The Most Trusted Name in News?

[Chizzang]

I think I might be the only guy on this forum who thinks that Conservatives are correct 49% of the time
and Liberals are correct 51% of the time...

which has convinced more than a few of you old farts that I'm an idiot

We may need to start another thread: You might be kidding yourself if...

There are very few fence straddlers here, and you sir are not one of them. Neither am I.

What...?
(I feel like the odd man out half the time around here)
I'm the only Liberal on here who says - over and over
1) we do not have a revenue problem we have a federal spending problem
2) Guns are not the problem - its a apart of American culture and in the constitution
3) Obama did not get my vote in the last election (Jill Stein baby)
4) States rights / that should reflect the wishes of their population



So what were you saying again...?
Because those are Liberal DEAL BREAKERS right there


So I kick the Religious thing and the abortion thing around like a TRUE LIBERAL
but what else..?

[Seahawks08]

So it's Toes ( like lined up with)
or Towed like pulling ..?

Never knew that myself

it is an old military thing.... when you stand in line with your comrades in response to an order... your toes are all on the imaginary line... you are "toeing the line"


what an awesome hijack we are completely off in outer space now

At least I learned something in this thread. Thank you!

[BlueHen86]

People who are 100% sure of their beliefs are a big part of the problem.

So are people who don't have any thought.

Which is most Fox viewers. They don't want to be informed, they want to be reassured. MSNBC sucks too, but nobody watches it.

[BlueHen86]

I'll try to explain this slowly for you:
Most reasonably intelligent people don't watch (or trust) either FOX News or MSNBC

So who does that leave left over to fill out the poll data..?
I'll wait here for you - take your time - this is not a trick question

I will explain it even s. L. O w. E. R........for you.

Fox News is no different than CNN other than it's entertaining and upbeat. Both have an agenda and neither of them are MSNBC.

Yes, it is. Fox is to the right what MSNBC is to the left. CNN is biased left, but closer to the center than either Fox or MSNBC.

CNN's problem is that it's incompetent. Did they ever find that plane?

[kalm]

We may need to start another thread: You might be kidding yourself if...

There are very few fence straddlers here, and you sir are not one of them. Neither am I.

What...?
(I feel like the odd man out half the time around here)
I'm the only Liberal on here who says - over and over
1) we do not have a revenue problem we have a federal spending problem
2) Guns are not the problem - its a apart of American culture and in the constitution
3) Obama did not get my vote in the last election (Jill Stein baby)
4) States rights / that should reflect the wishes of their population



So what were you saying again...?
Because those are Liberal DEAL BREAKERS right there


So I kick the Religious thing and the abortion thing around like a TRUE LIBERAL
but what else..?

2) There are many pro-gun liberals
3) No self respecting liberal voted for Obama in '12
4) I'm guessing there are millions of states rights liberals in Washington and Colorado.

You ain't that special. But you seem to be independent and the fact that frustrates 89 is

[mrklean]

CNN is the Best place for News

MSNBC: is a feaking Joke
Fox News:

[Chizzang]

What...?
(I feel like the odd man out half the time around here)
I'm the only Liberal on here who says - over and over
1) we do not have a revenue problem we have a federal spending problem
2) Guns are not the problem - its a apart of American culture and in the constitution
3) Obama did not get my vote in the last election (Jill Stein baby)
4) States rights / that should reflect the wishes of their population



So what were you saying again...?
Because those are Liberal DEAL BREAKERS right there


So I kick the Religious thing and the abortion thing around like a TRUE LIBERAL
but what else..?

2) There are many pro-gun liberals
3) No self respecting liberal voted for Obama in '12
4) I'm guessing there are millions of states rights liberals in Washington and Colorado.

You ain't that special. But you seem to be independent and the fact that frustrates 89 is

You say "I seem to be independent"
Do you remember that thread where the entire board trashed Independents as idiots...
In fact JohStWrong wrote a sermon (full page post) about how Independents have ruined America

and a few guys explained how anybody who can't make up their mind is a complete dolt

and I say:

The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt
~Bertrand Russell

[JohnStOnge]

Not to go completely off on a tangent, but comments like these get me thinking. Maybe it's not what you really meant, but to say somebody is "invested in Conservatism" sounds like you are saying JSO believes what he believes because it's the platform of Conservatism and he wants to follow along. I'd argue that he's a Conservative because of what he believes and the platform follows the lead of people with strong conviction in similar beliefs. I do think there are people who identify themselves as one party or the other and on certain issues are spoonfed their opinion by the party, but I don't think anyone here would argue that JSO is not 100% sure of his beliefs. Anyway, carry on.

Meh...
He tows the line pretty hard - I've never seen him step outside of a Conservative talking point
but I like your story Bro

Yes that's why I say things like:

1) DWI laws are over the top and the public perception of risk associated with impaired driving is highly exaggerated.

2) Consenting sex between a 26 year old male and a 12 year old female who has reached reproductive stage is completely natural from a biological standpoint and should not be considered rape.

3) A person should be able to have sex with their dog if they want to. Yes it's sick but it's their property and none of government's business.

4) There should be no laws against recreational drug use of any kind involving any substance.

5) Prostitution should be legal.

6) People should be able to walk around naked in public if they want to. It's none of government's business.

7) I believe the overall theory of evolution is essentially correct.

8) I've got no issue with pornography.

9) I think Capn' Cat and D1B are good guys that like to jerk chains.

I could go on but you get the picture. You can tell I'm a veritable Jerry Falwell. It's obvious.

[Chizzang]

Yes that's why I say things like:

1) DWI laws are over the top and the public perception of risk associated with impaired driving is highly exaggerated.

2) Consenting sex between a 26 year old male and a 12 year old female who has reached reproductive stage is completely natural from a biological standpoint and should not be considered rape.

3) A person should be able to have sex with their dog if they want to. Yes it's sick but it's their property and none of government's business.

4) There should be no laws against recreational drug use of any kind involving any substance.

5) Prostitution should be legal.

6) People should be able to walk around naked in public if they want to. It's none of government's business.

7) I believe the overall theory of evolution is essentially correct.

8) I've got no issue with pornography.

9) I think Capn' Cat and D1B are good guys that like to jerk chains.

I could go on but you get the picture. You can tell I'm a veritable Jerry Falwell. It's obvious.

God Bless you - you magnificent Bastard..!!!
I forgot how odd you were

[JohnStOnge]

Here is a set of poll results that should inform the discussion:

http://www.people-press.org/2012/09/27/ ... audiences/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

One thing I find interesting is the last set of results where they asked people 4 questions to gauge how informed they were about current events. I'll use Fox News since I watch that.

I can tell you, for instance, that if you watch Fox News regularly there is no reason why you should not know the answer to all four of those questions.

Another thing that for some reason struck me was 72% of NPR listeners saying they wanted no political point of view. Other aspects of the poll show NPR listeners to be educated and informed. Yet 72% of them say they want no political point of view and THEY'RE LISTENING TO NPR?

And yes I have listened to NPR quite a bit. If what you are looking for is a source with no political point of view NPR is not what you want. Of course, actually, you probably don't have any options. There is no such thing as a news source with no political point of view. Not that I know of anyway.

[kalm]

Here is a set of poll results that should inform the discussion:

http://www.people-press.org/2012/09/27/ ... audiences/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

One thing I find interesting is the last set of results where they asked people 4 questions to gauge how informed they were about current events. I'll use Fox News since I watch that.

I can tell you, for instance, that if you watch Fox News regularly there is no reason why you should not know the answer to all four of those questions.

Another thing that for some reason struck me was 72% of NPR listeners saying they wanted no political point of view. Other aspects of the poll show NPR listeners to be educated and informed. Yet 72% of them say they want no political point of view and THEY'RE LISTENING TO NPR?

And yes I have listened to NPR quite a bit. If what you are looking for is a source with no political point of view NPR is not what you want. Of course, actually, you probably don't have any options. There is no such thing as a news source with no political point of view. Not that I know of anyway.

Amy Goodman and Democracy Now.

(Facts have a liberal bias )

[Grizalltheway]

Here is a set of poll results that should inform the discussion:

http://www.people-press.org/2012/09/27/ ... audiences/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

One thing I find interesting is the last set of results where they asked people 4 questions to gauge how informed they were about current events. I'll use Fox News since I watch that.

I can tell you, for instance, that if you watch Fox News regularly there is no reason why you should not know the answer to all four of those questions.

Another thing that for some reason struck me was 72% of NPR listeners saying they wanted no political point of view. Other aspects of the poll show NPR listeners to be educated and informed. Yet 72% of them say they want no political point of view and THEY'RE LISTENING TO NPR?

And yes I have listened to NPR quite a bit. If what you are looking for is a source with no political point of view NPR is not what you want. Of course, actually, you probably don't have any options. There is no such thing as a news source with no political point of view. Not that I know of anyway.

NPR does a good job of providing in-depth coverage of a wide variety of issues and topics. Much better than any of the three major networks. And, whether you will admit it or not, they editorialize less and have much less of a political bent (one way or another) than those networks.

[JohnStOnge]

(Facts have a liberal bias )

Yes I remember when that Young Terrier guy that used to hang out here said that and it's completely untrue. One of the problems with Liberalism is that its adherents present many things as facts that are not established as facts. Then they say facts have a liberal bias.

[JohnStOnge]

NPR does a good job of providing in-depth coverage of a wide variety of issues and topics. Much better than any of the three major networks. And, whether you will admit it or not, they editorialize less and have much less of a political bent (one way or another) than those networks.

NPR does not overtly editorialize as much. And it does present in depth discussion. It is more subtle in expressing its bias. But it is very biased. I think the critique by a conservative writer at http://newsbusters.org/blogs/lachlan-ma ... s-board-sa" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; is good. It provides one very good example of how subtle bias can be reflected in just the terminology one chooses to use:

For instance, it is official NPR policy to refer to pro-life Americans as "abortion rights opponents." As I have written, that intrinsically shifts the debate to the left by (a) assuming that there is a "right" to abortion, which is by no means a settled political question, and (b) tacitly rejects the pro-life position that the life of the unborn child, not the preferences of its mother, are the issue at hand.

"Opponents of the rights of the unborn" would certainly not fly in an NPR newsroom, but there is no substantive difference beyond the political position to which it lends intrinsic weight. Neither do we hear NPR referring to gun control advocates, for instance, as "gun rights opponents."

It's similar to how you will, generally, see references to "conservative" individuals as "far right," "right wing," etc.,in the media in general but rarely if ever see references to "liberal" individuals as "far left," "left wing," etc.

That type of subtle bias, to me, is worse. It's insidious "stealth" bias that is more likely to create the impression that there is no bias when there really is.

[∞∞∞]

It seems like CNN made a consciousness effort to shift back to the center and it's beginning to show. It still leans left, but certainly not as much as MSNBC.

Fox News is a lost cause as far as I'm concerned.

That said, I'd rather just listen to NPR and forgo all the nonsense on the news nowadays.

[JohnStOnge]

That said, I'd rather just listen to NPR and forgo all the nonsense on the news nowadays.

As long as you realize that you're getting plenty of bias there too. Just not as up front about their bias as some other sources. And, yes, you're getting some nonsense.