murder for hire or mercenaries (and I have had the misfortune of meeting some of them - the Jack Payne character from "Shooter"(2007) is real).
To have a tyranny built on lies, you won't get good people either. Even the good guys who get hoodwinked eventually catch on. Happy I was serving my country until one day one of our allies was bombing the crap out of the very same people we were sent to protect. I know a lot of ex cops who signed up because they truly are sheepdogs but could not deny they were becoming revenuers and oppressors. They left, leaving behind the "shave head roid rage types".
So back to the control freaks and statists... they are easy to manipulate and distract. Their outlook is predicated on living in a lie, so lies have power over them. If discernment was a gland in our bodies, they lost that gland. Because of that, it's almost like that "these are not the droids you are looking for" scene from "Star Wars" is do-able.
So we should expect those who follow FOX and the MSM (mainstream media) to go into denial. Partly out of fear, and mainly out of ego. Americans have the biggest egos on earth, so for someone to be able to think about the implications of other ideas and claims means they might have to accept they were fooled or wrong in the past. That's impossible for a lot of people. That's what we are seeing here.
|
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
3322
|
Posted - 2012.02.28 23:06:00 -
[128] - Quote
Abraham Lincolin wanted to ship all the black people back to africa so they could be re-enslaved by the zulu. Another reason why I laugh at any Zulu who claims his anscestors where slaves and I tell them to go wiki thier tribe up its a wonderful feeling to go around popping over inflated egos.
Dunno most liberals I have personally met never had a reality check on how horrible human kind really is. One trip though the worst of the world thanks to the internet and thier foundation of thier belifes get shattered quite horribly.
Now I have met level headed progressives that acknowledge that the world is effed up but it doesnt have to be status quo, to bad none of those guys are democrats or in power around here.
|
Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
319
|
Posted - 2012.02.29 04:40:00 -
[129] - Quote
Merin Ryskin wrote: Who needs an arbiter of fact when you have Ron Paul's own words to prove his racism and conservative Christian stupidity?
ROFL, you're proving my point for me, keep going.
Merin Ryskin wrote: I don't love the establishment media, I just recognize that it exists because of factors that are pretty much unavoidable, and that any claim (such as the linked article) that blogs/independent writers/etc will replace it (and bring on the libertarian revolution) are pure fantasy material.
No one said they would, duh! Shesh. Reading comprehension ... let me guess, you went to one of the government run schools. Did you get a trophy for effort when you came last in the race too?
Merin Ryskin wrote: If you agree with me and don't defend the article, then why are you arguing with me?
If you're not aware enough to understand where I agree with you, then you won't understand the answer either.
Nova Fox wrote:Let me get this straight, Merin here thinks Ron Paul is more imaginary than Derpy Hooves?
She has no idea who he is other than what, I'm going to guess MSNBC and CNN, say. |
Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
319
|
Posted - 2012.02.29 04:56:00 -
[130] - Quote
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:Statists are an interesting breed.
...
Another interesting thing about them is they are so ingrained into the left-right discussion that they rarely comprehend any thing out side that. What I find most amazing about those who cling to the state, fail to see that their addiction enables those with whom they disagree. They'll whine and scream about freedom and equality on some issues, but promote the state on other issues.
They whine about things like "compromise" and wonder what the hell happened when nothing good came of their whines about freedom. But they got their new intrusive state powers passed, half assed implemented; creating a whole new set of problems.
On matters that are not political they often try to turn everything into a dualist argument out of pure habit. It's pretty sad. Having been in debates with both those on the right and those on the left, I do have to say those on the right tend to be more polite. |
|
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
1283
|
Posted - 2012.02.29 05:14:00 -
[131] - Quote
Well thank you Russia Today for telling us about this latest assault while the American zombie control grid (aka: media) concentrates on their own lie about some guy winning polls for some mysterious reason even though he can't draw a crowd.
|
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
1283
|
Posted - 2012.02.29 05:17:00 -
[132] - Quote
Adunh Slavy wrote:Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:Statists are an interesting breed.
...
On matters that are not political they often try to turn everything into a dualist argument out of pure habit. It's pretty sad. Having been in debates with both those on the right and those on the left, I do have to say those on the right tend to be more polite.
Haven't been to a state GOP convention I see.
|
Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
319
|
Posted - 2012.02.29 05:23:00 -
[133] - Quote
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:Adunh Slavy wrote: ... those on the right tend to be more polite. ...
Haven't been to a state GOP convention I see.
Bolded an important bit there :) |
Kayosoni
Destructive Influence Northern Coalition.
0
|
Posted - 2012.02.29 07:22:00 -
[134] - Quote
Bootleg Jack wrote:Is a Republican Super Pac
Send a message, use parental control, block FOX!
What makes you any better, or less bigoted, trying to impose your views on other people?
get out hypocrite. |
Alpheias
Euphoria Released 0ccupational Hazzard
484
|
Posted - 2012.02.29 08:07:00 -
[135] - Quote
This thread is like watching two jews fighting to death over a penny or two catholic priests fighting over a young boy. I'd kill kittens and puppies and bunnies I'd maim toddlers and teens and then more |
baltec1
739
|
Posted - 2012.02.29 09:09:00 -
[136] - Quote
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:Well thank you Russia Today for telling us about this latest assault while the American zombie control grid (aka: media) concentrates on their own lie about some guy winning polls for some mysterious reason even though he can't draw a crowd.
looks to be around the same number of people, the only difference is one is inside a building and one inside a massive stadium. |
Sidus Isaacs
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
88
|
Posted - 2012.02.29 11:50:00 -
[137] - Quote
Quote:Appellate Court Rules Media Can Legally Lie. By Mike Gaddy. Published Feb. 28, 2003 On February 14, a Florida Appeals court ruled there is absolutely nothing illegal about lying, concealing or distorting information by a major press organization. The court reversed the $425,000 jury verdict in favor of journalist Jane Akre who charged she was pressured by Fox Television management and lawyers to air what she knew and documented to be false information. The ruling basically declares it is technically not against any law, rule, or regulation to deliberately lie or distort the news on a television broadcast.
That alone should be telling enough. Then agian, one need only a small glance at Faux News to see what it really is. |
Angriest Angel
The Scope Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.02.29 12:09:00 -
[138] - Quote
you know that the only people that watch fox news are those hardcore republicans at wall street and the trailer trash in the rest of the country, so no need to bring Fox News into this place. |
Sidus Isaacs
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
88
|
Posted - 2012.02.29 12:13:00 -
[139] - Quote
Angriest Angel wrote:you know that the only people that watch fox news are those hardcore republicans at wall street and the trailer trash in the rest of the country, so no need to bring Fox News into this place.
And yet, there is a lot of them. US is quickly heading down the drain and becoming a police state. News agencies should be the guardian of such things and inform the public, but now they are enabling it instead.
I find it worthy to discuss such things, if only to bring it to the attention of thoose who have not yet considred it.
|
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
3327
|
Posted - 2012.02.29 16:21:00 -
[140] - Quote
Angriest Angel wrote:you know that the only people that watch fox news are those hardcore republicans at wall street and the trailer trash in the rest of the country, so no need to bring Fox News into this place.
? Im a casual conservative going to a college living a house thats pertty decent and wont blow up if a tornado comes nearby.
My point of view is I see a current government trying to dictate my entire life. Telling me Im too rich even though I was technically getting paid less than minimal wage the year before. Saying I don't deserve the money my blood sweat and tears was spilled for. They already told me I dont deserve my job a year ago, they're doing thier best to backpedal out of a contract to pay me to go to school.
American Liberals playing eve is almsot an oxymoron well... unless they're carebares that complain about getting ganked.
also according to MSN and Card Ratings republican states typically are much better at paying thier bills.
http://money.msn.com/credit-rating/red-states-credit-beats-the-blues-cardratings.aspx
|
|
Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
320
|
Posted - 2012.02.29 19:19:00 -
[141] - Quote
Nova Fox wrote: also according to MSN and Card Ratings republican states typically are much better at paying thier bills.
Why pay bills when you can whine? Sooner or later some corp or opportunistic politician will hear the whines, hire some lobbyists to go influence congress. Then they can have a hearing. Those then write the legislation for government subsidies and competition stifling regulations. Then we can let everyone pay our bills by way of taxes and inflation.
Oh and if you don't want to compromise on this sort of soft fascism, you're a racist and greedy. |
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
46
|
Posted - 2012.02.29 20:25:00 -
[142] - Quote
Quote:also according to MSN and Card Ratings republican states typically are much better at paying thier bills.
Too bad republicans also seem to be much better at lying to make a point. From your own article:
Despite blue states having a rougher time of it over the past four years, their average credit scores still exceed those in red states, 759 compared with 740.
Translation: after four years of a bad economy, blue states are finally getting close to being as bad at paying bills as red states.
Or what about this quote?
Blue states maintain slightly higher levels of debt overall, with an average household debt of $24,349, compared with $24,181 for red states.
So there's less than 1% difference in average debt levels, hardly a compelling argument that republicans are better at staying out of debt.
Quote:Why pay bills when you can whine?
Even if you ignore the actual numbers, it's still a stupid argument. Let's look at a more likely cause:
Poor people tend to vote democrat (since republican policy is even more biased in favor of rich people than the democrats).
Poor people tend to have more financial hardships, like having to put food on a credit card because you just paid the rent with your last cash, accept high-interest payday loans because of an unexpected expense, etc.
Poor people tend to be faced with credit-destroying decisions more frequently. For example, if you have to choose between missing a credit card payment and feeding your family, you buy the food and take the credit score penalty. On the other hand, someone with more money is more likely to have a choice like cancelling their EVE subscription or paying the credit card bill, making it a lot easier to choose the option that keeps their credit score intact.
Poor people tend to have more trouble paying off debt. A wealthier person could choose to cut back on luxuries, but someone without that extra income has a lot less room to cut before they're giving up essentials like food, clothes, etc. And of course without the luxury of spending time and money on college/job training/etc, they're a lot less likely to gain additional income in the future.
End result: the poorer you are, the easier it is for you to get into debt, and the harder it is for you to pay off your debt once you have it. And guess what that means: lower credit scores, and higher average debt. This has nothing at all to do with being lazy/selfish/etc. |
Selinate
672
|
Posted - 2012.03.01 04:06:00 -
[143] - Quote
I think it'll be hilarious if or when this country reaches a point at which it's basically regressed to what it was mid-industrial revolution, which in some ways is what we're going back to. Big business owns the people, the people are kept destitute, while they very rich get obscenely rich. People who advocate for pure capitalism always make me laugh, especially when I remind them about the dirt floor, stick house they'd be living in if pure capitalism was still around. Somehow, they forget everything they've learned in history classes and immediately turn to saying "CAPITALISM WAS WHAT GOT MY GRAND PAPPY TO BE A DOCTOR". Sorry to say, with pure capitalism, your grand pappy can't afford the education. A nifty thing called socialism lets your poor grand father who barely survived in the depression to become a doctor. That, or pure blind luck, with about the same probability of this happening as, oh , I don't know, getting struck by lightening? Either way, capitalism surely didn't help...
Unfortunately, if we regress again, it's unlikely that we'll be able to get out of that situation like last time. At the time when Teddy Roosevelt broke up the big monopolies, there was no internet and instant communication. Now there is. This means that the common man gets SO much more power and ability to speak out than ever before.
It also means he gets to spread his stupidity to other stupid people unlike ever before, hence the dilemma of people who really should not have the right to vote under any circumstance since they're too stupid to decide what's best for the economy, the war, or whatever it may be. The alternative is a republic, which obviously too many people would be opposed to.
Stupid people don't know that they're stupid |
Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
322
|
Posted - 2012.03.01 09:49:00 -
[144] - Quote
Merin Ryskin wrote:Even if you ignore the actual numbers, it's still a stupid argument. Let's look at a more likely cause:
Poor people tend to vote democrat (since republican policy is even more biased in favor of rich people than the democrats).
So there's less than 1% difference in average debt levels, hardly a compelling argument that republicans are better at staying out of debt.
The statement was about paying bills on time, not their levels of debt.
Oh and I just have to laugh, here you are, "Even if you ignore the actual numbers, it's still a stupid argument." ... so if you ignore the facts, it is a stupid argument ... got it. So, the sky is red if you ignore the fact that it is blue ... uh, ok then.
You really do need to do your own research before you trot out the standard refrain of the left media. Columbia University, and others, have done a number of studies on this subject. It is a much more mixed bag than you want to believe.
It is you that just recently in this thread whined about establishment media and how they are the ones giving out facts, right? How do you know their facts are correct? You just trust them, don't you? Try bing, google, yahoo and do some of your own research instead of trusting a bunch of lame talking heads that make their money from appealing to your confirmation bias. Of course doing that would mean having to challenge your own world view, and that can always be scary.
As to your other point, it is true that poor are often more subject to the errors they may make with regards to credit and debt. They have much less room for error when it comes to finical matters. They tend to be more easily hooked on government assistance, they are more easily exploited by lenders, They are also hurt by being invisibly taxed by inflation, those who have the means and knowledge, to reconfigure their wealth, are not.
The poor tend to be more ignorant about economics and finance and provided the proper tools on how to deal with such matters. Proper education on such things would be helpful, of course these sorts things are never taught in government run schools. No one wants educated debt slaves. Much less entitlement slaves to vote for anything other than the party that will give them freebies.
"A government which robs Peter to pay Paul, can always count on the support of Paul." - George Benard Shaw
|
Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
322
|
Posted - 2012.03.01 10:06:00 -
[145] - Quote
This sounds like the typical Occupy Movement member's misunderstanding of what capitalism is and isn't. If I misunderstand, I am sure you'll let me know.
The US hasn't been a capitalist country for quite some time. One could easily point to 1913 as the start of the Fascist era of America.
"Fascism should rightly be called Corporatism, as it is the merger of corporate and government power." Benito Mussolini
When government regulates and taxes in favor of some members of an industry, or in favor of one industry over another, that is not capitalism. Capitalism relies upon natural market forces. Government interventions distort markets and they cease to be as efficient as they other wise would be. When government gets involved, markets become much less efficient with regards to the choices of people, including the social or environmental concerns of the people.
Many of these huge corporations could never have gotten as large and as powerful as they are with out government's help. Intrusive and expensive regulations stifle competition in favor of existing businesses that are large enough to incur the additional expense of regulations. |
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
46
|
Posted - 2012.03.01 13:24:00 -
[146] - Quote
Adunh Slavy wrote:Oh and I just have to laugh, here you are, "Even if you ignore the actual numbers, it's still a stupid argument." ... so if you ignore the facts, it is a stupid argument ... got it. So, the sky is red if you ignore the fact that it is blue ... uh, ok then.
Congratulations on missing the point that "ignore the numbers" was an assumption in YOUR favor. Even if we ignore the numbers that clearly say otherwise and pretend that people in blue states have trouble paying their bills, there are obvious reasons for that failure beyond "I'm lazy, so I'll let someone else pay it".
If we actually use the numbers, you're even more doomed since blue states have better credit scores (IOW, pay their bills on time better).
Adunh Slavy wrote:When government regulates and taxes in favor of some members of an industry, or in favor of one industry over another, that is not capitalism. Capitalism relies upon natural market forces.
You know, we have a word for a political system in which the government doesn't tax or regulate industry: anarchy.
Also, since this ideal capitalist state has never existed (at least in any relevant modern society), how can you be so sure that it's a good thing?
Quote:Government interventions distort markets and they cease to be as efficient as they other wise would be. When government gets involved, markets become much less efficient with regards to the choices of people, including the social or environmental concerns of the people.
Yes, how inefficient it is when corporations have to obey laws about things like unsafe working conditions...
Quote:Many of these huge corporations could never have gotten as large and as powerful as they are with out government's help. Intrusive and expensive regulations stifle competition in favor of existing businesses that are large enough to incur the additional expense of regulations.
Err, lol? You do realize that large corporations are hardly a modern invention, right? And that the situation has been FAR worse in the past? You know, back when monopolies were common, and there were no laws banning a wide variety of unfair tactics used by corporations to ensure that any potential competition was immediately crushed. But I guess it's easier to just ignore all of the cases where government intervention was required to break a monopoly and allow competition to exist.
Also, the driving force behind large corporations is NOT expensive regulations, it's the fact that modern communication and transportation technology have created a global market and allowed efficient operation on massive scales, while the cost of developing new products has increased in many cases*. Once the tools exist, the natural market forces lead directly to large corporations.
*For example, creating a new computer chip requires millions of dollars in manufacturing equipment, design tools, etc, and that's not even counting the labor costs of designing it in the first place. Even if you rent it from someone, you're paying millions before you even make your first sale. Good luck getting into THAT market if you aren't a large corporation.
|
Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
322
|
Posted - 2012.03.01 17:13:00 -
[147] - Quote
Congrats on missing the point that you whine about facts and then ignore them when it is convenient. If you don't see the irony, then too bad.
Merin Ryskin wrote: You know, we have a word for a political system in which the government doesn't tax or regulate industry: anarchy.
Oh let me guess, you're going to compare the chaos of a failed state like Somalia to an idealistic anarcho-capitalist society now.
Merin Ryskin wrote: Also, since this ideal capitalist state has never existed (at least in any relevant modern society), how can you be so sure that it's a good thing?
Surprise, Surprise.
Merin Ryskin wrote: Yes, how inefficient it is when corporations have to obey laws about things like unsafe working conditions...
Clue: Ask for more money, get together with fellow workers and make demands.
Merin Ryskin wrote: Err, lol? You do realize that large corporations are hardly a modern invention, right? And that the situation has been FAR worse in the past? You know, back when monopolies were common, and there were no laws banning a wide variety of unfair tactics used by corporations to ensure that any potential competition was immediately crushed. But I guess it's easier to just ignore all of the cases where government intervention was required to break a monopoly and allow competition to exist.
You go find your examples, and I'll find the government support they got to crush competition. Get along now, go get some facts and examples. Let's see if you willfully ignore the facts you don't like some more.
Merin Ryskin wrote: Also, the driving force behind large corporations is NOT expensive regulations, it's the fact that modern communication and transportation technology have created a global market and allowed efficient operation on massive scales, while the cost of developing new products has increased in many cases*. Once the tools exist, the natural market forces lead directly to large corporations.
*For example, creating a new computer chip requires millions of dollars in manufacturing equipment, design tools, etc, and that's not even counting the labor costs of designing it in the first place. Even if you rent it from someone, you're paying millions before you even make your first sale. Good luck getting into THAT market if you aren't a large corporation.
You make it clear you do not understand basic economics. Technological advance increases productivity, it lowers the cost of entry, it creates new competition, making room for smaller firms. More work can be accomplished by less people. Regulation on the other hand increases the cost of entry and day to day operations.
You also make it clear you do not know the difference between structural oligopoly and regulatory oligopoly. Crack a book. |
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
46
|
Posted - 2012.03.01 17:51:00 -
[148] - Quote
Adunh Slavy wrote:Oh let me guess, you're going to compare the chaos of a failed state like Somalia to an idealistic anarcho-capitalist society now.
Of course not. I've heard more than enough excuses for how Somalia (or any other real anarchy) is not a "true" anarchy to know that it's a hopeless cause. But then I don't really need to make the connection. The horrifying nature of an ideal anarcho-capitalist state speaks for itself, really.
(Not that an ideal anarcho-capitalist state is anything other than a fantasy in the minds of people who think Ayn Rand novels are the best **** ever made. Thankfully one has never existed, and never will exist.)
Quote:Clue: Ask for more money, get together with fellow workers and make demands.
Oh, you mean like how people did before the government stepped in to regulate business?
(Hint: the corporations brought in mercenaries to bring a rather violent end to the demands.)
Quote:You go find your examples, and I'll find the government support they got to crush competition. Get along now, go get some facts and examples. Let's see if you willfully ignore the facts you don't like some more.
Oh, I'm sure you will. I've dealt with enough people like you to know that everything can be traced back to the existence of government. No matter how badly a corporation behaves or how much harm it causes, if you look back far enough you can always find some kind of government involvement, no matter how minor, that excuses it.
Quote:You make it clear you do not understand basic economics. Technological advance increases productivity, it lowers the cost of entry, it creates new competition, making room for smaller firms. More work can be accomplished by less people. Regulation on the other hand increases the cost of entry and day to day operations.
Hint for the clueless: this only applies to technological advances within an industry. Let me make this very simple for you:
If you think you can run a farm better than everyone else in 1700, the barriers to entry are minimal. Land is cheap, equipment is cheap, and your own labor is the main cost.
If you want to start a restaurant in 1900, the barriers to entry are minimal. Rent is reasonably cheap, equipment is cheap enough to be within your ability to buy on credit, and your biggest expense is your labor/raw food/etc.
If you want to start a CPU company in 2012 the barriers to entry are massive. Even if you have the complete design for your chip already (something that usually takes teams of experts), you need software that costs millions of dollars to license, you have to pay production setup costs in the millions of dollars, and you have to rent production capacity from a semiconductor manufacturer with tools that probably cost hundreds of millions of dollars (or more).
Like it or not, advanced technology requires organization on a scale FAR beyond an individual person, or even a small business. Even in your ideal fantasy world large corporations will exist, and you're an idealistic moron if you think they're going to behave any better than they do in the real world. |
baltec1
745
|
Posted - 2012.03.01 19:02:00 -
[149] - Quote
Adunh Slavy wrote:Merin Ryskin wrote: You know, we have a word for a political system in which the government doesn't tax or regulate industry: anarchy.
Oh let me guess, you're going to compare the chaos of a failed state like Somalia to an idealistic anarcho-capitalist society now. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhopal_disaster
Yea, thats sounds like fun |
Selinate
672
|
Posted - 2012.03.01 19:17:00 -
[150] - Quote
Adunh Slavy wrote:This sounds like the typical Occupy Movement member's misunderstanding of what capitalism is and isn't. If I misunderstand, I am sure you'll let me know. The US hasn't been a capitalist country for quite some time. One could easily point to 1913 as the start of the Fascist era of America. "Fascism should rightly be called Corporatism, as it is the merger of corporate and government power." Benito Mussolini When government regulates and taxes in favor of some members of an industry, or in favor of one industry over another, that is not capitalism. Capitalism relies upon natural market forces. Government interventions distort markets and they cease to be as efficient as they other wise would be. When government gets involved, markets become much less efficient with regards to the choices of people, including the social or environmental concerns of the people. Many of these huge corporations could never have gotten as large and as powerful as they are with out government's help. Intrusive and expensive regulations stifle competition in favor of existing businesses that are large enough to incur the additional expense of regulations.
You didn't read my post. Try again.
|
|
THE L0CK
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
12
|
Posted - 2012.03.01 19:51:00 -
[151] - Quote
Oh **** dawg, I totally forgot about this thread. I'm a little dismayed that I only got 2 bites off that last post. Looks like the rest of the thread turned into people trying to be right on the internet. Do you smell what the Lock's cooking? |
Stellar Vix
State War Academy Caldari State
5
|
Posted - 2012.03.01 19:59:00 -
[152] - Quote
Isn't like anyone with a house car and internet the top 10% of the world?
-Vix |
Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
322
|
Posted - 2012.03.01 20:39:00 -
[153] - Quote
Adunh Slavy wrote:If I misunderstand, I am sure you'll let me know.
Selinate wrote: You didn't read my post. Try again.
Ditto. Feel free to elaborate |
Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
322
|
Posted - 2012.03.01 20:46:00 -
[154] - Quote
Merin Ryskin wrote: Of course not. I've heard more than enough excuses ...
Evasion and red herrings
Merin Ryskin wrote: Oh, you mean like how people did before the government stepped in to regulate business?
(Hint: the corporations brought in mercenaries to bring a rather violent end to the demands.)
And government stepped in to enforce a level playing field. But then overcompensated on the side of labor over the years, United States v. Enmons et alia.
Merin Ryskin wrote: Oh, I'm sure you will. I've dealt with enough people like you ...
ROFL, yeah, more evasion, don't want to take up the challenge to prove your point. I'll let that speak for it self.
Merin Ryskin wrote: If you think you can run a farm better ...
Again, you are speaking about structural issues when the topic was regulatory issues. Sorry but the equivocation game is full of fail, or you can be cited for moving the goal posts, pick a fallacy of your choice, both will do. |
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
3350
|
Posted - 2012.03.01 21:45:00 -
[155] - Quote
Running a farm these days are nearly impossible too many regulations and businesses patcies and costs have driving most family farmers out of business, they're all corporate entities, and with more child labor laws comming into play last of the family own farms are going have to shut down.
|
GreasyCarl Semah
A Game as Old as Empire
11
|
Posted - 2012.03.01 23:02:00 -
[156] - Quote
Stellar Vix wrote:Isn't like anyone with a house car and internet the top 10% of the world?
-Vix
Pretty much, don't you feel rich!? |
Sturmwolke
139
|
Posted - 2012.03.01 23:44:00 -
[157] - Quote
I'll just leave this here :
Psychological Warfare Subversion & Control of Western Society ANY Society
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5gnpCqsXE8g
it's a 1hr video, so those with short attention spans may not appreciate its content. toodle-loo
|
baltec1
751
|
Posted - 2012.03.02 00:06:00 -
[158] - Quote
Nova Fox wrote:Running a farm these days are nearly impossible too many regulations and businesses pratcies and costs have driven most family farmers out of business, they're all corporate entities, and with more child labor laws comming into play last of the family owned farms are going have to shut down.
Reason why small farms are going under is because the big farms can beat them on price. |
Bootleg Jack
Potters Field
21
|
Posted - 2012.03.02 15:15:00 -
[159] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Nova Fox wrote:Running a farm these days are nearly impossible too many regulations and businesses pratcies and costs have driven most family farmers out of business, they're all corporate entities, and with more child labor laws comming into play last of the family owned farms are going have to shut down. Reason why small farms are going under is because the big farms can beat them on price.
Ok here we go, now it will get good, we are going to get into the people who got a GOVERNMENT HANDOUT in the form of a homesteaded farm but don't want to help anyone else because everyone who didn't get a FREE FARM is lazy.
As if all the people crammed into cities wouldn't like the government to give them 80 acres of land and then on top that tax breaks and subsidies.
Small farmers are the most entitled of all. |
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
3354
|
Posted - 2012.03.02 15:18:00 -
[160] - Quote
I was more inferring the small farms owned by a familiy for generations but meh things that go by unnoticed if you dont live in the area.
|
|
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
1293
|
Posted - 2012.03.02 15:45:00 -
[161] - Quote
I listened to Rush and Levin and Glenn. I watched Foxnews and only Foxnews, regularly. IGÇÖd brag about how GÇ£I donGÇÖt watch the mainstream mediaGÇ¥ unable to see the irony that Fox has more viewers than every other cable news channel combined.
|
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
3354
|
Posted - 2012.03.02 16:12:00 -
[162] - Quote
^ Love being in the old gaurd.
|
Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
322
|
Posted - 2012.03.02 21:20:00 -
[163] - Quote
Here's one for our gaurdian of establishment media,
Hillary Clinton asks for cash as US Is losing world info war. |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 :: [one page] |