Fox News viewers are the most misinformed

[Hot Mega]

Then you post the article from the Huff Post......not the actual study....what are you trying to get across here? Or is this article a good example of what you said.........

"Hell, even without their input anyone can see the average story or article you read is poorly written from the standpoint of some of what's unintentionally conveyed either by omission or settling for conventional semantics."

Huffington post is what's called a content aggregate blog...which means they don't create per se news articles...they cite with a description and link to the original source for them. AGAIN, if you READ the post there you would have found the link to the original story and the supporting study. In that case, what does the story have to do with Huffington Post's credibility???

I honestly think you respond just to keep from being quiet.

But Gal..yeah...I am going to trust the opinions of a couple of family members about their profession who have both been in the field almost as long as you've been alive 'son'.

You read well thought out articles?? Why should a news article be 'thought out' as opposed to simply being well written?:1orglaugh

Your responses in the debate amount to, 'how do you know' , 'you don't know' 'you can't generalize' blah, blah, blah....that's how children respond in a debate.:2 cents:

Speaking of which....a bit about 'symptoms' for you. This is really pretty elementary...symptoms are problems too. For example, cirrhosis of the liver is a symptom of alcoholism. Now at some point you could completely remove alcohol from the equation but now you don't produce bile which is a symptom of your cirrhosis liver...

Point is it was a bad analogy to begin with.

PS, You're not beating me in chess as I've been playing nearly as long as you've been alive and your too emotional. Also, whether I'm 'loved' around here or not is irrelevant to me. I'll let you worry about shit like that and begging people not to respond to other posters.

I read posts here and respond to them one of two ways...jokingly or seriously. Don't like...don't read 'em and continue your silly campaign of worrying about who responds to me. :hatsoff:

 

[Crazy4theBrat]

I don't need a study to tell me this. It seems Fox News just doesn't like facts.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/17/fox-news-viewers-are-the-_n_798146.html

I think that what it comes down to is you just don't happen to like the facts they report on Fox News. If you like the left side of things, you should watch MSNBC. They are very misinformed too, but you would probably like the "facts" they report better than what you hear on Fox.

 

[domshooter]

That's why I stick to Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert, thank you very much! But even they are slightly partisan, but not as bad as most news networks

thats not news, thats comedy. and both of em are highly biased, on the same level as any of the real news shows

 

[Galactic]

Huffington post is what's called a content aggregate blog...which means they don't create per se news articles...they cite with a description and link to the original source for them. AGAIN, if you READ the post there you would have found the link to the original story and the supporting study. In that case, what does the story have to do with Huffington Post's credibility???

I honestly think you respond just to keep from being quiet.

But Gal..yeah...I am going to trust the opinions of a couple of family members about their profession who have both been in the field almost as long as you've been alive 'son'.

You read well thought out articles?? Why should a news article be 'thought out' as opposed to simply being well written?:1orglaugh

Your responses in the debate amount to, 'how do you know' , 'you don't know' 'you can't generalize' blah, blah, blah....that's how children respond in a debate.:2 cents:

Speaking of which....a bit about 'symptoms' for you. This is really pretty elementary...symptoms are problems too. For example, cirrhosis of the liver is a symptom of alcoholism. Now at some point you could completely remove alcohol from the equation but now you don't produce bile which is a symptom of your cirrhosis liver...

Point is it was a bad analogy to begin with.

PS, You're not beating me in chess as I've been playing nearly as long as you've been alive and your too emotional. Also, whether I'm 'loved' around here or not is irrelevant to me. I'll let you worry about shit like that and begging people not to respond to other posters.

I read posts here and respond to them one of two ways...jokingly or seriously. Don't like...don't read 'em and continue your silly campaign of worrying about who responds to me. :hatsoff:

I thought as much. You get proven wrong, and you resort to smiley face palms, shrugging shoulders, name calling and condescension. If you are so much older and wiser, why do you degrade yourself like this?

Personally, I think you have the maturity level of a sixteen year old. I'm deadly serious. You behave like this almost every single time someone simply disagrees with you....which is why nine times out of ten I don't bother wasting my time responding to your posts......

I don't get it my man. It's a porn forum board for Christs' sake. Don't get me wrong, I love the discourse, otherwise I wouldn't partake......but why you insist on behaving like a child, when you, by age anyway, are not.....why you put people down in sneaky ways so as to avoid the ban hammer (most of the time anyhow)......quite the conundrum......

But you go right on ahead my man, go right on ahead and slice apart my response and click your little smiley icons.....do what you do best. Your public awaits! Your multitudes shake with shivering anticipation.....GO FORTH! Don't let them down Mega! There is work to be done! People to put down! Opinions to deride and rail against in your lovely way! We all need, we crave, WE MUST HAVE your sarcastic, biting, highly intelligent wit! Go! Waste not a minute more!

 

[Supafly]

Just look at the est results from the article

--Most economists estimate the stimulus caused job losses (12 points more likely)

--Most economists have estimated the health care law will worsen the deficit (31 points)

--The economy is getting worse (26 points)
Story continues below
Advertisement

--Most scientists do not agree that climate change is occurring (30 points)

--The stimulus legislation did not include any tax cuts (14 points)

--Their own income taxes have gone up (14 points)

--The auto bailout only occurred under Obama (13 points)

--When TARP came up for a vote most Republicans opposed it (12 points)

--And that it is not clear that Obama was born in the United States (31 points)

You can argue about point of view, but the total numbers are on the table, and they prove the point. You remember all those tea-partiers? Here's where get their 'facts'

 

[Red Spyder]

I do watch Fox News, though I don't watch Greta Van (whatever) or Glenn Beck. I might watch O'Reilly once in a while mostly because I've seen him be kind of mean with not only liberals but also conservaties. He does ask some very hard questions for his guests (no wonder Obama won't go there). I have no problem with their to-the-point reporting of the news but do have some problem with their opinion shows, like Beck's. I do agree with him in principle about questioning those who are in power (like who are all those czars and why is it necesary to have them?), regardless of the political party they're in, until he goes into the tinfoil-hat-we-got-to-buy-gold-or-we're-all-doomed deep end

Right now they're saying the Truman Carrier Group is coming home, earlier on they said there was a huge explosion in Mexico with over 30 killed when some criminal gang tried to siphon off some crude oil, and some guys of Bangladeshi origin were arrested on a terror plot in London, but since Fox News is all misinformation, I guess none of that really happened, right?

 

[Whit]

I do watch Fox News, though I don't watch Greta Van (whatever) or Glenn Beck. I might watch O'Reilly once in a while mostly because I've seen him be kind of mean with not only liberals but also conservaties. He does ask some very hard questions for his guests (no wonder Obama won't go there). I have no problem with their to-the-point reporting of the news but do have some problem with their opinion shows, like Beck's. I do agree with him in principle about questioning those who are in power (like who are all those czars and why is it necesary to have them?), regardless of the political party they're in, until he goes into the tinfoil-hat-we-got-to-buy-gold-or-we're-all-doomed deep end

Obama did go on O'Reilly for a long interview and was hammered the whole time. Palin went on abc? and got basic questions and Fox cried and whined how mean they were to her. Why would Obama go back to a suppose new channel that is all Right-wingers that aren't going to change their minds about him. Palin went to Hannity and he smiled and nodded every time she answered a question and most had a Obama/left dig in the question. Made me want to puke.
Bush had czars, they just weren't called that.

Abstinence Czar (Randal Tobias)
AIDS Czar (4 Czars: Scott Evertz, Joe O’Neill, Carol Thompson, Jeffrey Crowley)
Bank Bailout Czar (Neel Kashkari)
Bioethics Czar ( Leon Kass)
Bird flu Czar (Stewart Simonson)
Birth control czar (Erik Keroack)
Budget czar (3 Czars: Mitchell Daniels, Joshua Bolton, Rob Portman)
Clean Up Czar (2 Czars: Jessie Roberson & James Rispoli)
Communications Czar (Dan Bartlett)
Cyber Security Czar, Cyber Czar (2 Czars: Richard Clarke, Rod Beckstrom)
Democracy Czar (Elliott Abrams)
Domestic Policy Czar (Karl Rove)
Drug Czar (John P. Walters)
Faith-Based Czar, Faith Czar (4 Czars: Don Willett, John Dilulio, Jim Towey, Jay Hein)
Food Safety Czar (David W.K. Acheson)
Global AIDS Czar (2 Czars: Randall Tobias, Mark Dybul)
Health Czar for WTC, World Trade Center Health Czar (John Howard)
Health IT Czar (David Brailer)
Homeland Security Czar (Michael Chertoff)
Homeless Czar, Homelessness Czar (Phil Mangano)
Gulf Coast Reconstruction Czar, Hurricane Katrina Recovery Czar (Donald E. Powell)

 

[busenbust]

Facts being skewed? wow!

 

[Hot Mega]

I thought as much. You get proven wrong, and you resort to smiley face palms, shrugging shoulders, name calling and condescension. If you are so much older and wiser, why do you degrade yourself like this?

Personally, I think you have the maturity level of a sixteen year old. I'm deadly serious. You behave like this almost every single time someone simply disagrees with you....which is why nine times out of ten I don't bother wasting my time responding to your posts......

I don't get it my man. It's a porn forum board for Christs' sake. Don't get me wrong, I love the discourse, otherwise I wouldn't partake......but why you insist on behaving like a child, when you, by age anyway, are not.....why you put people down in sneaky ways so as to avoid the ban hammer (most of the time anyhow)......quite the conundrum......

But you go right on ahead my man, go right on ahead and slice apart my response and click your little smiley icons.....do what you do best. Your public awaits! Your multitudes shake with shivering anticipation.....GO FORTH! Don't let them down Mega! There is work to be done! People to put down! Opinions to deride and rail against in your lovely way! We all need, we crave, WE MUST HAVE your sarcastic, biting, highly intelligent wit! Go! Waste not a minute more!

<<<Another gratuitous smiley.

I said it time and time again, those who want to engage on an intellectually honest plane and rationalize their points/counterpoints seriously..I respond to them in kind. You don't.

Just like in this post...what did you prove wrong exactly??

You went on a tirade about who or what I may or may not know about journalists...weren't you the one in that case speaking from ignorance since you didn't know while you were quick to pounce that I have a sister and a cousin who have been journalists and in the field nearly as long as you've been alive?

That Huffington Post is a content aggregate blog (probably your first time hearing the expression) and not a news service?

That symptoms are problems too as in some cases removing an 'an over-arching issue' doesn't always solve the problems primary symptoms beget? Or the anatomy of a bad analogy?? Fox is not a symptom but a separate problem? That 'lazy journalism' is not my expression but an expression commonly used in journalism circles??

What exactly did you prove wrong??

Here's a clue Gal...you probably learned (if you allowed yourself to) far more in this exchange than you've convinced yourself of having proven wrong.:2 cents:

In fact, your response here doesn't say anything but more typical 'Mega bashing because you think I'm 'mean' or condescending.:crying:

Am at times condescending to some like you? Of course I am because some of you beg for it with ridiculous assertions. Debate your point like a man and you'll get treated like one.

Personally I have no thought of which particular poster is making a point...I don't wrap myself in the cliques..You either make a good point that I agree with or you don't.

C/S and I had a mature back and forth until you jump in with what I know and don't know.